<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Dear M. Nurhuda,<div><br></div><div>Sorry, I just missed this e-mail.</div><div><br></div><div>I am "pleased" to get the confirmation from a native Javaneese, but at the same time sad to hear the lack of commitment from the World Bank teams.</div><div>Crispin is another story.</div><div><br></div><div>I am familiar with that the WB teams, hardly passes the gateway of the five star hotels in the capital cities, but to be so ignorant as Crispin seems to be, I hardly belive.</div><div><br></div><div>Iam very happy to see what you are doing and accieving on Java!!</div><div>To my knowledge, you are very much on the right track.</div><div><br></div><div>How do you deal with the challange to keep the pellet dry during heavy rains and the monsoones?<br>I also belive that you also have quite a humid climate.</div><div>How does the pellet react to that?</div><div>What is your "normal" moisture content in pellets and/or rawmaterials?</div><div><br></div><div>I very much agree with you:</div><div>People has to be given an option and your Govenment should start subsidizing the pellet production, as a start.</div><div><br></div><div>Well done and good luck.</div><div><br></div><div>Kindly</div><div><br></div><div>Otto<br><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div>> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 06:57:19 +0700<br>> From: mnurhuda@ub.ac.id<br>> To: stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org<br>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] More on the Alternatives to Charcoal.<br> </div><div>> Dear all stovers,<br>> <br>> I am from Java, but not central Java as Crispin and World Bank team are<br>> mostly visiting.<br>> <br>> Dense forest in Java is now just a story. We do not have anymore dense,<br>> big rainfall forest. Not only in Java, even in other island like Borneo or<br>> Sumatra. Probably in Papua there are still big forest, but I am very<br>> skeptic if in the next 5 or 10 years these dense forests still do exist.<br>> There are currently massive deforestation due to palm plantation.<br>> <br>> We propose, regarding the clean cookstove initiative phase I, which<br>> targeting 10 million stove users between 2014-2020, not to use woods as<br>> fuel, but the agriculture and plantation residues. We have provided simple<br>> calculation, that rice straw alone can be feedstock for pellets sufficient<br>> for 164 Million house holds in Indonesia. How does this number come?<br>> <br>> The rice grain production in year in all Indonesia is 70.4 Million tons.<br>> The ration between dry rice straw to dry rice grain is always between<br>> 1.1-2, but mostly 1.44. The total dry rice straw as byproduct of rice<br>> farming will be around 100 million tons in year. When the straw is<br>> converted to pellet, around 10% of mass will be lost. Thus, from 100<br>> Million tons of rice straw we can get 90 million tons pellets. Assuming<br>> that each house hold needs only 1,5 kg pellet daily, the pellet will<br>> suffice for 164 millions house holds.<br>> <br>> The agriculture and plantation residues are not only rice straw, but also<br>> rice husks, cornstalk, sugar cane, grass and still a lot. All can be used<br>> as pellet feedstock. There are many big companies in Indonesia ready to<br>> produce the pellet, if the governments give supports and the market for<br>> pellet is open.<br>> <br>> All we have to do is introducing the change. We have to make the people<br>> aware that they can not rely at all to log woods as well as to subsidized<br>> LPG and kerosene.<br>> <br>> Kind regards<br>> M. Nurhuda<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> > Crispin,Thanks for your quick reply.<br>> > Like allways, you have an answer to everything and enjoy your stay in the<br>> > dense forest of Java or Canada.Replacing trees is not a new idea on the<br>> > planet, only linked to Canada.In the jungle the forest are dense, but not<br>> > so heavily populated, that I know of.If you are still using charcoal for<br>> > cooking (not grilling) in Canda, I wish you good luck.<br>> > Pellet have been on the marked in Sweden for almost three decades.<br>> > I was mainly commenting Paul M, but anyway you are of the same part and<br>> > parcel.<br>> > I am not here to entertain you and your fellow followers, but here to<br>> > pinpoint that there are other options than charcoal.There is no need of<br>> > reporting, what we allready know.