July 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 REEDTB at compuserve.com Wed Jul 1 13:05:29 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:57 2004
Subject: The Nairobi Stovers Forum
Message-ID: <199807011313_MC2-51EA-9221@compuserve.com>

Dear ELK:

Thanks for bringing all of us STOVERS up to date on the Nairobi conference.
Even though most of us weren't present, we have gotten a good flavor.

One comment on one point raised.

*It was expressed that because of variations in diet and available fuel
resources, the concept of a "perfect stove" is unrealistic. Rather stove
design is driven by the environment within which it is used. This fact is
of particular importance when considering stove demand and distribution.

This certainly has some truth in it. However, in the U.S., where we could
have any number of variations of stove, there are essentially only two
stoves: The four burner + oven electric stove; and the gas variation of
the same. (I was in our local appliance store the other day looking them
over.) There are a few specialty variations for small quarters etc., but
95% of U.S. housewives have given over to these two - really only one -
choice.

I have presumed that if one made a sufficiently advanced, low cost, high
efficiency, low pollution, high heat rate biomass stove, it would wash
away a few hundred lesser stoves and eventually be accepted by the
housewives of China, India and Africa who simply want to cook a good meal
quickly. Might take a while to get them all to accept, but the key is
"sufficiently advanced". It is on this basis that I and others have been
working on the "Wood-Gas Stove" for the last decade. Wood-gas adds the
missing new dimension to biomass cooking.

I'd value your opinion on this philosophy.

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

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Wed Jul 1 13:07:29 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:57 2004
Subject: Benz-(a)-Pyrene in "tars"
Message-ID: <199807011315_MC2-51EA-9272@compuserve.com>

Dear Salimol, Kookpman, Stovers, gasifiers et al:

Here is information relative to carcinogenicity in woodsmoke and pyrolysis
products.

Benz-(a)-pyrene is a potent carcinogen, found in chimney deposits etc.
First alert, chimney sweeps in London, c 1850, cancer of the scrotum.

Low temperature, primary, pyrolysis (<600C) does not provide ANY BAP.
Higher temperatures cause a reforming of the primary products to
polyaromatic hydrocarbons, including BAP. Probably the higher the
temperature the higher the fraction of BAP.

So the tars from downdraft gasifiers should be handled with care and maybe
gloves. On the other hand : ) I have been working with these tars for 15
years, not too carefully, and no lesions so far.

Much of this information comes from the careful molecular beam mass
spectrometer research activities of Tom Milne, Bob Evans et al at the
National Renewable Energy Lab, NREL over the last 15 years. They are
writing a survey on "tars" that should be out in 6-12 months.

I hope that Salimol will clearly distinguish sources of "tar" in his
thesis, or it will misguide more than guide.

