<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'><style>p { margin: 0; }</style><div style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000"><style>p { margin: 0; }</style><div style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000">Crispin and stoves list<br><br>See below. For background, here are the two responses and my comments from which Crispin has picked one sentence<strong>.<br><br>From Dean (with my responses, with two emphases added.)<br></strong>Hi Ron,<br><br>1.) For the EPA we tried to burn all the fuel about 2/3 as wood and 1/3 as charcoal to get the best fuel economy.<br> <strong>[RWL:
Most char-making estimates are that (if char had been retained), the
char weight would have been about 1/5 to 1/3 (average of 1/4??) of the
initial weight - leaving (maybe) 1/2 of the initial carbon in the
biomass. But because pyrolysis removes most of the hydrogen, more than
half of the initial energy content has appeared as gases/liquids when
pyrolysis stops and gasification begins.</strong><strong> Just saying that the 2/3 and 1/3 values could be right on, but the analysis is pretty complicated.</strong>]<br><br>2.)
As far as I can tell, <u>no primary air can make it up through the pellets</u>
until 2/3 fuel is gone and the bottom air gets up through the remaining
charcoal.<br> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL: It sounds
like there was no "door" placed over the usual Stove-Tec opening, so
perhaps other owners of Stove-Tecs can also test this in some way. It
sounds like it would have been difficult to capture much char - but you
were seeing several nice advantages from top lighting. <span style="text-decoration: underline;"> For those not
having experience with TLUDs, Dean's reference to "no primary air can
make it up", means that the oxygen is "entirely" used to produce carbon
monoxide.</span> I am presuming that for Dean's specific geometry, there is
some side air entry when the pyrolysis front has moved down by 2/3 (but
I may not yet have the geometry right).]</span><br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL1. I should have stated more - my reason for wanting to respond on this topic was that the number 2/3 was so foreign to me. I know of no other TLUD with this characteristic - and so my question was trying to understand Dean's twice talking about 2/3. I still can only guess at what is going on because I have no figure/photo from which to deduce air flow patterns. More below.</span><br><br></span><b>From: </b>"Crispin Pemberton-Pigott" <crispinpigott@gmail.com><br><b>To: </b>"Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" <stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org><br><b>Sent: </b>Monday, October 24, 2011 7:03:38 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [Stoves] Hi TLUDers -- and EPA testing questions<br><br><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.5pt;
font-family:Consolas;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.MsoNoSpacing, li.MsoNoSpacing, div.MsoNoSpacing
{mso-style-priority:1;
margin-top:5.0pt;
margin-right:0mm;
margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:0mm;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
p.MsoNoSpacingCxSpFirst, li.MsoNoSpacingCxSpFirst, div.MsoNoSpacingCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:1;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:5.0pt;
margin-right:0mm;
margin-bottom:0mm;
margin-left:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
p.MsoNoSpacingCxSpMiddle, li.MsoNoSpacingCxSpMiddle, div.MsoNoSpacingCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:1;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
p.MsoNoSpacingCxSpLast, li.MsoNoSpacingCxSpLast, div.MsoNoSpacingCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:1;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0mm;
margin-right:0mm;
margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:0mm;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dear Ron</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Addressing only one sentence of your very interesting list: </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">“For those not having experience with TLUDs, Dean's reference to "no primary air can make it up", means that the oxygen is "entirely" used to produce carbon monoxide.”</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The Hydrogen in biomass (about 5.6%) requires almost exactly the amount of Oxygen available in it (46%) to create water. While CO can form at a low temperature, the tendency of Oxygen to react with Hydrogen is so strong that given a chance, biomass heated in a TLUD environment creates H2O. Lots of it. The thick fog of ‘smoke’ coming of a totally choked TLUD does have lots of CO in it but it has a heck of a lot more water (which we usually don’t measure).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It is really rare to find a normalised CO emissions factor (not concentration in the emerging gases) above 100,000 ppm. I have only see it once and I work with some of the wildest devices the imagination has produced. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL: This part I don't understand. Neither Dean or I were talking about anything other than primary air. For TLUDs, the most important defining characteristic is separation of the air stream into primary and secondary components. The Rocket, before this newest modification, didn't have that separation. I presume (could be wrong, but think Dean said so) that the "StoveTec TLUD" tested by Jim Jetter had this separation.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> So I repeat - I don't know what Crispin is talking about here or below. Or more accurately - why. Obviously photosynthesis requires energy, water and CO2 - and "reversing" that in a fire we expect all three back.