[Stoves] Work for 2018

[Nikhil Desai]

Christa, Crispin, Frank:

If "Start with the Fuel" is key to stove design -- makes sense, that's how
I have seen in electric utility coal power plant design - does it not
follow that an international standard or even a standardized protocol for
stoves cannot be just for a stove but stoves for use with particular fuels?

Even leaving aside the questions of service standard (what is to be cooked)
and cooking sequence (what we in utility business would call "cycling"
rather than "base load"), just from first principles of chemistry it makes
no sense at all that every stove get an efficiency of emission rating
independent of fuel.

I suppose the analogy is more appropriate with vehicle engines -- fuel
specs are fixed, engine is rated for efficiency and emissions, but the user
is free to drive as much as s/he wants and waste as much fuel or cause as
much pollution that comes with the choice. But a the fuel is varied too
much, the engine is damaged.

Who are these "international standards" of TC-285 meant to be applied to
and what is sought to be controlled? It cannot be fuel efficiency, because
there is an economic trade-off; people may buy cheaper fuels or cheaper
stoves (like cars). Nor deforestation because wood has multiple uses and
can be grown somewhere or the other. Nor exposure to disease-causing
pollutants because such pollutants arise from many sources other than
cooking fuel/stove.

I am inclined to the view, "Start with the cook, and optimize fuel/stove to
a service standard with some minimum efficiency rating and maximum
pollutant emission rating."

Unless one is prepared to issue cooking licenses like driving licenses and
ticket people for "stacking", deforestation. Or impose a Black Carbon tax.

Nikhil


On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 3:15 PM, CHRISTA ROTH <stoves at foodandfuel.info>
wrote:

> Frank, you basically come back to what late Paal Wendelbo always said:
> START WITH THE FUEL, stove design depends on and should be linked to fuel
> substance and shape.
> The slide below is what I use in the Stoves101 for visualisation of that
> topic.
> and Crispin is right: we need the predictable fuel behaviour meaning
> standardised processed fuels so that the stoves have a chance for a
> predictable performance.
> There are years of science applied to the elaboration of liquid and
> gaseous fuels likeLPG and the fuels have to suit the elaborated standards,
> thus for the associated stoves it is easy to have a standardised
> performance if the fuel is predictable. it is not the stove that needs to
> be standardised.
> The clean cooking system goes well beyond a stove, but it includes more
> variables like the fuel, the user and the environment and ventilation space.
>
>
>
>
> Am 27.10.2017 um 06:01 schrieb Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com>:
>
> Dear Stovers,
>
>
> The Pellet Fuel Institute is a fine example of proper use of a biomass
> fuel. They have the test methods, certified labs and fuel requirements for
> the pellets to be used in pellet stoves. If we were to market clean burning
> pellet stoves to a receiving site we would need to include a pellet making
> machine and make sure there is available the proper feedstock that results
> in the quality pellets required.
>
>  We need to do the same with our other biomass stoves. Write up the
> requirements for the biofuel to insure clean combustion, develop methods to
> measure them, certify labs to  test them and make sure the receiving site
> has the biomass suitable and a program in place to prepare and distribute
> the proper fuel for the stoves being used. A lot of work and Cecil will be
> busy preparing the people at the receiving site for the changes.
>
>  I’m thinking people collect the biomass and deliver it to a location
> where its dried and prepared for stove use. Then deliver it where needed.
>
>  The requirements for TLUDs will be different and requirements for
> briquette stoves different still. Biomass that is found to burn clean need
> be tested until we come up with limits for each stove classification.
> Perhaps for each stove depending how unique they are. So there is a lot of
> work to be done before we take them into the field.
>
>  It may seem impossible but I see no other way that we can insure an
> improvement of air quality and most efficient use of fuel.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Frank
>
>
> Frank
>
> Frank Shields
> Gabilan Laboratory
> Keith Day Company, Inc.
> 1091 Madison Lane
> Salinas, CA  93907
> (831) 246-0417 cell
> (831) 771-0126 office
>
> franke at cruzio.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171027/64e5c7d0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Bildschirmfoto 2017-10-27 um 21.08.14.png
Type: image/png
Size: 185521 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171027/64e5c7d0/attachment.png>