<br>> > We are not forcing matters on anybody, just trying to give them an option,<br>> > linked to stoves and FUEL.<br>> > If I should check all your previous posts, I would be busy into the next<br>> > century and I have better ways to spend my time.<br>> > We dont need to be told obvious facts, again and again, when we know of<br>> > the mountains of vaste materials through out the planet.The most important<br>> > issue is to find ways to utilize it in a smart an rational way.<br>> > To keep on pushing the old fashion metodes dont direct us in the right<br>> > direction, as far as I know.People tend to stick to old and "secure"<br>> > metodes, known for decades, but does it create inventions and progress?<br>> > Have you ever tested a ND gasifier and the heat transfer to the pot?To<br>> > boil water in Norway, we need only 100 C at sea level, less at higher<br>> > altitudes.We do not need tempertures at the melting point of the pot.The<br>> > gasifier produces heat around 550 - 750C to the pot stand, depending on<br>> > which type of biomass used.<br>> > I do not consider a charcoal producer, as you say, "a good or bad guy".i<br>> > have met several of them during my time as a forest officer in Zambia.<br>> > They are hard working people, struggeling to feed their families with some<br>> > "cash crop" from the forest, "free of charge".They do not do it because<br>> > they, "like it", but because it is the only option they have for some<br>> > income.<br>> > Either way, they normaly get 150 kg of charcoal out of 1 tonne of<br>> > wood.Thats the fact of to day in Zambia and many other African countries.<br>> > This should also be reflected in your calculation on MJ/kg.Most of the<br>> > energy content to produce the charcoal on the truck has been consumed in<br>> > the forest and into the thin air, dont you see?I consider that vaste of<br>> > energy, so your calculation is bit more complex than you seems to know.<br>> > The prices are very much linked to the marked and you cant compare<br>> > firewood and charcoal, as woodchips and charcoal, because of the fact that<br>> > woochips will last longer and be more fuel efficient in a gasifier, than a<br>> > treestone fire or an improved woodstove.On the other hand we do not need<br>> > to use wooden biomass in a gasifier.You cant compare apples and oranges,<br>> > either by taste or price. They are fruits, yes, but still totally<br>> > different.<br>> > Why do you think Phiilps have started producing gasifiers in Maseru?Do you<br>> > feel they are stupied or commented?<br>> > Everbody on this list know about the energy chain of charcoal, I belive,<br>> > and do not need to be highlighted every now and then.<br>> > To use residues from platations, like in Rwanda, to produce charcoal is of<br>> > course a better option than using indigionus forest.But if you dont forsee<br>> > an unefficient and harmfull industry, before it is to late, you are in<br>> > trouble".<br>> > Enjoy the dense forest of Java, whilest you can.I have heard stories about<br>> > heavy logging to create palmoil platations and utilize the char as<br>> > biochar.<br>> > Trees are renewable, IF you LEAVE them for a while, that is the big<br>> > question and bushfires will come and go wheter we like it or not.<br>> > Otto<br>> ><br>> > From: crispinpigott@gmail.com<br>> > To: stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org<br>> > Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 19:54:30 +0700<br>> > Subject: Re: [] More on the Alternatives to Charcoal.<br>> ><br>> > Dear Otto Well it can truly be said that your posts are entertaining. Let<br>> > me (once again) set you straight about some things you say I am saying by<br>> > point out what I am not saying and what I do say. I think it matters if<br>> > you wont to hold a conversation. >I am on the other hand, very sad to see<br>> > the scepticism and disbelive in people to be able and willing to change in<br>> > developing countries. I have no such skepticism. I am reporting what<br>> > people do. You are welcome to help them change. If the change you bring is<br>> > not wanted, they will not popularise it. >Your arguments are very much<br>> > based on that "people never change” or are to ignorant to even consider<br>> > doing that. I made no such argument at all. I want you (I am asking for<br>> > the how-many-eth time?) to consider the whole equation. I am not<br>> > pre-judging the answer, I am with Paul M looking at all facets