<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 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-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.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Crispin, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>g/ton doesn’t make much sense. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Does the EPA have a reference fuel with an HHV or LHV in MJ/kg or GJ/ton?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Tom<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_MailEndCompose"><o:p> </o:p></a></p><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose'></span><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Crispin Pemberton-Pigott<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 05, 2018 2:31 PM<br><b>To:</b> Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Stoves] Stoves Digest, Vol 95, Issue 3<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Dear Norbert<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>In fact I have a number for you – forces out by the need to match some emissions per ton burned used by the JICA team in Ulaanbaatar which is doing the air shed modelling. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>The metric is mass of PM2.5 per ton burned. It makes no reference to the energy in the fuel per kg or to the efficiency of the stove (which is why it is a dumb metric). All the same, I believe the incoming EPA target (2022, possibly delayed?) is 13 g/ton burned. Perhaps you can correct that number.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>The current crop of space heating and water heaters (hydronic heaters) is 0.09 kg per ton, or 0.7% of the <i>future</i> EPA target for wood stoves. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Properly accounted for, meaning considering the energy available in a ton of fuel and the efficiency of the stove at delivering it, the metric is mass emitter per MJ delivered (MJ<sub>NET</sub>) and the number is 6 mg for the high power only, flat-out heating test (SEET Lab, UB) and 0.4 mg for the Hebei Farmer’s heating and cooking sequence.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Because these test sequences are contextual they are not directly comparable, save with similar tests in the neighbourhood. So the relevant comparison is a relative on: how much is the reduction compared with the baseline. In the case of the UB flat-out high power test, the reduction is just over 99%. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Crispin<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Stoves <<a href="mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Norbert Senf<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 05, 2018 12:03 PM<br><b>To:</b> Discussion of biomass <<a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Stoves] Stoves Digest, Vol 95, Issue 3<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>On 7/5/2018 9:01 AM, Harold Annegarn wrote: <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Dear Paul, Andrew and list<br><br>I would like to add my voice to a request for coal stoves (home cooking and<br>heating) to be added back to the discussion topics for stove list.<br><br>I agree with Andrew's comments that the diversion into climate change was<br>way off topic and should not be part of this list. But the fact that such<br>abuse occurred is not to my mind valid reason to blacklist the entire<br>domain of coal stoves. There are are of the world where coals (of various<br>types) are the dominant energy carrier, and the techniques for clean<br>burning stoves, whether coal or modern biomass, rely on the same underlying<br>principles of physics, chemistry and industrial design.<br><br>Please do not allow populist sentiment against coal as a source of long<br>term climate pollution detract from the near-term necessity to burn it as<br>cleanly as possible until the longed for utopia when we all live in a<br>pollution free planet, with no war, hunger or inequality (or smelly<br>domestic combustion fuels!).<o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>I would second Prof. Annegarn's request. My own interest lies in clean burning heating stoves. Our particular<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>learning curve, which includes PM measurement, has resulted in cordwood burning stoves that are<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>twice as clean as pellet stoves (in terms of "EPA PM number").<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>We do have a wood burning cookstove at home, and have been cooking on it for the last 45 years, <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>so cookstoves are also of interest.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>On the combustion side, I have learned a lot from Crispin, and he serves on our Masonry Heater<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Association technical committee. I follow his coal burning adventures with interest. I first met Dr.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Tami Bond online on this list in the 90's, when she was pursuing her PhD studies on coal burning stoves in <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>China. Crispin's PM numbers for coal burning stoves sound too good to be true, so I look forward<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>to getting the "EPA PM number" some day, for an apples-to-apples comparison with wood.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>-- <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-CA>Norbert Senf<br>Masonry Stove Builders<br>25 Brouse Road, RR 5<br>Shawville Québec J0X 2Y0<br>819.647.5092<br><a href="https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heatkit.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5d5c88fd7efd4a50f8ab08d5e290ed96%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636664034435024186&sdata=JJXuMnFDzxt43g3fN5nKrW3VrHSUiot9FQHEglFQRB8%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">www.heatkit.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></body></html>