[Stoves] PM emissions from engines
neiltm at uwclub.net
neiltm at uwclub.net
Tue Jun 6 17:36:17 CDT 2017
On 6 Jun 2017 at 19:59, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
> I am willing to bet that with the addition of electronically controlled
> valves the hindrance can be overcome. They can't be far from market. My
> nephew did his PhD on them 10 years ago. Fully programmable valve timing,
> no cam shaft, no chain etc. Flat torque profile.
Whether they ever come to market seems likely to depend on political
decisions over favoured and disfavoured technologies. Another great
technology we never got for the ICE was optical sensors looking at the
colour of the burn in order to modify the next firing. Then the cat was
globally mandated as an imposed solution to meet emission targets already
capable of being reached by such advanced lean burn technologies, and my
brother's career took an abrupt turn in a totally different direction as
he muttered about governments imposing solutions on engineers instead of
the standards, and leaving the solutions up to the experts. Your last
link indicated that the petrol/gasoline engine is also slated for the
abominable encumberance of particulate filters that has already ruined
the diesel engine, and caused me to have to trade my last car in for an
older model without one, as it was unfit for purpose by design. But never
fear, the UK government is always one step ahead in the war on us, and
they intend to punish those hanging on to old models without the new
technology. At a time when engines should be running better than ever,
motorists are complaining about their poor and uneven performance, new
unreliabilities and massive servicing expense compared with the earlier
models with diesels at least, but gasoline engines seem slated to go the
same way. It is clear from the massive government subsidies that we are
to get electric vehicles, like it or not, and if they can't be made
attractive enough fast enough, then spoiling the ICE adds disincentive in
the direction of the desired change.
To bring this thread back on topic, the manipulations and mandatory
globalised adoptions of sub optimal technologies seems to be something
the motor industry has in common with globalised stove solutions!
Its an old cliche the garage/backyard inventor who discovered a way to
get 10 more MPG out of a carburettored vehicle, but I actually know
someone who's brother not only did this but got offered a 7 figure sum
from the motor industry for his patent! He didn't take it, but shortly
after that the carburettor became history anyway.
If the poorest people still can't afford a nineteenth century clean
burning paraffin pressure stove, without Crispin having to radically
simplify and make the build cheaper and lower tech, I find it hard to see
how they are likely to (usefully to them) get LPG and electricity, even
if it is possible to see how they could. Which probably means that
GACC's 'interim' biomas technology could fill a very long interim for all
too many, and hard to prevent once learned and adopted, because locally
empowered.
Neil Taylor
More information about the Stoves
mailing list