of a<br>> > calculation I have made for you in the past. You are welcome to check the<br>> > old posts. The equation does not change if it is all-inclusive. >…They<br>> > should be given an option to be part of the value chain from raw materials<br>> > out of agri- and forest residues to production of woodchips, pellets and<br>> > briquettes, just like in the charcoal “industry”. I completely agree with<br>> > this idea. If we do not consider the economic impact of decisions about<br>> > technology there are many unintended consequences. Charcoal is definitely<br>> > an industry, and it is a biofuel industry. It is a well-developed industry<br>> > with a clear value chain. >2. We are not talking about raw wood and wood,<br>> > only, but residues. which normally are wasted on the fields and inthe<br>> > forests. There is a great deal of waste from agriculture and forestry.<br>> > About ½ the mass of a tree is left on the forest floor after cutting –<br>> > according to South African data on managed forest plantation. >Charcoal is<br>> > lighter by weight, but consuming in volume. Yes it is less dense but<br>> > people pile the trucks up very high until they are overloaded. Changing to<br>> > moving wood will not move more tons in the same number of trucks, if that<br>> > is what you were getting at. The same number of overloaded tons would be<br>> > moved with a much lower heat content. They do not dry the wood in rural<br>> > areas. Not for long anyway, but they could. That is part of the equation.<br>> > >But dont forget that in a ND gasifier, or as we like to call it, a Micro<br>> > Kiln, you will utilize the gases in the biomass for cooking and your<br>> > calculation on MJ/kg will fall apart. When we look at the calculation of<br>> > the MJ delivered into the pots, we will see the result. I am not<br>> > speculating, I am calculating. We can calculate for the present<br>> > conditions. We can calculate from improved charcoal production technology,<br>> > utilisation of charcoal fines, utilisation of small branches presently<br>> > wasted, utilisation of agriwastes for charcoal and the use of slash (the<br>> > branches and thinning from plantations). We can also remember that after a<br>> > forest fire most of the partly burned tree wood that cannot be sawn and<br>> > sold is made into charcoal. >Traditional charcoal making, looses more than<br>> > 50-70% of the energy content in the biomass during production. Yes, let us<br>> > suppose it is 50% to be generous to the charmaker think of him as a ‘good<br>> > guy’ for a change. He does a good job and produces 50% of the original<br>> > energy in the form of char. Now let us put a quantity of wood onto a truck<br>> > and a quantity of charcoal of the same mass onto another truck. Who is<br>> > carrying more energy? The charcoal truck of course. How much? About<br>> > double. That means the energy cost of getting the fuel to the customer is<br>> > twice as much. When selling wood from trees as fuelwood, will it only be<br>> > the parts of the tree that are ‘nice to use’ of all of it? I think only<br>> > the bits that will sell. Large pieces can be split but that is a lot of<br>> > work. I am pointing out that not all the wood from a tree makes saleable<br>> > firewood, just like not all the charcoal that gets made gets sold. Of the<br>> > price, the transport is often 50% or more of the cost to the consumer.<br>> > Because the cost of moving wood (per MJ) is twice that of charcoal, the<br>> > landed cost of wood, even if it cost ½ as much to begin with, is now equal<br>> > to that of charcoal. The wood chopper chopped the tree, dried it a bit,<br>> > got ½ as much money for it per MJ (assuming he is willing to do that) and<br>> > because of transport, the cost per useful MJ in the city is the same as<br>> > charcoal. So we have two fuels with different prices per kg but the same<br>> > price per MJ of useable heat. No, put the fuel into a stove. The charcoal<br>> > stove is going to be 25-40% efficient. Here we have 50% efficient ones but<br>> > I am being generous. Not everyone has good $3 stoves. If the wood stove is<br>> > not as energy efficient (calculated on the raw fuel consumed), it costs<br>> > more to run. Simple as that. Checking prices for wood in Maputo these<br>> > numbers hold up. Wood is over-priced per MJ and people avoid it. >How can<br>> > you argue that charcoal is a better option, when you bring the raw<br>> > materials, sundried, to the