<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Ron, (and to Frank regarding his comment presented at the end)<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/22/2017 7:53 PM, Ronal W. Larson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:F659EC3F-F2AD-4573-85CE-F5E9EADA184E@comcast.net">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size:
18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto;
text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255,
255, 255); float: none; display: inline !important;"
class="">[Anderson wrote: Crispin and I have long ago
come to agreement that energy efficiency is not the same as
fuel efficiency.</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica;
font-size: 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps:
normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal;
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto;
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><b
class="">[RWL: I do not know how to interpret this. Can you or
Crispin express this statement in equation terms? <br>
</b></blockquote>
<br>
No. When dealing with two different concepts (energy viewed as MJ
and fuel viewed as tree or piece of wood) that each have different
parameters for being evaluated, writing an equation that reflects
only one shared parameter or variabled (in this case it is units of
energy) will not carry forward the other important parameters (such
as the other uses of pieces of wood or the need -- or not need --
to protect forests in different environments.) One of those other
parameters is the "value of charcoal" which canNOT be ONLY expressed
in terms of energy content. <br>
<br>
$ value of MJ does NOT equal the $ value of wood (trees) with
equivalent number of MJ.<br>
<br>
$ value of charcoal does NOT equal the $ value of MJ / 3 (assuming
2/3 of the MJ are being lost when the charcoal is made).<br>
<br>
Crispin and I stopped agrueing about this a long time ago. The
concepst of fuel and energy are different. And this becomes much
more evident when discussing "char-making stoves" where there is a
useful by-product (or co-product), and not just buring all the way
to ashes.<br>
<br>
For eons of time, combustion science has as part of its mission the
extraction of as much energy as possible from whatever might be the
"fuel" (immediate source of the energy). But it happens that the
simple Migratory Pyrolytic Front (MPF) that occures in TLUD stoves
makes charcoal in a batch mode, mainly without consuming much of
the created. Regular fires are consuming the charcoal during the
standard burning processes. <br>
<br>
Energy in Wood fuel = the Energy in the Pyrolytic Gases + the
Energy in Created charcoal.<br>
<br>
I like the comment from Frank earlier today:
<blockquote type="cite">The other side of the coin is the total
carbon going to the secondary [combustion should be used when]
determining the efficiency of that energy being used for the
task. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think Frank is saying that the "energy efficiency" of a TLUD stove
should be measured in relation to the energy in the pyrolytic
gases. And that means leaving aside the charcoal for separate
discussion. <br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.drtlud.com">www.drtlud.com</a></pre>
</body>
</html>