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

Tue Jan 31 12:41:57 CST 2017

Guys;

Ron, thank you for the compliments. Most appreciated. I also agree we are
making considerable progress. I have watched art Donnelly work like a beast
to get a stove that is clean and democratized for the people. And, if you
see the progress being made on rocket stoves at the burn design lab at the
University of Washington, I was astounded how much progress those people
have made.

Norm

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Ronal W. Larson <rongretlarson at comcast.net>
wrote:

> Frank, list and ccs
>
> 1.  Three objections:
>
> a.  You say: “*Year after year going nowhere ..” . * I’ve been part of
> this list for more than 20 years, went to my first stoves conference (Pune
> India in about 2000) and been going to ETHOS for quite a few of its 17 (?)
> years.  This was by far the best year - lots of progress.
>
> b.  You say “*It’s real simple”.  *I find the entirety (including my part
> of the dialog on biochar and CDR) to be exceedingly complex.  Yes - some
> parts are simple.
>
> c.  You say:  “*Not our problem “.  *If not ours - whose?   Maybe not
> specifically yours  (and I don’t know of anyone who is trying to tackle
> all), but, collectively, there are plenty of people on this list (some
> thousand - mostly silent) who are tackling all the problem areas you list
> (and more).
>
> 2.   As an example of an unexpected unknown that I saw for the first time
> yesterday:  Norm Baker is doing some extremely strong work on very large
> TLUDs, and he gave an outstanding talk on his 16th model (called “Ring of
> Fire”).  He later showed me parts of a 1.5 hour run with a pyrex window
> inserted into the side of his barrel.  Neither of us know how to explain
> the clear picture of pyrolysis gases (smoke) traveling DOWN near this
> window (mostly - not periodically).  Anyone else seen this?  (pretty hard
> without a window). Clearly the overall gas flow is upward - as he produces
> plenty (35%) of high quality char.
>
> All (most?) of Norm’s char goes into his extensive home garden - with real
> scientific handling of the testing. He calls the char difference
> “incredible”.
>
> (Norm’s was one of five char-making talks in the final breakout period
> yesterday;  more coming on that and everything else I was able to attend -
>  to be mixed in with other response.)
>
> 3.  In particular, GACC and EPA staff gave excellent reports - well beyond
> what has been given in the past.
>
> Ron
>
>
> On Jan 28, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Nikhil,
>
> Well how is this all working for us so far? Year after year going nowhere
> and on the road to continue.
>
> Its real simple.
>
> We go from (a specific) biomass and through some one specific device we
> use that energy to cook one specific meal. Boil the problem down to that
> simple problem. Work it out in the lab to find the limits to the biomass
> fuel for that device. And how best to use utensils to cook that food. Then
> we have done the job.
>
> If others want to add conditions for safety, air quality, color and shine,
> stable, weight etc - then let them. Not our problem.
>
> Regards
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 28, 2017, at 12:04 AM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Frank:
>
> Delighted. Thank you. You bring "meal" and "toast" in the discussion, not
> just wood quality and combustion and heat transfer in the abstract.
>
> Food, fuel, stove, operating practices - everything can and will change.
> (For one, average family size in India is probably 4 or 3 for perhaps 50%
> of the rural families. I did some numbers in 2012 and didn't get into
> district details. A cook now frequently works outside, even with two
> babies. At least, she doesn't have two babies at home for more than five
> years of cooking time.)
>
> Yes, "A toaster is for making toast. "  On the other hand, why "We have
> biomass >> and >> a fully cooked meal. "??
>
> You do recognize "We need one for frying and another for hot oil cooking
> etc. " and also that biomass varies.
>
> So, boiling water should evaporate, as should WBT. Have a kitchen
> performance test. Find PARTIAL solutions instead of a "fully cooked meal".
> Get away from the GACC gabbing about "health benefits" from "complete and
> irreversible transition to clean cooking solutions".
>
> Make a stove for one task, specific to a context. Forget this top-down
> idealism of "doing something for the poor". Watch what poor have done for
> themselves. There are too many variations in four billion people, and think
> of some half a billion coming on every decade.
>
> David Stein had written a few days ago about solar cooking with biomass
> backup -- to have an "integrated" cooking solution.
>
> I would instead have a "dis-integration" of the meal. Some portions are
> "outsourced" - primary foods are no longer produced and stored at home but
> bought from others (grains, eggs, milk, oil). For the urban poor, leavened
> bread, tortillas, injeras are increasingly bought in the market. Same with
> snacks and such.
>
> Some can be fragmented at home - one stove for heating water, one for
> frying, one for stewing, and one for home-made breads.
>
> Someone just needs to go tour the new peri-urban areas, villages within
> cities, conurbations of quite a variety. Poor people migrate. Some are
> transient.
>
> Foods vary, not just across groups but over time.
>
> To me, this "test first" mentality is a handicap of scientists. If I
> really mean to get mean, I would say it is an elitist fancy (or worse).
>
> More so with what to me are irrelevant metrics - fuel consumption and
> PM2.5 hourly emission rates. Metrics are more important than methods. We
> lost our way in pursuing false gods - saving forests - and are doing more
> of the same now in GACC's "Evidence Base" party - health, climate,
> livelihoods, gender relations.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
>
> ---------
> (India +91) 909 995 2080
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:
>
>> 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> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_
> lists.bioenergylists.org
>
> for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170131/238a8e3f/attachment.html>