consumer and they are actually making and<br>> > burning their own char, while cooking? I am not arguing for charcoal, I<br>> > am reporting the energy train that exists and the costs and what people<br>> > do. I do not do it, they do. >Traditional charcoal making is also produced<br>> > from indigenous trees and bring a heavy tall to the forest in protected<br>> > areas. In some cases it is, in other, not so. Rwanda has been an<br>> > interesting case study for transforming this. Virtually all the charcoal<br>> > sold in Rwanda comes from woodlots on private land, and there is a lot of<br>> > it sold. You can ask Robert van der Plas about it. >In the Northern<br>> > Hemisphere, we do NOT turn the firewood into charcoal, unless we like to<br>> > bring up high temperatures and melt down iron for steel production, like<br>> > in the old days, when I was young………:) Charcoal is widely sold as a<br>> > cooking fuel in Canada. >Dont be so arrogant and pretend that people in<br>> > developing countries are ignorant and dont SEE, when given an option, pls.<br>> > I have just demonstrated above that people are very wise about their<br>> > decisions regarding fuels and prices and pots and convenience. Perhaps you<br>> > could consider why they prefer to purchase charcoal. Just because an<br>> > industry is not as efficient as it could be does not mean you shut down<br>> > the industry. >3. The Natural Draft - ND gasifiers, are lit form the<br>> > top, yes, and that is the whole key to pyrolysis and production of<br>> > char-coal in an efficient and proper manner. The ND gasifiers currently<br>> > available have several shortcomings and if they did not, I believe they<br>> > would be a lot more popular. >The Forced Draft (gasifiers driven by fan),<br>> > operates a bit differently and consume the char. Natural draft gasifiers<br>> > are quite capable of burning the char. It is important not to limit the<br>> > discussion to certain stoves that cannot. Alexis makes fan gasifiers that<br>> > make charcoal and do not burn it. Both are possible and both are<br>> > available. >4. I cannot see the difference between hauling charcoal,<br>> > pellets, briquettes or woodchips, pls highlight me. I have covered that.<br>> > Cost per ton is fixed. Energy per ton is not. Each fuel type is different.<br>> > >There is “no” need to develop any new low prized technology, Its already<br>> > there.Even bicykles and wheel borrows can ferry pellets, briquettes and<br>> > woodchips, not in the same number of bags as charcoal, but very much the<br>> > same quantity in terms of MJ/kg. What is the MJ/kg in the different<br>> > fuels? Wood at 16% moisture is about 15.5 MJ/kg. Charcoal at 2% is about<br>> > 29.3 MJ. Chips are wood. Agricultural waste is about 12-14 MJ. Pelleted<br>> > agri-wastes are about 16. >5. Do you know how much work and efforts in<br>> > terms of manpower, it takes to produce a bag of charcoal? Do you know how<br>> > much to produce an equal amount of energy in the form of chopped and split<br>> > and dried wood? Pellets? Chips? >…The technology is not NEW and very much<br>> > improved over the years The Chinese are producing a lot and have plans to<br>> > produce more in the next years but it has to be subsidised because of<br>> > production and distributions costs. The machinery suffers a lot. >For how<br>> > long can it be possible to chew on the same biscuit?Isnt it high time to<br>> > test a different brand or content? Ask people to try. We promote anything<br>> > that works that people are willing to buy. I am of course not involved in<br>> > the fuel supply chains, I just watch and measure. >For how long can we<br>> > accept to see people cutting the branch, they are both literally and<br>> > actually sitting on? For as long as trees grow. Trees are renewable (if<br>> > you leave them alone for a while). Western Canada has billions of them<br>> > planted after forests are cut. Thanks for pitching some interesting<br>> > points. RegardsCrispin in Central Java where they are drowning in biomass<br>> > and burn it to get rid of it.<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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/<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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/<br>> ><br>> ><br>> <br>> <br>> <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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/<br>> <br></div></div> </div></body>
</html>