Your nanny, TOM
REED
~~~~~

>Dear Stovers and Salimol,

We have provided some limited financial support to Ramir L. Jarabis, a
student from the Asian Institute of Technology, to do work on
"Determination
of Benzo-(a)-Pyrene from Household Woodfuel Combustion: A case study in
Cebu
City, Philippines" (the tile of his proposed thesis for his Master of
Engineering). This should be available from the Asian Institute of
Technology, School of Environment Resources and Development, P.O. Box 4,
Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand, Fax +66-2-5162126. We probably
have also a copy of the thesis and in case you have problems contacting AIT
we may be able to help.

Regards,
Auke Koopmans Tel.
+66-2-280 2760
<
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Wed Jul 1 17:25:16 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Non-member submission from Larry Sutherland
Message-ID: <v01540b00b1bfe3f48a6c@[204.133.28.32]>

Stovers and Larry:
I have normally not been sending this sort of message on. Rather I
urge newcomers to read our archives - which recently are full of useful
information. If you wish to join our list after reading the archives at
www.crest.org, please let me know.
But also I know there are list members in the UK who may wish to
contact you. There have been a number of past very valuable interventions
on charcoal making from the UK. Also perhaps you could provide a useful
test bed for those of us who are looking from places to test new ideas -
but who do not have much access to wood nor use for the charcoal. The
basic need is for a 200 liter barrel, probably.
My understanding is that the UK environmental rules, like those in
the US and some other countries, prohibits the venting of charcoal-making
gases (but allows their venting). Much of our list discussion is on how to
do this. I don't think you will find anything in the charcoal-making
literature on how to do it, especially at small scale (but hope someone
will tell me I am wrong). The key seems to be the top lighting of the wood
in the barrel - with the use of an upper chimney with added secondary air.

This isn't saying enough - but if you aren't discouraged, let us
hear back from you.

Best of luck. Ron

The rest from Larry Sutherland <l.sutherland@napier.ac.uk>

> Hello,
>
> I am trying to find out about how to make a device to turn scrap wood
> into charcoal.
>
> I am a member of a boat club and we have lots of off-cuts from our
> boat repair activities. We also have an annual barbecue for which we
> buy charcoal (probably from some third-world country which can ill
> afford to lose the timber).
> I would like to turn our scrap wood into charcoal and I need the
> equipment and know-how. Can you help?
>
> Larry

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From Auke.Koopmans at fao.org Wed Jul 1 20:48:18 1998
From: Auke.Koopmans at fao.org (Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Charcoal making kilns
Message-ID: <01IYWRDG82UQ8ZE30M@faov02.fao.org>

Dear Dr. Yuri Yudkevitch,

I just saw, probably the way my email is set up, that the last two
characters for the URL had dropped of and the URL ended now with ht instead
of html
So try again with the full URL
http://www.nri.org/Publishing/Internal_Publications/pubcat/biomass/guides.ht
ml

At this site by clicking General you will find also some publications on the
use of sawdust and wood carbonization with recovery of waste heat.

Regards,

Auke

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Woodcoal [SMTP:woodcoal@mailbox.alkor.ru]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 1998 7:53 PM
> To: Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP)
> Subject: Re: Charcoal making kilns
> ----------
> > Îò: Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP) <Auke.Koopmans@fao.org>
> > Êîìó: stoves@crest.org
> > Òåìà: Charcoal making kilns
> > Äàòà: 1 èþëÿ 1998 ã. 13:25
> >
> > Dear List Members,
> >
> > For those of you who are interested in charcoal making and different
> types
> > of kilns check the followoing web site:
> >
> >
> http://www.nri.org/Publishing/Internal_Publications/pubcat/biomass/guides.
> ht
> > ml
> I have tried to execute your recommendations and has received such answer:
> 404 Not Found
> The requested URL
> /Publishing/Internal_Publications/pubcat/biomass/guides.ht was not found
> on
> this server.
> 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

From K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl Thu Jul 2 06:07:37 1998
From: K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl (K. K. Prasad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: The Nairobi Stovers Forum
Message-ID: <199807021016.MAA22534@silicon.tue.nl>

Dear Tom, Dear ELK and other stovers

> Dear ELK:
>
> Thanks for bringing all of us STOVERS up to date on the Nairobi conference.
> Even though most of us weren't present, we have gotten a good flavor.
>
> One comment on one point raised.
>
> *It was expressed that because of variations in diet and available fuel
> resources, the concept of a "perfect stove" is unrealistic. Rather stove
> design is driven by the environment within which it is used. This fact is
> of particular importance when considering stove demand and distribution.
>
> This certainly has some truth in it. However, in the U.S., where we could
> have any number of variations of stove, there are essentially only two
> stoves: The four burner + oven electric stove; and the gas variation of
> the same. (I was in our local appliance store the other day looking them
> over.) There are a few specialty variations for small quarters etc., but
> 95% of U.S. housewives have given over to these two - really only one -
> choice.
>
> I have presumed that if one made a sufficiently advanced, low cost, high
> efficiency, low pollution, high heat rate biomass stove, it would wash
> away a few hundred lesser stoves and eventually be accepted by the
> housewives of China, India and Africa who simply want to cook a good meal
> quickly. Might take a while to get them all to accept, but the key is
> "sufficiently advanced". It is on this basis that I and others have been
> working on the "Wood-Gas Stove" for the last decade. Wood-gas adds the
> missing new dimension to biomass cooking.
>
> I'd value your opinion on this philosophy.
>
> 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
>
>

In Europe nobody will accept that the Italian food is the same as the
British. If you get excited further you can go on listing thirty odd
countries in Europe who can be considered to eat different foods. But
strangely enough they more or less are very happy to cook on
gas/electric stoves that are mass produced.

In India, where I originate from, the well-to-do city folk, in spite
of the bewidering variety of foods they cook and eat, manage quite
well with gas/electric stoves.

Perhaps another example will help. Human beings can be looked upon as
the passport control system does at the port of entry into a country.
They can also be considered from the point of view of medical science
- anatomy, physiology etc. The latter even refuses to acknowledge the
fact whether we are big or small, white, black, brown or yellow.

Thus I find it difficult to accept statements that make a big issue
of the eating habits of people. An improved biomass stove does not
dictate to people what they should eat!

Piet Verhaart wrote a paper "On Designing Woodstoves" in the year of
our Lord 1983. And he has a list of cooking tasks. They happen to be
less than the number of fingers on one human hand. If you are
pernickety the number creeps upto 8!! Never mind all those hundreds
of thousands of recipes crammed into cookbooks that adorn the
section called "cooking" in an average bookstore. That probably
represents just a percent or so of the foods cooked and eaten by
people.

I am sure almost every Indian and Mexican will swear by whatever
God/s they believe in that Rotis and Tortillas are worlds apart. But
as far as a cookstove design is concerned they can be handled in a
very similar manner.

I find it a bit strange that this discussion has not graduated much
further from when we started on our stove project in 1980. Never mind
we are using "state-of-the-art" communication medium.

Hope there will be some discussion on Tom Reed's and my thoughts so
that we can leave the thoughts of a by-gone era behind.

Prasad
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From dstill at epud.org Thu Jul 2 13:59:51 1998
From: dstill at epud.org (Dean Still)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: one stove?
Message-ID: <199807021812.LAA13005@epud.org>

Dear Tom,

Of course, the concept of "one best stove" goes against the grain of a long
held tenent of the A.T. movement: that design should be responsive to local
needs which differ. If you factor money into the equation then stoves will
look different because they will be made from different locally available
materials and made by different people, in unique local ways. Some people
might really dislike a stove, others might love it.The "one stove"
available in the U.S. perhaps is representative of our wealth, homogeneity
and amazing network of distribution.

On the other hand, like you, I believe that a lot of A.T. designs are not
accepted because they do not function sufficiently well. For example, I
have worked on solar cookers for a while now and still do not consider them
to work well enough to be overwhelmingly attractive. But I hope that with
more work someday we will make a solar cooker (or a wood stove, or heat
activated refrigerator or a gasified engine) that will be such a "good
deal" that it will be of general use and lessen suffering.

If we all produce one good thing every ten years that seems great progress!

Best regards,

Dean Still

----------
> From: Thomas Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
> To: E.L.Karstad <elk@arcc.or.ke>; STOVES <stoves@crest.org>
> Subject: The Nairobi Stovers Forum
> Date: Wednesday, July 01, 1998 10:13 AM
>
> Dear ELK:
>
> Thanks for bringing all of us STOVERS up to date on the Nairobi
conference.
> Even though most of us weren't present, we have gotten a good flavor.
>
> One comment on one point raised.
>
> *It was expressed that because of variations in diet and available fuel
> resources, the concept of a "perfect stove" is unrealistic. Rather stove
> design is driven by the environment within which it is used. This fact
is
> of particular importance when considering stove demand and distribution.
>
> This certainly has some truth in it. However, in the U.S., where we
could
> have any number of variations of stove, there are essentially only two
> stoves: The four burner + oven electric stove; and the gas variation of
> the same. (I was in our local appliance store the other day looking them
> over.) There are a few specialty variations for small quarters etc., but
> 95% of U.S. housewives have given over to these two - really only one -
> choice.
>
> I have presumed that if one made a sufficiently advanced, low cost, high
> efficiency, low pollution, high heat rate biomass stove, it would wash
> away a few hundred lesser stoves and eventually be accepted by the
> housewives of China, India and Africa who simply want to cook a good meal
> quickly. Might take a while to get them all to accept, but the key is
> "sufficiently advanced". It is on this basis that I and others have been
> working on the "Wood-Gas Stove" for the last decade. Wood-gas adds the
> missing new dimension to biomass cooking.
>
> I'd value your opinion on this philosophy.
>
> 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
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Thu Jul 2 15:41:26 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Alvin Patterson Introduction - on charcoal-making
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1c16704ee0d@[204.133.28.20]>

Stovers: This came in today, following an earlier message from Alvin a few
days ago saying:

>>I am looking for details on the manufacture of charcoal that would be
>>suitable for rural people. Do you have any leads or information?

(Larson): I signed Alvin up for our list and asked for more details, which
follow. I add a few of my thoughts and hope others will jump in also.
Alvin raises a few new issues - that parallel ideas we hear from especially
Elsen Karstad on wasted resources.

(Alvin):
>Hi Ron
>
>Thank you for your message received yesterday regarding my interest in the
>manufacture of charcoal.
>
>Firstly I must tell you that I know absolutely nothing about stoves or the
>manufacture of charcoal. The idea came to me that living in a third world
>country, South Africa, where there is a great shortage of fuel and a great
>deal of unemployment the timber currently being dumped as refuse could
>perhaps be converted into charcoal creating self employment and at the
>same time reducing the strain on the dump sites.

(Larson): So far, I am close to full agreement - creating
employment and reducing input to dump sites certainly are worthy goals.
One concern is that "timber" could mean a large diameter - which
could cause difficulty in conversion to charcoal. Secondly, I think there
should also be investigation of conversion of the "timber" into smaller
diameter fuelwood. The usual reasons for converting wood to charcoal is
that charcoal burns more cleanly (commands a higher price) and has a higher
energy density so that transportation costs are reduced (but there have
been some arguments on this list of the wisdom of doing this, where there
is an energy shortage).

(Alvin):
>
>Basically I thought that if small charcoal stoves could be sited at dumps
>or other suitable collection sites this would create employment and
>provide the community with fuel. As a member of our local Rotary Club I
>could present this as a project and may even obtain financial aid to get
>the project off the ground.
>
>Please advise me on the viability of this project.
>
>Regards Alvin Patterson.

(Larson): The use of small stoves at the dump site doesn't sound viable.
I would propose instead considering starting two small projects.

The first is to reduce the waste timber in size for use in
competition with locally collected fire wood. Some of us on the list would
then like to see this converted by the stove user to charcoal, while
capturing the waste heat (about 60-70% of the initial energy available) for
use in normal household cooking. These charcoal-making stoves still need
development. The development needs to be based on the type of cooking done
locally in South Africa. I have spent time in Zimbabwe, where maize is
cooked (and stirred) a long time in large pots. This would demand a more
rugged stove than many of us have been working with (but others, such as
Elsen Karstad in Nairobi might have one that is quite appropriate. See our
photograph web-site maintained by Alex English for this design). Some
development effort is needed for your local conditions - and we have some
list members in South Africa who may want to help. In any case, there are
other stove possibilities (that do not make charcoal) which may find your
"dump-created-firewood" better for some reason than collection by the user.
The problem of splitting larger wood down to smaller sizes is not
one we have ever discussed on this list. I have seen splitters in use in
the United States and Sweden of many different types. Most are portable
and some can be driven off of a vehicle. I hope someone on the list has
done a study of options and can offer some thoughts on costs, etc.
The main advantage of this first possible project is that less of
the "timber" energy will be lost. The problem is that the costs may be too
high.

The other project that you might consider is directly converting to
charcoal at the dump. The emphasis on our list has been on how to do this
without venting the gases - but rather to flare those gases. If you could
find some use for the large energy release with flaring, it would be even
better. We have talked about making bricks or other clay products, a
bakery, water purification, etc. To my knowledge, there is no-one anywhere
in the world presently doing any of these simulataneously with
charcoal-making. Again, development is needed.
Ignoring the issue of co-products, the only way to flare seems to
be to scale up what we have been doing with small charcoal-making
cookstoves. The key feature is top-lighting of the (enclosed) wood pile,
with careful attention to controlling the primary air supply. The flaring
takes place in a chimney which creates sufficient draft to draw in both
primary and secondary air. The approach will not work with wet wood,
whereas traditional bottom-fired systems will. However, during the period
when the pile is drying out, the gases cannot be flared. In many
countries, the traditional approach is being mandated out of existence
because of the noxiousness of these gases.
I hope this helps you to make a decision. I believe in a few more
years you will see many successful flared charcoal-making systems - in many
different sizes. There are quite a few on our list - who are trying
experiments right now - looking back in our archives will show you several
clever ideas. We wish you luck. Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Thu Jul 2 22:15:23 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Smoke from the Kitchen
Message-ID: <199807030224.WAA02105@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Stovers,
Elsen has passed along a few images a thoughts to be viewed at Stoves
Webpage listed below.
Alex

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From elk at arcc.or.ke Fri Jul 3 07:37:19 1998
From: elk at arcc.or.ke (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust
Message-ID: <v01520d01b1c2977a1d9c@[199.2.222.133]>

Some good progress with the downdraft sawdust carboniser kiln.

I've faxed Alex a drawing- pretty simple- and hope to get a few photos by
e-mail to him this evening. I'll include a picture or two of the mechanical
charcoal briquetting and air drying as well.

I've yet to weigh the carbonised sawdust, but conversion looks good. The
volatiles seem to burn O.K. in the firebox, but not as continuously as I'd
like. This should be improved with the controllable secondary air vent I'm
installing tomorrow. This vent can be used as a re-ignition point if
necessary as well.

Interestingly, weight loss in air/sun drying fresh sawdust was 39%. I doubt
very much if it's possible to carbonise fresh material in this kiln.

Indications are that with a bit of practice, over 300 kg sawdust can be
carbonised in this small (120 cm dia. X 1.5 m. deep) kiln within 8 hours.
I doubt if 300 kg of raw sawdust would fit into the chamber- pyrolysis
begins with only 15 cm or so at the bottom, and layers of sawdust are added
onto the surface at pyrolysis proceeds.

At the end of the shift, the carbonised sawdust is extinguished either by
wetting or by transferring to a sealable drum.

I'm leaving a fellow in charge of operating the kiln in my absence ('till
the 26th July), and all going according to plan, will scale this up
substantially using an earthen pit instead of an metal kiln.

Alex- what do your flue calculations say about a chimney 5 m. high by 13 cm
diameter? My 'gut feel' is that it's too tall for it's width, so I'm
cutting it down to 4 m tomorrow. Let me know if I'm wrong please.

All for now;

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@arcc.or.ke
_____________________________

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From tmiles at teleport.com Fri Jul 3 14:29:27 1998
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: SPONSORS NEEDED FOR BIOENERGY LISTS
Message-ID: <199807031838.LAA13012@mail.easystreet.com>

SPONSORS NEEDED FOR BIOENERGY LISTS

The Bioenergy lists (bioenergy, bioconversion, digestion, gasification,
stoves) are maintained by volunteer list administrators and funded by
contributions from list members to the Center for Renewable Energy and
Sustainable Technology (CREST). Recently, Auke Koopmans of the FAO Regional
Wood Energy Development Program in Asia (http://www.rwedp.org/) contributed
to the Stoves list. Make your contribution by following the instructions
below or fill out the form online at:

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

CREST has hosted these lists for four years. The lists have become an
important source of information and contacts for bioenergy worldwide.
Bioenergy list archives on the Web receive from 66,000 to 106,000 visits
per month. Sponsors are listed, linked, and can place banner ads, on the
list archives. View the list archives at:
http://solstice.crest.org/discuss.shtml

LIST SPONSORSHIP
Sponsorship costs $50 per month, for a minimum of 3 months. Up to two
sponsorships will be accepted for each list per month.

To sponsor one of the Bioenergy mailing lists hosted on Solstice by CREST,
please complete and submit the form at
http://crest.org/services/biolist-spons.shtml

CREST will generate and send via email an invoice, which is due upon
receipt. Payment must be received before the beginning of the first month
your sponsorship is scheduled to run or its run will be delayed.

Checks or money orders made out to CREST may be sent to:

CREST
Attn: Bioenergy List Sponsorships
1200 18th St. NW
Suite 900
Washington DC 20036
USA

List Name:
Choose a list or lists to sponsor
Bioenergy (available now)
Stoves (available now)
Digestion (available now)
Gasification (available now)
Bioconversion (available now)

Sponsor Name:
as you would like it to appear on the sponsor
messages, no more than 120
characters

IMAGE FILES
Do you have an image file (logo, etc.) for us to use
with your sponsorship?
Image files for bioenergy list sponsorships must be in GIF or JPEG format,
must measure 120 pixels wide by 80 pixels high, and must be less than 15
kilobytes in size. Animated GIFs are acceptable as long as they fit the
above criteria. Files may be uploaded to:

ftp://crest.org/pub/banners/biolist-incoming/

Thank you for your support
Tom Miles
Bioenergy List Administrator

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas R. Miles tmiles@teleport.com
Technical Consultants, Inc. Tel (503) 292-0107/646-1198
1470 SW Woodward Way Fax (503) 605-0208
Portland, Oregon, USA 97225

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Fri Jul 3 17:07:44 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Non-member submission from Larry Sutherland
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1c27f48d6bc@[204.133.28.22]>

Stovers & Larry:

In my introduction response for Larry Sutherland, I said:

<snip>

> My understanding is that the UK environmental rules, like those in
>the US and some other countries, prohibits the venting of charcoal-making
>gases (but allows their venting).

The last word should have been "flaring". Sorry

Best of luck. Ron

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Fri Jul 3 17:07:49 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: One Stove?
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1c2875fbd4e@[204.133.28.22]>

Summary: Additional thoughts are provided on the recent comments by list
members Reed, Prasad, and Still - all responding to that part of Karstad's
report of the Nairobi Conference, which concluded that:

>> *It was expressed that because of variations in diet and available fuel
>> resources, the concept of a "perfect stove" is unrealistic. Rather stove
>> design is driven by the environment within which it is used. This fact is
>> of particular importance when considering stove demand and distribution.

1A. Tom Reed said on July 1, after quoting the above:

>This certainly has some truth in it. However, in the U.S., where we could
>have any number of variations of stove, there are essentially only two
>stoves: The four burner + oven electric stove; and the gas variation of
>the same. (I was in our local appliance store the other day looking them
>over.) There are a few specialty variations for small quarters etc., but
>95% of U.S. housewives have given over to these two - really only one -
>choice.

(Larson): It is true that most stoves in developing countries look pretty
similar. However, (I am somewhat embarrassed to say) cooking in my family
is on many more devices than our 45-year-old "modern" stove (which is
almost indistinguishable from those Tom describes). Today, I expect our
household will use a separate electric coffee-maker, an electric griddle
(pancakes), a microwave oven, and a small toaster-oven. On other days
there might be use in our household of a small bread-maker, a rice-cooker,
an electric waffle-maker, or a crock pot. Tomorrow (our "Independence
Day"), a majority of Americans, myself included, will use an outdoor
charcoal grill (and a growing number will be using list member Paul Hait's
much more efficient Pyromid). I guess that about half of our family
cooking is on the "standard stove". Incidentally, because of these
subsidiary cookers, we could readily get along with two rather than four
burners. My daughter has actually disabled her front two burners to
provide greater safety for her three young daughters and says she don't
miss those two burners at all.

I don't believe my list proves much of anything about the Nairobi
conclusion or Tom's comment on it - both of which I see as correct. Almost
all of the supplementary cooking devices in my home could have been
avoided. The stove-oven combination can do all but the grilling (and some
modern US stoves do that as well - eleectrically).

In talking over this with my daughter and wife - the reason for
using the auxiliary non-stove cookers is their convenience. Most have
timers. All have a temperature control that is more precise than that of
the stoves. Many are completely automatic - the correct temperature and/or
timing. Mostly they are probably more efficient (often by being smaller).
They are mostly irrelevant for our list emphasis on low-cost stoves for
developing country applications - except to note that saving time is
probably a universal favorable attribute. Constant tending of a fire is
not likely to be viewed as desirable by anyone - and not likely to be done.

1B. Tom went on to say:
>I have presumed that if one made a sufficiently advanced, low cost, high
>efficiency, low pollution, high heat rate biomass stove, it would wash
>away a few hundred lesser stoves and eventually be accepted by the
>housewives of China, India and Africa who simply want to cook a good meal
>quickly. Might take a while to get them all to accept, but the key is
>"sufficiently advanced". It is on this basis that I and others have been
>working on the "Wood-Gas Stove" for the last decade. Wood-gas adds the
>missing new dimension to biomass cooking.
>
>I'd value your opinion on this philosophy.

(Larson): I think Tom has merged two other important ingredients
into "sufficiently advanced" that need separate mention. One is constancy
of operation at a specified power level. This is needed to avoid the
constant tending of the fire. Of course the developed country stove has
this feature. It is also a feature of what Tom and I respectively call
"Wood-Gas Stove" (WGS) and "charcoal-making-stove" (CMS). We see virtually
no change in power output over periods of even an hour. Is this a feature
of any other low-cost wood-fired cookstove?
Secondly, the stove should have controllability - what we have
termed a large turn-down ratio. In most stoves being used in developing
countries this is done only through the fuel loading - and in a very few
cases, through control of draft. We have found in the WGS/CMS that we can
achieve a turndown ratio of about 3 through control of the primary air -
and maybe eventually we can achieve the value of about 5 (I think) in
modern stoves.
I also claim two other (totally unimportant in developed countries)
advantages to the WGS/CMS - a) that the rural cook can make or save money
from the charcoal that is produced, and b) that many fewer trees will be
sacrificed to the hugely inefficient traditional "pit" manufacture of
charcoal.
We believe that the WGS/CMS burns more cleanly, but this remains
to be proved.

2. Professor Prasad said, in part

<snip>
>Piet Verhaart wrote a paper "On Designing Woodstoves" in the year of
>our Lord 1983. And he has a list of cooking tasks. They happen to be
>less than the number of fingers on one human hand. If you are
>pernickety the number creeps upto 8!!
<snip>

(Larson): I'd like Piet or Prasad to remind us of these. I have
read that paper and believe the list will benefit from its summary here.
My concern is that some of these cooking methods are so
sufficiently different (boiling vs grilling, for instance) that you can't
accomodate them well with a single stove type. In particular, I see
several advantages to charcoal and doubt that we can get cooks in many
countries to drop its use.

2b. Prasad said:

>I am sure almost every Indian and Mexican will swear by whatever
>God/s they believe in that Rotis and Tortillas are worlds apart. But
>as far as a cookstove design is concerned they can be handled in a
>very similar manner.
<snip>

(Larson): But can you make the same claim about cooking fried
foods vs cooking rice? Or grilled foods vs bread?
Also size is important. I am distressed at the inefficiencies of
cooking Ethiopian Injera (on an open 60 cm wood-fired ceramic "hot plate").
I doubt that we will be soon successful in finding a way to cook these on
any modern stove (lack of surface temperature uniformity) - or in any
modern oven (the injera needs special attention to moisture release or not
at different times, and is cooked in about 2 minutes) . In my opinion, the
Ethiopians need a special stove design (and possibly half of the country's
total energy use goes to this application). Fortunately, the WGS/CMS has
been scaled up to at least this size - but it looks very different from a
WGS/CMS used for boiling a few cups of water for a tea or coffee break.
Neither should be used for the other purpose.

(Larson): Prasad - I think one other main conclusion from Tom's
example is that stoves should be run with individual controls for each pot
heater. I believe that I saw something from Eindhoven that showed that
running two of more cookpots in series from a single source was never as
eficient as running the two in parallel (which of course is the way all
modern stoves work). Can you confirm this observation?

3. Dean Still said
:
>Of course, the concept of "one best stove" goes against the grain of a long
>held tenent of the A.T. movement: that design should be responsive to local
>needs which differ. If you factor money into the equation then stoves will
>look different because they will be made from different locally available
>materials and made by different people, in unique local ways. Some people
>might really dislike a stove, others might love it. The "one stove"
>available in the U.S. perhaps is representative of our wealth, homogeneity
>and amazing network of distribution.

>On the other hand, like you, I believe that a lot of A.T. designs are not
>accepted because they do not function sufficiently well. <snip>
>
(Larson): I agree on these issues of 1) locally available
material, 2) of costs and 3) poor functioning. Fortunately, there is
nothing inherently material sensitive, costly or technically problematic
about the WGS/CMS. I believe all of us doing work on this have been using
scrap materials and some have done testing only using several holes in the
grounds. But there is nothing to say it shouldn't be produced of stainless
steel in modern factories - much remains to be learned. The essence of the
WGS/CMS is in design and experience in operation. It is certainly possible
to use it badly. But I believe that learning to use one makes it pretty
easy to use any other.
The main operational problems for the WGS/CMS of which I am aware
are that 1) it requires batch operation, and 2) it is not easy to stop
operations. I believe the first is handled through experience in loading
and the second still remains to be better solved (but is not a
show-stopper).

It also would be interesting to learn if someone has developed or
is working on a WGS/CMS which 1) could efficiently heat two or more
utensils, or
2) can be used for baking

Like the previous writers on this topic, I hope to hear from others. Tom
has raised a very important topic. We should all be striving for
perfection - but I believe the "perfect" WGS/CMS will be much more
different in appearance in different locations than is the modern 4-burner
stove/oven.

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Fri Jul 3 23:05:18 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Web page update
Message-ID: <199807040314.XAA13888@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Stovers,
The Stovers Webpage has three New submissions, plus a new link to a
charcoal making page from England.

Alex

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Sat Jul 4 08:01:40 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust
In-Reply-To: <v01520d01b1c2977a1d9c@[199.2.222.133]>
Message-ID: <199807041210.IAA28700@adan.kingston.net>

Elsen,
> I'm leaving a fellow in charge of operating the kiln in my absence ('till
> the 26th July), and all going according to plan, will scale this up
> substantially using an earthen pit instead of an metal kiln.
>
> Alex- what do your flue calculations say about a chimney 5 m. high by 13 cm
> diameter? My 'gut feel' is that it's too tall for it's width, so I'm
> cutting it down to 4 m tomorrow. Let me know if I'm wrong please.

I figure at that rate of sawdust carbonization you should be burning
off the volatile gasses at a rate near 300,000 btus/hr. That is three
time an average household furnace in this country which has a
similar chimney height. The higher gas temperatures would result in a
volume flow equivalent to about a 500,000 btus/hr furnace. I would
suggest a chimney of around 20cm in diameter. Interestingly, within
limits, if you shorten a chimney you need to increase its diameter.
Could someone else please double check this wrought advise?

If you scale up in the future, and need a taller chimney, I have a
cheap and simple soil anchor and guide wire system that might come in
handy.

Alex

> All for now;
>
>
> elk
>
> _____________________________
> Elsen Karstad
> P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
> Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
> E-mail: elk@arcc.or.ke
> _____________________________
>
