[Stoves] stoves and credits again

[Paul Anderson]

Philip,

You are mostly correct.  Actually wood takes up (has) too much WEIGHT.  
Wood has 3 times (or more, if the char is poorly made) the ENERGY value 
of charcoal that could come from that char.   But it has about 5 times 
the DRY weight of the char, plus there can be 20 to 50% moisture  
content to make the wood even heavier.

And the charcoal has  almost double (30 vs. 16) the energy content by 
weight, but char is so much lighter per unit of volume.

Apart from the transportation issue, I believe that the appeal of 
charcoal is that it does not smoke (not much).   CO is invisible and 
deadly, but the people learn to cook on the balcony or keep some air 
flowing.  And it does not turn the bottom of the pots black.

Paul

Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com

On 9/24/2017 10:50 AM, plloyd at mweb.co.za wrote:
> Just a thought on Sub Saharan charcoal use. As Africa urbanizes, so it 
> needs energy to cook. Wood takes up too much volume, and the roads are 
> primitive. So it makes sense to use charcoal. A bicycle load will keep 
> ten homes cooking for a week.
> The use of char oal has everything to do with logistics and nothing to 
> do with the environment.
> Philip
>
>
>
> Sent from my Huawei Mobile
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] stoves and credits again
> From: Nikhil Desai
> To: Ron Larson
> CC: Andrew Heggie ,Crispin Pemberton-Pigott ,Discussion of biomass 
> cooking stoves
>
>
>     Ron:
>
>     What makes you believe that users of biomass-fuelled stoves are
>     predominantly growers (of biomass)?
>
>     Saw the figures for urban charcoal markets in Sub-Saharan Africa
>     lately? Or looked at non-household cooking (in my view roughly 50%
>     of cooking energy consumption worldwide)?
>
>     Nikhil
>
>     On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Ronal W. Larson
>     <rongretlarson at comcast.net <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
>         Andrew and list:
>>
>>         There appears to be a win win situation here and I gather
>>         there is
>>         still a vast part of equatorial Africa where annual burning
>>          takes
>>         place. However it brings me to another reason I like the
>>         idea, though
>>         not the practicalities, of a householder-subsistance farmer
>>         being paid
>>         a subsidy funded by the developed world. The trouble is I have a
>>         parochial view and not a good worldview of what types of persons
>>         depend on biomass fuelled stoves. Are they also predominantly
>>         growers?
>
>         *[RWL9:  Yes to Andrew’s last question.  I disagree with
>         Andrew calling himself “parochial” - when he supports (as do
>         I) the ethics of /“a subsidy funded by the developed world”./*
>         *
>         *
>         **
>         *[RWL10:   Agree totally.  And I think this is what will
>         eventually kill the geoengineering technology that is often
>         placed ahead of biochar - BECCS.  In BECCS, as with “clean
>         coal”, the CO2 from combustion (never pyrolysis) is placed, as
>          liquid, deep underground.   Major expenses needed to protect
>         the world’s soil are not needed for biochar.  Soil quality is
>         closely linked to carbon content - and biochar does this with
>         no penalty - while apparently being the cleanest and most
>         efficient of all possible solid-fuel stoves.*
>
>         *`Andrew - thanks for your above rebuttal to Crispin.*
>         *
>         *
>         *Ron
>         *
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170925/8351dcd3/attachment.html>