[Stoves] Topic Changed: Working on biochar/heat systems (Gordon West)

[Frank Shields]

Hi Gordon,

I changed the subject line so not to interrupt their ongoing rousing discussion. 

The different feedstocks you mention are:
1) Pecan shells, 2) forest thinning, 3) ag residue, and 4) wood chips. 
They are sometimes modified into A) pellets and B) briquettes. 

So we have many different fuels all with different densities and chemical and physical properties. 

These different properties transfer to different burn characteristics, biochar qualities and affects the process of cooking, water heating, room heating etc.

So a lot can be done here.
I suggest first analyzing the characteristics of the fuels: (1 to 4) and the A) pellets and B) briquettes made from each different feedstock.  
Tests include: particle size distribution, length to width ratio, moisture, ash, organic matter, solvent extract, fixed carbon and volatile carbon (both under nitrogen), bulk density and particle density to determine void space for air movement, soluble salts (EC measurement), ++

I suggest in the lab to make biochar from the feedstock to determine what can be expected from an optimum system. Test the biochar for;
particle size, ash, carbon, bulk density, particle density, activity, carbonate, neutralizing value, ++

From the above group of tests you can come up with the best combination to do the job you want. I’m thinking high volatile carbon best for the secondary burn where high fixed carbon good for biochar production and home heating(?). Void spaces effect air movement. Quality of the biochar produced depends on feedstock/temperature and time, Good control for cooking depends on both chemical and physical properties. etc. 


At my lab I can do all the above with only simple equipment. It would be nice to have a Leco CHN - but not really necessary to get good results. I can help set you up to do the tests or charge you for me to do the tests. 

To compare the biofuels for cooking you will need a cooking control. This group has spent may years discussing this with the Water Boiling Test (WBT) being the most talked about. I believe the WBT is not suitable as-is but can be improved to be a good test. Determining that will take a lot of someones time. 

I think this group (and perhaps you too) will think all the above a waste of time. After all you have the free fuel so it doesn’t really matter it it takes a little longer or more work. You are not likely to bring in a better fuel at more cost to replace. That is understood. But you may be able to make adjustments to the stove to optimize to a specific fuel or you may have an equal choice over one than the other or perhaps one fuel will need more pre-treatment to become optimum. 

As it is now you are just running samples and seeing differences. With the above tests and results you may be able to quantify the differences to a specific value and make good predictions. 


Air quality is important and good indicator of proper combustion and safety. Aprovecho is best for that IMO.

Regards

Frank


 





> On Sep 3, 2017, at 2:42 PM, Gordon West <gordon.west at rtnewmexico.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Frank,
> 
> My colleague/mentor Bill Knauss, and I, are working on biochar/heat systems that are currently more scaled and adapted to developed countries than to undeveloped ones. The reason for this is that we need to financially support our work as it is all personally bootstrapped - no grants or NGO or government support. We have in prototype a system where a rural U.S. community could process forest thinnings and agricultural residues into densified feedstocks, supporting forest restoration, building heating, water heating, and cooking. Some of the objectives there are large scale CO2 sequestration, avoidance of fossil fuel use, enhancement of local economies, water conservation, and increase of soil productivity. 
> 
> Bill’s entry into the field was focused on rural Mexican communities, however, and that is still in our field of interest. Just across the border from Bill’s house is the very poor community of Palomas MX, where they have only propane for fuel (it costs a buck to cook a dollar’s worth of beans). Our smallest unit, a batch TLUD, is capable of operating for up to three hours on a charge of pecans shells (available for only the cost of hauling from the farms in the Mesilla Valley). Bill has fitted a kettle barbecue, a plancha cooktop, a water hear exchanger, and an air heat exchanger to the base unit - meaning that a family can cook, heat water, and heat their home while making biochar. There is a project ongoing by Border Partners where the locals are using the biochar to improve their gardening capability. Bill’s concept to get beyond the cost barriers is to make a deal with families where they get a unit at no cost, they get the pecan shell feedstock provided at no cost, and they collect and return the biochar produced until they have paid for the unit. After that it is all “profit” for them (to borrow a somewhat inappropriate term from Capitalism). No loans with interest, no upfront costs for the “customers”. We have similar communities in our ‘developed’ country, a prime example being the native Americans of the Southwest.
> 
> I cook on a Charbecue (as we are calling them) once or twice a week out on the porch, even in the winter. The unit lights up in seconds with no visible smoke and shuts down automatically when the pyrolysis zone reaches the bottom of the cylinder. By ‘shuts down’, I mean that the small 12vdc computer fan controlling primary airflow is turned off. During the process, the pyrolysis temp can be controlled and the syngas production varied to provide a range of cooking temps. We have not yet tested the emissions, but would like to. I expect we are doing well in that regard, since we do have the ability to control secondary combustion air as well as the primary.
> 
> Our feedstocks are most commonly wood chips, pecan shells, and fuel pellets. 
> 
> Bill and I are just completing a second prototype of a slightly larger TLUD that operates continuously, not in batches. We took our first rudimentary prototype to Aprovecho in 2016, and also to the biochar conference in Oregon right after, and a few folks on this list saw it work, along with a Charbecue. The continuous unit is designed to make heat at a building or greenhouse scale. Our next project is somewhat larger, and will use the heat from burning the syngas to dry biomass feedstock, which will then be pelletized or briquetted, bagged, and distributed to be feedstock for the Charbecues and building heaters. I know I have drifted quite far from cook stoves, yet this larger system will provide dry and uniform feedstock for cookstoves, which is one way of solving the problem of successfully operating low tech and inexpensive units by individuals.
> 
> I feel that our approach can be adapted to serve most any circumstance around the world.
> 
> Bill and I welcome anyone who would like to participate in our efforts.
> 
> Gordon West
> The Trollworks
> 
> An entrepreneur sees problems as the seeds of opportunity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 2, 2017, at 9:46 PM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com <mailto:franke at cruzio.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear Gordon,
>> 
>> I believe the TLUD technology is an excellent stove to do research on. It being batch feed means the biomass must be laid out correctly at the beginning.  Not sure how you plan on approaching the ‘development of technologies’ but I’m thinking the structure, physical properties, packing properties, void space for air flow and chemical make-up are all constituents to monitor and adjust when optimizing biomass for combustion. I just retired from testing organic biomass for over forty years and know a lot of test methods that might be useful to you. If you could explain more on what you are doing (on this site or by personal E-mail) and if you think I might be of some help with test methods -Let me know. I welcome the change! 
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Frank     
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 2, 2017, at 5:05 PM, Gordon West <gordon.west at rtnewmexico.com <mailto:gordon.west at rtnewmexico.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have been mostly lurking here for many months reading the posts and looking for bits that have relevance to our development of various TLUD technologies, which we are interested in integrating with the objectives of you other globally conscious biomass/biochar proponents.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> 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 <mailto: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




franke at cruzio.com



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170903/002ac9ad/attachment.html>