<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 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:0in;
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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
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]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-CA" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Thanks Norbert, I will take a look at this and see how to use my new calculation model to support this method.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">For example, I do everything on a wet basis, so all the moisture in the wood fuel is accounted for in the mass balance. I even separate the H2O in the flue gas generated from
the combustion of hydrogen in the wood from the evaporated moisture in the wood fuel. These two quantities of H2O are then added together in the wet flue gas.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I also have a dry volume basis calculation since that is how the dry flue gases are measured in the field. I designed the model to blend both lab analysis data for the wood and
LHV efficiency with field data for emission measurements and HHV efficiency. It should be fun to figure this all out.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Norbert Senf [mailto:norbert.senf@gmail.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> December 18, 2017 11:43 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Law, Steven (MOECC)<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Ronal W. Larson; Discussion of biomass; mhatech@yahoogroups.com; Sauve, Terrence (OMAFRA); John Ackerly<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Stoves] Top lit updraft combustors<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Thanks, Steven. That's great.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Our experience with domestic-scale cordwood in masonry heaters (50 lb batches @20% moisture) is that the "boiling of water" or latent heat loss is typically in the 13% range, using the Condar spreadsheet HHV calculation
<a href="http://heatkit.com/docs/condar.PDF">heatkit.com/docs/condar.PDF</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Law, Steven (MOECC) <<a href="mailto:Steven.Law@ontario.ca" target="_blank">Steven.Law@ontario.ca</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Hello all,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I have finally completed a proper study of reporting efficiency using LHV and HHV. It was much more complicated than
I thought it would be, and now I know why this is such a mess!</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Just remember that HHV is always less than LHV, and anything above 100% is WRONG and cannot possibly conserve energy
or mass and is therefore unscientific.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">When an LHV efficiency from Europe is 90% (which is actually a reasonable number), the HHV efficiency is a maximum of
84% or usually less, depending on the moisture content of the wood fuel and is more typically 75-80%. This is important, HHV efficiency is extremely dependent on fuel moisture whereas LHV is less so, but only for non-condensing boilers.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Again, this is for non-condensing combustion devices, because when you throw in high efficiency condensing heat recovery
all the numbers get screwy and LHV no longer applies. Everything has to be re-done for condensing boilers and only HHV can be used, I will repeat LHV cannot be used for anything where condensation of the flue gas occurs in the heat recovery device!</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I think I have a proper engineering calculation procedure mapped out to deal with all of the above issues and I will
begin to roll this out a little bit at a time since I need to review it again before sending anything out. It is a scientific method that is based on conservation of mass and energy and I hope that this new calculation procedure will help to solve some current
problems in the industry.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Best regards, Steven</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Norbert Senf<br>
Masonry Stove Builders<br>
25 Brouse Road, RR 5<br>
Shawville Québec J0X 2Y0<br>
819.647.5092<br>
<a href="http://www.heatkit.com" target="_blank">www.heatkit.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>