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From larcon at sni.net Sat Jul 4 11:58:21 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1c3d265ce80@[204.133.28.48]>

Stovers: This message from former list member Andrew Heggie was sent
through me. ? Also received another shorter message from Andrew on flaring
requirements in the UK, which said:
>
>I think there remains an exemption from Environmental Agency requirements
>for charcoal making by traditional methods, this is presumably to do with
>scale, there are however laws related to nuisance and local byelaws that
>can constrain activities.

The rest from Andrew in response to Elsen:

At 11:38 AM 01-07-98 +0300, E. L. Karstad wrote:
>Stovers;
>
>It is obvious that it's a shame to waste the 60% energy which is lost
>during the carbonisation of wood to charcoal, and that the greenhouse
>gasses produced are harmful if not flared.

Agreed but this view is not widely acknowledged by the charcoal making
fraternity in UK.
>
>It is also better to utilise the wastes from agro-industry than to leave
>them and carry on with ineficient industry at the expense of the
>environment.

Whilst I am only familiar with a benign climate and tolerant soils I can
understand a problem in harsher areas with both exporting fertility in the
char and loss of humus.
>
>Ergo: it's O.K. to produce charcoal from sawdust if there's no other use
for it.
>
>But it's best to find a direct use for the sawdust, no?

Agreed but also consider James Arcates view. IIRC he considers charcoal to
be a relatively energy dense product, to produce this locally (and utilise
waste heat??) and transport the char to a centralised urban generator will
enable the building of a facility which is large enough to gain economies
of scale currently enjoyed by fossil based power stations. Currently the
size of a biomass powered device is limited by the transport constraints
imposed by the huge hinterland that is needed to service the facility with
*raw* biomass.
>
>How many of you have heard of the 'Freeplay' radio? It's an intriguingly
>simple radio recently developed between the U.K. and South Africa. Wind it
>up for half a minute or so, & you've got 20 minutes of radio reception-
>A.M., S.W. & F.M. stereo too I believe.
>
>I remember, some time back, that a list member mentioed a small battery
>powered camping stove that used a fan to increase the heat & efficiency of
>burning pretty well any biomass. It was called a zip-stove or something....
>my hard-disk crashed with the details some time back- does anyone have the
>info?

Sorry I am on a different machine now so I would have to trawl the archive.

OK so you have decided on forced draught being a good thing, I have no
technical knowledge but recall Tom Reed suggested that to continue
gasifying the char after pyrolysis was complete in the IDD stove would
require a twentyfold increase in air velocity. So the blower may be best
used in an IDD device only after pyrolysis is complete to ensure continued
gasification of the char with a clean burnout.

You have identified an electric (photovoltaic or thermo voltaic) and manual
(stored and regulated by clockwork) powered fan/blower ( I gather from Tom
Reed's posts there is a semantic argument as to which word is appropriate
depending on pressure).

On the Gasification list Skip Goebel has proposed (and Tom Reed has
commented on) a simple steam ejector. If I understand this correctly Skip
is proposing a sealed water container (presumabley self pressurised or
pumped like a kerosene blow-lamp) which meters water into a coil in the
fire. This coil being of sufficient length to ensure the steam is fully
vaporised and superheated and venting via a nozzle ( the geometry of which
is critical) into the gas stream to entrain gas and create either an
induced draught ( as in the "chuff chuff" of an old steam engine where the
steam exhausting the cylinders is used to eject flue gases in the smoke
stack) or a forced air inlet.

With a relatively cheap fuel I wonder what the effects on efficiency of
producing this steam would be. Even with a high steam velocity, Tom Reed
suggests sonic speeds are possible, what would be the possible mass ratio
of gas entrained to steam used be at the few inches of water guage
depression likely to be needed? An intuitive suggestion from one more
qualified than myself is that the steam would need to eject some hundred
times its own mass, is this possible? Further what heat losses would the
steam suffer, the higher the initial pressure the higher the cooling by
adiabatic expansion let alone the loss of latent heat (unless the steam
condensed on the cooking pot and dripped off away from the flame).

Whilst induced draught is probably simpler what are the ramifications of
forced air inlet? Depending on the mass ratio of steam to air in the
ejector if the steam were very hot would the combined effect of water and
air hitting hot char in an exothermic producer gas reaction and very hot
steam reacting with hot char in an endothermic water gas reaction be stable
or indeed benificial in increasing the calorific value of the gas products
(albeit presumably the enthalpy would be unaltered).

I note I missed a query from the UK if anyone cares to discuss charcoal
prodution situation in my area, SE England, please feel free to e-mail me.
AJH
ahe1@cableol.co.uk

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sat Jul 4 12:04:09 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Koopmans on Charcoal making kilns
Message-ID: <v01540b08b1c3f52bfa30@[204.133.28.48]>

Auke (and any other list member): I have a few more questions on the
recommended site:

www.nri.org/Publishing/Internal_Publications/pubcat/biomass/guides.html

" on the use of sawdust and wood carbonization with recovery of waste heat"
that you recommended to Dr. Yury.

The listings did not provide much detail and there were quite a few
there. Rather than buy all of them, I wonder if you or someone could
provide a review of what each (or some) contained. I didn't recognize any
of the authors - do you know where they are located and how they came to be
in this list? Are these all or most from FAO studies? Many of the titles
look good, but I'd like more of a recommendation before ordering any. In
particular I am interested in those where waste heat recovery from charcoal
making was the key feature - and knowing if they were flaring the gases.
It would be good to get more of thee authors into our "stoves" list, if
anyone knows how to reach any of these authors. Thanks in advance.

Thanks Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From floodl at innercite.com Sat Jul 4 13:09:55 1998
From: floodl at innercite.com (Laurie Flood)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
Message-ID: <359DF310.5DBCAEEA@innercite.com>

>
>I remember, some time back, that a list member mentioed a small battery
>powered camping stove that used a fan to increase the heat & efficiency of
>burning pretty well any biomass. It was called a zip-stove or something....
>my hard-disk crashed with the details some time back- does anyone have the
>info?

Sorry I am on a different machine now so I would have to trawl the
archive.

Ronal,

I sent that information to Elsen off-list. If anyone else wants that
information, please let me know and whether you think I should respond
to the entire list with this or off-list.

Laurie Flood
floodl@innercite.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

From tmiles at teleport.com Sat Jul 4 13:34:30 1998
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
In-Reply-To: <359DF310.5DBCAEEA@innercite.com>
Message-ID: <Version.32.19980704103846.00ef2bf0@mail.teleport.com>

Zat waz zee "Sierra". It iz a "Zip Ztove" by Z.Z. Corp. (10806 Kaylor
Street, Los Alamitos, CA 90702, USA; 310-598-3220). The 3.5 in diameter
(90mm) x 2.5 in (64 mm) deep stove is powered by one size AA 1.5 V battery.

Contact Tom Reed for operational details.

Tom Miles

At 09:17 AM 7/4/98 +0000, Laurie Flood wrote:
>>
>>I remember, some time back, that a list member mentioed a small battery
>>powered camping stove that used a fan to increase the heat & efficiency of
>>burning pretty well any biomass. It was called a zip-stove or something....
>>my hard-disk crashed with the details some time back- does anyone have the
>>info?
>
>Sorry I am on a different machine now so I would have to trawl the
>archive.
>
>Ronal,
>
>I sent that information to Elsen off-list. If anyone else wants that
>information, please let me know and whether you think I should respond
>to the entire list with this or off-list.
>
>Laurie Flood
>floodl@innercite.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
>

From tmiles at teleport.com Sat Jul 4 13:46:07 1998
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
In-Reply-To: <359DF310.5DBCAEEA@innercite.com>
Message-ID: <199807041755.KAA09704@mail.easystreet.com>

You can find a picture and description of the "Sierra" on the web at:

http://www.gorp.com/zzstove/sierra.htm

We should probably start a reference page of links to commercial biomass
stoves organized by type, scale and use. It could include the Pyromid,
Hearth Products Assn, Pellet Fuels Institute and others that we've
mentioned on the list.

Tom

At 10:44 AM 7/4/98 -0700, Tom Miles wrote:
>Zat waz zee "Sierra". It iz a "Zip Ztove" by Z.Z. Corp. (10806 Kaylor
>Street, Los Alamitos, CA 90702, USA; 310-598-3220). The 3.5 in diameter
>(90mm) x 2.5 in (64 mm) deep stove is powered by one size AA 1.5 V battery.
>
>Contact Tom Reed for operational details.
>
>Tom Miles
>
>
>At 09:17 AM 7/4/98 +0000, Laurie Flood wrote:
>>>
>>>I remember, some time back, that a list member mentioed a small battery
>>>powered camping stove that used a fan to increase the heat & efficiency of
>>>burning pretty well any biomass. It was called a zip-stove or something....
>>>my hard-disk crashed with the details some time back- does anyone have the
>>>info?
>>
>>Sorry I am on a different machine now so I would have to trawl the
>>archive.
>>
>>Ronal,
>>
>>I sent that information to Elsen off-list. If anyone else wants that
>>information, please let me know and whether you think I should respond
>>to the entire list with this or off-list.
>>
>>Laurie Flood
>>floodl@innercite.com

From elk at arcc.or.ke Sat Jul 4 16:16:44 1998
From: elk at arcc.or.ke (E.L.Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199807042025.XAA17156@arcc.or.ke>

>If you scale up in the future, and need a taller chimney, I have a
>cheap and simple soil anchor and guide wire system that might come in
>handy.
>
>Alex

How about a chimney that fires/cures bricks? This was first suggested by
Ronal, and makes sense to me.

I don't know anything about what's needed in brick manyfacture. I can
imagine a pit kiln with maybe four chimneys made out of uncured bricks
surroundin, that could be fired in rotation/succession flaring the volatiles.

I've been informed that the the ratio of fuel wood to fired (finished) brick
is in the order or 4:1.... that's four kg of fuel wood for one kg of
finished brick. Can this be true?

I've seen the brick firing kilns all around Kampala. There must be a whole
forest burnt as fule monthly if this is the case.....

elk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
Elsen L. Karstad P.O. Box 24371 Nairobi Kenya. Fax (+254 2) 884437 Tel
884436, 882375
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From b.brandberg at mail.com Sun Jul 5 01:29:25 1998
From: b.brandberg at mail.com (Bj=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=f6rn_Brandberg?=)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: List for ecological housing and building?
Message-ID: <199807050529.BAA28074@solstice.crest.org>

Stovers
Do you people know about a list for ecological housing and building with
local natural resources like mud, wood and grass.

From floodl at innercite.com Sun Jul 5 12:14:39 1998
From: floodl at innercite.com (Laurie Flood)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: List for ecological housing and building?
In-Reply-To: <199807050529.BAA28074@solstice.crest.org>
Message-ID: <359F379C.1A9E1E0A@innercite.com>

Björn Brandberg wrote:

> Stovers
> Do you people know about a list for ecological housing and building
> with
> local natural resources like mud, wood and grass.
>
> Of special interest is of course heating systems for the house and hot
>
> tap water using solar energy and or biomass fuel.

I have a few sources I subscribe to:

An alternative building mailing list:
http://csf.Colorado.EDU/lists/essa/

An alternative energy mailing list:
ae@sjsu.edu

A discussion group on building with cob:
Cob Email Discussion Group

A magazine called Home Power that also has a CD rom full of how-to
information:
http://www.homepower.com/hp/

There are also a few Crest groups like this one related to AE and
alternative building that I have not tried:
http://solstice.crest.org/discuss.shtml

Enjoy!

Laurie Flood
floodl@innercite.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

From floodl at innercite.com Sun Jul 5 12:25:08 1998
From: floodl at innercite.com (Laurie Flood)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: List for ecological housing and building?
In-Reply-To: <199807050529.BAA28074@solstice.crest.org>
Message-ID: <359F3A12.2C100AC6@innercite.com>

Laurie Flood wrote:

> Björn Brandberg wrote:
>
> > Stovers
> > Do you people know about a list for ecological housing and building
> > with
> > local natural resources like mud, wood and grass.
> >
> >A discussion group on building with cob:
> Cob Email Discussion Group
>

Sorry,

This cob link did not work as expected. Let's try this one again.
http://www.deatech.com/natural/
http://www.deatech.com/natural/coblist/

Btw, the first link will give you many alternative building resources
websites, especially for cob. The latter will give you the information
on subscribing to the list and how to view its archives.

Laurie Flood
floodl@innercite.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

From Rkfabf at aol.com Sun Jul 5 15:35:14 1998
From: Rkfabf at aol.com (Rkfabf@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: List for ecological housing and building?
Message-ID: <4c179ed2.359fd775@aol.com>

Björn -
You might try greenbuilding@crest.org ('greenbuilding@crest.org') or contact
Bion Howard (see contact info below) - he can most likely direct you to the
appropriate list.

|
=O= Environmental Building Consulting Services
| Contact: Bion D. Howard, Principal
Building Environmental Science & Technology
P. O. Box 1007, Upper Marlboro, MD 20773 USA
<mailto:bhoward2@sprynet.com> <http://www.nrg-builder.com>

Environmental Building News <www.ebuild.com> and Oikos <www.oikos.com>
For instructions send e-mail to greenbuilding-request@crest.org

Regards,
Cathy Flanders
Fax: 972-527-6608
rkfabf@aol.com
<A HREF="http://members.tripod.com/~rkfabf/index.html">Candles and Indoor Air
Quality</A>
http://members.tripod.com/~rkfabf/index.html
<A HREF="http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/iaq">IAQ Listserve (to
subscribe)</A>
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/iaq

______________________________________________________________________
<<Subj: List for ecological housing and building?
Date: 98-07-05 01:40:37 EDT
From: b.brandberg@mail.com (Björn_Brandberg)
Sender: owner-stoves@crest.org
To: stoves@crest.org (Stovers)

Stovers
Do you people know about a list for ecological housing and building with
local natural resources like mud, wood and grass.

Of special interest is of course heating systems for the house and hot
tap water using solar energy and or biomass fuel.
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 5 18:13:45 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
Message-ID: <v01540b02b1c59f241bf3@[204.133.28.45]>

Laurie -
As you know, Tom Miles sent some material in, so maybe it is no
longer needed. But if you have specific knowledge of the Hottenroth
(Z-Stove) product line, I think it would be good to give it to the full
list.

So therefore, I think it would be good to transmit your material to
the full list, because the subject of stove fans and blowers have not been
discussed for quite a long time.

Ron

>>
>>I remember, some time back, that a list member mentioed a small battery
>>powered camping stove that used a fan to increase the heat & efficiency of
>>burning pretty well any biomass. It was called a zip-stove or something....
>>my hard-disk crashed with the details some time back- does anyone have the
>>info?
>
>Sorry I am on a different machine now so I would have to trawl the
>archive.
>
>Ronal,
>
>I sent that information to Elsen off-list. If anyone else wants that
>information, please let me know and whether you think I should respond
>to the entire list with this or off-list.
>
>Laurie Flood
>floodl@innercite.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

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 5 18:13:50 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: hardwood charcoal source request
Message-ID: <v01540b05b1c5a36d1da9@[204.133.28.45]>

A non-list member, "Russell M. Blair" <irblair@mail2.nai.net> sent this
message yesterday. I am somewhat fearful of passing this on, because this
is outside our list area of interest or expertise. But someone may be able
to help Russell, and I'd like know more about how the charcoal supply
chain. But mostly, it is interesting to learn of this presumably small use
of charcoal.

(Russ):
>Do you know of any mfg. of hardwood charcoal in Connecticut or anywhere
>in the North East US? We need it for start up of a coal fired steam
>boiler. Now we get too much smoke using newspaper and wood. Any help
>will be appreciated. Thanks Russ Blair

(Larson): Russ - our list has been having a lot of discussion
recently on clean charcoal manufacture. You may wish to join or listen in
for awhile to learn about either using wood cleanly for your application (
we think we know hoe todo this in many cases) or cleanly making charcoal
yourself. And you may hear from some one of our members on your reasl
question - a few of whom live near you. How big a need do you have?

Ron

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From floodl at innercite.com Mon Jul 6 01:51:35 1998
From: floodl at innercite.com (Laurie Flood)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
In-Reply-To: <v01540b02b1c59f241bf3@[204.133.28.45]>
Message-ID: <359FF70F.6F3D4E38@innercite.com>

Ronal W. Larson wrote:

> Laurie -
> As you know, Tom Miles sent some material in, so maybe it is
> no
> longer needed. But if you have specific knowledge of the Hottenroth
> (Z-Stove) product line, I think it would be good to give it to the
> full
> list.
>
> So therefore, I think it would be good to transmit your
> material to
> the full list, because the subject of stove fans and blowers have not
> been
> discussed for quite a long time.
>
> Ron
>

Ronal,

Tom sent the same website address that I sent to Elsen, but I did also
have an address which has a few small discussions on this stove (once
you have hashed through discussions on other stoves):

http://stickit.bpbasecamp.com/stickit/display/bp_geartalk?TOPID=2XVobG3o

Laurie Flood

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl Mon Jul 6 05:36:28 1998
From: K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl (K. K. Prasad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: One Stove?
Message-ID: <199807060945.LAA06293@silicon.tue.nl>

Ron and other stovers

Ron Larson provided a fairly large discussion on what Tom Reed and I
thought about the idea that there should be a stove design for each
village as it were. He raised some questions in the discussion. I
shall try and provide brief answers to those that were specifically
addressed to me.

> Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 15:31:11 -0600
> To: stoves@crest.org
> From: larcon@sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
> Subject: Re: One Stove?

> Summary: Additional thoughts are provided on the recent comments by list
> members Reed, Prasad, and Still - all responding to that part of Karstad's
> report of the Nairobi Conference, which concluded that:
>
> >> *It was expressed that because of variations in diet and available fuel
> >> resources, the concept of a "perfect stove" is unrealistic. Rather stove
> >> design is driven by the environment within which it is used. This fact is
> >> of particular importance when considering stove demand and distribution.
>

<snip>
>
> 2. Professor Prasad said, in part
>
> <snip>
> >Piet Verhaart wrote a paper "On Designing Woodstoves" in the year of
> >our Lord 1983. And he has a list of cooking tasks. They happen to be
> >less than the number of fingers on one human hand. If you are
> >pernickety the number creeps upto 8!!
> <snip>
>
> (Larson): I'd like Piet or Prasad to remind us of these. I have
> read that paper and believe the list will benefit from its summary here.
> My concern is that some of these cooking methods are so
> sufficiently different (boiling vs grilling, for instance) that you can't
> accomodate them well with a single stove type. In particular, I see
> several advantages to charcoal and doubt that we can get cooks in many
> countries to drop its use.
>

The cooking task list of Piet Verhaart is:
1. Boiling
1.1 Stewing
1.2 African Beer (Dolo) boiling
1.3 Parboiling rice
2. Frying
2.1 Deep frying
2.2 Saucepan frying
2.3 Flat plate frying
3. Baking
3.1 Roasting
4. Grilling

A conventional stove can handle the first two tasks. Task 3
customarily requires an oven. However a bit of innovation can lead to
the use of a tin box with a door placed on the stove can serve the
functions of an oven. As a matter of fact in the fist couple of years
of our married life, my wife used such an artifact (since she is a
fan of baked foods).

Grilling is the thing that requires a separate design.

My arguments are based on a fundamental premise: those who use
wood/biomass for cooking by definition cannot afford the fuels like
gas/electricity. By implication their foods are adapted to their
resources and one does not expect them to indulge in fancy imported
foods. They might still like to grill their foods once in a while - I
suspect that they will improvise some form of open air barbecue for
that.

In other words the average cooking task that comprises anywhere
between 75 to 90% of the foods eaten can be accomplished by a simple
cook stove - the wood-fired equivalent of a gas stove.

There is one variable which can significantly vary from family to
family - that is its size. I accept that it is not intelligent to use
the same stove to cook for four people and a dozen as well. By and
large we need to provide a range of designs to meet this requirement.
I see this problem being handled by scaling a generic design to suit
small, medium and large families - very much like the small, medium and large
of the apparel industry. Piet Verhaart provides a prescription to
handle this. I'm sorry I cannot go into this here simply because it
is involved technical discussion. I would be more than happy to
provide the original publication of Piet to those who are interested.

The principal problems with biomass-fired cookstoves, as I see them,
are two:
(i) Most simple designs will require the stoves to be charged
frequently with fuel. How frequent should this be is not
obvious. My own guess is that one can manage with twenty minute
intervals. This can be quite taxing on the cook.
(ii) The turn-down ratio. I do not see this being achieved by a
simple design that uses long, thick sticks of wood.

> 2b. Prasad said:
>
> >I am sure almost every Indian and Mexican will swear by whatever
> >God/s they believe in that Rotis and Tortillas are worlds apart. But
> >as far as a cookstove design is concerned they can be handled in a
> >very similar manner.
> <snip>
>
> (Larson): But can you make the same claim about cooking fried
> foods vs cooking rice? Or grilled foods vs bread?

Well, my mother used to manage the tasks of deep frying and cooking
rice on the same stove. I've talked about baking and grilling
earlier.

> Also size is important. I am distressed at the inefficiencies of
> cooking Ethiopian Injera (on an open 60 cm wood-fired ceramic "hot plate").
> I doubt that we will be soon successful in finding a way to cook these on
> any modern stove (lack of surface temperature uniformity) - or in any
> modern oven (the injera needs special attention to moisture release or not
> at different times, and is cooked in about 2 minutes) . In my opinion, the
> Ethiopians need a special stove design (and possibly half of the country's
> total energy use goes to this application). Fortunately, the WGS/CMS has
> been scaled up to at least this size - but it looks very different from a
> WGS/CMS used for boiling a few cups of water for a tea or coffee break.
> Neither should be used for the other purpose.
>

I agree: Injera is a bear. We had some thoughts on this problem in
the mid-eighties when we were working with ILO in Ethiopia. But
before our ideas could be brought to bear upon the problem on the
ground, the "ground" under our feet literally gave way - our project
came to an end. The guy who was doing this couldn't make a living out
of designing cookstoves for the wood users of this world and called
it a day!

> (Larson): Prasad - I think one other main conclusion from Tom's
> example is that stoves should be run with individual controls for each pot
> heater. I believe that I saw something from Eindhoven that showed that
> running two of more cookpots in series from a single source was never as
> eficient as running the two in parallel (which of course is the way all
> modern stoves work). Can you confirm this observation?
>

Ron, you are right. If efficiency is the principal criterion, our
thinking was that it was better to use two independent stoves. But -
there are always buts in this business - a single point firing with
two pans cooking has its merits. Remember attending to the fire is a
chore and thus one might find many a woman preferring the two pan
stove.

> 3. Dean Still said
> :
> >Of course, the concept of "one best stove" goes against the grain of a long
> >held tenent of the A.T. movement: that design should be responsive to local
> >needs which differ. If you factor money into the equation then stoves will
> >look different because they will be made from different locally available
> >materials and made by different people, in unique local ways. Some people
> >might really dislike a stove, others might love it. The "one stove"
> >available in the U.S. perhaps is representative of our wealth, homogeneity
> >and amazing network of distribution.
>
> >On the other hand, like you, I believe that a lot of A.T. designs are not
> >accepted because they do not function sufficiently well. <snip>
> >
> (Larson): I agree on these issues of 1) locally available
> material, 2) of costs and 3) poor functioning. Fortunately, there is
> nothing inherently material sensitive, costly or technically problematic
> about the WGS/CMS. I believe all of us doing work on this have been using
> scrap materials and some have done testing only using several holes in the
> grounds. But there is nothing to say it shouldn't be produced of stainless
> steel in modern factories - much remains to be learned. The essence of the
> WGS/CMS is in design and experience in operation. It is certainly possible
> to use it badly. But I believe that learning to use one makes it pretty
> easy to use any other.
> The main operational problems for the WGS/CMS of which I am aware
> are that 1) it requires batch operation, and 2) it is not easy to stop
> operations. I believe the first is handled through experience in loading
> and the second still remains to be better solved (but is not a
> show-stopper).
>
> It also would be interesting to learn if someone has developed or
> is working on a WGS/CMS which 1) could efficiently heat two or more
> utensils, or
> 2) can be used for baking
>
> Like the previous writers on this topic, I hope to hear from others. Tom
> has raised a very important topic. We should all be striving for
> perfection - but I believe the "perfect" WGS/CMS will be much more
> different in appearance in different locations than is the modern 4-burner
> stove/oven.
>
> Regards Ron

I would like to moderate this remark a little. I will repeat an old
cliche - "the best is the enemy of the good". It seems useful to
concentrate on improving the existing devices. At any rate we'll have
trouble defining the "perfect" stove that suits everybody's tastes
and pockets.

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

Like Ron, I hope there will be more people participating in this
discussion.

Regards, Prasad
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in Mon Jul 6 06:30:51 1998
From: gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in (Priyadarshini Karve(SBO))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: One Stove?
In-Reply-To: <199807060945.LAA06293@silicon.tue.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980706153906.15259B-100000@physics>

Dear Stovers,
I have followed the discussion on this issue with considerable
interest. I agree that technically it may be possible to arrive at a
design that takes care of all the cooking needs of all the people, and
such a design will necessarily involve gasification. It is also true that
the one stove concept will be difficult to achieve if we also think of the
economics.
In my opinion, there is one more aspect to the general belief that
different eating habits require different stove designs. This aspect is
that of the users' psycology. In our work of improved stove
popularisation, we have found that generally people are happy with those
stoves that require the least modification in their cooking habits.
To site an example, in India, housewives took a considerable time
to accept pressure cookers as it involved a change in the way of cooking
rice. Even today, I know several households where the traditional method
of rice cooking is preferred over the more convenient use of pressure
cooker. It is true that after the earlier reluctance most housewives have
now accepted pressure cooker as a necessary kitchen appliance, but it has
required an extensive ad campaigning by the cooker manufacturers. And this
is valid only for the urban areas. In rural areas even today pressure
cooker is a novelty. One factor is of course the cost, and the other is an
even greater reluctance to accept new things than what is exhibited by the
urban population.
In view of this, an improved stove manufacturer or promoter finds
it much more convenient to develop or promote a design which is similar in
operation to the traditional one already being used. Otherwise the
potential user rejects the design saying that it does not suit her cooking
habits and therefore the family's eating habits. Although this rejection
is more due to the user's prejudice than any fault of the design, the
stove gets branded as a failure and such experiences lead to the rationale
that different eating habits require different stove designs.

Priyadarshini Karve.

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl Mon Jul 6 08:23:28 1998
From: K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl (K. K. Prasad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Energy for brick production
Message-ID: <199807061232.OAA21032@silicon.tue.nl>

Dear Elk

> Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 23:25:01 +0300
> To: stoves@crest.org
> From: elk@arcc.or.ke (E.L.Karstad)

> How about a chimney that fires/cures bricks? This was first suggested by
> Ronal, and makes sense to me.
>
> I don't know anything about what's needed in brick manyfacture. I can
> imagine a pit kiln with maybe four chimneys made out of uncured bricks
> surroundin, that could be fired in rotation/succession flaring the volatiles.
>
> I've been informed that the the ratio of fuel wood to fired (finished) brick
> is in the order or 4:1.... that's four kg of fuel wood for one kg of
> finished brick. Can this be true?
>
> elk
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is other way around at least according to the following data in
MJ/kg - 4 kg of bricks per kg of wood!

Bangladesh .................................. 4
India .................................. 4 +
Indonesia .................................. 2.2
Nepal ................................... 4 +
Pakistan ................................... 4 +
Thailand ................................... 4 +

If we assume 16MJ/kg of moist wood, you retrieve my number. The
source for the table is a Master's thesis at ITC in The Netherlands.
The original reference is said to be "FAO, 1993. Status and
development issues of the brick industries in Asia, Bangkok,
Thailand"

Regards, Prasad

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Mon Jul 6 09:50:48 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:58 2004
Subject: Preoccupation with Heating values
Message-ID: <199807060959_MC2-5246-82D@compuserve.com>

Dear CRESTERS:

The exchange below illustrates the futility of looking for "the" heating
value of various biomass energy sources. We have had a number of
submissions on "the" value for peach pits, ranging from 18-23 kJ/g from
documented sources. What's wrong, who's right?

I could probably list a few dozen reasons for the variations, but inter-
and intra- variations in species, sample storage, errors in sampling,
errors in measurement, errors in reporting, high (US) vx low (Europe)
heating value confusion, all contribute.

So, I go back to my generalization that, ON A DRY, ASH FREE BASIS, most
biomass has a heating value of 18-20 kJ/g. If you really must know the
value for YOUR particular pile of biomass, have it measured, but make sure
to stir well and sample widely before you waste your $100.

And to get good perspective on heating values, check our new book, "Thermal
Data for Natural and Syntetic Fuels", (S. Gauar, T. Reed Marcel Dekker,
1988) where there are over 200 entries, both measured and calculated from
the ultimate analysis. (Also contains prox and ult analyses on all
entries) I am thinking of including this table on the next update of my
web page at www.webpan.com/bef.

Thanks to all those supplying information on this.

Comments?

Yours truly, TOM REED
~~~~~
Message text written by Jim Lindley
>
> Does anyone know the heating value of peach pits, or where I can find
that
> information?

