[Stoves] Inherent emissions differ from combustion emissions -- by Crispin PP

[Paul Anderson]

To all,

Crispin's message (below) is SOOOOOO important that I am placing it 
(might take a day or two) for easier continual access at the EPosts 
section of my website    www.drtlud.com     (I can remove it if Crispin 
objects to its republication there.)

VERY well stated. EVERYONE should read it.   And send it on to anyone 
who continues to talk of "dirty fuels".

Paul


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [Stoves] Another attack on solid fuels by public health 
Stoves Digest, Vol 81, Issue 19
Date: 	Wed, 31 May 2017 05:49:16 +0000
From: 	Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
Reply-To: 	Discussion of biomass cooking stoves 
<stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
To: 	Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>



Dear Karin, Verena and All

I appreciate the explanations.

I have just emerged from the Black Carbon Summit organised by the Polish 
Government, ICCI, CCAC and the GACC in Warsaw. One of the major outcomes 
was a clear picture of the change that, while mostly in the mind, has 
its roots in the performance of advanced stoves: there is a decoupling 
of emissions from fuel type.

Fuels have chemistry, and stoves have  combustion efficiencies. The 
former leads to ‘inherent emissions’ and the latter leads to ‘combustion 
emissions’. Black Carbon is not an inherent emission.

The concept of a ‘clean fuel’ is, without doubt, rooted in the 
assumption that combustion emissions are in fact inherent emissions. 
This is a conceptual error.

There was a presentation on advances in coal combustion (it was a 
conference on small coal and wood fire heating stoves) using state of 
the art in Poland. The emissions of PM2.5 (which are combustion 
emissions and the lofting of particles of fly ash) were reduced to 4-5 
mg per cu metre (O_2 normalised to 6%) by the combination of their fifth 
tier boilers and the addition of a 1 kW electrostatic precipitator.

Testing at the China Agriculture University by Altanzul has shown that 
the TJ4.0 stove (which is two models behind the current one) has 
emissions in approximately that same range. This was achieved without 
electric controls, fans or stack cleaning. In short, there is no 
meaningful relationship between the fuel type (wood, as demonstrated by 
the Austrians and by the Masonry Heaters in the US or coal as 
demonstrated in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan this winter) and PM emissions. 
In the case of the Austrian and Americans, the standard (20mg) was met 
without electronic controls or stack cleaning.

Thus the concept incorporated in the thesis of the paper of ‘people 
moving to clean fuels’ is mistaken. They already use ‘fuels’ which if 
burned properly, produce very clean results, as much as 75% below the 
highest EU standard for air quality.

I agree that there is a war on solid fuels but as we heard in Warsaw, 
this is not limited to solid fuels only. For about 18 years now there 
has also been a war on paraffin (kerosene) waged on the basis that ‘it 
is burned badly in lighting appliances in India’ as if that somehow 
defined properties of the fuel.

Believe me, kerosene is still on the hit list of the WHO. It is 
classified as a ‘dirty fuel’ in spite of being the most widely used 
energy carrier for modern aviation. Ultra-low emissions kerosene 
appliances like aircraft, FLOX burners and stoves are ignored while 
19^th century wick lamps are held up not to illuminate the subject, but 
to cloud the issue.

I realise it is very fashionable in some circles to promote subsidised 
LPG. It would be far more effective far sooner and far cheaper in the 
long run to promote cleaning burning appliances than to subsidise LPG 
for the next few decades through its expensive, regulation-ensconced and 
inevitably long supply chain.

If we want transformation at scale, it is far easier to move a stove for 
a day than fuel for a lifetime.

Crispin

  ********************

Dear Karin
Thanks for the exchange.
The gasifier solution is a true option and very promising. Even wood 
burning stoves are progressing, e.g. Rocket works stoves et al. I would 
love to see us not excluding solutions and always thinking in 
alternative options to choose from.


I would love to see who/paho also opening eyes for those alternatives.

Thank you
Verena

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170531/95cb1de3/attachment.html>