December 1998 Gasification Archive

For more information to help people develop better stoves for cooking with biomass fuels in developing regions, please see our web site: http://www.bioenergylists.org

From elk at net2000ke.com Tue Dec 1 00:21:36 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:10 2004
Subject: Theoretical Yield of Charcoal
Message-ID: <199812010535.IAA20751@net2000ke.com>

Your input has been valuable, Tom & Kevin.One big difference in the process between carbonisation with the charcoal making stove (16 - 20% yield) and the downdraft sawdust kiln (23%) is that virtually no sawdust is allowed to burn through to ash in the latter. The stove, with it's lower yields, invariably had a small core of material that had progressed past charcoal to white ash - the 'sparkplug'.I've not had any other experience with charcoal production. Would yields below 23% be the result of this 'over-cooking' in most all cases?I'm working on the construction of my big sawdust pyrolyser now. It'll have five separate kilns operated sequentially. Also have a local engineering firm working on making a BIG meat-miner type extruder that'll (hopefully) replace the six small ones I'm currently running.UNHCR is coming out to the factory tomorrow to take a look at the process and product with an objective to introduce the charcoal vendor's waste briquettes into refugee camps here.I'll present a more formal report on this project to the group in a couple of days.elk~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Elsen L. Karstad , P.O. Box 24371 Nairobi Kenyaelk@net2000ke.com tel/fax (+ 254 2) 884437

From antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu Tue Dec 1 13:05:49 1998
From: antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Michael Antal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:10 2004
Subject: Theoretical Yield of Charcoal
In-Reply-To: <199811301450_MC2-61FD-1249@compuserve.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPX.4.03.9812010802140.9414-100000@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu>

Stovers: basically I agree with Tom's comments. Usually I qualify my
reference to charcoal as "high-quality charcoal", which I usually further
define as a charcoal with a VM of 30% or less. Anyone interested in
charcoal needs to define exactly the quality of charcoal, before
discussing yields. Regards, Michael Antal. P.S. We have realized yields
of a high quality charcoal in excess of 60 wt% from some feeds.

On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Tom Reed wrote:

> Dear All:
>
> There is no "theoretical" yield of charcoal (in spite of what Mike Antal
> says). I prefer to think of it as XCOAL where X is the degree of
> devolatilization or volatile cracking. Normal charcoaling at 450C produces
> typically 25% charcoal with 20% volatiles, the typical yield also in our
> inverted downdraft gasifier. Larger pieces can crack more volatilve for
> higher yields. Chemical treatment (ZnCl2 and Na2CO3) can increase yield.
> High pressure can produce up to 50% in Antal's process. But if you don't
> measure the volatile and energy content you don't know how charcoally it
> is. Get a prox-ult analysis.
>
> Higher temperatures can produce much smaller yields like 15% for
> metallurgical charcoal (600C) or 10% for activated charcoal (800C).
>
> So the original question is meaningless without a lot more specification.
>
> Yours, TOM
> REED
>
> Message text written by kchishol
> >
> Elk is getting in the order of 25% charcoal yield from his
> sawdust charcoal operation. If the theoritically attainable
> maximum yield was 26%, he is doing phenomenal. However, if
> the theoretical maximum is 50%, then he has lotsa
> opportunity for improvement.
>
> I would hypothesize that the maximum yield attainable in a
> real world operation would be from a charcoal retorting
> operation, running on bone dry sawdust. Would anyone have
> data on what yield could be expected in this case?
>
> The next question is a bit more difficult.: How can
> pyrolysis gases be processed to recover carbon?
> Specifically, the so-called "creosote" is a low grade form
> of "wood coke", in that it still has some volatiles present.
> The creosote or wood tar fraction is basically a complex
> C-O-H compound of some sort. If the -O-H elements could be
> removed, then there would be an additional yield of solid C.
> How can this be done? How much additional carbon yield could
> be attained, if this was possible?
>
> Kevin Chisholm
> <
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Tue Dec 1 13:32:10 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:10 2004
Subject: stoves and refrigeration
Message-ID: <v01540b01b289e0441024@[204.131.233.38]>

Stovers:
This very interesting new data from John Smallman on the
stove-powered refrigeration system. The issue is whether this can be used
effectively in developing countries to promote better charcoal-making -
with use of the otherwise wasted pyrolysis gases (such as being done by
Elsen Karstad).

John: 1) I do not believe that Jimm Bollman is part of the stoves list -
but I hope you will encourage him to do so.
2) It would be interesting to convert your $85 to today's $ and
then see how that compares to refrigerator (or maybe freezer) prices in the
same two years (1933 and 1998). My understanding is that stoves are both a
lot better (long lived, less electricity need, etc) and cheaper. Anyone on
the list able to make that comparison for us?
3) The "Figure of Merit" idea would be well worth pursuing.
4) I am wondering if there might be any better, new working fluids
around now, to replace the ammonia.
5) Thanks for this data and your promise to send more. Ron

RON:
Last Saturday Jimm Bollman had a successful run with his 70 year old
IcyBall. I don't know if he's connected to you by e-mail.
Today I tried mine out. There's no doubt that it works! 5 hours after
the charging sysle - just sitting on the floor beside me, there's still
at least a 25F temp differential between the two balls.
I plan to build some sort of cooler cabinet. In fact, I have the word
out to look for an original cabinet, but I doubt I'll be that lucky!
With a couple of thermometers, I can assess the actual cooling effect
available from a single charge. Some sort of lbs. of ice equivalent
perhaps even.
And you can bet that I'll be in touch when I have any quantitative
information - however approximate.

Incidentally, these things cost $85 back in the early 30's. Mechanism,
cabinet, stove etc etc. The whole works!

cheers

jrs

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Wed Dec 2 08:39:52 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: wood stoves in Haiti
Message-ID: <v01540b00b28af2fbe566@[204.131.233.43]>

Stovers: An interesting self-introduction, I hope Elsen has time to reply
on both charcoal-making stove and on the jiko market. I think we have one
or two others on the list interested in Haiti - who will also respond. Ron

Tom: This is just an initial acknowledgement as I am on another high
priority project today. I have signed you up and will unsign you after the
9th, if you will remind me. More later. Ron

>Wow! I thought I was the only one looking at improving charcoal
>stoves and then my brother sends me this site on the web. I'm new at it
>and would like to join the discussion/work/whatever.
>
> Unfortunately (?), I'm headed back to Haiti next week and will not
>have access to the internet (nor electricity, plumbing, etc) and will
>not be able to be an active participant in this discussion. I will
>still enjoy knowing that others are out there working on this issue.
>
> I'm currently spending about half my time in Haiti and the other half
>in Michigan earning money. The main focus of my efforts currently or on
>agricultural development (specifically preventing erosion and following
>up with returning the organic matter back into the soil). I'm new at
>this, only getting into it about two years ago. I'm on my own and
>working rather grassroots. I'm considering setting up a nonprofit
>organization in order to raise funds but I'm not sure the headaches are
>worth it. The only reasons I'm considering it is because there are
>projects I'd like to start in Haiti that would require my being there
>full-time.
>
> We've been planting Luecaena trees around the farmer's gardens. Would
>you believe they grew 20 feet tall the first year!? From seed no less!
>It wasn't until I realized how much money the people were paying for the
>charcoal produced from these trees that I started thinking about the
>stoves inefficiency. Oh, by the way, the trees grow back after being cut
>and the leaves are fed to the goats.
>
> I'm planning to order some Jiko stoves from Africa to trial with some
>of my neighbors. Are you familiar with them? Are there better ones out
>there? The construction sounds simple enough that were they accepted in
>Haiti I'd look into manufacturing them in Haiti.
>
> I cooked most of my own food (when I was home and not out working in
>other villages) with solar. I made my own cooker for about $6.00
>(including the scrap metal I painted black and put under the pot). It
>worked well enough. Made pizza for some Peace Corps volunteers passing
>through and often made bread as well. I figure the temps were near 300F.
>But try as I might I couldn't convince the Haitians to try cooking with
>this method (not that that was my goal). I have found that my
>demonstrating a new technique never works. It must intially be done by
>one of them. The planting of trees is something they can understand and
>hopefully will be confidence in trying something new. Perhaps the solar
>ovens will follow. It is just too far removed from the norm right now.
>
> Hey, I've gotta go as I'm borrowing my parents computer and they need
>to use it. Hope to hear from you soon (I leave on the 9th!). Please
>excuse me if I come across as rude or whatever. I'm new to the internet
>and don't know the rules. Thanks, Tom Braak

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Thu Dec 3 09:04:09 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Forwarding: On Haiti (by Peter Young)
Message-ID: <v01540b01b28c4b91d7bc@[204.131.233.36]>

Stovers: This just in from list non-member Peter Young:

Peter: Thanks very much. I'l bet this helps Tom a good bit. How about
sending us another message carrying each of your project areas further? I
think yours is the type of project the stoves list is trying hardest to
assist. What technical areas are needing the greatest work? What are the
biggest surprises to date? Ron

>Reply to Tom Braak
>
>Here is some background information on Haiti.
>
>Haiti Household Energy Program.
>
>Haiti is a desperately poor nation with an environment that has near
>collapsed due to deforestation caused both by expanding agriculture and
>charcoal production. Even today 90% of all urban households still use
>charcoal for cooking. All rural households use wood and agricultural
>residues. CARE in co-operation with the Bureau of Mines and Energy has
>designed and is implementing a household energy strategy to reduce the
>overall national charcoal consumption by 30% by the year 2002. This is not
>expected to reverse deforestation but at least reduce pressure on the few
>remaining farms with trees as well as provide some time for newly planted
>tress to get established.
>
>The program comprises three principal charcoal saving tactics and three
>supporting activities; (1) Promoting and commercializing improved stoves,
>amongst households and 'Manje Kwit' -roadside restaurants; (2) Promoting
>the use of new kerosene stoves, particularly amongst households who only use
>charcoal; (3) Encouraging greater use of gas in households who only
>partially use gas for cooking. Supporting activities include; (4) Small
>scale enterprise sector development, which will link with Credit
>institutions; (5) Research and surveillance of new and emerging energy
>saving options and (6) Impact monitoring on household energy interventions
>which will link with other CARE activities in the Natural Resources sector.
>
>Todate the project has evaluated 5 different improved charcoal stoves
>through trials in 120 households. An acceptable model for marketing has
>evolved from those trials and in the past 18 months 8000 units have been
>sold through a pilot marketing project and raised over US$25, 000 as revenue
>for 30 Artisans. This year the project is targeting to market 15,000 units
>in preparation for the launch of a national marketing campaign in 1999 which
>is expected to increase sales to 50,000 units per year.
>
>Kerosene stoves also remain an important option and over 20 different models
>have been tested in the laboratory and 6 models in household Trials. Whilst
>the tests have confirmed that enormous savings in charcoal as well
>expenditure can be achieved, the kerosene stoves themselves remain very
>problematic. This is a combination of poor technical design and a lack of
>care by the user. Further trails are planned to improve durability and ease
>of operation. However it must be said that some Modern Kerosene Stoves have
>remarkably clean combustion indistinguishable from gas. However, they do
>require more care and training than gas stoves, which is likely to make
>their acceptance more difficult to achieve.
>
>In September a program was started to improve energy efficiency in small
>enterprises, which includes a campaign to market improved stoves to 2000
>school canteens and 20,000 roadside restaurants and improved burners in 1000
>bakeries and 2000 dry cleaners.
>
>There are a few other NGO's and companies working on energy projects which
>include (i) Charcoal Briquetting using waste fines and have sold in the
>region of 60 tones; (ii) Briquetting Agricultural residues using manual
>presses from Malawi and (iii) the manual fabrication of Kerosene burners.
>
>The Household Energy Program currently comprises CARE staff which includes a
>Technical Advisor, 1 project coordinator for small scale enterprises, 2
>marketing coordinators for the Household sector and two technicians /
>trainers. The Bureau of Mines and Energies provide technical support
>through a Senior Energy Specialist, 2 Engineers and a newsletter editor.
>The project also hires occasional consultants.
>
>There are a number of short papers available from CARE on the overall energy
>situation in Haiti and on some of the results achieved todate. A quarterly
>newsletter has also been launched to share and in form Donors, NGO's and
>Government Agencies on household energy issues and solutions. An Energy
>Website is expected to be available online in January 1999.
>
>CARE and the Bureau of Mines also have a number of small research projects
>available for students with good French Language skills. However very
>little funding is available for the work and priority would be given to
>interested students with scholarships or some partial funding.
>
>
>Pete Young
>ITC/CARE-Haiti
>92 Rue Gregoire, Petion-Ville
>B.P 15546, Petion-Ville, Haiti
>Tel: 57-5380, 57-5358
>Fax: (509) 57-6785
>

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From kjellove at mail.nsb.norrkoping.se Thu Dec 3 17:30:17 1998
From: kjellove at mail.nsb.norrkoping.se (Kjell-Ove Martinsson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Condenser
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01b289e0441024@[204.131.233.38]>
Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981203232819.007a7100@mail.nsb.norrkoping.se>

I need help do calculate the dimensions of a proposed condenser for a
kitchen stove.