<br></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So we need to talk about the produced numbers: If you multiply the measured CO number (the concentration) by the Excess Air (EA) present at the time adding 100% to the EA figure you get the CO emission factor </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">CO(ppm) * (EA+100%) = CO(EF) at O2=0% (the O2 is factored out). <br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL3: The subject of excess air for testing the completeness of combustion (after adding secondary air and releasing the majority of the energy) is extraneous to the sentence under discussion.]</span><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">An emission factor calculated in this manner makes it possible to compare any stove emission to any other without worrying that ‘the conditions’ were different. This normalises the conditions.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So, back to the CO. If the O2 available in the biomass (about 46% by mass) were turned into CO, it would create far more than 10% of the total non-O2 component of the total emissions. That 5.6% H2 mass is a heck of a lot of H atoms. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Normally it is unusual to see a CO(EF) above 50,000. In a single case I have seen +130,000 briefly during the test of an ‘improved stove’ which put it unfortunately into the category where many ‘improved stoves’ belong. That high a value does not seem to be able to be created without first heating the fuel quite a bit so I am expressing doubts that level could be created in a TLUD that was not first run as a regular fire. I mention this to support my conclusion that the O2 tends to create ‘fuel moisture’ very easily.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL4: I have no issue with the last sentence - but not sure why it is raised. But I am not sure where these CO numbers are coming from - or why. I have no problem with them, but they are not the issue. The question is what are the various pyrolysis gas (especially CO) levels before the pyrolysis gases see the secondary air. I have personally measured the gases coming up through the fuel bed in a TLUD (a borrowed high quality tool) and the dominant gas was CO (many millions of ppm). The initial 21 % oxygen is down to zero - as is the CO2 level. My equipment didn't measure water content and I have forgotten most as this was more than 15 years ago. But it would be easy to make such a CO test - maybe also for H20. But the equipment for testing the hot pyrolysis gases before their full combustion is not cheap.]</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> RWL4: My main concern is with Crispin's above next-to-last sentence: "</span></span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-style: italic;">I am expressing doubts that level could be created in a TLUD that was not first run as a regular fire.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> The word "TLUD" should say to all that the test operation was NOT run as a regular fire. They are as near to polar opposites as the stove world can get. So this is to ask Crispin what he is saying here and what part of my response he is objecting to?</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Biomass needs just a little more air (Oxygen) to completely use up the H2 and then breathe in whatever additional air would burn all the Carbon. In any real file, some of the C becomes CO and CO2 (surface reactions mentioned by Dr Tom Reed in a previous discussion).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-weight: bold;">[RWL: I hope we can get a specific citation for/from Tom here. At the hot surface from which (very complicated and numerous [1000's of species??]) pyrolysis gases are emerging, my understanding of the pyrolysis surface effect literature is that "all" (given control of the incoming oxygen flow) are turned into CO and water. The relatively small amount of CO2 that is produced near the surface (not ON) is converted back to CO as it interacts with the hot char above it, while rising to meet the secondary air (which through combustion is providing the needed natural draft). The theoretical literature is not one I claim to understand, but the more thorough talk about several transformation zones. The important point is that the oxygen molecules are converted and therefore cannot reach the hot blackening surface. This is why we make char - rather than consume it in TLUDs. In the Rocket, the 3-stone and other fires, there is so much air that pyrolysis and gasification can both occur. For most fires (and all TLUDS worth than name), char is consumed while nearby fuel particles are still pyrolyzing (but will themselves soon also be consumed because the air supply is too large). </span></p><p style="font-weight: bold;" class="MsoNormal"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> So I repeat - I am mystified by this message and about what is at dispute. Ron</span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> <br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Regards</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Crispin</span></p></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>Stoves mailing list<br><br>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br>stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org<br><br>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org<br><br>for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:<br>http://www.bioenergylists.org/<br><br></div></div></div></body></html>