Rodgers (1936) Agricultural Engineering 17(5):199-204 gave the value as
8,209 Btu/lb. Ebeling and Jenkins (1985) Transaction of the ASAE
28(3):898-902 gave the value as 20.82 MJ/kg (8960 Btu/lb)

> From: "eadc" <eadc@sfsu.edu>
> To: <bioenergy@crest.org>
> Subject: Heating value of peach pits
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 16:14:26 -0700

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From ferguson at antenna.nl Mon Jul 6 18:35:00 1998
From: ferguson at antenna.nl (Eric T. Ferguson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Briquetting machines from the third world
Message-ID: <199807062250.AA31985@antenna.nl>

Dear Stove and Bioenergy Colleagues,

I have been asked for names and addresses of third-world manufacturers of
machines for briquetting sawdust and agricultural waste. The only ones I
have seen myself were locally made screw presses in use in Bangkok
(Thailand) in 1983, but do not know if that factory still produces them.

I would be very grateful for any information on such manufacturers, and
also for suggestions on other sources of information (books, mailing lists,
websites) which I could consult.

Please reply by private e-mail unless the topic is of sufficient interest
for the list.

Thanks in advance, and greetings,

Eric

|dr. E.T. Ferguson, Consultant for Energy and Development (MacFergus BV)|
|van Dormaalstraat 15, 5624 KH EINDHOVEN, Netherlands. |
|e-mail: e.ferguson@antenna.nl. phone:+31-40-2432878; fax:+31-40-2467036|

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Tue Jul 7 00:21:40 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Dick Glick on Heating values
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1c73098c515@[204.133.28.25]>

Stovers - the following came in from non-list-member Dick Glick as a
follow-up to one from Tom Reed. Ron L

Hello All --

Tom is on target -- but pardon my use of 'common' units:

Estimating biomass energy, on a low heat value, ash free basis, goes something
like this:

Cellulose, ~7000 BTU/lb
Lignin and protein, ~8500 BTU/lb
Oils, ~14,000 BTU/lb

Amost looks like 'kitchen' food values! If you know the relative values of
each, that is, figuring on this basis is probably as good a way as any.

Best, Dick

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From dstill at epud.org Tue Jul 7 00:40:45 1998
From: dstill at epud.org (Dean Still)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Kammen article in Scientific American
Message-ID: <199807070455.VAA25578@epud.org>

Students at Aprovecho are now concluding tests on various designs and have
built two clay Rocket stoves to be studied for emmissions. The last batch
of tests confirmed tests done a few years ago that distance from the fire
is one of the most important variables effecting fuel efficiency in a
stove. We tested many designs again and fooled around with non insulated
models, insulated models and the three stone fire without improvement. Then
I passed out the famous Kammen article which presents a summary of progress
for Scientific American. The differences between our conclusions and his
have 'sparked' several class members to do more experiments which they will
share with this list.

Generally though, the biggest difference is that Kammen ignores a very
important part of fuel efficiency: how to make the pot into a more
efficient heat exchanger (by adding a skirt, etc.) His article focuses on
combustion efficiency and pushes the idea that efficiency is due to the
insulated liner which lessens conductive losses. In our experience, this is
not the major cause of greater efficiency. Distance from the pot is very
important, as is the addition of a skirt around the pot, having the proper
shape under the pot, etc.Of course, putting the pot into an insulated box
to finish cooking saves the most energy.

Kammen also makes stoves look very good by saying that the insulated stove
can be 40% efficient and gives 10% for the efficiency of the open fire.
Unfortunately for us stove designers, the open fire is much more efficient
than that. An expert using a three stone fire can get surprisingly high
efficiencies.

I am looking forward to redoing some of our earlier experiments and
presenting a slightly different summary of efficiency in stoves.

Dean Still
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From p.verhaart at cqu.edu.au Tue Jul 7 03:02:17 1998
From: p.verhaart at cqu.edu.au (P.Verhaart)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: One Stove?
In-Reply-To: <199807060945.LAA06293@silicon.tue.nl>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19980707170725.007b43e0@janus.cqu.edu.au>

Dear Prijadarshini,

At 16:08 6/07/98 -0500, you wrote:
snip
>To site an example, in India, housewives took a considerable time
>to accept pressure cookers as it involved a change in the way of cooking
>rice. Even today, I know several households where the traditional method
>of rice cooking is preferred over the more convenient use of pressure
>cooker.

In the above paragraph you can with equal truth substitute Australia for
India and I suspect also USA, UK, Netherlands and a host of others.
I would not be surprised if India were ahead of many other countries in
this respect as a result of the extensive campaining you mentioned.
Personally the only way I can cook rice is in a pressure cooker, 1 part raw
rice, 1.5 part water (all by weight), salt, oil, bring to boil and leave
under pressure 5 minutes.

Best regards,

Piet Verhaart
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
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From kammen at phoenix.Princeton.EDU Tue Jul 7 07:44:38 1998
From: kammen at phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Daniel M. Kammen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: new and old stove designs, practices, and efficiency
Message-ID: <v01530501b1c7be8b26d3@[128.112.71.79]>

Dean Still and the Aprovecho students are absolutley right about the
importance to overall efficiency of the fire-to-pot distance and the
efficiency of the pot as a heat exchanger. There are a number important
parameters that impact the overall efficiency-- including the overall
management of the biomass fuel and the particulars of cooking practices--
that have been investigated and could and should be compared 'head to head'
and in combinations that reflect actual cooking situations. I have a
project working at this in central Kenya where a set of old and new stove
designs are being tested in actual, 'in the hut' conditions where a very
broad definition of efficiency and utility becomes important.

My 1995 Scientific American article was only a brief comparison of a few
stove types, and was intened primarily to highlight the issues regarding
stove and cooking alternatives. There are many far more detailed and more
appropriate sources for quantitative comparisons of cooking efficiency.
I've
listed the references to only a few of these sources below. The stoves list
has discussed (and have authored, to considerable extent) the large
and very diverse set of reports on this subject.

An important and very useful project would be to collect and compare these
findings, particulalry as many new designs and usage strategies have been
developed, promoted, and tested in recent years. I'd be very interested
to see this comparative study begin to emerge from the discussions on
this list!

- Dan Kammen

Selected references:

Baldwin, S. F. (1987) Biomass stoves, engineering design, development, and
dissemination (Volunteers in Technical Assistance/Arlington, VA).

Barnes, D. F., Openshaw, K., Smith, K. and van Plas, R. (1994) What makes
people cook with improved biomass stoves? (World Bank Technical Paper No.
242: Energy Series).

Foley, G., Moss, P. and Timberlake, L. (1984) Stoves and trees: how much
wood would a woodstove save, if a woodstove could save wood
(Earthscan/IIED: Washington, DC).

Kammen, D. M. (1995) "From energy efficiency to social utility: Improved
cookstoves and the Small is Beautiful Model of development," in Energy as
an instrument for socio-economic development, Goldemberg, J. and Johansson,
T. B. (eds.) (United Nations Development Programme: New York), 50 - 62.

Krugmann, H. (1987) "Review of issues and research relating to improved
cookstoves," (International Development Research Centre: Ottawa, Canada),
IDRC-MR152e.

Prasad, K. K. and Verhart, P. (1983) Wood Heat for Cooking (Indian Academy
of Sciences: Bangalore, India).

Smith, K. R. (1987) Biofuels, air pollution and health (Plenum: New York).

__________________________________________________________________
Daniel M. Kammen
Assistant Professor of Public and International Affairs
Chair, Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (STEP) Program
201 5 Ivy Lane
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ 08544-1013
Tel: 609-258-2758
Fax: 609-258-6082
Email: kammen@princeton.edu
WWW: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~kammen/
Secretary Jackie Schatz:
Tel: 609-258-4821; Email: jackie@wws.princeton.edu
__________________________________________________________________

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From btremeer at dds.nl Tue Jul 7 13:18:19 1998
From: btremeer at dds.nl (Grant Ballard-Tremeer)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Kammen article in Scientific American
In-Reply-To: <199807070455.VAA25578@epud.org>
Message-ID: <000501bda9ca$525c23a0$2f0deed4@blackthorn>

Dear Dean, Aprovecho students and all

I agree with you that distance from the fire is a very important variable
for stove efficiency. I'm concerned however that in your attempt to get high
efficiency through improved thermal contact, stove emissions will also
increase. The bottom of a pot is usually not very much higher that 100 C
and when the hot gases are "forced" onto this surface they cool very
suddenly. The hydrocarbon mixture that was burning is then suddenly "frozen"
in a partially burned state. You can often see this because the bottom of
the pot goes black (and even sometimes sticky), but even without these
visible signs the effect can be a substantial increase in emissions. I've
compared emissions and efficiencies of a number of stoves and this effect
was clearly visible; the 'improved' stoves had higher efficiencies but also
higher emissions. So I'm interested in what you find with the emissions
tests of the Rocket stoves...

If you'd like further information about my tests and findings take a look at
my web page, http://www.energy.demon.nl. You can jump directly to a summary
of the work I'm referring to, which is appendix E of my thesis, by adding
/AppdxE.htm to the end of the address.

I'll be in Russia and Belarus for a couple of weeks leaving on Thursday (yes
I plan to meet 'our' Yury Yudkevitch in St Petersburg)... so 'till I get
back...

Grant

-------------------
Grant Ballard-Tremeer
btremeer@dds.nl; http://www.energy.demon.nl (note new WWW address)
-------------------

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Wed Jul 1 00:14:40 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Ted Keller Introduction
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1bf009451fb@[204.133.28.46]>

Stovers: The following came in from an off-list correspondence set up by
a mutual acquaintance - in which I asked Ted if he were interested in
joining our list. I also asked him for an introduction to us all - which
follows.

Ted - I have signed you up at both e-mail addresses. Please let me know if
only one would be better - or perhaps you can juggle them as you go back
and forth.

As follow-up questions:
1. You have described your top metal surface - but not the bottom
portion. Is is somewhat like the Lorena there? Or maybe more open?
2. I do not know Ed Schmidt. Could you please supply his e-mail
address so we can invite him to join our list also.
3. In your last paragraph, you said you ".. have lots of life
experiences..".. Are there any specifically related to stoves that we
should be asking you about?

Thanks for a very interesting description of what you have been doing. The
remainder all from Ted:

Hi Ron, Yes, put me on your list my home address is: Ted Keller, P.O. Box
592, Effingham, Ill. 62401 Tel. 217-857-3542, Fax 217-857-6615, E-Mail
<spanish@xel.net> Guatamalan e-mail <estrella@c.net.gt> until July 30th.
Ham radio 20meters when at home.

I ordered 42 stoves this year and down from the 150 from last year due to
the decline in tourism because of the crime here.

I believe the Lorena stove is all brick and adobe and this is much cheaper.
The Indians here wanted a metal top which is about 18"x 36"x 3/16" and has
four holes with some that can vary in size. This year I eliminated the
back hole and replaced it with a 3 7/8" hole to support a 4" chimney pipe
with a crimped end and with the damper at the top of the pipe or away from
the intense stove heat. I will also suggest they make their fire bed about
4 to 6 inches deeper for the accumulation of ashes to serve as an insulator
between the fire and the adobe base. The Indians like the metal top
because they can cook several tortillas at one time and they say they burn
their hands less from the brick surfaces that are not always perfectly
round or fit their cooking pot thus allows flame to come up the sides of
their cooking pots.

Do you know Ed Schmidt of St. Louis? He has made a
rather intensive study of cooking stoves for third world countries.

I try to give two months of my time for service to others which includes
the stove project. I do not not wish any compensation for what I do. When
I am not putting in stoves I do the following:
I teach English, I work in a kitchen to improve food sanitation and
prepare different menues, I teach Swedish Massage, and I suggest treatment
for
minor health problems. Yesterday, I gave suggestions on how to treat
fungus of the toenails and today I have a grandmother coming in that I will
suggest treatments for her bad case of toe nail fugus. I will teach her
how to take care of her feet, which most women down here don't do a very
good job of doing this. I'm not a doctor but I do read a lot about home
remedies and I brought three good books on the subject. I also do a little
metal work, a little carpentry work and a little electrical work and I have
some of my tools here to help me. I also give advice on how to improve
peoples livelyhood and sometimes help them financially.
I'm 70 years old and have lots of life experiences to share and
this is what I am doing. I will leave for home on August 3rd from
Guatemala but leave Xela on July 31st. I will start receiving incoming
students from Mexico who will be arriving for a 9 month stay to learn
English. I'm still in good health and I hope I can be around for a long
period to help a lot more people. Catch
you later, TED

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From elk at arcc.or.ke Wed Jul 1 04:30:47 1998
From: elk at arcc.or.ke (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: 'Freeplay' Sawdust Stove
Message-ID: <v01520d01b1bfc63e2969@[199.2.222.136]>

Stovers;

It is obvious that it's a shame to waste the 60% energy which is lost
during the carbonisation of wood to charcoal, and that the greenhouse
gasses produced are harmful if not flared.

It is also better to utilise the wastes from agro-industry than to leave
them and carry on with ineficient industry at the expense of the
environment.

Ergo: it's O.K. to produce charcoal from sawdust if there's no other use for it.

But it's best to find a direct use for the sawdust, no?

How many of you have heard of the 'Freeplay' radio? It's an intriguingly
simple radio recently developed between the U.K. and South Africa. Wind it
up for half a minute or so, & you've got 20 minutes of radio reception-
A.M., S.W. & F.M. stereo too I believe.

I remember, some time back, that a list member mentioed a small battery
powered camping stove that used a fan to increase the heat & efficiency of
burning pretty well any biomass. It was called a zip-stove or something....
my hard-disk crashed with the details some time back- does anyone have the
info?

So- what the urban dweller in Nairobi (for example) needs is a stove that
is gratifyingly quick (early morning tea when you're late for work), has a
reasonable turn-down ability, and uses cheap fuel. Kerosene and charcoal
are the only two realistic candidates at the moment.

Would a forced air sawdust burning stove fit the requirements? Maybe a
clockwork fan would be appropriate. The unit could be quite small and
portable, and the sawdust could be contained neatly in a removeable
'charge'- a perforated cell. This would provide the slick techno appeal
that is valued here in my developing country (Kenya).

Alternatively, a less portable stove with a chimney designed to provide a
good flue draft which creates an internal vacume in the stove that draws
air past the sawdust charge. In this case the cooking pot would have to be
embedded in the stove, with hot gasses and flame in direct contact on it's
way toward the chimney. In order to 'prime' the unit, maybe a small amount
of fuel (kerosene?) could be placed on a rag in the bottom of the chimney
to get the airflow initiated in order to light the sawdust.

These stoves could burn cow dung etc. as well as sawdust I reckon.

Just a couple of ideas. Anyone want to try some R & D.?

As for me- I'm still working on carbonising sawdust, so the Freeplay
Sawdust Stove'll have to wait a bit.