The condenser would consist of a 100 mm pipe of steel or stainless steel in
a water jacket. It would be in the form of two straight concentric tubes
replacing the chimney or coiled into a steel box.

The temperature of the flue gas is 900 C at most (correct?) and the water
temperature about 60 C, cooler at the top where the water enters and hotter
at the bottom where it exits.

The stove would have an effect of 10 kW.

How large will the surface of the condenser have to be?

No, I am not a schoolkid asking you to do my homework :-)

Kjell-Ove

From larcon at sni.net Fri Dec 4 11:20:27 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Andrew Sartain question on charcoal standards
Message-ID: <v01540b03b28d9a7d437f@[204.131.233.44]>

Stovers:

The following came in from non-list member (but earlier
contributor) Andrew Sartain <A.G.T.S@tesco.net>. I think the issue here is
an important one - of product standards. I wonder if any "stoves" list
members have references for us on standards - and in particular for
Andrew's request on flammability of charcoal.

Elsen - based on your recent posting that related to charcoal flammability
(greatly improved with a small electric fan), do you have any comments on
what such a standards test protocol should include?

Paul Hait - you might be our best expert on this sort of topic. Any thoughts?

Andrew said:

>I recently spoke to you with regards to a paper I am writing on the
>scientific analysis of charcoal to improve the domestic market for
>"burners" in the Chilterns, sponsered by (TWIG) trans woodland
>industries group. This entails testing imported with English charcoal.
>I recently found a standard which I am using as a guide, but I am
>aiming to do work toward a standard of our own. To date the differences
>are quite amazing, and looking to be a worthwhile project for the
>Chiltern woodland group to increase sales of barbeque charcoal.

>If any one has any suggestions about how I may test for ignitability
>please let me know.

>regards . Andrew Sartain
>

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Sun Dec 6 17:44:41 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Surface combustion....
Message-ID: <199812061744_MC2-62A4-FD8@compuserve.com>

Dear Skip, et al:

Vacation? I was working 7 days a week travelling nights. (Of course, if
you like gasification you'll like that schedule!)

Glad to see you using insulation. I have commented on insulation before in
both the STOVES and GASIFICATION nets, but I feel my comments mostly fall
on deaf ears. Commercial groups use it and succeed; amateurs don't and
don't.

