[Stoves] stoves and credits again

[Todd Albi]

Crispin is correct.  Running TLUD's in efficient cook stoves produce
little, if any char.  Our most efficient Super Dragon Fan Stove or Teg Fan
Stove, or the Cook Air Fan grill we offer leave only small amounts of fine
ash and have *no value producing char*.  In fact, one could contend that a
cook stove that produces lots of char is actually impeding both ventilation
and heat transfer to the pot.

Our natural draft Scout trekking gasifier and larger natural insulated
Hunter chimney stove also leave primarily ash and extremely little char,
the fuel is maximized for cooking, not char production.  We'd contend
efficient cooking and making char is two opposing value outcomes.

Regards,

Todd Albi, SilverFire


​





On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:

> Dear Ron
>
>
>
> *>**No one would ever want to run a TLUD without making char.  They do
> horribly in combusting the char.  *
>
>
>
> Our experiences differ.  We received stoves for testing the in CSI Pilot
> in Central Java that not only made char then burned it and the char could
> be forwarded to the next replication of the cooking sequence. Stoves that
> could do that were, according to the rules of engagement, tested with a
> fuel load that included recycled fuel from a previous burn, during all
> evaluations. Fuel consumption is the requirement for additional fuel
> sourced outside the cooking system needed to replicate a cooking sequence
> in any of a series of identical replications, save the first. The ‘save the
> first’ refers to stoves such as the TLUD’s that can burn charcoal, which
> can use remnant fuel in the next replication of the test. All stick-burning
> stoves were tested in this manner as well, if they could use partially
> combusted fuel.
>
>
>
> The lab staff in Yogyakarta, in spite of the relative simplicity of the
> lab, were able to get very tight groupings of test results even though the
> ‘forwarded fuel’ varied a bit in mass and composition.
>
>
>
> It can be argued that the correct assessment for such a series of test
> replicates is to average the entire set into a single result, rather than
> ‘averaging’ the averages produced individually for each test. I favour this
> approach as it has a sound logical basis.
>
>
>
> PL >>I am not certain of the physical meaning of the (1-e2) equation.
>
>                 >*[RWL6:  I hope you will try to learn of its importance.
>  (Essentially important only in tier rankings.)  *
>
>
>
> Tier ranks have nothing to do with that equation. The formula is a
> postulate with no sound physical basis. That is why no examples could be
> found outside the WBT using it as an efficiency calculation. Please refer
> to Tami’s recent categorical re-statement of her message earlier this year.
>
>
>
> It is only ‘important’ to those who wish a 25% efficient stove to be
> reported as having an efficiency of 50%. It is more important that such
> pseudo-science be stopped in its tracks.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Crispin
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170927/f2f37a3d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Teg4.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 416094 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170927/f2f37a3d/attachment.jpg>