I'll be firing up yet another experimental kiln today or tomorrow. This one
is a downdraft carboniser using a 5 m. high chimney, a firebox at the base
of the chimney to initiate the downdraft (and maybe to flare the
volatiles), and a 1.8 m. dia. by 1.5 m high galvanised steel tank with a
perforated bottom. The tank sits over an earthen pit, is sealed around the
tank's sides, and a horizontal pipe leads underground from the pit to the
firebox at the base of the chimney. The firebox has a sealeable access
door, so once the small wood fire is established, the unit can be sealed
and a strong flue vacume is created via the tall chimney. This then draws
air down through the top-lit sawdust in the tank, through the tank's
perforated steel bottom, and into the chimney past the firebox.

Theoretically, once the air-dried sawdust begins pyrolysis, the wood fire
can be allowed to die out and the chimney will continue to draw sufficient
air through the carbonising mass. Additional layers of sawdust can be
spread on the top to control complete combustion and as additional
feedstock.

I'll report back to the group on how the trials go shortly, and if it looks
promising, will provide Alex with a photo and a drawing.

I'm off on home leave for most of July, so there's going to be a haitus in
my work here for that period.

All for now;

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@arcc.or.ke
_____________________________

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From Auke.Koopmans at fao.org Wed Jul 1 05:17:01 1998
From: Auke.Koopmans at fao.org (Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal making kilns
Message-ID: <01IYVUV88G868ZDZH2@faov02.fao.org>

Dear List Members,

For those of you who are interested in charcoal making and different types
of kilns check the followoing web site:

http://www.nri.org/Publishing/Internal_Publications/pubcat/biomass/guides.ht
ml

Reagrds,

Auke Koopmans Tel. +66-2-280 2760
Wood Energy Conservation Specialist Fax +66-2-280 0760
FAO-RWEDP Internet:
http://www.rwedp.org
Maliwan Mansion, Phra Atit Road 39, Email rwedp@fao.org
Bangkok 10200, Thailand Email auke.koopmans@fao.org

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Thu Jul 9 07:39:52 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Hottenroth Stoves
Message-ID: <199807090748_MC2-529A-150D@compuserve.com>

Dear Stovers:

I am puzzled by the inquiries on the fan stove produced by ZZ Corp. (10806
Kaylor St., Los Alamitos, CO 90702; 562 598 3220). I wrote an extended
reply on the subject a week ago - but I guess it got lost in the mail"
(whatever that is in Cyberspace).

Fred and Fred Jr. have sold the business to former employees who are still
in business there. I think I talked to the new owners the other day.

Ron and I were both very impressed by the Sierra Stove. It uses one AA
battery driving a fan that gives more than 6 hours of cooking; has
adjustable heat; weights 15 oz (30 oz complete with saucepan and skillet
into which the stove fits); produces 18,000 BTU/hr. The stove burns chips,
twigs, leaves etc. with amazing heat. They produce also a number of other
stoves, including the Gasifire, an early model of
what Ron is calling the IDS/CMS. They have a web site
.www.gorp.com/zzstove/sierra.htm).

Fred is 93 and would love to hear from you. He lives at 1740 Interlachen
39E in Seal Beach, CA 90740; 562 596 7741. My son lives nearby, so I get
to see him occasionally.

Good luck to all, 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

From larcon at sni.net Thu Jul 9 08:45:40 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal Making (John Cartlidge)
Message-ID: <v01540b00b1ca67624701@[204.133.28.6]>

Stovers: The following came in from John Cartlidge, a list reader (I think
not a list member) in the UK. I ask John a few questions at the end.

>Dear Mr. Larson
>
> This communication is the latest link of a long chain.
>I volunteered information to Larry Sutherland whom I saw asking about
>charcoal making on the Stoves List. I first became aware of the Stoves
>List through a fellow menber of a barbeque list (Rock McNelly) and his
>quest to locate some standards for charcoal manufacture.
>
> I must confess that my main interest in charcoal is for use as
>a fuel in barbeque cooking. Because the food is in direct contact with
>the combustion products I prefer to use lumpwood charcoal rather
>than compressed briquettes in order to avoid the binders and other
>heaven-knows-what garbage that commercial manufactures use as padding.
>Kingsford, in the USA, even admit to adding anthracite! Most British
>retailers cannot even tell you who made it never mind tell you what's
>in it.
>
> Unfortunately the lumpwood charcoal available in the UK is not
>of high quality - too many small pieces. The main problem is in handling
>and shipping. By the time it reaches point of sale you'd think the store
>boys had been using the bags for soccer practice.
>
> I read some time ago about a charcoal making method which utilises
>a fifty gallon drum as a kiln. This is bottom-lit and the gasses are just
>vented off the top. For some time I have been planning to have a go myself.
>
> Having read the concerns on the Stoves List over the pyrolysis
>products I am now planning to use the drum as a furnace with a smaller can
>inside being used as a retort. This retort will be vented downwards, back
>into the fire thus 'flaring' the gasses instead of just venting them. It's
>just a shame that I can't make use of them instead.
>
> Another, more practical, reason for my change of plans is that I
>suspect that the original single drum method requires considerably more
>skill and judgement to execute successfully.
>
> Regards - John Cartlidge. +44 (0)1666 832768
> +44 (0)1666 832181 (fax)
> johncartlidge@lucent.com (email)
>
>p.s. Unfortunately Larry and I live at opposite ends of the UK so we
>will probably only communicate by email. (AND I'll not get to his club BBQ :-)
>

Questions for John: Could you tell us more about the barbeque list.
What is the discussion usually about? Are there many on the list who are
interested in charcoal? There are developing country parts of the world
where barbequeing is a major means of food preparation - do these topics
ever come up for discussion?

For anyone:. 1. I'd like to hear more on John's remark ".. the food is in
direct contact with the combustion products.." Does anyone on the list
have definitive, quantitative information on the possible health impacts of
consuming food cooked via barbequeing?

2. Any more comments for John and Larry about making one's own charcoal?
I believe we will hear more over the next year, but maybe not right now.

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From pcbadger at tva.gov Thu Jul 9 10:23:25 1998
From: pcbadger at tva.gov (Badger, Phillip C.)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Briquetting machines from the third world
Message-ID: <4BC88098C5DDCF11A5E40000F8014BA7014EF2FA@mshmshois1p.mss.tva.gov>

One of the most knowledgeable people in the world on wood briquetting is
John Zeazeas whose address is 146 High Circle Rd, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864,
USA, phone +1 208 265 4952, fax +1 208 263 2552, email jzeazeas@nidlink.com
John has traveled the world studying wood briquetting technologies.
Phillip C. Badger, Manager, Southeastern Regional Biomass Energy Program

----------
From: Eric T. Ferguson[SMTP:ferguson@antenna.nl]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 1998 7:54 PM
To: bioenergy@crest.org; stoves@crest.org
Subject: Briquetting machines from the third world

Dear Stove and Bioenergy Colleagues,

I have been asked for names and addresses of third-world
manufacturers of
machines for briquetting sawdust and agricultural waste. The only
ones I
have seen myself were locally made screw presses in use in Bangkok
(Thailand) in 1983, but do not know if that factory still produces
them.

I would be very grateful for any information on such manufacturers,
and
also for suggestions on other sources of information (books, mailing
lists,
websites) which I could consult.

Please reply by private e-mail unless the topic is of sufficient
interest
for the list.

Thanks in advance, and greetings,

Eric

|dr. E.T. Ferguson, Consultant for Energy and Development (MacFergus
BV)|
|van Dormaalstraat 15, 5624 KH EINDHOVEN, Netherlands.
|
|e-mail: e.ferguson@antenna.nl. phone:+31-40-2432878;
fax:+31-40-2467036|

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From larcon at sni.net Fri Jul 10 01:09:07 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Dr. PHAM Hoang-Luong: An Introduction
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1cb3d7090de@[204.133.28.19]>

Stovers: The following came back from my invitation to new list member Dr.
PHAM Hoang-Luong to introduce himself to the list. Dr. Pham, on behalf of
the list - welcome. I hope you will jump in especially with answers to the
many questions which come to this group. Ron (The rest from Dr. Pham)

...At present, I work as a research specialist & Affiliated faculty in
the Energy Program of AIT. My current special focus is on biomass energy
technologies, such as biomass briquetting (rice husk and saw dust),
gasification of wood chips and briquetted saw dust, and biomass fuelled
cook stoves.

Through the discussions of stovers, I hope to get more info. on ways to
improve the combustion efficiency and reduce the GHG emission from
biomass cook stoves.

Sincerely,
H-L. Pham
--
Dr.PHAM Hoang-Luong Voice :(66-2) 524 5411 (off.)
Energy Program 524 8140 (res.)
Asian Institute of Technology Fax :(66-2) 524 5439
PO Box 4, Klongluang 516 2126
Pathumthani 12120 e-mail : hlpham@ait.ac.th
Thailand http://www.ait.ac.th/
--

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Fri Jul 10 01:09:17 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal Production Plant
Message-ID: <v01540b04b1cb40fb65ea@[204.133.28.19]>

I hope the original offeror of the charcoal plant is still tuned in or that
someone can recall who made the offer. Ron

>From: Jack Dickey <jdickey@wavegate.com>
>To: "'owner-stoves@crest.org'" <owner-stoves@crest.org>
>Subject: Charcoal Production Plant
>Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 11:26:20 -0400
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>
>Please advise if plant is still available for sale. We are interested.

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From johncartlidge at lucent.com Fri Jul 10 08:30:26 1998
From: johncartlidge at lucent.com (johncartlidge@lucent.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Barbecue list + Charcoal
Message-ID: <199807101237.NAA15870@mlswa.uk.lucent.com>

Stovers
most of the following is in response to Mr.Larson's questions
but first may I direct your attention to the efforts of one barbecuer
to make his own charcoal.

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

I subscribe to two barbecue discussion lists. Each is quite
different in character from the other. There are also forums in the
newsgroup world (rec.food... etc.) about which I know nothing. I think
that most of the listmembers have an interest in _using_ charcoal, not
necessarily in making it.

The first list is owned by Rick Thead. It has been running
for over two years now and is the more relaxed of the two as far as
sujbect matter goes - some say too relaxed! Discussions cover all types
of outdoor cookery from a gas or electric grill on the deck,through
charcoal and log burning smokers up to whole-animal BBQ in a pit. Recipes
are posted, techniques discussed, successes boasted of and failures
analysed. There is also a large ammount of what is politely referred to
as "MD" - Mindless Drivel - less politely as "BS"... This consists
of personal greetings, _friendly_ insults and generally off-topic
chit-chat. Bear in mind that a lot of the subscribers have met at
various festivals and cook-offs and are personal friends.

The second list is owned by Dave Lineback. It is a spin-off
from the first, catering for the purist barbecuer who regards gas
or electric power as inadmissable. As you might expect, the signal
to noise ratio is somewhat higher. Again, within the above constraints,
all aspects of outdoor cooking are freely discussed.

Both lists are fairly high traffic, together generating
100-140 mails per day sometimes more at weekends. Both have a
digest form available.

BBQ restaurants and other commercial operations often come up
for discussion, in fact a number of professional chefs are members.
However, any commecial activity - advertising etc. is instantly jumped-on
from a great height.

Non-USA BBQ styles are occasionally discussed, normally in the context
of 'how can I do that' or 'is there a restaurant that does that'.

Joining Instructions: See the following web pages.

http://www.azstarnet.com/~thead/bbq/

http://www.sunsetridge.com/lex.htm

If you do not have internet access then send email as follows:

For the Thead list:
To: bbq-request@listserv.azstarnet.com
In the body if your mail put subscribe bbq

For the Lineback list:
To: Majordomo@ipass.net
In the BODY of your mail put subscribe barbecue

Regards - John Cartlidge.
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 12 00:55:23 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Message from Kirk Smith
Message-ID: <v01540b02b1cded89197a@[204.133.28.21]>

Stovers: The following comes from a separate off-list communication I
initiated with Kirk Smith. The paper (a very important one from what I see
below) that Kirk refers to is now (or soon will be) available at Alex' web
site:

Ron, I am just returning home after attending the first
National Conference on Environmental Health in India, held by the Center
for Science and Environment in Delhi. I gave the keynote at the indoor air
session (one of 11).

I gave a paper at the meeting, which was based on our recent
study on the national burden of disease from IAP in India. It
seems that there are about 500k premature deaths per year among children
under 5 and adult women. There have been a number of news stories on the
study in India recently and while I was there was a question in Parliament
on the issue.

In the full report, I was able to do some calculations that show that a
stove that truly reduced exposures by 90%, had a lifetime of 15 years, and
cost $50 (including all the costs of the program such as marketing,
maintenance, pro-rating over the remaining stoves those that failed or did
not last the full lifetime, etc.) could extend life at a cost of about $30
per life-year extended. This is in the range of a number of other health
measures now undertaken in developing countries (nutrition supplements,
tobacco education, etc.) although not as cheap as some (vaccinations, AIDS
education, etc.).

If any of the above conditions are not met (exposure reduction, full cost,
lifetime), however, the cost-effectiveness declines substantially. One of
the interesting results of this analysis is the critical importance of
lifetime on these calculations. Few of the improved stove programs have
focused on lifetime, but some of the most successful ones I have seen have
promoted truly pucca (sturdy long-lived) devices, which have been
attractive among poor groups even at higher prices (%25+).

I agree that it would be good to have another international meeting on
stoves, but, in my view, we need to be sure it is not just the same old
choir and their new friends. It is time to draw in some of the hard-nosed
health and rural development folks who could both benefit themselves and
help the stove people face up to the realities of development issues and
priorities.

Best/K

p.s. My family and I move to London next week for a six-month sabbatical.
I will be working with three groups, the London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine, Kings College London (with David Hall, editor of Biomass
and Bioenergy), and at a Cambridge Univ climate change group. My email will not
change.

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 12 08:36:57 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Message from Kirk Smith
Message-ID: <v01540b01b1ce632e4f1b@[204.133.28.40]>

Stovers: I inadvertently cut out Kirk's continuing e-mail address as he
moves temporarily to London:

krksmith@uclink4.berkeley.edu

Sorry - Ron

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Sun Jul 12 18:06:06 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Kirk Smith's Report
Message-ID: <199807122215.SAA15012@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Stovers,
You may now access Kirk Smith's report,
Overview of the Indian National Burden of Disease from Indoor Air
Pollution
at the Stoves web site, address below. Check under the" New" .

Alex

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Sun Jul 12 22:57:31 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal without the smoke.
Message-ID: <199807130306.XAA06876@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Stovers and charcoalers,

This afternoon I tested a scaled up version of the venturi burner.
The idea being to produce charcoal on a "viable" scale without the
high production of polluting gasses.

Check the drawing at the website under the "New". Pictures will be
added later this week, when the camera comes back.

A 200 litre drum was packed with cedar slabwood from my sawmill. Most
of it less than 5 cm thick, and at about 12% moisture, dry basis , I
think. My meter consistently gives this reading for air dried lumber
under cover in this region.

The top was sprinkled with kindling and lit. The three primary
air holes were plugged. It burned in the open, with no lid,
for five minutes. I spread the burning kindling around to try and get
the entire surface burning. The primary air holes were unplugged and
the lid and chimney assembly were erected.

This consists of a short 60 cm tall , 9 cm dia. pipe which draws
the pyrolysis gasses out of the drum, and a 150 cm tall, 20cm. dia.
chimney which draws additional air through a tangential air supply at
the top of the short chimney.

A pilot flame, inserted through the tangential secondary air vents,
was required for the first five or ten minutes to maintain the
combustion of the gasses in the upper chimney. The secondary air
supply was adjusted by plugging the air openings with insulation, to
achieve the loudest roar of the flame. This seems to be the setting
which offers the greatest reliability for maintaining the flame. Gas
production and composition varies somewhat over the course of the
burn and some adjustment seems necessary. The burn lasted three
hours until no flame or smoke was evident. I should have shut it
down a bit sooner as some of the charcoal was consumed. The top
chimney was removed and a plug placed in the remaining short
chimney. The three primary hole were also plugged. It all cooled down
in an hour and a half.

The charcoal looks good. To bad it isn't hardwood.

This device had a heat output in the range of 200,000btus/hr for three
hours. We ought to be able to use that for something useful.

Alex

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Tue Jul 14 01:54:07 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal without the smoke.
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1d06efe78c0@[204.133.28.47]>

Alex - Thanks for your further information yesterday on larger-scale,
top-down charcoal-making, with the use of a flaring chimney. I have these
additional questions for you (and any others who I hope will try it out or
who might already have done so).

1. Any idea of whether your flaring experiment would have allowed
compliance with environmental regulations? How much visible smoke?

2. Could your "lid" have been done with clay/mud? (just trying to
reduce costs)

3. Presumably the chimney was getting pretty hot with your 200,000
Btu/hr (about 60 kW) thermal release. Any idea of that temperature and the
likely lifetime of the 150 cm chimney? Is the chimney the component with
the shortest lifetime and can you estimate any lifetimes? And costs?

4. Three hours seems pretty fast for this conversion - but not
surprising because of the extra draft attributable to the flaring. Did you
or could you try estimating the turn-down ratio that was available to you?
Any possible advantages to one end or the other of the turn-down ratio
statistic other than the value of the charcoaler's time?

5. Do you think the 200 liter drum could have been replaced by a
hole in the ground? How big a hole might be realistic? (assuming
(controllable) pipes to get the primary air below the wood stack). Should
one think of multiple flaring stacks?

Again thanks for demonstrating that the top-down, charcoal-making stove
concept can be extended up to the 200 liter (60 kW) scale.

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Tue Jul 14 07:43:43 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal without the smoke.
In-Reply-To: <v01540b03b1d06efe78c0@[204.133.28.47]>
Message-ID: <199807141153.HAA24155@adan.kingston.net>

> Alex - Thanks for your further information yesterday on larger-scale,
> top-down charcoal-making, with the use of a flaring chimney. I have these
> additional questions for you (and any others who I hope will try it out or
> who might already have done so).
>
> 1. Any idea of whether your flaring experiment would have allowed
> compliance with environmental regulations? How much visible smoke?

As long as "smoke" ignition took place, the only visible emission was
heat waves. Ignition was lost occasionally while trying to turn down
the burn rate by reducing primary air.
>
> 2. Could your "lid" have been done with clay/mud? (just trying to
> reduce costs)

I don't know.
>
> 3. Presumably the chimney was getting pretty hot with your 200,000
> Btu/hr (about 60 kW) thermal release. Any idea of that temperature and the
> likely lifetime of the 150 cm chimney? Is the chimney the component with
> the shortest lifetime and can you estimate any lifetimes? And costs?

I understand the value of having answers to these questions. As far
as life times are concerned, I just don't know. The device took me
two hours to make. The material costs here in Canada would be
negligible and, I assume, irrelevant.

>
> 4. Three hours seems pretty fast for this conversion - but not
> surprising because of the extra draft attributable to the flaring. Did you
> or could you try estimating the turn-down ratio that was available to you?
> Any possible advantages to one end or the other of the turn-down ratio
> statistic other than the value of the charcoaler's time?