As to the possible catalytic effect, this may be too strong a word. Flames
don't like told metal surfaces; they love hot ceramic surfaces, so burn
fine at the interface. We've had the same experience of clean burning on
riser sleeve surfaces.

~~~~~
In a related field, I am interested in "surface Combustion". I just bought
a propane heater for my lab (Winter is definitely here in Golden) and will
test it tomorrow, but the ceramic will probably glow at 900C. Does anyone
know of a good source of information on surface combustion? Specifically,
on my trip around the world I asked a number of "experts" and none knew.

In particular, I am puzzled by why the premixed air-fuel mixture doesn't
flash back to the mixer and burn rather than prefering the surface.

In particular, I am interested in whether some of the combustion air
arrives at the surface from the outside which would explain lake of
flashback..

In particular, I am interested in whether the Wellsbach Mantle lamp is
surface stabilized and gets air from outside.

Comments???

Yours truly, TOM REED

Message text written by "skip goebel"
>dear tom,
hope you enjoyed your vacation.
i want your 2 cents worth on something that i have discovered.
in my boiler fireboxes, i use to use 1/4" cerablanket soaked in rigidizer
and
it was excellent refractory. i recently changed to 1/2" and spray on the
rigidizer now.
well, the old stuff was smooth and furry while the new stuff is frizzy like

fiberglass.
even after a good fire, the entire firebox is spotless! with a good fire,
it
gets extreemely bright when you open the door and all the expanded metal
retainer is bright red. this is with dirty wet wood and is no doubt due to

the high refraction properties. ok. withthe old stuff, there would be a
soot
mark here and there but with this new stuff, nothing! the only thing that
i
come up with is that with the fibers extended instead of smooth and pleated
i
must be getting a catalitic reaction of sorts, the fibers being a few
thousands of an inch apart and the gasses passing over them??? must be
something cuz the metal retainer is red hot and the fire itself aint. if
this is so, then perhaps we have a cheap catalyst here. if one took a 6"
tube
say and kinda frizzed the material and lined the inside of the tube then
sprayed inthe rigidizer, you should have a reaction type tube of sorts.

nowdays i am so busy that i am not subscribed to the forum, but you could
post
this along with your comment to the forum if you wish.
if i am missing something here, sure would appreciate a response from you.
thanx
skip goebel
sensible steam

Thomas B. Reed: The Biomass Energy Foundation
1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401
303 278 0558V; 303 278 0560F
E-mail: reedtb@compuserve.com
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From elk at net2000ke.com Mon Dec 7 08:20:48 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (e. karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Sawdust Carbonising Report - Dec. 1998
Message-ID: <v01510102b2918620008e@[195.202.65.85]>

CARBONISING SAWDUST AND BRIQUETTING CHARCOAL FINES

A PROCESS IN DEVELOPMENT

NAIROBI KENYA

1998

1. OVERVIEW- SAWDUST UTILISATION IN KENYA

Sawdust is considered a waste product within Kenya. Very little is used,
the vast bulk of this material is simply dumped along roadsides or burnt on
site at sawmills. In both instances the material can be considered a toxic
waste- an environmental hazard. No figures are available at present for the
amount of sawdust being produced and discarded annually, but it is
estimated that 15% of a tree's biomass is lost to sawdust during the
milling process. If 60% of sawdust's energy was salvaged via carbonisation
and made available as a readily accepted cooking fuel, the net positive
environmental impact would be significant.

There are approximately 450 sawmills within Kenya alone, processing an
estimated 300,000 tons of wood per annum (air-dry weight). This equates to
45,000 tons of sawdust. At 23% conversion plus 25% clay binder, 12,938 tons
of charcoal briquettes could be produced representing an end-user value in
the region of USD $3,175,000.00

Charcoal is the most common urban fuel in East Africa, and a large and
extensive rural industry has grown to meet demand. In order to reduce the
pressure on forests and bushlands and to increase the overall efficiency of
the timber industry, it is advantageous to utilise sawdust as a fuel. There
has been little success in the development and dissemination of cookstoves
designed to accept sawdust as a primary fuel. Due to it's fine particulate
nature sawdust does not burn efficiently, primarily due to poor airflow.
The form of sawdust must therefore be altered in order for it to be used as
a fuel.

Briquetting is the standard method to form sawdust into agglomerates of a
larger size ranging from pellets to logs of several kilos in weight.
Expensive non-portable electrically powered plants using large amount of
energy press or extrude the sawdust- effectively melting the lignin and
forming a dense hard mass which burns a little less readily than wood and
does not represent a substitute for charcoal.

For obvious reasons this type of processing is not viable in Rural Kenya
and is not currently practiced. An alternate method must be found that does
not rely on heavy imported equipment, can be operated off the electrical
grid, and is reasonably portable. More importantly, the method must form
the basis of a sound and attractive economically viable industry that
directly addresses the woodfuel problem in Kenya.

2. THE PLAYERS

Elsen Karstad, an ecologist, together with John Njuguna and their Company
Tamfeeds Ltd. are responsible for design and development as well as
commercial development such as raw material purchase and finished goods
sales. The Stoves internet group (stoves@crest.org) provide important
technical advice. All developments are reported to the stoves group, and
can be found in the 'crest' archives as publicly accessible information.

3. THE PROCESS.

The most common cooking fuel in urban areas within Kenya is charcoal. This
is produced in the bush and transported to the towns and cities often over
hundreds of kilometers. Charcoal's popularity is due to it's smoke-free
burning characteristic, high calorific value and it's ease of transport.
Though the normal conversion rate from wood to charcoal in the field is
low- between 15 and 20%, it is more energy dense than wood, and is dry
(non-hydroscopic). Charcoal can therefore be economically transported over
relatively long distances.

Due to the rural locations of sawmills in Kenya, it is logical that sawdust
be transformed into charcoal briquettes. Transport to the urban market is
thereby made economically feasible. Existing technology generally relies on
large-scale plants that first briquette the sawdust and subsequently
carbonize to charcoal. We propose to do the opposite- carbonize first and
briquette second.

The process outlined here is of two distinct parts then; carbonization and
briquetting.

a. Carbonization

It is this area that the most innovation is required. To date there has
been no simple and small scale method devised for the carbonization of
sawdust. Some success has been realized at Tamfeeds with development of a
downdraft carbonizer that utilises flared gaseous products from the
carbonizing sawdust (volatiles) to maintain sufficient flue suction within
a chimney. This also has the highly desirable function of burning the
pollutant volatile gasses. An excellent yield of 23% charcoal from
air-dried sawdust has been consistently achieved. A scaled-up version of
the original successful carbonizer is currently being constructed that
should be capable of carbonising over 250 kg of dry sawdust per hour over
five separate flat-bed kilns operated sequentially. This could produce
approximately 1400 kg of charcoal powder over a 24 hour period and enable
one carboniser kiln to utilise the entire sawdust production from a large
Kenyan sawmill.

The sawdust must be dried to below 20% moisture in order to insure an
acceptable rate of pyrolysis and for efficient flaring of the volatile
gasses. Air and sun-drying of the sawdust requires labour and space.
Timber is usually cut while the wood is still 'green', and freshly produced
sawdust, in our experience, can contain up to 50% moisture. For material
spread out and dried on the ground, a moisture-barrier is necessary.
Plastic sheets serve this purpose well. Investigations into alternative
methods of drying both sawdust and the extruded briquette are being
undertaken at Tamfeeds.

The carboniser unit is simply constructed of sheet metal, old 200 liter
drums, rock and cement. Total materials cost is estimated at under USD
$2000.00

b. Briquetting

Tamfeeds is currently using 6 meat mincers coupled to small geared
electric motors to extrude up to 200 kg of briquettes per hour. Manual
operation via a ram system is possible at reduced output rates. Charcoal
powder is mixed by hand or in a powered cement mixer with locally
sourced clay. Any type of clay is suitable and sourcing should not prove a
problem within any of the upland timber producing areas in Kenya. For
briquetting salvaged charcoal vendor's fines, 10% clay is added to milled
material. For sawdust charcoal, 25% clay is added to unmilled material in
order to achieve suitable density and hardness. Once a homogenous mixture
with a dough- like texture is achieved, he material is hand fed into the
mincer and extruded via three sections of 1 inch diameter steel pipe welded
to a plate that replaces the meat mincer's perforated outlet. The extruded
clay-bound charcoal 'briquette' naturally breaks into 3 to 7 cm length
pieces upon handling and is air/sun dried on long chicken-mesh trays set at
waist height for ease of handling. One day of full sun or three days of
overcast weather is sufficient to dry the material. A hard and dense
product results that compares favourably with regular lump charcoal.

The construction of a scaled-up extruder based on the meat mincer design is
being constructed by a Nairobi engineering firm. It is estimated that this
machine will have an output of close to 200 kg per hour and be capable of
replacing all six small extruders currently in operation with the same
output. The cost estimate is in the region of USD $2,500.00 inclusive of a
5 hp. geared motor.

4. PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE

Tamfeeds has been marketing a similar product over the past six months,
made from discarded vendor's fines and bound with 10% clay. The briquette
is heavier (denser) than that made from carbonised sawdust- the latter
more closely resembling regular wood charcoal. Two negative factors
affecting customer acceptance have been noted- 1)- Cost due to a high
labour component in the cost of production due to reliance on six small
meat-mincer extruders, and 2)- Bag size. Although the 50 kg bag is almost
33% heavier than the standard bag of bush charcoal, I is smaller in size
due to the high density of the briquette.

Volume is very important in charcoal sales as most charcoal is sold not by
the bag, but by the bucket, hence volume is important to the discerning eye
of the customer.

Some additional observations were made during production trials running
from June through December 1998 during which 85 tons of clay-bound
vendor's waste charcoal briquettes were produced and marketed:

- burning time is longer due to the retardant action of the clay binder.
This is considered an advantage for most domestic cooking applications.

- Ignition time to full heat is longer due to the high density of the
briquette. This is considered a minor negative feature.

- The product is hydroscopic and can lose it's integrity if wet. This is a
negative aspect, as normal charcoal is commonly left outdoors with no
protection from rain or surface water.

Large quantities (5 ton lots) have been supplied to pig and poultry growers
for brooder heating, as in the highland areas supplemental heating of young
stock is necessary. This is a substantial potential market, as the
slow-burning characteristics of this charcoal is particularly suitable to
space-heating applications.

The price structure defined below should, at a retail price of under $5.00
per 50 kg bag ($0.10 per kg), allow vendors to continue selling by volume
into the domestic cooking fuel market.

5. COMMERCIAL ASPECTS.

The cost of the both carboniser and extruder is in the region of $4500.00.
Ancillary equipment such as shovels, plastic sheeting, drying racks, weigh
scales and possibly a earthen floored steel roofed working area would cost
another $1500.00. The extruder can be run by a small petrol or diesel
engine (at roughly the same initial cost) if no electrical supply is
available, though operating costs would rise due to the additional expense
of diesel fuel.

An alternative worth consideration is a centralised extrusion and drying
center that is supplied with carbonised sawdust from several carboniser
units each located at a small sawmill. Additional feedstock in the form of
waste charcoal fines collected from both wood charcoal producers and
charcoal vendors (as is currently being used at Tamfeeds) can boost output
and ensure production continuity

The value of the two raw materials (sawdust $0.017/kg and clay $0.01/kg)
reflect a possible cost of transport and a nominal purchase price. It is
anticipated that demand will eventually lead to a price. For the purpose
of this exercise it is assumed that the project is independent of the
sawmill.

For the purpose of this analysis and in order to ensure an initial place in
the market for the extruded sawdust charcoal briquette the market price
herein is $0.10/kg and the wholesale ex-producer (factory) price is
$0.08/kg

The competitive product, bush and forest wood charcoal, can cost as little
as $0.085 per kg away from road access. Once at a major road system ready
for trucking (e.g. 200 km) to an urban center, the price typically reaches
$0.10 per kg. Delivered to the urban distributor, the price varies between
$0.12 and $0.14. The domestic consumer buys a heaped 4-liter paint measure
(ave. 1.7 kg) and pays $0.24 per kg.

a. Additional Cost Factors:

A charcoal yield of 23% of original sawdust weight.
A clay binder content of 25%. This has been proven acceptable.
A bag cost of $.007 per kg charcoal. Second-hand sacks.
A daily labour rate of $2.50. This is almost twice national average.
A single supervisor cost of $5.00 per day.
A misc. cost of 20% of wholesale price- primarily maintenance.

b. Labour Distribution:

1 - wheelbarrowing fresh sawdust to drying area from mill
1 - air/sun drying assisted by the two 'transporters'
1 - wheelbarrowing dried sawdust to carboniser
2 - operating carboniser
1 - extinguishing and packing carbonised sawdust
1 - extruder operator
1 - mixer - clay+charcoal+water (manual)
1 - assistant to both extruder and mixer operators.
3 - drying, weighing and packing
1 - supervisor

6. PROFIT/LOSS ANALYSIS

Based on the above factors, a plant processing 5 tons of air-dried sawdust
per day over one 8-hr shift for 26 days per month would produce 37,375 kg
of charcoal from 130 tons of sawdust and 7.48 tons of clay.

The monthly income would be USD $2,990.00 and a net profit of $1,046.50
(35%) would reasonably be expected.

Return on the total initial investment of $6,000.00 from profits would take
a minimum of 5.7 months.

Dependent on location, a central extruding & drying facility that is
supplied with carbonised sawdust from several sawmills- each with it's own
carbonising kiln- could conceivably produce in excess of one hundred tons
of briquettes per month. There are possibly as many as 10 areas around
Kenya where such an operation could utilise the sawdust by-product of many
small mills in close proximity to a central extrusion and drying
operation. Profitably responds strongly to production.

7. WHAT NEXT?

A large carboniser is currently being built at Tamfeeds. The high-output
extruder is scheduled for testing before mid December. Sawdust is being
collected, sun-dried and stored prior to the pyrolysis trials. A full
trial- from carbonisation to marketing- will be underway early in 1999.
Unfortunately, Tamfeeds is not located close to a sawmill, so the test
venue cannot be considered appropriate for long-term operation.

UNHCR has expressed an interest in using the vendor's waste briquettes in
refugee camps- Kenya has several- and should this be encouraged as woodfuel
has become acutely scarce in the areas around most camps. It is possible
that sawdust-charcoal briquettes could be manufactured in Kitale and
Nanyuki. Both of these towns are relatively close to the northern locations
of refugee camps, and have numerous active sawmills.

Once proven economically viable in the field, the process has application
throughout the world; wherever labour is cheap, urban charcoal demand high
and unutilised sawdust readily available.

Elsen L. Karstad
P.O. Box 24371
Tamfeeds Ltd.
Nairobi Kenya
e-mail elk@net2000ke.com 7/12/1998

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:
E.L. Karstad :
P.O. Box 24371 :
Nairobi, Kenya :
Fax/tel 884437 :
elk@net2000ke.com :
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Mon Dec 7 10:41:39 1998
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Woodcoal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Theoretical Yield of Charcoal
Message-ID: <199812071541.SAA17605@ns.alkor.ru>

I have made this account some years back. Some data are taken from the
literature, others are received by experiment. This table is made for a
birch, but other firm breeds give similar result.
volatiles 9,0!
9,5!10,0!10,5!11,0!11,5!12,0!12,5!13,0!13,5!14,0!14,5!15,0!15,5
Output of a charcoal,%!40,1!39,6!39,1!
38,6!38,1!37,6!37,1!36,6!36,1!35,6!35,1!34,6!34,1!33,6
the contents
of Ñ,%
.......!78,4!79,4!80,4!81,5!82,6!83,7!84,8!85,9!87,1!88,4!89,6!90,9!92,2!93,
6

Sincerely Yury Yudkevitch (Rossia)
----------
> Îò: Tom Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
> Êîìó: kchishol <kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>; Stoves <stoves@crest.org>;
gasifiers <gasification@crest.org>
> Òåìà: Theoretical Yield of Charcoal
> Äàòà: 30 íîÿáðÿ 1998 ã. 22:50
>
> Dear All:
>
> There is no "theoretical" yield of charcoal (in spite of what Mike Antal
> says). I prefer to think of it as XCOAL where X is the degree of
> devolatilization or volatile cracking. Normal charcoaling at 450C
produces
> typically 25% charcoal with 20% volatiles, the typical yield also in our
> inverted downdraft gasifier. Larger pieces can crack more volatilve for
> higher yields. Chemical treatment (ZnCl2 and Na2CO3) can increase yield.

> High pressure can produce up to 50% in Antal's process. But if you don't
> measure the volatile and energy content you don't know how charcoally
it
> is. Get a prox-ult analysis.
>
> Higher temperatures can produce much smaller yields like 15% for
> metallurgical charcoal (600C) or 10% for activated charcoal (800C).
>
> So the original question is meaningless without a lot more specification.

>
> Yours,
TOM
> REED
>
> Message text written by kchishol
> >
> Elk is getting in the order of 25% charcoal yield from his
> sawdust charcoal operation. If the theoritically attainable
> maximum yield was 26%, he is doing phenomenal. However, if
> the theoretical maximum is 50%, then he has lotsa
> opportunity for improvement.
>
> I would hypothesize that the maximum yield attainable in a
> real world operation would be from a charcoal retorting
> operation, running on bone dry sawdust. Would anyone have
> data on what yield could be expected in this case?
>
> The next question is a bit more difficult.: How can
> pyrolysis gases be processed to recover carbon?
> Specifically, the so-called "creosote" is a low grade form
> of "wood coke", in that it still has some volatiles present.
> The creosote or wood tar fraction is basically a complex
> C-O-H compound of some sort. If the -O-H elements could be
> removed, then there would be an additional yield of solid C.
> How can this be done? How much additional carbon yield could
> be attained, if this was possible?
>
> Kevin Chisholm
> <
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Wed Dec 9 16:55:44 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Braak on Haiti
Message-ID: <v01540b02b29494bb91da@[204.133.28.66]>

