[Gasification] Making char vs producer gas

[David Murphy]

Peter, I am absolutely thrilled to see that you 
are commercialising your brillant gasifier at last !

David Murphy.

On 19/03/2014 2:10 PM, Peter Davies wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> Sorry if the slowness of my own response makes 
> the conversation a bit disjointed but I have 
> other priorities taking up my time. To be clear 
> our system produces both engine grade gas at the 
> top end of the heating value range for naturally 
> aspirated down draft gasifiers AND concurrently 
> a useful high quality char output, there is no 
> "perhaps" about it. The systems gas outputs were 
> independently collected and tested on several 
> occasions and I have provided you with copies of 
> lab certificates as courtesy in the past. I 
> respect the right of others to doubt, and 
> understand your own commercial interests here, 
> but I only make comment where I feel it can add 
> some value and to encourage others to question 
> old narrow system specific wisdom's and explore 
> for themselves.
>
> In regard your suggestion of a conflict with 
> some other person you don't publicly name you 
> overstep considerably in any understanding of my 
> circumstances, nor do I appreciate attempts at 
> lumping me in with the same behavior I abhor. 
> Raising such red herrings in the middle of a 
> discussion has no place and only detracts from it.
>
> In regard "cheap" words this is why we spent 
> considerable time and money traveling systems 
> 7500km to successful public demonstrations since 
> 2009 including one on the lawns of Parliament 
> House Canberra, not a venue for the feint 
> hearted or place for a system that did not work. 
> Running a small second hand 16hp twin cylinder 
> engine on the gas whilst operating a concurrent 
> smokeless flare and producing charcoal, all with 
> a gasifier tied on a trailer that only had crude 
> gas cooling and no filtering! A notable comment 
> from one of the pollies present at the time (now 
> the Federal Minister for Industry) was that 
> "...you are a brave man, running a old Briggs 
> Stratton engine in preference to a new reliable 
> Honda!" I am sure yourself and many far less 
> honorable would wish for us to reveal intimate 
> details of our designs, however I cannot be 
> goaded into it.  There are many on this list who 
> have genuine and commercial gasification 
> technologies who do not always contribute to 
> discussions and certainly don't share 
> proprietary information.
>
> As for due diligence we expect and encourage it 
> always and in our own case are commercialising 
> our systems in the first instance through 
> leasing or JV arrangements where we take the 
> financial risk, no performance no pay. As this 
> is being done through our own resources, not 
> sucking in mug investors or otherwise ripping 
> people off it is necessarily a task requiring 
> patience, but we now have >1.2MWe worth of 
> systems being prepared right now, the first of 
> which have successfully gone through 
> commissioning testing (including cold starts on 
> dry wood chip) and will now be deployed over the 
> coming weeks into a range of commercial 
> settings.  It is not important to us whether 
> commentators on this or any other list believe 
> it to be true.
>
> I respect your knowledge Doug, in the past it 
> has given me insights that when working with our 
> own designs have led to break through in 
> understanding and ultimately a different way of 
> doing things that has substantially improved 
> performance at every level. I don't pretend to 
> know everything about gasification, but my own 
> experience over 30 years is that I don't know 
> anyone who does. This is what makes the journey 
> of discovery exciting and if our own success has 
> taught us anything it is that there is much more 
> yet to learn, and other people sharing their 
> failures does indeed help with this. Happily 
> gasification wins are coming.
>
> Kind regards,
> Peter
>
>
> On 3/16/2014 3:37 PM, Doug wrote:
>> Hi Peter and Colleagues.
>>
>> Sorry for the delay in this reply:
>