[Gasification] TLUD BEST

Tom Miles tmiles at trmiles.com
Sat Dec 17 11:40:29 CST 2011



Thanks for the observations.


Burning forest slash is CO2 neutral at the very least. The benefits when the charcoal is used in the forest are in soil health and water quality. No doubt there are models that show the net improvement in the carbon cycle from carbonizing slash. 


Blanket strips could be used just as you have suggested for the turf. Unlike the turf the blankets could be reused on several piles. The total cost of treatment should be less than using a portable kiln like a modified air curtain incinerator ( www.airburners.com ) or a mobile pyrolyzer to make oil (http://www.advbiorefineryinc.ca/technology/). 


The benefit of using the TLUD approach is to have a cleaner burn than a typical earth kiln approach. 


You're welcome to come out and stimulate our pyromania. 


Happy Holidays




From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Reed
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 8:45 AM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification; Paul Anderson; Hugh McLaughlin; Kathy Nafie
Cc: knothj at uw.edu
Subject: [Gasification] TLUD BEST


Tom Miles and all


First let me reiterate the warning that TLUD charcoal making is not CO2 negative unless you have also a use for the heat GENERATED in the pyrolysis gas fire.  Wood is 50% carbon, and if you get a 20% yield of charcoal, you have put 30% back in the air as CO2 sooner than if the wood rotted.  So 1 ton of wood gave 400 lb of charcoal and (1600x44/12) 5.87 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.


Unless you cook or generate electricity with the heat, in which case you are doubly CO2 negative by replacing propane or other fossil fuel for cooking!



I like the idea of the blanket, but not the $1500 it would cost and the time it would take to develop.    How about TURF.


Classic charcoal at the time of Napoleon ( he burned down the forests to make cannons) involved stacking many cords of wood around a central chimney made of poles and covering it with turf, leaving a smoke hole at the top.  Small air entries were made at the base and fires lit.  For quite a while the smoke was white as water vapor was expelled amd the wood dried.  Then the smoke turned yellow, as pyrolysis began, and finally blue when the charcoal was burning.  Then seal the bottom up tight and wait another few days for it to cool.  Strip off the turf and you have a beautiful pile of charcoal.  


I have been tempted to replicate the above method on a small scale in my back yard next  April when we are allowed to burn.  But I would substitute TOP LIGHTING with burning off of the pyrolysis gases as they are formed and regulation of the burn rate by adjusting the air inlet holes.  Make a TURFTLUD.


I hope you will discuss this with your friends at UW.  I would even be willing to fly out for a meeting and maybe small tests if you have a secret burn spot.  


Onward to more charcoal with cleaner air.


Tom Reed,   Dr. PGas

Dr Thomas B Reed 

The Biomass Energy Foundation


On Dec 17, 2011, at 11:00 AM, "Tom Miles" <tmiles at trmiles.com> wrote:



The pyromid looks like a good  in-woods approach to converting slash to biochar.


Do you think that the pyrolysis blanket that is being developed by Carbon Cultures (Jenny Knoth U Washington) can be used to improve the performance of the pyromid? 


See video and story at: 








Tom Miles


From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org [mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Reed
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 6:43 AM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification; STOVES
Subject: Re: [Gasification] gasifier type updarft use rice husk


Dear gassers and Stovers


Using any size TLUD device including an open PYROMID, and any junk biomass, we all have easy access to as much charcoal as we could ever need, for the first time in history.


Furthermore, Hugh McLaughlin tells me that, while it's not true activated charcoal, made with steam or CO2 at 800C, it has significant absorption capacity (iodine no 400?) since it is made at 500-800 C.  I hope Hugh or Frank will comment.  


So we really have no excuse for cleaning up TLUD gas if we wish to.  


I'm waiting for a good analysis of TLUD gas.  I suspect after cleaning it will have significantly more energy than the typical 5.5 MJ/m3 or 150 Btu/ scf of downdraft Woodgas, since the air fuel ratio for pyrolysis is only 1-1.5, rather than the 3.5 for complete gasification of the cellulose lignin package that is wood.   So, as a first guess, with 1/3 the A/F ratio, I'm guessing 3x the energy content, of 4.5 MJ/m3 or 450 Btu/scf.  Compare to natural gas at 1000 Btu/ scf. 


I'd sure like to see some comments from all you practical guys (and dolls?) out there.  




Tom Reed.   Dr WoodGas



Dr Thomas B Reed 

The Biomass Energy Foundation


Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Gasification at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20111217/e2354630/attachment.html>

More information about the Gasification mailing list