Stovers:
The following message indicates we were helpful, and I think Tom
Braak would want me to send this on. I think if anyone has a stove or
charcoaling idea that wish to see tried in Haiti, there might be a chance
for that.

Tom: I have stopped your subscription. You better not count on me to
contact you in six months but I hope that you will do so in reverse. I
think many on the list will want to hear your thoughts on stoves activities
you see there. For instanace, it would help us to know a lot of things
like the costs of stoves, wood, charcoal. If you could measure efficiency
that would be wonderful. We would like to get specific data on health
impacts. If this could only be anecdotal, that will help, but it would be
helpful to have things like hospital records.

I do not believe you should drop your stove work. This is still a
major world issue and you can still make a major contribution. Please,
maybe through CARE-Haiti, contact us
>
>Ron, Just a quick note to say thank you for putting my message out
>there. Also , thanks to all those who responded. You saved me alot of
>time and energy. I will not be testing and manufacturing charcoal stoves
>in Haiti as CARE has recently undertaken this project. They plan to sell
>50,000 of them next year! I hope I can assist them in promoting the
>stoves. It's nice to know I was at least thinking in the right
>direction!
>
> I fly out today and depending on what funds come in while I'm there,
>my return is as yet undecided. Hoping to stay through March at least.I
>must admit, the technicality of the questions your group discusses gave
>me a good laugh. Important stuff perhaps but way over my head.
>
> Any how, thanks again. Now I can focus my efforts elsewhere (primarily
>erosion control, sustainable agriculture, education, and health issues).
>Please remove my address from the mailing list. Drop me a message in six
>months or so and I'll let you know how things are going (e-mail address
>belongs to my parents so if I'm down there they can either reply or
>forward a letter).
> Tom Braak
> Tom Braak
>

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From tmiles at teleport.com Thu Dec 10 00:49:16 1998
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Sponsor the Gasification List
In-Reply-To: <199811130336.TAA26633@mail.easystreet.com>
Message-ID: <199812100549.VAA27396@mail.easystreet.com>

List Members

We need sponsors for the Bioenergy Lists for 1999.

We can list two sponsors at the bottom of each message at a cost of
$300/each per list per year.

The list archives receive more than 2500 hits per day.

To sponsor Bioenergy, or one of the other lists (bioconversion, digestion,
gasification, or stoves) please fill out the form at:

http://crest.org/services/biolist-spons.shtml

and send a check to CREST as instructed.

These lists receive no other funding or subsidy.

Thanks

Tom Miles
Bioenergy Lists Administrator

T.R. Miles tmiles@teleport.com
1470 SW Woodward Way http://www.teleport.com/~tmiles
Portland, OR 97225
Tel 503-292-0107 Fax 503-605-0208
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From wolf at ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de Thu Dec 10 11:28:07 1998
From: wolf at ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de (Marc-Andree Wolf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Charcoal production, environmental impact - request for information
Message-ID: <32ea44b07206097a390fbfbb096c05f5@NO-ID-FOUND.mhonarc.org>

<000c01be2455$1a353fb0$1d01a8c0@nixerlangen.verfahrenstechnik.uni-stuttgart.
de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Sender: owner-stoves@crest.org
Precedence: bulk

Dear colleagues,

I am presently preparing a module for assessing the environmental
impact related to the production of charcoal and would be very
grateful if you could help me with experts information and data.
Do you have any quantitative data on the chemical emissions
occurring during the production of charcoal? If possible, I would
like to differenciate between tropical wood and temperate/nordic
wood (here probably further between broad-leaved and coniferous
trees).
Regarding the differences between charcoal produced in less
developed countries and charcoal produced in Europe or
Northamerica, I would also be interested to learn, which of the
gaseous and liquid components like Acetic Acid etc. are separated
and sold and which are set free into the atmosphere. If there is
any technological information on the separation technology used, I
would be glad to get some information or reference of publications
as well. In Brazil I saw many small production sites for charcoal
(to be finally used at home and for pig iron and silicon) which
did not make any use of any of the gaseous components. Do the big
charcoal producers in Brazil make use of these components? In
developed countries some of them will be separated and sold, as
far as I know (?)

I would be very grateful if you could help me in any way. Thank
you very much in advance for your effort.

Yours sincerely,

Marc-Andree Wolf

**********************************************************
Marc-Andree Wolf (Environmental Scientist (Dipl.-Geooekol.))

Universitaet Stuttgart
IKP (Institut f. Kunststoffkunde u. Kunststoffpruefung)
Boeblinger Strasse 78
D-70199 Stuttgart
Germany
tel: +49 (0) 711 641-2271 fax : -2264
e-mail: wolf@ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de

Private:
Neue Weinsteige 54
D-70180 Stuttgart
+49 (0)711 605407

Home: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3742/home.html

************************************************************

From dgill at myhost.ccsinc.com Thu Dec 10 12:55:13 1998
From: dgill at myhost.ccsinc.com (Dan Gill)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: [Fwd: WP: Indian Kitchen Helper: Stoves With Chimneys]
Message-ID: <36700BE6.6518E78@myhost.ccsinc.com>

This came to me today from a cookbook list!

Dan
http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/Charmake.htm

To: Cookbook-L@mich.com
Subject: WP: Indian Kitchen Helper: Stoves With Chimneys
From: Josephine Bacon <bacon@langservice.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:35:57 -0500
Sender: owner-cookbook-l@mich.com

I thought people would be interested in this article which appeared in the
Washington Post, as they slave away over their microwave ovens and
dishwashers.

Josephine Bacon

>Indian Kitchen Helper: Stoves With Chimneys
>
>By Kenneth J. Cooper
>Washington Post Foreign Service
>Monday, December 7, 1998; Page A20
>
>NEW DELHIóCooking used to bring tears to Rambati's eyes -- and not because
>she was upset about having to make the family's meals. It was the smoke,
>those poisonous puffs coughed up by her simple mud stove, the same kind that
>barefoot village women in India have used several times a day for thousands
>of years.
>
>Rambati still burns jagged scraps of wood and round patties of cow dung to
>heat her pots. And the dirty fuel still smokes. But now she has a new stove,
>an improved model that combines traditional mud construction with what
>struck her neighborhood not long ago as a major technological innovation: a
>concrete pipe that sucks the smoke six feet toward the sky. No more tears.
>
>"Now instead of into my eyes, it goes through the pipe," Rambati said at her
>home on the capital's rural fringes. The stove works "quicker too, because
>it gives out more heat."
>
>Watery eyes represent the immediate and least harmful symptom of the major
>public health problem lurking in the smoke spewed from unvented cooking
>stoves that predominate not just in India, but throughout the developing
>world. The kind of kitchen stove that Rambati, now in her early sixties, had
>used all her cooking life can produce indoor pollution levels four to five
>times higher than the levels found outside in such heavily polluted cities
>as New Delhi, according to Kirk Smith, a professor of environmental health
>at the University of California, Berkeley.
>
>In rural India, cooking tends to be done indoors, but not in kitchens that
>in any way resemble the separate rooms with counter tops, cabinets, sinks
>and a faucet in developed nations. Stoves sit low on the floor, often in a
>corner formed by soot-covered walls. The only ventilation is often an open
>doorway, through which traditional stoves can blow enough smoke to make it
>appear that a thatch dwelling has caught fire.
>
>The harm done by the smoke falls hardest on peasant women and the small
>children they tend while preparing meals. Inhaling the cooking smoke's
>particles -- fine dust similar to the brown stuff trapped in cigarette
>filters -- can cause fatal bouts of pneumonia in children under 5. In
>adults, the same indoor pollution can lead to blindness, tuberculosis and
>heart disease.
>
>The World Health Organization has estimated that such pollution kills as
>many as 3 million people each year around the world, roughly the same number
>who die from drinking contaminated water.
>
>The environment also suffers, because of the widespread use of organic fuels
>in smoky, inefficient stoves, a major part of the developing world's
>contribution to the phenomenon some scientists call global warming.
>
>"They have rather high greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy, compared
>to power plants and automobiles," said Smith.
>
>About half the world's population uses organic fuels for cooking. The
>associated health and environmental problems are most serious in India, the
>world's second-most-populous country, where almost 80 percent of households
>use such fuels; in rural areas, more than 90 percent do.
>
>The national government has made slow, halting progress toward addressing
>those problems since the early 1980s when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi
>initiated a subsidized stove program. So far 30 million improved stoves
>similar to Rambati's have been installed. But nearly a third of the new
>stoves are no longer in use, mainly because they have fallen into disrepair.
>
>Initially, the rural development program was geared to save energy and
>thereby conserve India's disappearing forest cover: Some improved stoves
>have proved to be 15 percent to 20 percent more fuel-efficient. But after
>finding that the promise of energy savings did not impress many village
>women enough to make them abandon their traditional stoves, government
>officials and private aid workers have in recent years emphasized the health
>benefits instead.
>
>"We never talk about the fuel-saving quality of the improved [stoves] first,
>because they say, 'We have a lot of fuel, so why bother?' " explained Lalita
>Balakrishnan of the All India Women's Conference, a private aid group. "But
>when we talk about the smoke -- the smoke that hurts their eyes, the smoke
>that makes them cough -- then they start listening."
>
>India has developed dozens of models of improved stoves, which cost about
>$6, to accommodate regional differences in the types of fuel burned, shapes
>of cooking pots and climate. Wood, used in five out of eight Indian
>households, is the most common organic fuel used. Others include cow dung,
>farm waste such as rice husks and even waste paper.
>
>Besides health benefits and possible energy savings, improved stoves have
>cut down women's daily drudgery by reducing the time required to cook,
>forage for wood and scrub blackened walls before religious festivals.
>
>But retaining mud as the basic building material also means that many of the
>benefits do not last long -- because the stove doesn't. China began
>attacking indoor pollution about the same time India did, but has enjoyed
>more success with longer-lasting stoves made from ceramic, which is durable
>enough to withstand the heat, weight of cooking pots and the occasional
>spills.
>
>"If it's all mud, it's pretty hard to achieve these benefits in a
>sustainable manner," Smith said. "On the other hand, getting the smoke
>outdoors is a benefit to the family."
>
>
>Special correspondent Rama Lakshmi contributed to this report.
>

Josephine Bacon
American Pie
bacon@langservice.com

From antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu Thu Dec 10 13:08:24 1998
From: antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Michael Antal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Charcoal production, environmental impact - request forinformation
In-Reply-To: <bulk.23868.19981210112825@solstice.crest.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPX.4.03.9812100806450.6527-100000@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu>

Dear Dr. Wolf: Dr. Kirk Smith with U.C. Berkeley
(krksmith@uclink4.berkeley.edu) is the authority on this subject. You
should contact him and get copies of his recent papers. Regards, Michael
Antal.

On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Marc-Andree Wolf wrote:

> <000c01be2455$1a353fb0$1d01a8c0@nixerlangen.verfahrenstechnik.uni-stuttgart.
> de>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
> Importance: Normal
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
> Sender: owner-stoves@crest.org
> Precedence: bulk
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I am presently preparing a module for assessing the environmental
> impact related to the production of charcoal and would be very
> grateful if you could help me with experts information and data.
> Do you have any quantitative data on the chemical emissions
> occurring during the production of charcoal? If possible, I would
> like to differenciate between tropical wood and temperate/nordic
> wood (here probably further between broad-leaved and coniferous
> trees).
> Regarding the differences between charcoal produced in less
> developed countries and charcoal produced in Europe or
> Northamerica, I would also be interested to learn, which of the
> gaseous and liquid components like Acetic Acid etc. are separated
> and sold and which are set free into the atmosphere. If there is
> any technological information on the separation technology used, I
> would be glad to get some information or reference of publications
> as well. In Brazil I saw many small production sites for charcoal
> (to be finally used at home and for pig iron and silicon) which
> did not make any use of any of the gaseous components. Do the big
> charcoal producers in Brazil make use of these components? In
> developed countries some of them will be separated and sold, as
> far as I know (?)
>
> I would be very grateful if you could help me in any way. Thank
> you very much in advance for your effort.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Marc-Andree Wolf
>
>
> **********************************************************
> Marc-Andree Wolf (Environmental Scientist (Dipl.-Geooekol.))
>
> Universitaet Stuttgart
> IKP (Institut f. Kunststoffkunde u. Kunststoffpruefung)
> Boeblinger Strasse 78
> D-70199 Stuttgart
> Germany
> tel: +49 (0) 711 641-2271 fax : -2264
> e-mail: wolf@ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de
>
> Private:
> Neue Weinsteige 54
> D-70180 Stuttgart
> +49 (0)711 605407
>
> Home: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3742/home.html
>
> ************************************************************
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>

From larcon at sni.net Fri Dec 11 09:09:45 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Forward: Wolf on charcoaling hazards
Message-ID: <v01540b00b296d32f4358@[204.131.233.43]>

Stovers: This seems to be a serious effort to collect data that should
help us in the future. Anyone have existing data that will help?

Marc: 1) I think your presence on the list would help you and help us. I
am taking the liberty of signing you up. Drop off whenever you wish. We
are about 160 in maybe 35 countries - probably about 6-10 in Germany.

2) Have you gone back through our archives? The output from our
charcoal-making stoves show very little CO2, no O2, and a lot of CO with
some H2, and CH4 and many tars and chemicals. For most of us on this list
the interest is in cooking, but with some of us this involves making
charcoal as a co-product, so the gases are immediately burned and their
exact composition notcritical to our stove design.
3) That dialong led to efforts to clean up all charcoal-making - through
flaring rather than venting.
4) Would you please let us know more about the word "module" - and how far
along you are now.
5) The message to "stoves" in response from Mike Antal which cites Kirk
Smith is certainly appropriate. His message to us came about because Marc
wrote to both "bioenergy" and "stoves", with Mike getting in a response
before me.

Regards Ron

>Dear colleagues,
>
>I am presently preparing a module for assessing the environmental
>impact related to the production of charcoal and would be very
>grateful if you could help me with experts information and data.
>Do you have any quantitative data on the chemical emissions
>occurring during the production of charcoal? If possible, I would
>like to differenciate between tropical wood and temperate/nordic
>wood (here probably further between broad-leaved and coniferous
>trees).
>Regarding the differences between charcoal produced in less
>developed countries and charcoal produced in Europe or
>Northamerica, I would also be interested to learn, which of the
>gaseous and liquid components like Acetic Acid etc. are separated
>and sold and which are set free into the atmosphere. If there is
>any technological information on the separation technology used, I
>would be glad to get some information or reference of publications
>as well. In Brazil I saw many small production sites for charcoal
>(to be finally used at home and for pig iron and silicon) which
>did not make any use of any of the gaseous components. Do the big
>charcoal producers in Brazil make use of these components? In
>developed countries some of them will be separated and sold, as
>far as I know (?)
>
>I would be very grateful if you could help me in any way. Thank
>you very much in advance for your effort.
>
>Yours sincerely,
>
>Marc-Andree Wolf
>
>
>**********************************************************
>Marc-Andree Wolf (Environmental Scientist (Dipl.-Geooekol.))
>
>Universitaet Stuttgart
>IKP (Institut f. Kunststoffkunde u. Kunststoffpruefung)
>Boeblinger Strasse 78
>D-70199 Stuttgart
>Germany
>tel: +49 (0) 711 641-2271 fax : -2264
>e-mail: wolf@ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de
>
>Private:
>Neue Weinsteige 54
>D-70180 Stuttgart
>+49 (0)711 605407
>
>Home: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3742/home.html
>
>************************************************************

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From wolf at ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de Fri Dec 11 13:39:47 1998
From: wolf at ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de (Marc-Andree Wolf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: AW: Charcoal production, environmental impact - request for information
Message-ID: <000801be2535$c84b3920$1d01a8c0@nixerlangen.verfahrenstechnik.uni-stuttgart.de>

Dear David and dear list,

thank you very much for your quick answer and the
information-source for the interesting summary of your report at
http://www.energy.demon.nl/GHG/Kilns.htm. I already read it and
found it very useful.

Did you also measure further substances emitted during the
charcoal production process, such as acetic acid, alcohols and
aromatic substances? I suppose that some of them are relevant due
to their carcinogenic potential. Especially regarding the emission
of PAHs I wonder whether they are rather emitted into the air or
whether they remain concentrated locally within the coverage of
the kilns (?). I found information, that during industrial
production of charcoal also relevant amounts of Methanol, Aceton,
Methylacetate, Acetaldehyde, Allylalcohol, and Methylformiate were
found, but suppose they are covered by the measurement of the
TNMOC?

Regarding the relevance of the different ways to produce charcoal:
do you happen to have information which of the methoads you
investigated is the most common and - with regards to the absolute
amount of charcoal produced (in Thailand or more generally in the
tropics) for industrial purposes - roughly about which percentage
is produced by larger charcoal plants?