Three hours is fast. Had this been done with hardwood the time would
have been greater. Turn down may only be available with drier wood.
Our work a Queens U. last winter, showed that the best charcoal
results were achieved at the slowest possible rates while still
maintaining smoke ignition. The slowest rates were possible with the
driest wood.

The tall chimney was to increase turbulent combustion of the smoke
and handle the large volume flow rates, not to increase the draw on
the drum.
>
> 5. Do you think the 200 liter drum could have been replaced by a
> hole in the ground? How big a hole might be realistic? (assuming
> (controllable) pipes to get the primary air below the wood stack). Should
> one think of multiple flaring stacks?

Yes, if the ground is very dry. We don't need any more steam. The
size of hole might be limited by the ability of the operator to
cover it with a single metal lid. Smaller kilns cool down faster. For
larger kilns multiple stacks offer one distinct advantage. The
chimney diameter and height are sized according to the amount and
characteristic of the gas that has to move through it. Larger kilns
would require single chimneys to large to handle.

The Selkirk Chimney Sizing Handbook and Jay Sheltons's Solid Fuel
Encyclopedia are very helpful references for getting a handle on
necessary chimney sizes.

Alex

> Again thanks for demonstrating that the top-down, charcoal-making stove
> concept can be extended up to the 200 liter (60 kW) scale.
>
> Regards Ron
>
>
> Ronal W. Larson, PhD
> 21547 Mountsfield Dr.
> Golden, CO 80401, USA
> 303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
> larcon@sni.net
>
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From larcon at sni.net Tue Jul 14 12:50:42 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal without the smoke.
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1d13c882bff@[204.133.28.22]>

Alex and other stovers:

A few more selected follow-up questions -

<snip>

(I asked):
>> 2. Could your "lid" have been done with clay/mud? (just trying to
>> reduce costs)
(You said)
)>I don't know.

(Larson-2b). If you could try this at some point, I think we could get
more use of flaring in developing countries. It is not so important here
as it is if there is a pit as discussed below.

<snip>

(I asked)
>> 4. Three hours seems pretty fast for this conversion - but not
>> surprising because of the extra draft attributable to the flaring.

<snip>
(you said):
>The tall chimney was to increase turbulent combustion of the smoke
>and handle the large volume flow rates, not to increase the draw on
>the drum.

(Larson -4b). I have sensed in this and other of your remarks that you do
not believe that the stack height changes the draft for primary (as well as
secondary) air - whereas I see a direct relationship. Are we disagreeing
on this or are we talking about different subjects? Are you just saying
that you have enough draft without the taller flaring stack?

(I said)
>> 5. Do you think the 200 liter drum could have been replaced by a
>> hole in the ground? How big a hole might be realistic? (assuming
>> (controllable) pipes to get the primary air below the wood stack). Should
>> one think of multiple flaring stacks?
>
(You said)
>Yes, if the ground is very dry. We don't need any more steam. The
>size of hole might be limited by the ability of the operator to
>cover it with a single metal lid.

(Larson-5b): I am really hoping that a dirt/mud cover can replace
the "single metal lid". The chimney alone looks much easier to
make/buy/move-around. I am afraid that many potential users will forego a
metal lid - but be willing to try a flaring chimney.

(You said, continued):
>Smaller kilns cool down faster. For
>larger kilns multiple stacks offer one distinct advantage. The
>chimney diameter and height are sized according to the amount and
>characteristic of the gas that has to move through it. Larger kilns
>would require single chimneys too large to handle.
>
>The Selkirk Chimney Sizing Handbook and Jay Sheltons's Solid Fuel
>Encyclopedia are very helpful references for getting a handle on
>necessary chimney sizes.
>
>Alex

(Larson-5b2): Assuming that chimneys are available with diameters of 6"
(15 cm) and 8" (20 cm) and 1 meter height, can you estimate what spacing
you might recommend for these sizes of flaring chimneys? Can one simply
punch a row of nail-holes for the secondary air supply or what would you
recommend for simplicity? I believe some wind-shielding will be necessary
as well

I hope that some of those who are thinking of making charcoal with
only venting , will try the flaring approach you have demonstrated.

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Tue Jul 14 16:23:16 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal without the smoke.
In-Reply-To: <v01540b03b1d13c882bff@[204.133.28.22]>
Message-ID: <199807142032.QAA03384@adan.kingston.net>

Ron and all,
Answers to Ron's questions, below.

> Alex and other stovers:
>
> A few more selected follow-up questions -
> <snip>
> (I asked):
> >> 2. Could your "lid" have been done with clay/mud? (just trying to
> >> reduce costs)
> (You said)
> )>I don't know.
>
> (Larson-2b). If you could try this at some point, I think we could get
> more use of flaring in developing countries. It is not so important here
> as it is if there is a pit as discussed below.
>
> <snip>
>
> (I asked)
> >> 4. Three hours seems pretty fast for this conversion - but not
> >> surprising because of the extra draft attributable to the flaring.
>
> <snip>
> (you said):
> >The tall chimney was to increase turbulent combustion of the smoke
> >and handle the large volume flow rates, not to increase the draw on
> >the drum.
>
> (Larson -4b). I have sensed in this and other of your remarks that you do
> not believe that the stack height changes the draft for primary (as well as
> secondary) air - whereas I see a direct relationship.

You will see a relationship with the configuration that you have
used.
I may have over stated it in relation to the double chimney
configuration that I have been using. However, while monitoring both
primary and secondary air flow into the smaller burner at Queens U. I
was able to add chimney length while the stove was operating and see
the secondary air flow double with no noticeable change in the primary
air flow. This is dependent upon the resistance to flow through the
secondary air ports. The increased draft suction will draw from
either the short gas chimney coming from the fuel chamber or the
secondary air ports. With the arrangement I have been using, the
secondary air ports are above the top of the short chimney. The bulk
of the draft is exerted on these openings. The pressure drop occurs
just above the lower chimney. The lower chimney may not experience
any effect from the upper chimney with all the secondary air ports
wide open, As they are closed the effect will increase. However the
lower chimney is much smaller and has it's own flow charecteristics,
and may act as a flow limiter.

> Are we disagreeing
> on this or are we talking about different subjects? Are you just saying
> that you have enough draft without the taller flaring stack?

The smaller chimney below the flare provides enough draft on the fuel
chamber. At the start of the top- down process the chimney provides
the bulk of the draft from the hot gasses it contains. As the
reacting zone moves down through the fuel, the height of hot gasses
both in the chimney and in the drum make for some additional stack
effect.

At one point late in the burn the additional draft was
bringing in enough air to create some combustion in the drum. This
manifested as a chugging action, where the gasses would partially
ignite and pressurized the drum slightly,cutting off the draft, starve
itself out, then draw more air in and repeat this routine about once
a every second. Partially blocking the primary holes settled it
down.

>
> (I said)
> >> 5. Do you think the 200 liter drum could have been replaced by a
> >> hole in the ground? How big a hole might be realistic? (assuming
> >> (controllable) pipes to get the primary air below the wood stack). Should
> >> one think of multiple flaring stacks?
> >
> (You said)
> >Yes, if the ground is very dry. We don't need any more steam. The
> >size of hole might be limited by the ability of the operator to
> >cover it with a single metal lid.
>
> (Larson-5b): I am really hoping that a dirt/mud cover can replace
> the "single metal lid". The chimney alone looks much easier to
> make/buy/move-around. I am afraid that many potential users will forego a
> metal lid - but be willing to try a flaring chimney.

The metal lid could save a lot of work. What incentive is there for
flaring?
>
> (You said, continued):
> >Smaller kilns cool down faster. For
> >larger kilns multiple stacks offer one distinct advantage. The
> >chimney diameter and height are sized according to the amount and
> >characteristic of the gas that has to move through it. Larger kilns
> >would require single chimneys too large to handle.
> >
> >The Selkirk Chimney Sizing Handbook and Jay Sheltons's Solid Fuel
> >Encyclopedia are very helpful references for getting a handle on
> >necessary chimney sizes.
> >
> >Alex
>
> (Larson-5b2): Assuming that chimneys are available with diameters of 6"
> (15 cm) and 8" (20 cm) and 1 meter height, can you estimate what spacing
> you might recommend for these sizes of flaring chimneys?

Believe it or not, I really try to comment from my observations. The
number of variables involved here can even quench my tendency to
speculate.

Your asking me to go dig a hole, aren't you?

> Can one simply
> punch a row of nail-holes for the secondary air supply or what would you
> recommend for simplicity? I believe some wind-shielding will be necessary
> as well.

The arrangement I have used offers a few advantages over the simpler,
row of nails approach, which I have not tried at this scale. The
enhanced mixing in the vortex created by the high velocity tangential
air supply, and the expansion of that vortex into a wider chimney
portion, allows for additional ignition stability from what is
essentially a partially premixed flame attached, so to speak, to the
decelerating vortex. (Don't ask me to repeat that.)
The flame is well above the secondary air ports
and can not be blown out by the wind. If it is operating a bit to
lean, a gust may move the mix out of the flammability range. So a bit
of shielding will not hurt. It was very gusty during the trial on
Sunday. I was amazed at how well it was working both with and without
a small wind shield around the secondary air ports.

Having said that, and based on some of the smaller tests I have done
in the past, I think the expansion into the larger diameter chimney
is more important than the vortex.

>
> I hope that some of those who are thinking of making charcoal with
> only venting , will try the flaring approach you have demonstrated.

Dry wood is the key. Is it a realistic option?

Regards, Alex
>
> Regards Ron
>
>
> Ronal W. Larson, PhD
> 21547 Mountsfield Dr.
> Golden, CO 80401, USA
> 303/526-9629; FAX same with warning
> larcon@sni.net
>
>
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From larcon at sni.net Tue Jul 14 19:55:19 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Water Boiling in a Peruvian Village: Diffusion that failed
Message-ID: <v01540b00b1d1a02b294f@[204.133.28.23]>

Stovers: The following message appeared on another internet list to which
I belong. This list is entitled RSVP ("Renewables for Sustainable Village
Power"). RSVP is maintained by the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(NREL) - and deals mostly with small remote stand-alone Photovoltaic and
Wind systems. This list does not carry any discussion on stoves and is a
little larger than ours (180+ vs 145). The list manager is Julie Cardinal,
an employee of NREL. Julie has been a member of "stoves" for a short time
also. Julie is working on a Master's thesis where the topic is not
diffusion itself (the subject of the following), but rather the role of the
internet and e-mail lists (like "RSVP" and "stoves"). Julie says it is
fine to ask her questions on both difusion and the internet aspects of
technology diffusion (but not on the water boiling subject of this
forwarding). I send this on with her approval mainly because the subject
matter is so close to that of "stoves" and because I am interested in water
quality improvement, as well as the problems of diffusion of technologies
like stoves. Any comments on the applicability (or lack thereof) to the
diffusion of new stove technologies?

The remainder is from Julie and then from Wellin

Dear Listserv Members,
Here is an article about diffusion that I found during my thesis research.

It comes from Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. (4th ed.). New
York: The Free Press. He references Wellin, E. (1955). "Water Boiling in a
Peruvian Town, " in Benjamin D. Paul (ed.), Health, Culture and Community, New
York, Russell Sage Foundation. for this case illustration.

Julie_Cardinal@nrel.gov

Water Boiling in a Peruvian Village:
Diffusion That Failed

The public health service in Peru attempts to introduce innovations to villagers
to improve their health and lengthen their lives. This change agency encourages
people to install latrines, to burn garbage daily, to control house flies, to
report cases of infectious diseases, and to boil drinking water. These
innovations involve major changes in thinking and behavior for Peruvian
villagers, who do not understand the relationship of sanitation to illness.
Water boiling is an especially important health practice for villagers in Peru.
Unless they boil their drinking water, patients who are cured of infectious
diseases in village medical clinics often return within a month to be treated
again for the same disease.

A two-year water boiling campaign conducted in Los Molinas, a peasant village of
200 families in the coastal region of Peru, persuaded only eleven housewives to
boil water. From the viewpoint of the public health agency, the local health
worker, Nelida, had a simple task: to persuade the housewives of Los Molinas to
add water boiling to their pattern of daily behavior. Even with the aid of a
medical doctor, who gave public talks on water boiling, and fifteen village
housewives who were already boiling water before the campaign, Nelida=s
diffusion campaign failed. To understand why, we need to take a closer look at
the culture, the local environment, and the individuals in Los Molinas.

Most residents of Los Molinas are peasants who work as field hands on local
plantations. Water is carried by can, pail, gourd, or cask. The three sources
of water in Los Molinas include a seasonal irrigation ditch close to the
village, a spring more than a mile away from the village, and a public well
whose water most villagers dislike. All three sources are subject to pollution
at all times and show contamination whenever tested. Of the three sources, the
irrigation ditch is the most commonly used. It is closer to most homes, and the
villagers like its taste.

Although it is not feasible for the village to install a sanitary water system,
the incidence of typhoid and other water-borne diseases could be greatly reduced
by boiling the water before it is consumed. During her two-year campaign in Los
Molinas, Nelida made several visits to every home in the village but devoted
especially intensive efforts to twenty-one families. She visited each of these
selected families between fifteen and twenty-five times; eleven of these
families now boil their water regularly.

What kinds of persons do these numbers represent? We describe three village
housewivesCone who boils water to obey custom, one who was persuaded to boil
water by the health worker, and one of the many who rejected the innovationCin
order to add further insight into the process of diffusion.

Mrs. A: Custom-Oriented Adopter. Mrs. A is about forty and suffers from a sinus
infection. The Los Molinas villagers call her a Asickly one.@ Each morning,
Mrs. A boils a potful of water and uses it throughout the day. She has no
understanding of germ theory, as explained by Nelida; her motivation for water
boiling is a complex local custom of Ahot@ and Acold@ distinctions. The basic
principle of this belief system is that all foods, liquids, medicines, and other
objects are inherently hot or cold, quite apart from their actual temperature.
In essence, hot-cold distinctions serve as a series of avoidances and approaches
in such behavior as pregnancy, child-rearing, and the health-illness system.

Boiled water and illness are closely linked in the norms of Los Molinas; by
custom, only the ill use cooked, or Ahot@ water. Once an individual becomes
ill, it is unthinkable to eat port (very cold) or drink brandy (very hot).
Extremes of hot and cold must be avoided by the sick; therefore, raw water,
which is perceived to be very cold, must be boiled to make it appropriate to
consume.

Villagers learn from early childhood to dislike boiled water. Most can tolerate
cooked water only if a flavoring, such as sugar, cinnamon, lemon, or herbs, is
added. Mrs. A likes a dash of cinnamon in her drinking water. The village
belief system involves no notion of bacteriorological contamination of water.
By tradition, boiling is aimed at eliminating the Acold@ quality of unboiled
water, not the harmful bacteria. Mrs. A drinks boiled water in obedience to
local norms, because she perceives herself as ill.

Mrs. B: Persuaded Adopter. The B family came to Los Molinas a generation ago,
but they are still strongly oriented toward their birthplace in the Andes
Mountains. Mrs. B worries about lowland diseases that she feels infest the
village. It is partly because of this anxiety that the change agent, Nelida,
was able to convince Mrs. B to boil water.

Nelida is a friendly authority to Mrs. B (rather than a Adirt inspector@ as she
is seen by other housewives), who imparts useful knowledge and brings
protection. Mrs. B not only boils water but also has installed a latrine and
has sent her youngest child to the health center for a checkup.

Mrs. B is marked as an outsider in the community of Los Molinas by her highland
hairdo and stumbling Spanish. She will never achieve more than marginal social
acceptance in the village. Because the community is not an important reference
group to her, Mrs. B deviates from village norms on health innovations. With
nothing to lose socially, Mrs. B gains in personal security by heeding Nelida=s
advice. Mrs. B=s practice of boiling water has no effect on her marginal
status. She is grateful to Nelida for teaching her how to neutralize the danger
of contaminated water, which she perceives as a lowland peril.

Mrs. C: Rejector. This housewife represents the majority of Los Molinas
families who were not persuaded by the efforts of the change agents during their
two-year water-boiling campaign. In spite of Nelida=s repeated explanation,
Mrs. C does not understand germ theory. How, she argues, can microbes survive
in water that would drown people? Are they fish? If germs are so small that
they cannot be seen or felt, how can they hurt a grown person? There are enough
real threats in the world to worry aboutCpoverty and hungerCwithout bothering
about tiny animals one cannot see, hear, touch, or smell. Mrs. C=s allegiance
to traditional village norms is at odds with the boiling of water. A firm
believer in the hot-cold superstition, she feels that only the sick must drink
boiled water.

Why Did the Diffusion of Water Boiling Fail?

This intensive two-year campaign by a public health worker in a Peruvian village
of 200 families, aimed at persuading housewives to boil drinking water, was
largely unsuccessful. Nelida was able to encourage only about 5 percent of the
population, eleven families, to adopt the innovation. The diffusion campaign in
Los Molinas failed because of the cultural beliefs of the villagers. Local
tradition links hot foods with illness. Boiling water makes less Acold@ and
hence, appropriate only for the sick. But if a person is not ill, the
individual is prohibited by village norms from drinking boiled water. Only
individuals who are unintegrated into local networks risk defying community
norms on water boiling. An important factor regarding the adoption rate of an
innovation is its compatibility with the values, beliefs, and past experiences
of individuals in the social system. Nelida and her superiors in the public
health agency should have understood the hot-cold belief system, and it is found
throughout Peru (and in most nations of Latin America, Africa, and Asia). Here
is an example of an indigenous knowledge system that caused the failure of a
development program.

Nelida=s failure demonstrates the importance of interpersonal networks in the
adoption and rejection of an innovation. Socially an outsider, Mrs. B was
marginal to the Los Molinas community, although she had lived there for several
years. Nelida was a more important referent for Mrs. B than were her neighbors,
who shunned her. Anxious to secure social prestige from the higher-status
Nelida, Mrs. B adopted water boiling, not because she understood the correct
health reasons, but because she wanted to obtain Nelida=s approval. Thus we see
that the diffusion of innovations is a social process, as well as a technical
matter.

Nelida worked with the wrong housewives if she wanted to launch a
self-generating diffusion process in Los Molinas. She concentrated her efforts
on village women like Mrs. A and Mrs. B. Unfortunately, they were perceived as
a sickly one and a social outsider, and were not respected as social models of
appropriate water-boiling behavior by the other women. The village opinion
leaders, who could have activated local networks to spread the innovation, were
ignored by Nelida.

