[Stoves] Cook-char [Was Stove types and poverty]

Nikhil Desai pienergy2008 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 26 16:39:57 MDT 2018


Crispin:

What is a "stove"? Why can't it be a char-maker? Or why can't a
"char-maker" also provide pyrolytic gases for cooking, process heating?

If I understand Paul and Ron correctly, what they are talking about is
"cook-char" -- charcoal produced during cooking, and available for later
use, or sale for soil conditioning or fuel.

I don't know if the chars so produced can be burned in any old portable
charcoal stoves, but otherwise there is a question of finding and marketing
charcoal stoves that can use that char. (Not a consideration for soil
conditioning if the char is granular or can be used as is.)

But let me turn the "cook char" around -- how about cooking as a byproduct
of char production?

Why is everybody so hung up on "households"? From cursory observations,
driving around and looking at billboards or television, it seems to me the
"food services industry" is expanding at a faster pace than household
cooking.

Has nobody been paying attention?

Commercial-scale char-making (and briquetting) is a natural candidate for
co-production of prepared foods. Conversely, every restaurant or canning
factory can use pyrolytic gases for cooking and sell char.

Leave WHO and UN SDG types to count statistics of  households. More than a
half of the time is spent outside the home and more than a half of the
meals preparation (including partial preparation for home cooking) is done
outside the home.

Think moolahs, not satisfying the fatwas of mullahs.

Nikhil



On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
crispinpigott at outlook.com> wrote:

> Dear Paul
>
> You are proposing to completely unrelated things: a particular
> implementation of a TLUD stove, and the creation of a charcoal market.
>
> You give numbers of 11,000 and 40,000. The number of TLUD’s far, far
> exceeds 11,000. There are 180,000 in Ulaanbaatar alone, though I recall you
> have disputed that they are TLUD’s because (for very good reasons) they are
> not designed to yield char as a byproduct.
>
> The creation of a stove-char market is completely different. How far “up”
> can such a market be scaled?  Surely the market for  cooking stoves is far
> larger than the market for stove-char at break-even value?
>
> Thanks
> Crispin
>
>
> Nikhil,
>
> You wrote:
> >>. I am still looking for a formulation of the problem, definition of a
> market, and the delivery >>chain for usable stoves and fuels, at an
> appreciable scale.
>
> Are you saying that the West Bengal success story (Deganga report with
> 11,000, and now expanded to about 40,000), plus what I have been
> formulating, defining and with delivery chain is:
> A.   Not good enough to get some support for some further scale up?  Or
> B.   Is not known by you?   (as if you and others are not even aware of
> the progress and methods that are functional thus far on a break-even and
> even net financial gain  basis.)  Or
> C.   Something else????
>
> What should be done differently?    Or abandon because it is not
> sufficient?
>
> I cannot get Kirk Smith to publicly comment specifically on the TLUD
> gasifiers.  So you are in good company as those who cannot see any success
> worthy of acknowledging with biomass-fueled stove.
>
> Paul     (still with multiple avenues for moving forward.)
>
> Doc / Dr TLUD / Paul S. Anderson, PhD
> Exec. Dir. of Juntos Energy Solutions NFP
> Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu<mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>       Skype:
>  paultlud
> Phone:  Office: 309-452-7072    Mobile: 309-531-4434
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180726/cee73a99/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list