When having compiled all the relevant information on emissions
related to charcoal production, I will sent them to the list by
email. A list of publications I encounter(ed) during my search
will be provided as well.

Thank you again for your help.

Sincerely,

Marc

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: David Pennise [mailto:dpennise@uclink4.berkeley.edu]
> Gesendet am: Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 1998 19:53
> An: Marc-Andree Wolf
> Betreff: Re: Charcoal production, environmental impact - request
for
> information
>
> Dear Marc-Andree,
>
> I am a doctoral student in environmental health sciences at
> the University
> of California-Berkeley. My advisor is Dr. Kirk R. Smith who was
just
> mentioned in an email by Michael Antal. We have made
measurements of
> airborne emissions from the production of charcoal in
> Thailand, Kenya, and
> Brazil. The summary of our Thailand report (soon to be
> published by the
> USEPA) is available on the STOVES webpage under the "NEW"
> section. Please
> have a look. We are in the process of data analysis/report
> writing for our
> work in Kenya and Brazil.
>
> I will try to respond to some of your other questions in the
> next few days.
> I would enjoy talking further with you. So, after you read
> the summary on
> the webpage, please contact Kirk and I with any questions or
> comments. Kirk
> is in India and will not have access to his email account
> until December
> 17. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.
>
> Sincerely,
> David Pennise
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David M. Pennise
> Doctoral Student
> Division of Environmental Health Sciences
> School of Public Health
> University of California, Berkeley
> 140 Warren Hall, MC 7360
> Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 Tel: 510-643-5580
> Email: dpennise@uclink4.berkeley.edu Fax: 510-642-5815
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>

**********************************************************
Marc-Andree Wolf (Environmental Scientist (Dipl.-Geooekol.))

Universitaet Stuttgart
IKP (Institut f. Kunststoffkunde u. Kunststoffpruefung)
Boeblinger Strasse 78
D-70199 Stuttgart
Germany
tel: +49 (0) 711 641-2271 fax : -2264
e-mail: wolf@ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de

Private:
Neue Weinsteige 54
D-70180 Stuttgart
+49 (0)711 605407

************************************************************

From wolf at ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de Fri Dec 11 13:41:06 1998
From: wolf at ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de (Marc-Andree Wolf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Charcoal production, environmental impact - request for information
Message-ID: <000a01be2536$016dd730$1d01a8c0@nixerlangen.verfahrenstechnik.uni-stuttgart.de>

Dear Tom Reed and dear list,

oh, thats bad to hear; I supposed that at least the acetic acid
and the tar would have been used. But what is done with these
substances, then? Since we have restrictions regarding the
emission of toxic substances such as PAHS, NOx and others, the
emissions should at least be burned for energy production (?) I
also found information, that in large-scale plants the gaseous
fraction (CH4, CO, H2, ...) is partly used to dry the next load of
wood. And the surplus? And the tar? If you have any information,
please let me know!

Thank you very much.

Yours sincerly,

Marc-Andree Wolf

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Tom Reed [mailto:REEDTB@compuserve.com]
> Gesendet am: Freitag, 11. Dezember 1998 14:44
> An: Marc-Andree Wolf
> Betreff: Charcoal production, environmental impact - request for
> information
>
> Dear Marc..
>
> Sorry to say none of the valuable chemicals in charcoal have
> been recovered
> economically in the US or probably anywhere, since about 1950
when
> petrochemicals became cheaper. There are lots of old books
> in the library
> listing the chemical components in the tar and pyroligneous
> acid fractions.
> You can also get a lot of information from the National
> Renewable Energy
> Lab (NREL) on the various components of pyrolysis products.
Look for
> papers by Bob Evans and Tom Milne on the WWW.
>
> Yours truly, TOM REED
>
> Message text written by "Marc-Andree Wolf"
> >
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I am presently preparing a module for assessing the
environmental
> impact related to the production of charcoal and would be very
> grateful if you could help me with experts information and data.
> Do you have any quantitative data on the chemical emissions
> occurring during the production of charcoal? If possible, I
would
> like to differenciate between tropical wood and temperate/nordic
> wood (here probably further between broad-leaved and coniferous
> trees).
> Regarding the differences between charcoal produced in less
> developed countries and charcoal produced in Europe or
> Northamerica, I would also be interested to learn, which of the
> gaseous and liquid components like Acetic Acid etc. are
separated
> and sold and which are set free into the atmosphere. If there is
> any technological information on the separation technology used,
I
> would be glad to get some information or reference of
publications
> as well. In Brazil I saw many small production sites for
charcoal
> (to be finally used at home and for pig iron and silicon) which
> did not make any use of any of the gaseous components. Do the
big
> charcoal producers in Brazil make use of these components? In
> developed countries some of them will be separated and sold, as
> far as I know (?)
>
> I would be very grateful if you could help me in any way. Thank
> you very much in advance for your effort.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Marc-Andree Wolf
> <
>
>
>
> Thomas B. Reed: The Biomass Energy Foundation
> 1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401
> 303 278 0558V; 303 278 0560F
> E-mail: reedtb@compuserve.com
>

**********************************************************
Marc-Andree Wolf (Environmental Scientist (Dipl.-Geooekol.))

Universitaet Stuttgart
IKP (Institut f. Kunststoffkunde u. Kunststoffpruefung)
Boeblinger Strasse 78
D-70199 Stuttgart
Germany
tel: +49 (0) 711 641-2271 fax : -2264
e-mail: wolf@ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de

Private:
Neue Weinsteige 54
D-70180 Stuttgart
+49 (0)711 605407

************************************************************

From larcon at sni.net Sat Dec 12 07:30:25 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Forward (2): Wolf on charcoaling hazards
Message-ID: <v01540b00b297908c9016@[204.131.233.23]>

Stovers: This should be added to the several messages received from Marc
on his module development project. The rest from Marc. Ron

Dear Ronal and dear list,

thank you for the warm welcome and for taking me up into your
list.

2) Yes, I had a look into the archives and found it an interesting
approach to make this sensible use of the gas produced during the
making of the charcoal. Where the gases are not used and charcoal
is the main product is the place where most of the environmental
problems related to charcoal making arise. These are both the
small scale charcoal production sites that I saw throughout
Brazil - both for private use and also for brick making and pig
iron production - and also (at a larger scale - at least for the
single plant) charcoal production for industrial purposes like pig
iron and silicon production.

4) The module that I prepare will be used to assess the different
environmental effects caused by the production of charcoal for
industrial processes - both in industrialised and in developing
countries. This is considering ecotoxic effects from PAHs as well
as global warming from Greenhouse gas emissions and other
environmental effects.

When having collected the relevant data and information I will
send it to the list together with a publicationslist in this
field.

Thank you again for your help.

Yours sincerely,

Marc

"Marc-Andree Wolf" <wolf@ikp2.uni-stuttgart.de>

From larcon at sni.net Sat Dec 12 07:30:36 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: forwarding - ARTICLE: Cooking smoke: a silent killer
Message-ID: <v01540b02b29793dd5783@[204.131.233.23]>

Stovers: The following article has been suggested for our list by list
member Cathy Flanders who also does a great job as the coordinator for the
list "iaq" (Indoor Air Quality). Cathy - Thanks. I also add another from
the same list, sent in by Ron

>From: Rkfabf@aol.com
>Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 16:28:40 EST
>To: "Ronal W. Larson" <larcon@sni.net>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Subject: ARTICLE: Cooking smoke: a silent killer
>
>Hello Ronal -
>
>I came across this article & you list in fact may already be acquainted with
>this text, but I wanted to pass it along in the event they weren't. I've
>included a link to the article & the text as well.
>
><A HREF="http://www.oneworld.org/patp/pap_6_3/Cooking.html">Cooking smoke: a
>silent killer</A>
>http://www.oneworld.org/patp/pap_6_3/Cooking.html
>
>
>Regards,
>Cathy Flanders
>IAQ List Manager & Moderator
>Fax: 972-527-6608
>rkfabf@aol.com
><A HREF="http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/iaq">IAQ Listserve (to
>subscribe)</A>
>http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/iaq
> <A HREF="http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/iaq">IAQ Listserve (to search
>archives)</A>
>http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/iaq
>
>(ARTICLE TEXT)
>The material that follows has been provided by People & the Planet
>
>Cooking smoke: a silent killer
>
>Thousands of articles have beenwritten about air pollution, from cities choked
>with traffic to forest burning in Asia. But an even greater killer is indoor
>air pollution, as Dietrich Schwela reports.
>
>
>Woman with a child cooking indoors, Senegal
>Photo : Ron Giling/Panos Pictures
>Wood, stubble, dung and grass are used daily in about half of the world's
>households as energy for cooking and heating. In most parts of the Third World
>they are burnt in open fires or inefficient stoves in poorly ventilated
>kitchens. The result is a toll in death and ill health far greater than the
>more often discussed outdoor air pollution.
>
>Biomass smoke contains many harmful constituents such as respirable
>particulates and carbon monoxide (CO), exposure to which can cause or
>contribute to acute respiratory infections (ARI), pneumonia, tuberculosis,
>lower birth weights, cataract, and nervous and muscular fatigue. Smoke,
>especially coal smoke, also contains sulphur and nitrogen oxides and
>hydrocarbons which can lead to cancer. Women and children are most exposed to
>high levels of harmful smoke and suffer the most serious health damage;
>respiratory infections alone cause between 4 and 5 million deaths per year
>among small children, which is equal to or marginally less than deaths from
>diarrhoeal diseases.
>
>WHO has estimated that about 2,500 million people in the world are exposed to
>excessive levels of indoor air pollution, largely due to burning biomass and
>coal indoors in ovens that are badly designed and lack proper chimneys. Some
>1.9 million additional deaths each year are blamed on rural indoor pollution
>through suspended particulate matter and another 450,000 deaths are attributed
>to urban indoor air pollution. These figures are over and above the 500,000
>excess deaths worldwide due to concentrations of suspended particulate matter
>and sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere.
>
>African countries and India have the worst record for suspended particulate
>matter in rural homes, while Latin America, India again and China are worst
>for suspended particulate matter in urban interiors. Again, most monitoring is
>being carried out on ambient (outdoor) air, whereas many health problems
>potentially linked to indoor air pollution still go unrecognized. For example,
>several studies in China found that coal smoke was a strong risk factor for
>lung cancer among non-smoking women, while another study in Japan has related
>lung cancer to the past use of biofuels in cooking. In Gambia it was found
>that girls aged under five carried on their mother's back during cooking (in
>smoky cooking huts) had a six times higher risk of ARI - a substantially
>higher risk factor than if their parents smoked.
>
>At the 7th International Conference on Indoor Quality and Climate, "Indoors
>Air '96", held in Nagoya, Japan, last July, participants were told that a
>shift of focus was needed to ensure that the health hazards from indoor air
>pollution were accorded the importance they deserve. This series of
>conferences - which started two decades ago - continue with "Indoor Air '99"
>in Edinburgh in August 1999. During that meeting, WHO will sponsor a Workshop
>on indoor air pollution due to domestic fuel combustion: problems and
>solutions.
>
>Unfortunately, while the health problems are all too clear, the solutions are
>as many as grains of sand in the desert. The issues involved are culturally
>diverse since they relate to such basic traditional patterns as how people
>live and cook and eat. The literature abounds with designs for 'simple'
>smokeless stoves or 'elementary' chimneys, hoods and smoke removal appliances.
>But persuading people to build, install, maintain and use such devices en
>masse is a thorny issue; indeed the first step is probably to persuade the
>millions exposed to biomass smoke that it does actually pose a health hazard.
>
>Although carbon dioxide, the principal gas produced by biomass combustion, is
>the best-known greenhouse gas, it is by no means the only one. Essentially,
>all the products of incomplete combustion produced by biomass fires with less
>than 100 per cent efficiency (virtually all of them) are also greenhouse
>gases, and include methane, carbon monoxide and non-methane hydrocarbons. It
>is the products of incomplete combustion, mostly in the form of carbon
>monoxide, particulates and gaseous organic compounds that comprise the chief
>health-threatening materials in coal and biomass smoke.
>
>The WHO Air Management Information System (AMIS) has recently been initiated
>to report trends in air pollution concentrations in many of the world's mega-
>cities. But much additional research is also needed on the relationships
>between indoor smoke and respiratory diseases, and on the linkages between
>housing design, fuel, stoves, water, food and health - taking into account
>social, economic and cultural factors as well as the appropriate technologies
>that are locally available.
>
>At present, great emphasis and attention is placed on controlling industrial
>emissions, prevention air pollution from road traffic through farsighted
>transport policies and urban planning, the phasing out of leaded petrol and
>obligatory emission control in new cars. But no less effort needs to be put
>into the actions required to reduce indoor air pollution both in cities and in
>villages.
>
>Dr Dietrich H. Schwela is a Scientist with WHO's Urban Environmental Health
>Unit (UEH), Division of Operational Support in Environmental Health (EOS) in
>Geneva.
>
>[Legal Notice: Re-posted for non-profit use under the Federal Library Act]

II. Via Ron Larson (also because it shows another web site):

From: Tim_Wallace@doh.state.fl.us

> -----Original Message-----
> OPPT NEWSBREAK Monday, 7 December 1998
>
>

> Today's "Toxic News for the Net"
> Brought to you by the OPPTS Chemical Library
> http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/oppt_nb.txt
>
> NEWS
> "Indian Kitchen Helper: Stoves With Chimneys." Washington Post,
> 7 December 98, A20.
> Unvented cooking stoves in rural India and other developing
> countries spew smoke that can cause fatal cases of pneumonia
> in children under 5 and lead to blindness, tuberculosis, and
> heart disease in adults. The pollution kills an estimated 3
> million people a year, and the burning of organic fuels such
> as wood and cow dung contributes to global warming. About 30
> million improved stoves that vent the smoke outside and are
> more fuel-efficient have been installed in India, but a third
> of those have fallen into disrepair.
>

From larcon at sni.net Sun Dec 13 16:03:37 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:11 2004
Subject: Report on Paul Hait activities
Message-ID: <v01540b00b290a60bf786@[204.131.233.26]>

Stovers:
I had a recent conversation with Paul Hait (Pyromid stoves) that
might be of interest to others on the list. Paul is having exceptionally
good success right now on two major fronts. I also discuss a third
conversational category on charcoal

1) First, Paul is finding a number of mail order firms interested
in his several products because of the potential computer problems
surrounding Y2K. I heard words like "Cabellas (spelling?) Sporting Goods",
Boy Scouts, and National Geographic catalogs. Paul has developed a
stainless steel product that offers much longer life that most stoves. For
camping trips and for storing in one's car or a warehouse, its foldability
is a major advantage.

I'm guessing Paul is well ahead of most of us in this Y2K stove
area, so he probably won't mind my alerting this list to what he has
accomplished and the possible role for wood and charcoal stoves in urban
settings (since the impact of Y2K in rural areas will probably be
relatively small).

2) Paul also has had recent success in following up on stoves
problems associated with the tropical storm "Mitch", "Georges", and
others. He has gotten the American Red Cross to begin creating a fund for
the stockpiling of his stoves for use in the Caribbean with future stormsa.
Paul is also hoping to have the stockpiled stoves manufactured in Haiti or
a similar country - as he has found a superior means of manufacturing in
Oregon and so has surplus manufacturing equipment for sale.

3) Paul and I talked also about his results in informal
comparisons of different types of charcoal briquettes (never lump). Paul
assured me that there are no Federal standards. The US market for
briquettes is highly regional (because of high shipping costs) with many
different formulations and different output. Paul is interested in the
topic of standardization, so that he can better state the charcoal need for
various cooking tasks. For a typical bag of 20 pound weight, there may be
from 275 to 320 briquettes from different manufacturers with prices
varying from about $4.00 to $7.00. The rule of thumb for good briquettes
is "finer grind and better bind". Bind is typically corn starch - with
some dirt/clay added to improve burning characteristics. He finds that
some briquettes fall through earlier, being smaller and having less
"earth" fill.

He has asked several briquette manufacturers for their Btus /
briquette (or per bag) and has never obtained an answer from any
manufacturer. Paul hopes that some group or person reading this will be
able to assist in obtaining that number. It is not something that
briquette manufacturers are apt to want to see. Paul also reported on some
of the material added to the briquettes, including coal dust and various
"pyrotechnics" for gereater ease in lighting.

I have missed many of the details on which Paul is well versed, so
I hope he will correct me and add to this brief report. To those who have
not heard earlier about the Pyromid stove, I believe it is the most
efficient of the charcoal burning stoves - by virtue of the reflectivity of
the stainless steel, the sloping geometr (and attention to spacings
optimized for briquette size and shape), and the pattern (which Paul calls
a "harmonic array") of briquettes.

I hope this will create some dialog on the several ideas passsed on
by Paul. Ron

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Sun Dec 13 16:04:01 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding - Candle Flames & Combustion Re-visited
Message-ID: <v01540b02b299b706c6f6@[204.131.233.30]>

Stovers - again another interesting dialog from iaq - with a relationship
to our interest in combustion efficiency (and flame color) for stoves. Ron

>IAQ Subscribers -
>
>This is re-visiting a thread on candle flames and combustion from last month,
>but since several subscribers on the IAQ List have particular interest in the
>candle soot issue I felt it was worthy of passing along to the list.