How potential adopters view the change agent affects their willingness to adopt
new ideas. In Los Molinas, Nelida was perceived differently by lower-and
middle-status housewives. Most poor families saw the health worker as a
Asnooper@ sent to Los Molinas to pry for dirt and to press already harassed
housewives into keeping cleaner homes. Because the lower-status housewives had
less free time, they were unlikely to talk with Nelida about water boiling.
Their contacts outside the community were limited, and as a result, they saw the
technically proficient Nelida with eyes bound by the social horizons and
traditional beliefs of Los Molinas. They distrusted this outsider, whom they
perceived as a social stranger. Nelida, who was middle class by Los Molinas
standards, was able to secure more positive results from Housewives whose
socioeconomic level and cultural background were more similar to hers. This
tendency for more effective communication to occur with those who are more
similar to a change agent occurs in most diffusion campaigns.

Nelida was too Ainnovation-oriented@ and not Aclient-oriented@ enough. Unable
to put herself in the role of the village housewives, her attempts at persuasion
failed to reach her clients because the message was not suited to their needs.
Nelida did not begin where the villagers were; instead she talked to them about
term theory, which they could not (and probably did not need to) understand.
These are only some of the factors that produced the diffusion failure in Los
Molinas.

------------------------------------------------------------
Posted to the Renewables for Sustainable Village Power List
By: "Cardinal, Julie" <Julie_Cardinal@nrel.gov>
------------------------------------------------------------

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Wed Jul 15 02:10:05 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Charcoal without the smoke.
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1d1f05992ec@[204.133.28.26]>

Alex - thanks for the clarifications. Just a few more additions.

<snip>

(You said - 1):
>You will see a relationship with the configuration that you have
>used.
>I may have over stated it in relation to the double chimney
>configuration that I have been using. However, while monitoring both
>primary and secondary air flow into the smaller burner at Queens U. I
>was able to add chimney length while the stove was operating and see
>the secondary air flow double with no noticeable change in the primary
>air flow. This is dependent upon the resistance to flow through the
>secondary air ports. The increased draft suction will draw from
>either the short gas chimney coming from the fuel chamber or the
>secondary air ports. With the arrangement I have been using, the
>secondary air ports are above the top of the short chimney. The bulk
>of the draft is exerted on these openings. The pressure drop occurs
>just above the lower chimney. The lower chimney may not experience
>any effect from the upper chimney with all the secondary air ports
>wide open, As they are closed the effect will increase. However the
>lower chimney is much smaller and has it's own flow charecteristics,
>and may act as a flow limiter.

(Larson-1): You are right. I am thinking of my own experiments -
and I am not even very sure of them. I certainly do not yet understand
your geometry.
I will try to generate a pressure plot and think through your
answer above. Thank you for a very complete description.

(You said -2 )
>
>The smaller chimney below the flare provides enough draft on the fuel
>chamber. At the start of the top- down process the chimney provides
>the bulk of the draft from the hot gasses it contains. As the
>reacting zone moves down through the fuel, the height of hot gasses
>both in the chimney and in the drum make for some additional stack
>effect.
>
> At one point late in the burn the additional draft was
>bringing in enough air to create some combustion in the drum. This
>manifested as a chugging action, where the gasses would partially
>ignite and pressurized the drum slightly,cutting off the draft, starve
>itself out, then draw more air in and repeat this routine about once
>a every second. Partially blocking the primary holes settled it
>down.

(Larson - 2) Good description and interesting observation. Not
heard of chugging before. You need now to find a way to make use of (make
$ from) the chugging.

<snip>

(You said - 3)

>The metal lid could save a lot of work. What incentive is there for
>flaring?

(Larson -3) I agree the lid will probably save work - but it may
be pretty hard to find and pay for any good-sized piece of metal. In
Northern Ethiopia I found that used 20 liter cans (that we throw away here)
cost about $2.00
In Kafa, Ethiopia, a used 30-40 (?) gallon drum cost about $30 last
month. I feel that many rural charcoalers will opt to put in an hour or
two more work in each burn to avoid the need to invest in a part that costs
even $10 (which also can be stolen).

And you are right about the general lack of incentives for flaring.
One could be the increased speed of charcoaling (due to the increased and
controllable amount of primary air) - which seems might halve the time
required (an assumption) - allowing double the charcoal per work hour.
This could be similarly achieved with an electric blower - but that is not
too likely in most charcoaling places.

You are probably also saying (and I agree) that flaring will not be
instituted to meet local air pollution requirements - as has been imposed
in the US, the UK, and probably a few other jurisdictions (at least for
larger operations). But I think we can assume that such is not too far off
(I just heard that today is the hottest US day ever - when averaged over
the entire US. Even the world's most wasteful consumer of energy may soon
push for controlling global warming gases.)

<snip>

(You said- 4 )
>Believe it or not, I really try to comment from my observations. The
>number of variables involved here can even quench my tendency to
>speculate.
>
>Your asking me to go dig a hole, aren't you?

(Larson): Shucks - now I have to go and look up this Selkirk book.

As to digging a hole, I know better (on the other hand ......).
What I am looking for is someone with an existing hole, lots of wood (and a
long way from a power pole), a need for both charcoal and flaring (or maybe
intrigued by the idea of saving time).
>
<snip>
(You said - 6)
>
>The arrangement I have used offers a few advantages over the simpler,
>row of nails approach, which I have not tried at this scale. The
>enhanced mixing in the vortex created by the high velocity tangential
> air supply, and the expansion of that vortex into a wider chimney
>portion, allows for additional ignition stability from what is
>essentially a partially premixed flame attached, so to speak, to the
>decelerating vortex. (Don't ask me to repeat that.)
> The flame is well above the secondary air ports
>and can not be blown out by the wind. If it is operating a bit to
>lean, a gust may move the mix out of the flammability range. So a bit
>of shielding will not hurt. It was very gusty during the trial on
>Sunday. I was amazed at how well it was working both with and without
>a small wind shield around the secondary air ports.
>
>Having said that, and based on some of the smaller tests I have done
>in the past, I think the expansion into the larger diameter chimney
>is more important than the vortex.

(Larson): I am again apologetic that I still don't understand you
geometry. I will go back and look at things more closely on your web page.
You certainly seem to have less difficulty with flame attachment and
stability than have I. Let's forget the words "nail holes" for awhile.
>
(I said)

>> I hope that some of those who are thinking of making charcoal with
>> only venting , will try the flaring approach you have demonstrated.
>

(You said)
>Dry wood is the key. Is it a realistic option?
>
(Larson): For those coming in late on this discussion - you will
have missed the fact that many charcoalers want to move newly cut wood
quickly through the charcoaling process. Those working with top-down
firing have found that it is not possible above a certain level of moisture
content. For small stove applications, this does not seem to be a major
hurdle, since most collected fire wood is from dead (and relatively dry)
smaller branches.

In some places, the larger wood can be cut and left to season for a
year or so. In others - they will have to find other approaches if flaring
is felt to be important. Like Alex, I wonder which is the more realistic
option.

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Wed Jul 15 10:19:44 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:35:59 2004
Subject: Making charcoal
Message-ID: <v01540b04b1d1ff4e167b@[204.133.28.2]>

Stovers: The following came in as a followup on the indirect method of
making charcoal. Dan Gill asks some questions which I take a shot at -
and ask a few more questions myself.

>Dear Dr. Larson,
>
>I had planned to discuss my findings on the indirect method of making
>charcoal with you but it appears that I have been pre-empted by my
>friend and fellow barbecuer from across the big waters (John Cartlidge,
>AKA John the Brit). I assume by now that you have checked out the URL
>(http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/Charmake.htm) which John provided
>and are familiar with what I have done. I have been a BBQ list
>participant and contributor for several years and cook with wood, coals
>and charcoal. I prefer cooking with real lump charcoal rather than
>briquettes for a number of reasons and, being somewhat of a skinflint,
>would rather utilize the resources at hand and make my own as opposed to
>buying it. My objective was to use existing technology to design a
>simple, cheap, reliable and efficient method for the small scale
>production of charcoal for home use utilizing readily available
>materials and minimizing the release of pollutants.
>
>I was going to run a series of trials to compare the indirect method
>with direct (bottom lit) and direct (top lit). After several burns using
>the retort, I decided that there were such obvious advantages to the
>indirect method that I abandoned studies of direct burns. The retort
>method is easy, reliable, and does not require the skill and attention
>of direct burns. The equipment and materials which I used are readily
>available worldwide. As the gasses and volatiles are discharged into a
>hot bed of coals, I believe that most of the pollutants are burned,
>adding to the furnace heat. I also suspect that yield and quality are
>better. From what I have read, 32% by weight is good; the resulting
>charcoal burns hot and clean; you can almost light it with a match.
>
>The direct method also appears to be more compatible with heat recovery
>and waste wood utilization systems. As I mentioned in an earlier message
>to you and Dr. Reed, I live on a farm in Virginia and my wife operates a
>small sawmill. Disposing of slabs and wood waste is a serious problem. I
>can burn a lot of the hardwood slabs in my indoor masonry heater/cooker,
>which can be seen at http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/cooker.HTML We
>have not found an economical use for pine slabs and have started burning
>them in a field. This is obviously a wasteful and polluting practice. My
>ultimate goal is to build a small masonry furnace that would hold
>several 55 gallon drum retorts and recover heat for domestic space
>heating during the winter. Charcoal could be a marketable by-product. I
>envision an hydronic collector with either water, salts or rock for
>heat storage and water to deliver heat to the house. I would burn pine
>slabs and waste wood in the furnace and make charcoal from hardwoods in
>55 gallon drums. This approach appears to be very energy efficient as
>the gasses released by destructive distillation are utilized. Lets
>assume I am cooking one pound of air dried hickory at 20% EMC and
>recovering 30% of total weight in charcoal. At 9000 Btus per pound of
>dry weight, the wood contains 7200 Btus per pound at 20%. Lets also
>assume that energy is equally distributed between components. The
>charcoal, then, contains 2200 Btus then the volatiles 5000 Btus. These
>assumptions may be way off but I am a farmer and don't know any better.
>
>I have some questions for the stovers:
>What do you think of my work and approach?

1. I think we need more farmers on the list. I like what your are
doing - and especially the hydronic collector and storage parts. Being
able to make money (from charcoal) while heating your house is obviously a
great idea.

>Are there any suggestions for improvements (while keeping it "low
>Tech")?

2. I wrote something like this a while back in talking mainly to
Alex English. There he was trying to pyrolyze sawdust - which is pretty
hard to pyrolyze in small quantities in the direct methods. (Elsen is now
doing this with a down draft method that is another method to compare to.)
The only difference from what you have said was that I was suggesting a
column of (maybe 5 to 55 gallon) drums, one above each other so that the
lower coals could be eliminated and the upper barrels would be
progressively dried and pyrolyzed as they traveled down the column, using
only the pyrolysis gases. If the primary goal is both home heating and
charcoal, I don't think this is needed - your bed of coals are fine.
I have not yet had the opportunity to see your web site and you
might have answered this - but could you describe the holes you put in the
barrel to vent the gases?
Can you estimate anything about the lifetime of the barrels being
treated in this way?
What are you paying for barrels?
Do you have any difficulty in sealing the barrels?
We have had a lot of discussion on this list of using agricultural
wastes - with the resultant powder being eventually converted into
briquettes. If you have any opportunity to test and report on this, many
would be interested.
Moving your technique down to the household cooking level has a lot
of obvious potential - maybe thinking of 5 gallon or smaller cans. Any
thoughts on this?

>Does anyone have any information about charcoal quality and burn method?

3. Quality is out of my area of expertise, but I hope someone more
expert than I will chime in on quality. There certainly are commercial
preferences for harder charcoals - and maybe those with some aroma - such
as mesquite and hickory.

I think that one big advantage of the top down method of conversion
is the ability to control the speed. This is important in household
cooking - which of course should be the main point of this list. Have you
any methods of controlling the poer level output?

The "Grover method" of conversion has been mentioned on this list
quite often. In this case, the pyrolyzable material is on the outside and
the "coals" are inside, with the combustion flame coming up the middle of
the "doughnut" shape. This has some of the features of what you are
proposing, but has problems with sealing and control. I think you are
proposing something that needs more developmental effort. I especially
hope you (yourself) will try modifications for cooking in developing
countries. As you may have seen from the recent communication from Kirk
Smith, there is a huge cooking problem remaining to be solved out there.

Can you say something more about the size of the containers vs the
time required in your tests.

>After the endpoint of pyrolysis, is there further degradation of the
>charcoal if heat is maintained for some time and air excluded?

4. I'll let others address this one. I presume this is academic
as one doing this will want to maximize the charcoal output, won't they?
An interesting other question is how to know when to stop the process.
Leaving a lot of gases still in the charcoal may be of value to some users
(especially in being able to light more easily)

>
>You may post this to the mailing list and I anxiously await your
>comments.
>
>Dan Gill
>http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/index.html
dgill@myhost.ccsinc.com

5. Dan - Thanks very much for a very valuable input to our
"stoves" list. I have unilaterally added you to our list, so that you can
respond more directly to anticipated questions and responses withour going
through me. (I fouled up this response once - so Dan knows I am not to be
trusted.) Feel free to drop off the list at any time.

Your indirect method is certainly very interesting and is in
definite contrast to the top-down direct conversion method that Alex
English and I have been discussing in the last few days. I am inclined to
agree with you about all your points for operation in this country - but in
developing countries, I fear that there is too much equipment required. And
I worry about controllability. Other comments, anyone?

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Wed Jul 15 10:23:12 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Hello from Hiroshima
Message-ID: <v01540b02b1d270cd107e@[204.133.28.44]>

Stovers: Can anyone help? I don't surf the web very much. Ron

Scott - would you please keep us informed of what you learn? Let me know
if we can sign you up for he list.

>From: mckeeman@cab.city.hiroshima.jp
>X-Sender: mckeeman@www.city.hiroshima.jp
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:02:57 -0700
>To: larcon@sni.net
>Subject: Hello from Hiroshima
>
>Dear Mr. Larson,
>
>My name is Scott McKeeman. I'm originally from Alberta, but now I'm living
>in Hiroshima and working for a TV station. This month's program (July
>18-20) topic is the history of charcoal, and your web information has been
>very helpful. I was wondering if you knew of a general, all-round,
>world-history-of-charcoal-making resource on the web. I would like to do
>some research about how it's done around the world. Can you help me?
>
>Yours sincerely,
>
>Scott McKeeman
>
>PS I may also be reached at <sdm@ann.ne.jp>

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Wed Jul 15 10:28:51 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: BOUNCE stoves@crest.org: Non-member submission from [P Chakravarty (PChkravarty) (P Chkravarty) <pchakra@teri.res.in>]
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1d2718a3cd5@[204.133.28.44]>

Stovers - I am forwarding this simultaneously with adding Dr. Chakravarty
to the list.

Dr. Chakravarty: Welcome. Please feel free to give us a more technical
descripton whenever you can on any work you are doing with stoves and
charcoal-making. Ron

>
>Dear sir,
>
>Kindly include my name in the subscription list for Gasification,
>Bioenergy, stoves and related areas. In addition to the above my areas
>of interest include biomass gasification, IGCC, biomass based power
>generation / thermal application, combustion, and renewable energy. I
>am presently working as a fellow at the Biomass Energy Technology
>Applications group at Tata Energy Research Instt., India. I have a
>doctorate degree in "Aerospace Engineering" and for last about 8 years I
>am working in the area of Biomass Gasification in various capacities viz;
>in academics, industry, projects, as a researcher etc. Also giving below
>is my postal address and phone/fax nos. for your records.
>
>Dr. P. CHAKRAVARTY
>FELLOW
>TATA ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
>DARBARI SETH BLOCK
>HABITAT PLACE
>LODI ROAD
>NEW DELHI - 110003
>
>Phone: ++91-11-4622246, 4601550
>Fax : ++91-11-4621770, 4632609
>
>with warm regards
>
>P. Chakravarty

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From CAMPBELLDB at cdm.com Wed Jul 15 17:01:20 1998
From: CAMPBELLDB at cdm.com (Dan Campbell)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Information on mother's perceptions of indoor air pollution as risk factor for
Message-ID: <199807152117.RAA12341@cdm.com>

Dear Colleagues:

The Environmental Health Project is seeking information and contacts on
mothers' perceptions or knowledge of indoor air pollution as a risk factor
for
acute respiratory infections (ARI)

There have been some excellent studies recently on the health impacts of
indoor air pollution and the medical literature contains many studies on
mothers's recognition of ARI symptoms and treatment. I was able to locate,
however, only 7 studies that discuss what mothers believe to be the cause or
causes of ARI.

Abstracts of these are listed below. Studies in Bangladesh, Nigeria, and
Pakistan show that mothers consider "coldness" and not indoor air pollution
to
be the main cause of ARI. Additional studies in Ghana show a low level of
understanding among mothers about ARI and only 1.3% of mothers in Haryana,
India knew the causes of ARI.

If you have information on this topic or know of agencies that are
conducting
educational campaigns on the causes of ARI and the prevention of indoor air
pollution, please share this with the ARI Network by sending an email to the
network at: arilist@erols.com

Regards,
Dan Campbell, EHP

1 - Acute respiratory infections (ARI) in rural Bangladesh: perceptions
and
practices.
Stewart MK; Parker B; Chakraborty J; Begum H
Johns Hopkins University, School of Hygiene and Public Health, Department
of International Health, Baltimore, MD 21205.
Med Anthropol (UNITED STATES) May 1994, 15 (4) p377-94,

Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) are a major cause of death in children
under five in rural Bangladesh. A popular strategy for lowering ARI
mortality in such settings includes detecting and managing pneumonia in
children at the community level. The success of programs using this
approach requires a well-trained community-based cadre of health workers
and the appropriate utilization of services provided. Determinants of
health care seeking behavior are clearly of interest in this regard. A
qualitative study was conducted in Matlab, Bangladesh to describe community
perceptions of signs and symptoms of ARI, case management behavior, and
constraints to service utilization. Mothers recognized pneumonia and
thought it to be caused by "exposure to cold." They were able to identify
labored breathing, chest retractions, lethargy, and inability to feed as
signs of severe disease needing treatment outside the home. Nevertheless,
similar illnesses were sometimes believed to be due to attack by evil
influences. In these cases, spiritual healers were sought and allopathic
treatment was avoided or delayed. The mothers' observance of purdah and
"proper" behavior were reported to play a role in prevention of child death
from disease. Implications of this belief and its impact on service
utilization are discussed. Suggestions for program managers are made in
addition to recommendations for further research.

