<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Tom: <br><br>I agree with your characterization of the differences between Europe and US on biomass power and would only add that a) US grids being much larger and longer have permitted absorption of cheaper solar and wind generation within state and inter-state markets, and b) in some cases, solar and wind compete on peak that biomass cannot. <br><br>The question is, are there areas of large-scale biomass waste with smaller grids and can be valorized for a higher return? There are probably pockets in the developing countries where land is ample and biomass waste has other commercial values - e.g. direct combustion in brick kilns, industrial furnaces and boilers. When it came to electricity, I used to believe that small hydro is a superior alternative but I am disappointed. True, hydro is easier to run than engines with biomass gas or biodiesels, and pricing of independent electricity for distribution is another factor. But self-generation by biomass should be revisited for the commercial and industrial customers. For all we know, running a residential school or hospital on biomass power for cooking, heating, and other electricity may solve the air quality, waste management, and productivity problems at one go. <br><br>I see a lot about PV/diesel hybrids. But next to nothing yet on PV/biomass hybrids. Perhaps because of the problems in consistent quality and quantity of biomass supplies or suppliers. <br><br>Nikhil<br> <br><div><div dir="ltr" class="m_-6542043674718108126gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div> </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 1:59 PM <<a href="mailto:tmiles@trmiles.com" target="_blank">tmiles@trmiles.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The intent of these lists is to provide forums for discussion. As the list<br>
owner and sole sponsor I'm not concerned about the amount of traffic on a<br>
particular list. A new topic of interest usually emerges when we think it<br>
might be time to shut down a list. <br>
<br>
There is an active wood gas group on Yahoo that deals with small scale<br>
engine applications. <br>
<br>
Small scale power generation has been the focus of the<br>
<a href="mailto:gasification@bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">gasification@bioenergylists.org</a> list since 1996. Making syngas to produce<br>
liquid fuels has not been a frequent topic. <br>
<br>
While there are thousands of small scale gasifiers in operation they seem to<br>
land in two areas: low cost rice husk gasifiers to power SE Asian rice<br>
mills; and, expensive chip and pellet systems in developed economies. The<br>
rice husk systems often operate seasonally. They are very low cost and would<br>
not be acceptable to operate in most developed economies. Suppliers of those<br>
systems have occasionally posted on the gasification list. While these<br>
gasifier-engine systems do their intended job they apparently require high<br>
maintenance and operate for limited hours during the year. <br>
<br>
Most commercial gasifiers are in Europe where electricity is expensive<br>
relative to wood; where there is value in recovering waste heat from the<br>
engine; and where there are financial incentives for renewable energy. Many<br>
of them run 7000-8000 hours per year. They require wood fuel that meets<br>
tight size and moisture content specifications. One of the more recent<br>
companies has been making power efficiently at the 400-500 kWe scale with<br>
biochar as a coproduct. Those suppliers have difficulty finding<br>
opportunities in North America where fossil energy is cheap and where<br>
renewable energy from solar, wind and hydro are also cheap compared with<br>
biomass. Biomass energy in general has declined in North America due to<br>
lower cost alternatives. Three North American gasifier suppliers have found<br>
opportunities using wood and agricultural residues as fuel, sometimes<br>
including biochar as a co-product. They have been active on the gasification<br>
list in the past but recently have been concentrating on their market and<br>
product development.<br>
<br>
Pyrolysis and gasification are clearly important processes to understand for<br>
developing cook stoves and biomass heating appliances. TLUDs would be a<br>
prime example. These processes also help to understand products of<br>
incomplete combustion. But if you get the fuel, air, and design right then<br>
you can skip the conversation about the intermediate steps of pyrolysis and<br>
gasification. Let's talk about them as appropriate. <br>
<br>
Many thanks to Andrew for facilitating the discussion on this list and to<br>
all for contributing your experience and challenges. <br>
<br>
Tom<br>
Bioenergylists.org<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Stoves <<a href="mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>> On Behalf Of Andrew<br>
Heggie<br>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2019 4:09 AM<br>
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <<a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Stoves] The Blues<br>
<br>
On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 at 11:58, Andrew Heggie <<a href="mailto:aj.heggie@gmail.com" target="_blank">aj.heggie@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
> The gasification list has dwindled worse than stoves, there have been <br>
> no posts since November.<br>
<br>
Correction; I have checked the archive there were two posts on Wednesday but<br>
they went in my spam.<br>
<br>
Andrew<br> <br>
<br>
</blockquote></div></div>