>
>I had some questions about the accuracy of a previous post about luminous
>flames, so I sent the information to a combustion expert I am familiar with at
>NASA & requested that he comment. I have included my inquiry, the initial
>post I was commenting on and Dr. Urban's reply...in that order in this post.
>
>Regards,
>Cathy Flanders
>IAQ List Manager & Moderator
>Fax: 972-527-6608
>rkfabf@aol.com
><A HREF="http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/iaq">IAQ Listserve (to
>subscribe)</A>
>http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/iaq
> <A HREF="http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/iaq">IAQ Listserve (to search
>archives)</A>
>http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/iaq
>
>
>>I have attached a message
>>regarding candle flames & combustion that was posted on the IAQ List & I was
>>hoping you could comment on it. I think the post is off the mark on this
>>one...or am I? ...what do you think?
>>
>>David, if you want to view the entire thread it's contained in the digest for
>>11/17 at:
>>
>> <A HREF="http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/iaq">IAQ Listserve (to search
>>archives)</A>
>>http://www.onelist.com/archives.cgi/iaq
>
>>Message: 2 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 08:21:18 EST From: Pgengle@xxx.xxx
>>Subject: Re: Beeswax candles and Soot
>>Not to pick nits, but what the heck, I will anyhow.
>>Luminous flames can indeed burn soot free, or as nearly so as a blue flame.
>>It's just different flame chemistry. It is possible, even practical to
>>produce a luminous gas flame that burns bright yellow and produces little or
>>no soot. Think of the old mantel-less gas lights. When the flame was
>>properly protected by a glass, very little soot was produced.
>>The color is generated by the chemistry of the flame. The blue flame seen in
>>furnaces and other common appliances is the result of carbon monoxide
>burning.
>>Its characteristic color just happens to be blue. If the flame chemistry
>>changes a bit (les oxygen in the fuel-air mix), then carbon is produced
>within
>>the flame. The carbon then burns in the outer regions of the flame and
>>produces the yellow color. There is no reason physically that all of the
>>carbon cannot be fully combusted into CO2, with no soot production.
>>What causes a clean flame to produce soot is disruption of the flame. For a
>>luminous flame to burn clean, it must have clean, laminar flow within the
>>combustion zone. If a clean burning luminous flame is disturbed by an air
>>current, by impingement with a (cooler) object, or if it gets so large that
>>turbulence is generated within the flame, then soot is produced. This is
>easy
>>to demonstrate. Take an average candle, and wave your hand close to the
>>flame. As the flame jumps around from the air currents, visible soot will be
>>produced momentarily. When the flame calms down, the soot goes away.
>>So, soot production is not a function of flame color. Soot production is a
>>complex function of flame chemistry which is influenced by factors such as
>>initial wick and fuel chemistrys, airflow and flame temperature, flame
>>impingement, and probably others I've left out.Pete Engle, PEAlmost Home
>>Rumson, NJwww.almosthome.comIn a message dated 98-11-15 22:29:17 EST, you
>>write:
>><< All candles that have a yellow or orange flame produce soot because the
>> luminance of the candle flame depends on the presence of incandescent soot
>> (finely divided carbon) particles. Without these a flame is blue and not
>> very bright. Thus beeswax candle do produce soot but probably less than some
>> types of wax. >>
>>___________________________________________________________________
>
>(HIS REPLY)
>
>You are right, he is partially off the mark. He is correct that
>disturbances can cause a flame to emit soot and that soot is responsible
>for the luminance in a candle flame. After that he gets off the mark. By
>increasing the fuel flow rate (increasing the wick length) it is possible
>to get a candle to smoke even if it is undisturbed. The obvious example is
>a kerosene lamp where you can adjust the wick length. Standard operating
>procedure for those lamps is to adjust the wick just below the smoke point
>(maximize the light and minimize the soot). The emission of soot from a
>flame is caused by an in balance in the soot production and the soot
>oxidation. This is driven by the chemistry of the fuel and the relative
>fuel and air flow rates. He is also confusing partially premixed flames
>(stove and furnace flames) where air is mixed with the fuel with
>non-premixed or diffusion flames (candles) where the air and the fuel start
>out separate. in general, premixed flames are less likely than diffusion
>flames to produce soot but it gets much more complicated as the dependence
>on fuel properties is different from diffusion flames.
>
>As for gas mantle flames, they are not bright because of soot (there is
>no soot) but because the mantle acts as a black body emitter and radiates
>the light the way the soot does in a soot containing flame.
>
>He is correct that the blue light from furnace and stove flames is from
>spectral emission form gaseous species but it is more complex than just CO
>emission.
>
>david
>

From larcon at sni.net Mon Dec 14 17:26:49 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Request for information from Bruce Simon
Message-ID: <v01540b00b29b342f0f5c@[204.131.233.42]>

Stovers: The following is a little different from prior dialog on the
kelly kettle (a samovar-like small water heating kettle). Ron

>Sir:
>
> Would like more information on the kelly kettle and distributors
>in the United States. I currently reside in Ann Arbor Michigan, U.S.A
>Thanks for any help that you can give. Bruce Simon
>
["Bruce Simon" <Maslowsimon@email.msn.com>

Bruce: If you get some information, I hope you will let the list know.
Best of luck. Ron

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Tue Dec 15 08:09:20 1998
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Woodcoal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: visited Svaliava
Message-ID: <199812151309.QAA18689@ns.alkor.ru>

Stoves,
I have visited Svaliava forest chemical factory per the first week of
December.
This factory is in mountains Carpathians on the south - west of Ukraine. I
was at this factory frequently many years back. Now Ukraine the separate
state, but the director of a factory asked me to arrive for an advice. This
factory makes charcoal very much high qualities from beech and oak. It
processed in 1980 of fire wood of 150 000 meters cubic and received
charcoal 15 000... 20 000 tons per one year. Large and good shop for
processing tar and water condensate there is constructed. This shop worked
well, but now costs because of absence of the buyers on its traditional
products: a food acid, solvent for paints, ets. There is a small order for
an impurity for concrete from tar. The technology of this factory was an
example of complete processing of liquid products of charcoaling. (I have
not become to enter discussion stoves about liquid products. In Russia and
Ukraine the very wide experience of such technology is saved. But if to
speak seriously, it is necessary to speak very much. There are many books
in Russian on this theme. There were 2 special magazines and each month
there was a brochure - small monography on some to a separate question.)
Today this factory makes 15 % charcoal from former volume. They want
contacts to the large world, but have not normal communication. They asked
me to inform everyone, who would like to enter with them contact, that it
is possible is to made through me on EMail or fax 7 + 03133 + 22571, with
the general director Iohan Heshtin, telephone 7 + 03133 + 73256, chief of
factory charcoal Ernst Svarovsky. On English there do not speak, on German,
Hungarian and all slavic languages speak almost all.
The factory makes good activated charcoal and has wide experience
charcoaling.

Sincerely Yury Yudkevitch (Rossia)
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Tue Dec 15 22:49:19 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Andrew Sartain - address and other
Message-ID: <v01540b03b29cccf7424d@[204.131.233.43]>

Stovers - Andrew sent this message (see below also):

>
>Dear all,
>Again I have changed address. You may ask why? I do not reccomend any
>one to use aol. One of my lecturers did warn me and after careful
>consideration took his advice.
>As I am here, has there been any useful information out there with regards
>charcoal standards? or (articles on) the use of steel kilns in the U.K.
>
>Please respond.
>Andi Sartain
<Andy@sarty.freeserve.co.uk>

On charcoal standards (which you might have missed because of address
change) see something I wrote a few days ago on Paul Hait's comments.
There should be a good bit of past (maybe present) use of steel
kilns in the UK - but the problem is that many probably are illegal or soon
will be - as they are only vented, not flared. We had several messages
about a year ago on this subject from the UK.
Ron

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Tue Dec 15 22:49:30 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Dr. Yury visiting Svaliava
Message-ID: <v01540b05b29cd5ac4de4@[204.131.233.43]>

Dr. Yury and other stovers:
I have a few questions and comments below concerning your visit.

>Stoves,
>I have visited Svaliava forest chemical factory per the first week of
>December.
>This factory is in mountains Carpathians on the south - west of Ukraine. I
>was at this factory frequently many years back. Now Ukraine the separate
>state, but the director of a factory asked me to arrive for an advice. This
>factory makes charcoal very much high qualities from beech and oak. It
>processed in 1980 of fire wood of 150 000 meters cubic and received
>charcoal 15 000... 20 000 tons per one year.

(Larson-1) I think our stoves group would enjoy hearing more about
the conversion technology that is being used at this factory. Is it
similar to what you have described in the past as being developed in your
own laboratory? Are the pyrolysis gases vented or flared? What is the
conversion efficiency by weight? Etc.

> Large and good shop for
>processing tar and water condensate there is constructed. This shop worked
>well, but now costs because of absence of the buyers on its traditional
>products: a food acid, solvent for paints, ets. There is a small order for
>an impurity for concrete from tar. The technology of this factory was an
>example of complete processing of liquid products of charcoaling. (I have
>not become to enter discussion stoves about liquid products. In Russia and
>Ukraine the very wide experience of such technology is saved. But if to
>speak seriously, it is necessary to speak very much. There are many books
>in Russian on this theme. There were 2 special magazines and each month
>there was a brochure - small monography on some to a separate question.)

(Larson-2) What a shame that these are not available in all our
native languages. Are these magazines and brochure no longer being
produced?

>Today this factory makes 15 % charcoal from former volume. They want
>contacts to the large world, but have not normal communication. They asked
>me to inform everyone, who would like to enter with them contact, that it
>is possible is to made through me on EMail or fax 7 + 03133 + 22571, with
>the general director Iohan Heshtin, telephone 7 + 03133 + 73256, chief of
>factory charcoal Ernst Svarovsky. On English there do not speak, on German,
>Hungarian and all slavic languages speak almost all.
>The factory makes good activated charcoal and has wide experience
>charcoaling.
>
>Sincerely Yury Yudkevitch (Rossia)

(Larson-3) I hope that your message is able to help promote their
product.
Is it possible that some of the downturn in production has occurred
because of the nuclear fallout following the Chernobyl accident? If
contamination would have affected the trees in this part of the Ukraine,
would it perhaps be better to totally combust all of the biomass (probably
mainly for electricity production) and depend on filtration to contain
"all" of the radioactive residue? Have there been tests to show that both
the charcoal and the chemical by-products are "clean?
Or is the problem that which Tom Reed recently noted - that fossil
sources are now simply cheaper? (And we have to wait a bit longer before
the fossil fuel prices rise as supplies disappear?)
Thanks for keeping us informed of your trip and the difficulties
facing this charcoal-manufacturing facility.

Ron

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Tue Dec 15 22:49:34 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding: New member - John Hindman
Message-ID: <v01540b06b29cdb77aa3a@[204.131.233.43]>

Stovers: Based on a brief favorable comment from John, I sent the following
<truncated> message inviting his list membership: "John -
<snip> Is your interest in this area professional (for DoE) or more
personal (as I see little DoE involvement yet) ? <snip>

John replied today (see one more comment from me at the end):

>Ron, both actually. I work at the U.S. Department of Energy's Federal
>Energy Technology Center (FETC) with Scott Smouse, FETC's
>International Program Coordinator, who is on the stoves distribution list.
>
>Professionally, my interest comes from my work, wherein FETC is
>involved in supporting a Low Smoke Fuels Project under the Gore/Mbeki
>Binational Commission for cooperation between the U.S. and South
>Africa. Activities under this project have been ongoing since 1995, and
>have included information gathering missions by both sides, joint
>workshops in both countries, and FETC's participation in a macro-scale
>testing by South Africa's Department of Minerals and Energy of various
>low smoke fuels in Qalabothja township in June 97.
>
>My personal interest in cooking stoves stems from my having spent 3
>summers in Kenya in the 70s, and seeing first-hand the effects of
>uncontrolled combustion, especially from those jikas.
>
>I would be pleased to be added to your distribution list. If you need to
>ring me up or fax me anything, my PH is 412.892.4755 and my FAX is
>412.892.4216. My mailing address is:
>
>U.S. Department of Energy
>Federal Energy Technology Center
>P.O. Box 10940
>Pittsburgh, PA 15235-0940
>
>Regards,
>
>John

(Larson): John - glad to have you joining us and thanks to Scott
Smouse for keeping/making you aware of our list. My recollection is that
the "FETC" has been mostly involved with coal technology. Is your work
with South Africa continuing? Could you brief us on what you have learned?
How clean have you been able to make the combustion, etc? Is your present
FETC work with both coal and biomass? Etc. (tell us as much as you can)

I hope you don't mind my converting your private message into this
introduction message - but I'll bet you have lots of information to pass on
to our list. I didn't want to miss the opportunity you provided. Again,
welcome.

Ron

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Wed Dec 16 09:28:04 1998
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Woodcoal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Dr. Yury visiting Svaliava
Message-ID: <199812161428.RAA24997@ns.alkor.ru>

Dear Ron and all,
>Is it similar to what you have described in the past as being developed in
your
own laboratory? Are the pyrolysis gas vented or flared? What is the
conversion efficiency by weight? Etc.

The factory uses horizontal retorts from a brick. They round in section,
diameter 1.6 m, length 3m. The trolleys with fire wood drive to retorts on
rails. The walls of trolleys semicircular also are made in the form of a
lattice of a steel strip. Inside the trolleys between rails pass pipes (4
pieces). Diameter of pipes 100 mm. Pyrolysis gases burn inside these pipes
and give warmly for process. The output of a charcoal makes from 90 up to
120 kgs on 1 meter of cubic fire wood (It from 25 up to 35 %). Charcoal
usually contains up to 90 % notfly carbon, but they can on the order
do(make) from 70 % up to 94%.Pyrolysis gases leave from a retort in a
scrubber. The cooled condensate acts in a scrubber from above. The
condensate follows from below and gets in a tank. Tar there is separated.
The condensate passes a refrigerator. The part it comes back in a scrubber.
Other part acts in shop on manufacture of an acetic acid and solvent. The
gases are taken away from a scrubber by the fan and submits on burning. A
lack of heat compensate at the expense of natural gas. The refrigerator can
stand instead of a scrubber in the other variant. A design of retorts
original. It is a good design for a small factory. One retort gives about
1000... 1200 tons / years of a charcoal. Such retorts were in many
countries of east Europe. The engineers of Austrian - Hungarian firm
"Solva" have developed it in the beginning 20 centuries. And Svaliava has
improved a design.

>What a shame that these are not available in all our native languages. Are
these magazines and brochure no longer being produced?

It is very a pity, but the very large work of the Russian experts charcoal
remains latent for other world behind a language barrier. I for a long time
was convinced, that in the world repeat experiments, which results can be
found in clauses of the Russian researchers 50 - 60y. Russia has large
woods and beginning since 30 years has created largest in the world
factories charcoal. The wide experience them works now is not necessary and
gradually people having this experience die. The mankind tomorrow will
begin all at first and it is insulting.

> Is it possible that some of the downturn in production has occurre
because of the nuclear fallout following the accident? If contamination
would have affected the trees in this part of the Ukraine, would it perhaps
be better to totally combust all of the biomass (probably mainly for
electricity production) and depend on filtration to contain "All" of the
radioactive residue? Have there been tests to show that both the charcoal
and the chemical by-products are " clean?

Mountains of Carpathians stand between Svaliava and Chernobyl. It
ecologically clean place. The mountains have protected this territory and
all analyses negative. In general, it piece of paradise forgotten on ground
- the very beautiful and cosy world. The inhabitants of this territory -
motley mix of all languages, peoples, religions live amicably. They accept
the visitors how it are able to make only in mountains. The good luck of
Switzerland, that few people knows this territory. Differently Switzerland
will be ruined.
Sincerely Yury Yudkevitch (Rossia)

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Fri Dec 18 07:31:34 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Old, new charcoaling
Message-ID: <199812180731_MC2-6412-8564@compuserve.com>

Dear Yuri, Ron et al:

While I regret that all of the knowledge of charcoal making in Russia and
the world is dying, things are not as black as you paint. There is a great
deal of knowledge still about old methods of charcoal making, for instance
in "Industrial Charcoal Making", by Walter Emrich and Harry Booth, FAO
Forestry paper #63, available for a few dollars from the FAO, via delle
Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy. I hope that someone will assemble a
bibliography of other available books on charcoal making for this group.

It is my impression that "Top Down Charcoal Making" (alias "inverted
downdraft gasification" for those of us who are more interested in the
gas/vapor products for cooking and power) is a new twist on charcoal making
and does not occur in any of the classical methods. I made my first top
down charcoal/stove in 1995 after a trip to Africa, working on stoves for
the black homelands. Harry LaFontaine and Fred Hottenroth tried to
commercialize the stove aspects in a "GasiFire" model in 1990, but it
fizzled out. (Harry died in 1995, Fred in October 1998.) Ron Larson
joined me about 1992 and was more interested in the charcoal than the
cooking. Many people here at Stoves and Gasification have used variations
for charcoal, heat or both.

Does anyone know of top "down charcoal/inverted downdraft" before that
time?

Glad to hear that Svaliava is still pristine. Hope to visit there before I
fizzle out.

Yours truly, TOM
REED

