[Stoves] Biomass stoves v. PV-induction cooking (re: Frank)

[Frank Shields]

Nikhil,

The stumbling block is people believing cause is: “are irrelevant performance metrics - fuel consumption and emission rates” . : )

A toaster is for making toast.  The energy comes from an electrical outlet.  What is between the energy outlet …. and …. perfect toast is some man made object that does the job. So first it must make excellent toast from the energy from the outlet.  Conditions we apply is safe to use, low energy consumption, looks good, etc. 

We have biomass >> and >> a fully cooked meal. We first establish the conditions to get to that stage. Wet wood will not work. Sawdust will not work in a Rocket Stove. So we first establish the limits for the biomass for a stove. Then we establish a task that is completed and acceptable to the cook. Water boiling is one that can represent several meals (rice etc.). We need one for frying and another for hot oil cooking etc. 

Only after this is done do we apply Conditions that must be met. Safe, low smoke, low wood use, fast, low energy + high energy - whatever we want. But this only done after we get the Fuel established that using this combustion chamber will cook this meal. 

There are no shortcuts! 

You (and others) have listed several procedures that I have not seen.  The only test I know of that is even close to do what we must first do is the WBT. But it is so poorly designed is does not work. I believe it can be corrected and I have made suggestions to that over the years.    

And there is research needed to see if we can do some of the things I am thinking of. A lot of work is still needed before an official test can be presented. If we do anything else different than the above we will just be back here next year. Same O - Same O. 

 
Thanks

Frank









> On Jan 27, 2017, at 9:42 PM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Frank: 
> 
> The stumbling block to progress are irrelevant performance metrics - fuel consumption and emission rates for, heavens, BOILING WATER! 
> 
> Electricity and gas folks are skewered by ultra-Greens for their fuel-cycle GHG emissions, just to make sure the earth is balanced on the backs of the poor. 
> 
> But they had an advantage - the purportedly "exhaustible" fuels were used some four times over what was supposedly "left in the ground" in 1970 and the purportedly "renewable biomass" was costly, inaccessible, or had better uses. (Even that 1909 Journal of Home Economics article said there are superior uses of wood in America than burning it in the hearth.) 
> 
> Unless the biomass folks stop obsessing over bean-counting and manufacturing "co-benefits" in health, climate, livelihoods and women's empowerment - in other words, unless they get their heads out of the firebox and put ":cook" back in "cookstoves", they will keep arguing among themselves. 
> 
> After all, they seem to want to ensure that their egos are sufficiently fed. The ethos of ETHOS, I might say. 
> 
> I am tempted to put a slogan below my signature - "Usable Stoves Suited to Contexts", or USSC. Think I will raise $300+ million? :-) 
> 
> Nikhil
> 
> 
> --------- 
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>  
> 
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:11 AM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com <mailto:franke at cruzio.com>> wrote:
> My only point was that at the rate and direction we Stovers are heading the pv  people, no matter how many years, will likely solve the problem before we do regarding smoke.
> Frank
> 
> Sent from my iPhone

Thanks

Frank
Frank Shields
Gabilan Laboratory
Keith Day Company, Inc.
1091 Madison Lane
Salinas, CA  93907
(831) 246-0417 cell
(831) 771-0126 office
fShields at keithdaycompany.com



franke at cruzio.com



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170127/ddd9b223/attachment.html>