~~~~~

>Dear Ron and all,
>Is it similar to what you have described in the past as being developed in
your
own laboratory? Are the pyrolysis gas vented or flared? What is the
conversion efficiency by weight? Etc.

>What a shame that these are not available in all our native languages. Are
these magazines and brochure no longer being produced?

From dgill at myhost.ccsinc.com Fri Dec 18 12:46:56 1998
From: dgill at myhost.ccsinc.com (Dan Gill)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Old, new charcoaling
In-Reply-To: <199812180731_MC2-6412-8564@compuserve.com>
Message-ID: <367A9607.7B3F8931@myhost.ccsinc.com>

Tom, Yuri and others,

I also often think we are ploughing old ground. I think of the period
from 1750 to 1900 when industrial processes were being developed and
refined. There was a great deal of practical and technical knowledge
applied then that was not preserved or has been lost. The Russian
journals may contain basic knowledge which has lapsed in other parts of
the world.

Tom, I have seen several references by you to top down burning as a
recent discovery (or practice). I recall an article about masonry
heaters which discussed top down burning. I believe the technique has
historically been used with with these devises in Russia. The
descriptions of charcoal clamps in use during recent centuries also
suggest a top down method. After the clamp or pile was constructed, the
central chimney was filled with combustible material, lit from the top
and loosely covered. Here is an interesting quote from
http://www.connerprairie.org/fuel.html :
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Burn

Most often the pile was "charged" by dropping burning charcoal into the
chimney and covering
the opening with a "bridgen" of three billets (the ever experimenting
Thomas Jefferson lit his pile
from the bottom). If the burn proceeded properly, the "fire" burned
downward and out, like a
cone. The pile had to be watched until the final raking out of the
charcoal. The collier and his
assistants kept a wary eye on the steaming, smoking pile to guard
against blowouts that might lead
to a flaming of the pile. If blowouts occurred, the dirt remaining in
the ring was used to seal them.
Controlling the oxygen to the pile was a delicate matter. Too much might
mean the pile would
catch fire, too little would result in an unsatisfactory burn. Colliers
often had to cut or dig holes at
various spots on the pile to ensure proper air flow.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Obviously, the clamp method was a dirty process as the pile smouldered
and pyrolysis gasses were vented and not flared. I have seen no
descriptions of how masonry or steel charcoal kilns were historically
fired, but they afforded the opportunity to recover distillates as
described by Yuri.

This is all said in the spirit of discussion, not argument.

Dan
http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/Charmake.htm

Tom Reed wrote:
>
> Dear Yuri, Ron et al:
>
> While I regret that all of the knowledge of charcoal making in Russia and
> the world is dying, things are not as black as you paint. There is a great
> deal of knowledge still about old methods of charcoal making, for instance
> in "Industrial Charcoal Making", by Walter Emrich and Harry Booth, FAO
> Forestry paper #63, available for a few dollars from the FAO, via delle
> Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy. I hope that someone will assemble a
> bibliography of other available books on charcoal making for this group.
>
> It is my impression that "Top Down Charcoal Making" (alias "inverted
> downdraft gasification" for those of us who are more interested in the
> gas/vapor products for cooking and power) is a new twist on charcoal making
> and does not occur in any of the classical methods. I made my first top
> down charcoal/stove in 1995 after a trip to Africa, working on stoves for
> the black homelands. Harry LaFontaine and Fred Hottenroth tried to
> commercialize the stove aspects in a "GasiFire" model in 1990, but it
> fizzled out. (Harry died in 1995, Fred in October 1998.) Ron Larson
> joined me about 1992 and was more interested in the charcoal than the
> cooking. Many people here at Stoves and Gasification have used variations
> for charcoal, heat or both.
>
> Does anyone know of top "down charcoal/inverted downdraft" before that
> time?
>
> Glad to hear that Svaliava is still pristine. Hope to visit there before I
> fizzle out.
>
> Yours truly, TOM
> REED
>
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Sun Dec 20 22:43:52 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Tom Reed on atmospheric carbon
Message-ID: <v01540b06b2a3711eb2df@[204.131.233.7]>

Stovers: This got bumped to me as part of a message Tom sent to "stoves"
and two other lists - one of which carried the original Taylor letter given
below.

Tom: I think this got bumped because it was sent in from
"REEDTB@compuserve.com" rather than the "Reedtb@compuserve.com" by which
you are known on the "CREST" list. I had not realized there is case
sentivity, but I can't think of another reason. Let me know if a
permanent change should be made. Ron

(The rest of this is all from Tom Reed)

Dear Tom Taylor:

Your reply to Roy Lent had a good deal of sense in it. However, you will
find that most members of CREST subscribe to the current sacred cows, so
let it be and lets do our bit in promoting and discussing gasification
here. There were a few hundred exchanges on this subject a year ago before
you joined - those interested can check the archives. The rest of us are
talked out.

It would be intersting to take a census of opinions represented here, but
as you say the whole question may blow over before the next deluge or
glacier humbles us.

Yours truly, TOM
REED

Dear Mr. Roy Lent,
I believe that in a few years or decades when the atmospheric analysis has
settled down, that CO2 based atmospheric "heating" will be a comma in a
sentence of the book of this. If the number of tons of harvested wood vs.
native wood which decomposes in the forest on it's own is accounted for,
there
is very little us humans can do to affect the CO2 balance in the
atmosphere.
The same is true of the forest fires, volcanos, natural gas leakage in the
bottom of the ocean and other contributors.
In my opinion, the only affect increased carbon or other gases in
the
atmosphere has upon the thermal layers is conductivity which accelerates
the
velocity of the gas in the atmosphere. This will be reflected in greater
turbulence and resultant storms. I have read articles on both increases
and
decreases in storm activity as some connection to heating.
Measuring glacial activity is the best manner of determining
changes in
atmospheric conditions. I have not heard of massive slow downs in glacial
activity which would arise from reduced snowfall from heating.
There is a group also in contrary to global warming which is "the
coming ice
age", predicting cooler atmospheric from increased greenhouse gases. This
has
some sense when you discuss the loss of heat from a higher conductive
atmosphere to space. It goes along with the higher turbulence thoughts,
although I am not sure if they subscribe to this also.
One serious pollution problem may be the reflection of incident
radiation
back into space which would cause more cooling. Comparing the "clouds" of
pollution vs. normal cloud cover would be an interesting exercise to see if
it
has any merit.
Once again, nature's regulatory system is at work, if there is more
evaporation from heating, there would be more cloud cover to reflect the
heat
back into space.
We market agricultural products in Costa Rica, and are aware of the
need of
proper plant nutrients for plant growth. Your soils there are in serious
need
of limestone from the high rainfall and leaching of calcium. This also
causes
latteritic soils and reduces production in South American rainforests after
clear cutting. Our program replaces the cation exchange capacity of the
soil
allowing increased nutrient uptake on latteritic soils.
I appreciate your comments. We may all end up in coffins sooner or
later,
except for us who wish to relink to the carbon cycle as CO2 when we are
cremated, a faster way into the carbon cycle. We as living organisms are
much
more contributors to the carbon cycle on a continuous basis and burying us
does remove us as contributors to this cycle.
On to contributing to the carbon cycle!
Tom Taylor

From larcon at sni.net Wed Dec 23 12:47:45 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarded: Pari Luigi on miscanthus boiler
Message-ID: <v01540b00b2a6ddb94577@[204.131.233.48]>

Stovers: The following in today from Italy on a need for information on a
fairly large (250 kWt) boiler. Anyone able to help?

Ron

>Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 16:54:36 +0100
>To: stoves@crest.org
>From: Pari Luigi <ismapari@uni.net>
>Subject: request of information about miscanthus boiler
>
>I am carrying out a research funded by Italian Ministry of Agricultural to
>grow miscanthus to heat a building of our Institute. I am looking for an
>heating unit (about 250 kWt) able to burn miscanthus. As far as I know
>until now have been tested just straw boilers feed with miscanthus.
>I would like to know if there are enterprises that produce miscanthus
>boilers. Thank you in advance,
>
>
>Luigi Pari
>
>Dr. Luigi Pari
>Istituto Sperimentale per la Meccanizzazione Agricola
>Via della Pascolare 16
>00016 Monterotondo (Italy)
>tel.++39 6 9067917, fax.++39 6 90625591
>e.mail ismapari@uni.net
>

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni Thu Dec 24 11:25:33 1998
From: rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni (Rogerio Miranda)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: navidad/natal/christma
Message-ID: <3.0.2.16.19981224093359.35470018@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>

Estimados Amigos:

Gostaria de desejar-lhes um feliz natal e prospero ano novo. Espero que
todos os nossos sonhos sejam uma realidade em 1999.

Gustaria de desearles una feliz navidad y prospero ano nuevo. Espero que
todos nuestros suenos sean una realidad en 1999.

Dear Friends:

I would like to wish you merry christma and prosperous new year. Hope that
all our dreams will be a reality in 1999.

rogerio
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Rogerio Carneiro de Miranda
ATP/PROLENA/Nicaragua
Apartado Postal C-321
Managua, Nicaragua
telefax (505) 276 2015
EM <rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Thu Dec 24 15:36:36 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: greetings
Message-ID: <v01540b02b2a856f5077f@[204.131.233.34]>

Stovers:

In a few minutes my wife and I leave to spend Christmas with my
daughter, her husband, and our three grand-daughters.

We wish you all also a Merry Christmas and will look forward to
logging on again in a few days.

Ron

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From Andy at sarty.freeserve.co.uk Fri Dec 25 10:32:02 1998
From: Andy at sarty.freeserve.co.uk (Andrew Sartain)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Christmas
Message-ID: <001701be2f89$87d104c0$f603883e@default>

Dear all,
I would like to wish every one a very merry
Christmas, and thank all those who have helped with my research.

Greetings from Andrew
Sartain

From larcon at sni.net Sat Dec 26 09:08:32 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding submission from [Peter Verhaart <verhaarp@cqu.edu.au>]
Message-ID: <v01540b00b2aa93c6c4de@[204.131.233.34]>

>To: stoves@crest.org
>From: Peter Verhaart <verhaarp@cqu.edu.au>
>Subject: Merry Xmass
>
>Merry Christmas to all stovers.

>Peter Verhaart, 6 McDonald St. Gracemere Q 4702 Australia
>Phone: +61 7 4933 1761; fax: +61 7 4933 1761 or
>+61 7 4933 2112 (when computer is on); mobile: 0412 457239
>E-mail p.verhaart@cqu.edu.au
>

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Tue Dec 29 09:45:15 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Greetings from El Fadil
Message-ID: <v01540b02b2ae9a38dbeb@[204.131.233.4]>

Stovers:

Some of you will remember several messages from El Fadil. I have
replied privately - expressing a hope to meet him in Khartoum in the near
future. I have also cut him off the list

Then I decided that I should have replied publicly, since others
may have a similar desire to get to Khartoum and to help the Sudanese - who
have a very serious stoves problem. I will send El Fadil's address on to
anyone who is interested.

Ron

>From: "A. A. B. El Fadil" <Elfadil@495-simon.agrartech.uni-hohenheim.de>
>Organization: ATS, Hohenheim University
>To: larcon@sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
>Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 09:03:47 +0200
>Subject: Greetings from El Fadil
>Priority: normal
>
>Dear Mr. Larson,
>
>Merry Christmas and happy new year to you, your family and all list
>members.
>
>I am Leaving tomorrow back to the Sudan. I will keep in contact from
>there (may be e-mail if it is available otherwise per post).
>
>Please sign off.
>
>Best regards El Fadil

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From larcon at sni.net Tue Dec 29 09:48:11 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Re (2): Greetings from El Fadil
Message-ID: <v01540b00b2ae9d17411c@[204.131.233.42]>

Stovers:
A follow-up (with amazing turn-around speed):

>From: "A. A. B. El Fadil" <Elfadil@495-simon.agrartech.uni-hohenheim.de>
>Organization: ATS, Hohenheim University
>To: larcon@sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
>Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 15:36:48 +0200
>Subject: Re: Greetings from El Fadil
>Priority: normal
>
>Dear Mr. Larson
>
>Thanks alot for your kind message.
>My address in the Sudan as follows:
>
>Energy Research Institute
>Khartoum Centre P.O. Box 4032
>Khartoum SUDAN
>
>Tel. +249 11 451948
>Fax +249 11 770701
>
>Regards Elfadil

Ronal W. Larson, PhD
21547 Mountsfield Dr.
Golden, CO 80401, USA
303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
larcon@sni.net

From rhari at hotmail.com Wed Dec 30 07:05:22 1998
From: rhari at hotmail.com (R. Harikumar)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Greetings !
Message-ID: <368A16D5.E3A6235B@hotmail.com>

Wish you a very Happy & Prosperous 1999 !

Regards

Hari
____________________________
R. Harikumar
Energy Management Centre
(an autonomous Centre under the Dept. of Power, Govt. of Kerala)
Karamana P.O, Trivandrum 695 002
Kerala, India

Tel: +91 -471 345597
Fax: +91 -471 345587
e-mail: rhari@hotmail.com
_______________________________________________________
Electronic transmission from an ENERGY STAR labelled PC

CONSERVE ENERGY TO CONSUME FOR EVER

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Wed Dec 30 10:51:28 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: BOUNCE stoves@crest.org: Admin request of type /\bunsubscribe\b/i at lin
Message-ID: <199812301050_MC2-6507-2B79@compuserve.com>

Dear Ron:

This is a test, going through Crest and sni to you using all caps in the
address (and also normal address). (Four messages).

I have been receiving my mail regularly through Crest and was not aware of
bounced messages from you. How long has this been going on?

So, please send me a TEST message, all caps, through Crest and directly to
my address, reedtb@compuserve.com and REEDTB@COMPUSERVE.COM.

Good luck, TOM
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Thu Dec 31 08:47:45 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Shell Biomass
Message-ID: <199812310847_MC2-651F-6A08@compuserve.com>

Dear Biomass et al:

Did a web search on Shell and biomass.

See this page: http://www.shell.com/about/content/0,1369,1506-3090,00.html
. They had some nice quotes concerning company policy. Hope they are
serious.

1. Shell Companies will only obtain the biomass feedstock from sustainably
grown sources, that is, where the harvested biomass is continuously
replaced by new biomass in an environmentally and socially
responsible manner. These sources may be from dedicated plantations or as
residues harvesting and processing operations. Shell Companies will not use
biomass derived from native forests.

2. Conversion efficiencies can be increased if the biomass is first
gasified and then (depending on the process) the gas or bio-oil is used to
fuel a gas turbine equipped with waste heat recovery.
The schematic shows such a process to generate electricity.
The challenge is to ensure that the equipment can produce electricity &
heat reliably and in a cost-effective manner.

3. Trials are already in progress in Uruguay and Chile and there is
close collaboration between Shell Companies and various international
experts and
institutions. Shell also has its own forest research centre at East
Malling in
the United Kingdom. In parallel, state of the art technologies to convert
biomass more efficiently into electricity and heat are also being
identified, tested and further developed.

4. Over the last 18 years, Shell Companies have developed experience in
growing trees for pulpwood and sawn timber and its current area of
plantations is 129 000 hectares Shell Forestry is among the
world leaders in tree improvement and large scale tree production.

Yours truly, TOM
REED

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Thu Dec 31 08:48:23 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:12 2004
Subject: Biomass Generalizations
Message-ID: <199812310848_MC2-651F-6A20@compuserve.com>

Dear Cresters:

For 100,000 years Humans have been burning and pyrolysing biomass, guided
by experience and instincts. No more improvements down that line. For 100
years we have been making more headway, understanding the processes in a
quantitative way. If you are still thinking qualitatively, here are some
generalizations that I find helpful.
BIOMASS GENERALIZATIONS
COMBUSTION
1 kg "typical biomass" (10% moisture,ash free basis, 18 MJ/kg) wil generate
5 kWt when completely combusted.
1 kg biomass requires 6.4 kg air for complete combustion to 7.4 kg CO2 +
0.7 H2O

GASIFICATION
1 kg "typical biomass" will generate, 1 kWe (@20% efficiency)
1 kg biomass requires 1.6 kg air to make 2.6 kg producer gas
1 m3 producer gas weighs 1 kg
1 m3 air generates 1.7 m3 producer gas
1 kg biomass + 1.6 kg air ==> 2.6 kg producer gas; + 4.8 kg air ==>7.4 kg
(CO + 0.7 H2 + 4 N2)

AIR
1 m3 air weighs 1.2 kg at 20°C
Dry air contains: 21.0% O2; 78.0% N2; 0.9 % A; and 0.04% other by volume
Dry air contains: 23.2% O2; 75.5% N2; 1.3 % A; and .04% other by weight
Molecular Weight: 29.0
Nitrogen in dry air is 3.76 X oxygen (by volume) or 3.31 X oxygen (by
weight)

I have a lot more that will eventually appear in "Science and Engineering
of Gasification", but these are a minimum set of understanding.
Personally, I have made a chart in BIG letters and posted it on my wall.
but better to remember them in the brain for rapid navigation.

Yours truly, TOM REED

BioEnergy Lists: Improved Biomass Cooking Stoves

December 1998 Biomass Cooking Stoves Archive