2 - Acute respiratory infections--mothers' perceptions of etiology
and
treatment in south-western Nigeria.
Iyun BF; Tomson G
Department of Geography, Faculty of the Social Sciences, University of
Ibadan, Nigeria.
Soc Sci Med (ENGLAND) Feb 1996, 42 (3) p437-45,
The focus of this research was on what mothers do when their children
suffer from ARI at household level in rural settlements in Oyo State,
Nigeria. A total of 419 mothers were interviewed. The study has combined
three research methods, namely semi-structured questionnaire, in-depth
interview and focus group discussion to get an insight into their
perceptions in relation to cause and treatment of the disease. Most mothers
regard ARI episodes as ordinary coughs and colds. They strongly believe
that these are mostly caused by exposure to cold and perceive coldness of
the body as a causal `agent', whereas none of them mention viral or
bacterial agents. The reported dominating practice of mothers was either
the use of irritants to get rid of the cause of the disease (`coldness')
through vomiting, by forcing the child to swallow bitter remedies such as
cow urine, or to use a remedy with warming and soothing properties.`Robb',
a methyl salicylate--probably the most popular Nigerian ointment-appeared
to be the drug of choice to `warm the chest, both from outside and inside',
either applied topically or dissolved in hot water to drink. The paper
emphasizes the importance of behavioural and social science type studies to
get closer to community perceptions of disease etiology and practices as a
prerequisite for contextualized health education. The use of inappropriate
administration of remedies should be discouraged. Marketing of medicinal
drug products for inappropriate indications also needs to be controlled.

3 - An ethnographic study of acute respiratory infections in four
local
government areas of Nigeria.
Oyejide CO; Oke EA
Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University College
Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Afr J Med Med Sci (NIGERIA) Mar 1995, 24 (1) p85-91,

An ethnographic study was conducted in four local government areas of
Nigeria. The techniques of informal unstructured interviews and participant
observation were used. A total of 104 focus group discussions with 53
groups of mothers, 21 groups of grandmothers, and 30 groups of fathers were
conducted. Perception of causes of ARI ranged from cold water, to heredity,
poor hygiene, exposure to smoke and dust and the supernatural forces.
Preventive measures described were related to the perceived causes. For
those groups that discussed home remedies to the treatment of ARI, the
remedies described for cough included herbal drinks (39% of groups); honey
with lemon (19.5%); eating specific vegetables believed to relieve cough
(8.4%); and preparations containing palm oil (21.7%). Remedies described
for measles included herbal drinks (62%); local tropical creams (24%); and
palm wine (13.7%). Those for ear infections included drops of herbal
mixtures in the ear (29.4%); putting various type of oil in the ear (38%);
plugging the ear with cotton wool previously dipped in honey, or alcohol
(17%). The findings of this study have implications for the Health
Education Component of the National ARI Control Programm which Nigeria
recently embarked upon. There is also the need for research on the efficacy
and any possible adverse effects of identified home remedies.

4 - Maternal knowledge, attitude and practices regarding childhood
acute
respiratory infections in Kumasi, Ghana.
Denno DM; Bentsi-Enchill A; Mock CN; Adelson JW
Department of Paediatrics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
02903.
Ann Trop Paediatr (ENGLAND) 1994, 14 (4) p293-301

Acute respiratory infections (ARI) are a major cause of paediatric
mortality and morbidity, particularly when associated with delays in
treatment. A study of mothers' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding
ARI in their children aged less than 5 years was conducted in an urban
Ghanaian population. One hundred and forty-three women traders were
interviewed in open air markers in Kumasi, Ghana. Based on Western
standards, there was a poor maternal understanding of the aetiology of ARI.
A variety of herbal and home care therapies, including some which have
potentially harmful effects, were routinely employed for the prophylaxis
and treatment of ARI. For example, castor oil and enemas (25.9%) were
reported as agents to prevent ARI, and antibiotics were prescribed by the
parents in 39.9% for treating coughs. While the mothers exhibited an
understanding of symptoms which differentiate between mild and severe ARI,
a substantial number indicated that they would delay accessing a health
care facility in the presence of the following symptoms which signify
severe respiratory distress: dyspnoea (11.2%); tachypnoea (18.9%); chest
retraction (21.7%); cough, fever and anorexia (30.0%); and cough, fever and
lethargy (57.3%). These findings support the need for an ARI health
education programme in Ghana.

5 - ARI concepts of mothers in Punjabi villages: a community-based study.
Rehman GN; Qazi SA; Mull DS; Khan MA
Children's Hospital, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad.
JPMA J Pak Med Assoc (PAKISTAN) Aug 1994

Pneumonia is a major child killer in the developing world; to prevent
such deaths, mothers must be able to differentiate pneumonia from common
cold. Local concepts regarding these illnesses were studied by interviewing
315 mothers of young children in their homes in Punjabi villages. Mothers
described pneumonia differently from cough-and-cold but only a few
volunteered fast breathing as a sign of pneumonia. Both illnesses were
thought to be caused by "coldness," and were initially treated with
"heat-producing" home remedies and feeding was continued in both. Spiritual
healers were not consulted for cough-and-cold or pneumonia. Virtually all
mothers said that allopathic medicines were necessary for both illnesses
and 2/3rd said that if a child did not improve after 2 days of a given
medicine, they would change the medicine and/or the doctor.

6 - Acute respiratory infections (ARI) in rural Bangladesh: perceptions
and
practices.
Stewart MK; Parker B; Chakraborty J; Begum H
Johns Hopkins University, School of Hygiene and Public Health, Department
of International Health, Baltimore, MD 21205.
Med Anthropol (UNITED STATES) May 1994, 15 (4) p377-94

Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) are a major cause of death in children
under five in rural Bangladesh. A popular strategy for lowering ARI
mortality in such settings includes detecting and managing pneumonia in
children at the community level. The success of programs using this
approach requires a well-trained community-based cadre of health workers
and the appropriate utilization of services provided. Determinants of
health care seeking behavior are clearly of interest in this regard. A
qualitative study was conducted in Matlab, Bangladesh to describe community
perceptions of signs and symptoms of ARI, case management behavior, and
constraints to service utilization. Mothers recognized pneumonia and
thought it to be caused by "exposure to cold." They were able to identify
labored breathing, chest retractions, lethargy, and inability to feed as
signs of severe disease needing treatment outside the home. Nevertheless,
similar illnesses were sometimes believed to be due to attack by evil
influences. In these cases, spiritual healers were sought and allopathic
treatment was avoided or delayed. The mothers' observance of purdah and
"proper" behavior were reported to play a role in prevention of child death
from disease. Implications of this belief and its impact on service
utilization are discussed. Suggestions for program managers are made in
addition to recommendations for further research.

7 - Acute respiratory infections in children: a study of knowledge and
practices of mothers in rural Haryana.
Saini NK; Gaur DR; Saini V; Lal S
Deptt. of S.P.M., Medical College, Rohtak, Haryana.
J Commun Dis (INDIA) Jun 1992, 24 (2) p75-7,

In the present study, data were collected on knowledge and practices of
mothers in two villages of Block Beri of district Rohtak for devising a
standard management plan. In all 304 mothers were interviewed. About 23 per
cent mothers recognised pneumonia by fast breathing and 11.2 per cent
recognised severe pneumonia by chest indrawing. Only 1.3 per cent mothers
knew infective origin of ARI. Although most of them were convinced about
continuation of breast feeding, 70 per cent of them were advising food
restriction. Use of herbal tea in ARI was widely prevalent and so was the
practice of putting warm mustard oil in ear for curing ear pain. Primary
Health Centre was the most frequented place for treatment of ARI and
mother-in-law was the most important person in taking management decisions
for the child.

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From chwwwt at usit.net Thu Jul 16 09:44:05 1998
From: chwwwt at usit.net (Dr. Charles H. Wilson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Simple Questions for Simple Minds
Message-ID: <v03102808b1d3b81abeb9@[205.241.213.38]>

I am trying to get some very basic information:

1. Who regulates charcoal quality in the U.S.A.?
2. What are the standards for charcoal, e.g. how much carbon, how much
plutonium, etc.?
3. What are the standards for activated charcoal?
4. Are there tariffs for imported charcoal? If so, where can I go to find
out how much on a country by country basis?

I am sure someone on this group can help me. Thanks.

===============================================================
Dr. Charles H. Wilson
West Wind Technology <http://esi.athenstn.com/wwt/wwt.html>
5 South Hill St. Athens TN 37303
Phone 423-745-5087 Fax 423-744-8689
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Thu Jul 16 10:21:28 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Rules of thumb
Message-ID: <199807161030_MC2-534D-311A@compuserve.com>

Dear Bill and all:

Bill MacTaggart asked about estimating gas and energy production from
biomass.

As a good rule of thumb

The energy content of typical biomass is 18 MJ/kg (8,000 Btu/lb)
Gasification of 1 kg of biomass makes 3 m3 of gas
The energy in 1 kg of biomass can generate 5 kWh(thermal) or 1 kWh of
electric power (20% eff)
1 m3 of gas weighs 1 kg

Hope this helps -

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

From english at adan.kingston.net Thu Jul 16 21:51:14 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Re. Making Charcoal
Message-ID: <199807170200.WAA09479@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Dan,
I am interested to here of your method for making charcoal. Your
yield of 32% is better that can be achieved with the "top down "
method that we have been discussing. I assume that this did not
include the wood used for the fire under the retort. Do you know how
much that was?

I look forward to trying this method. It certainly sounds simple.

Regards, Alex

Alex English
RR 2 Odessa Ontario
Canada K0H 2H0
Tel 1-613-386-1927
Fax 1-613-386-1211
Stoves Webpage

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From dgill at myhost.ccsinc.com Fri Jul 17 01:13:11 1998
From: dgill at myhost.ccsinc.com (Dan Gill)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Re. Making Charcoal
Message-ID: <35AEDFCD.B0B@myhost.ccsinc.com>

Dear Ron, Alex and Stovers,

I appreciate the interest in my methods. More details and pictures are
on my webpages along with a list of URLs which I found informative. Now
for the questions:

Alex asked about how much wood was used to provide the heat for
pyrolysis. I did not measure it but was surprised how little scrap wood
and bark was required - especially once out gassing starts. I have found
that I still need to keep a hot wood fire going in spite of the burning
gasses or the temperature inside the retort will fall below the
threshold. Next time, I'll weigh it. This wood was not part of the
equation, partly because it would not have made good lump charcoal
anyway. As there is positive pressure in the drum, just about anything
(burnt motor oil, pine slabs, treated lumber, etc.) could be used to
provide heat without contaminating the charcoal.

Ronal W. Larson wrote:

I have not yet had the opportunity to see your web site and you
> might have answered this - but could you describe the holes you put in the
> barrel to vent the gases?

I simply used an acetylene torch and arbitrarily blew 8 holes between ¼"
and 3/8" in diameter. This appears to be a good size for this drum. In a
55 gal drum I would use more of the same size. I a 5 gal. bucket, I made
6 holes with a 10 penny nail. It is guess work on my part.

> Can you estimate anything about the lifetime of the barrels being
Ø treated in this way?

After four burns, the retort bottom is showing a few more holes. I
believe I can get two or three more burns from it. The furnace barrel is
holding up well.

Ø What are you paying for barrels?

Farmers always have a few barrels laying around - it's what comes in
them that is expensive. There should be industrial and commercial
sources for used barrels such as service stations, bakeries, feed mills,
etc. There is also a barrel recycling business and I believe they
generally cost around $5.00 to $10.00.

Ø Do you have any difficulty in sealing the barrels?

No. I tap them down good and use the crimp tabs. There Is always some
leakage (and flaming) around the top but as long as it can maintain
positive pressure in the retort, it works fine.

> We have had a lot of discussion on this list of using agricultural
> wastes - with the resultant powder being eventually converted into
> briquettes. If you have any opportunity to test and report on this, many
> would be interested.

We don't process and we leave crop residues in the field for organic
matter.

> Moving your technique down to the household cooking level has a lot
> of obvious potential - maybe thinking of 5 gallon or smaller cans. Any
> thoughts on this?

There is quite a bit of intense heat for several hours with this method.
I believe it is better suited to heat capture, storage and utilization
rather than cooking.

> >Does anyone have any information about charcoal quality and burn method?
>
> 3. Quality is out of my area of expertise, but I hope someone more
> expert than I will chime in on quality. There certainly are commercial
> preferences for harder charcoals - and maybe those with some aroma - such
> as mesquite and hickory.
>
> I think that one big advantage of the top down method of conversion
> is the ability to control the speed. This is important in household
> cooking - which of course should be the main point of this list. Have you
> any methods of controlling the power level output?

As this is an indirect method and the contents of a drum must be heated
to distillation temperatures, high heat levels are desirable. My next
furnace barrel will have a fire door so that the burn can be controlled
better. I stick a slab of wood in front of the door now to partially
block combustion air flow. It will char and have to be replaced every
hour or so.

> The "Grover method" of conversion has been mentioned on this list
> quite often. In this case, the pyrolyzable material is on the outside and
> the "coals" are inside, with the combustion flame coming up the middle of
> the "doughnut" shape. This has some of the features of what you are
> proposing, but has problems with sealing and control. I think you are
> proposing something that needs more developmental effort. I especially
> hope you (yourself) will try modifications for cooking in developing
> countries. As you may have seen from the recent communication from Kirk
> Smith, there is a huge cooking problem remaining to be solved out there.
>
> Can you say something more about the size of the containers vs the
> time required in your tests.

I used a five gallon bucket heated with a gas burner and it seemed to
take about the same time. I was interested in seeing how much smoke was
emitted during the first hour to see if this could reasonably be done in
a suburban backyard without triggering the promulgation of new
ordinances. The smoke level was about the same as a family sized
barbecue smoker burning wood.

As a practical consideration, the gross weight of a 16 gallon drum full
of hardwood is about 80 pounds. I can manually handle that and lower it
into the furnace drum. A 55 gallon drum full would weigh closer to 300
pounds and would require support equipment.

> >After the endpoint of pyrolysis, is there further degradation of the
> >charcoal if heat is maintained for some time and air excluded?
>
> 4. I'll let others address this one. I presume this is academic
> as one doing this will want to maximize the charcoal output, won't they?
> An interesting other question is how to know when to stop the process.
> Leaving a lot of gases still in the charcoal may be of value to some users
> (especially in being able to light more easily)

I watch for the orange gas flames to subside making sure that there is
still plenty of heat in the furnace. I then heft the retort to make
sure that it is not still heavy.

> 5. Dan - Thanks very much for a very valuable input to our
> "stoves" list. I have unilaterally added you to our list, so that you can
> respond more directly to anticipated questions and responses without going
> through me. (I fouled up this response once - so Dan knows I am not to be
> trusted.) Feel free to drop off the list at any time.

Thanks. I understand your charter and appreciate the need for a mailing
list to stay "on topic". Though my approach and motivation is
different, I believe the two subjects are so closely related that this
is the appropriate forum. Besides it's the "only game in town" for the
intelligent discussion of charcoal making principles. I'll probably be
here for a while.

> Your indirect method is certainly very interesting and is in
> definite contrast to the top-down direct conversion method that Alex
> English and I have been discussing in the last few days. I am inclined to
> agree with you about all your points for operation in this country - but in
> developing countries, I fear that there is too much equipment required. And
> I worry about controllability. Other comments, anyone?

In my limited experience in developing countries, there were always oil
drums around, especially if there was a US military presence. Though not
well suited to cooking, other uses of the heat are intriguing. For
instance: wrap a few coils of ½" copper pipe around the furnace drum and
wrap the whole thing with some insulation and you have a steam
generator. Increase the through put of water and add a tank and you have
a quick recovery hot water heater. With proper sizing and positioning,
water can be circulated by convection. Add mass and insulate the tank
and you have heat storage. And so forth…………….
--
Dan Gill
http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/Charmake.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

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Fri Jul 17 17:36:02 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Water Boiling in a Peruvian Village: Diffusion that failed
Message-ID: <199807171744_MC2-5373-2641@compuserve.com>

Dear Julie, Ron et al:

Thanks for the detailed message on acceptance of water purification. You
may remember that Paul Hait emphasized for us that the Number 1 and Number
2 most important problems in the world are supplying: Good cooking and
clean water (affecting 3 billion people. .

We tend to forget all the steps we have taken to arrive at our present
priveleged access to good food and water, but Julie's tale should bring it
back sharply.

One solution for Los Molina of course would be to chlorinate (or
superoxidize) a central water supply IN the village. The combination of
availability and demonstrated health (after a few years) should eventually
convince the next generation to use clean water.
*****
I hope that the introduction of clean biomass gas stoves might be easier
than introducing clean water. They are already used to fire, so a "better"
fire producing well cooked food in half the time they now spend would be
easier to comprehend than invisible germs in water. .

~~~~

If it is our desire to do the maximum good for the maximum number of people
with the limited time we can all donate, it seems we have to pick our
targets carefully. China and India have 5,000 year old
culture/civilizations, well intentioned governments, and 2 billion target
people who could be brought into the 21st century quite rapidly. If we
have to work each African or South American tribe out of their stone age
beliefs one at a time, we affect very few people.

Comments?

Yours, & theirs,
TOM REED

~~~~~
Message text written by Ronal W. Larson
Stovers: The following message appeared on another internet list to which
I belong. This list is entitled RSVP ("Renewables for Sustainable Village
Power"). RSVP is maintained by the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(NREL) - and deals mostly with small remote stand-alone Photovoltaic and
Wind systems. This list does not carry any discussion on stoves and is a
little larger than ours (180+ vs 145). The list manager is Julie Cardinal,
an employee of NREL. Julie has been a member of "stoves" for a short time
also. Julie is working on a Master's thesis where the topic is not
diffusion itself (the subject of the following), but rather the role of the
internet and e-mail lists (like "RSVP" and "stoves"). Julie says it is
fine to ask her questions on both difusion and the internet aspects of
technology diffusion (but not on the water boiling subject of this
forwarding). I send this on with her approval mainly because the subject
matter is so close to that of "stoves" and because I am interested in water
quality improvement, as well as the problems of diffusion of technologies
like stoves. Any comments on the applicability (or lack thereof) to the
diffusion of new stove technologies?

The remainder is from Julie and then from Wellin

Dear Listserv Members,
Here is an article about diffusion that I found during my thesis research.

It comes from Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. (4th ed.).
New
York: The Free Press. He references Wellin, E. (1955). "Water Boiling in a
Peruvian Town, " in Benjamin D. Paul (ed.), Health, Culture and Community,
New
York, Russell Sage Foundation. for this case illustration.

Julie_Cardinal@nrel.gov

Water Boiling in a Peruvian Village:
Diffusion That Failed

The public health service in Peru attempts to introduce innovations to
villagers
to improve their health and lengthen their lives. This change agency
encourages
people to install latrines, to burn garbage daily, to control house flies,
to
report cases of infectious diseases, and to boil drinking water. These
innovations involve major changes in thinking and behavior for Peruvian
villagers, who do not understand the relationship of sanitation to illness.
Water boiling is an especially important health practice for villagers in
Peru.
Unless they boil their drinking water, patients who are cured of infectious
diseases in village medical clinics often return within a month to be
treated
again for the same disease.

A two-year water boiling campaign conducted in Los Molinas, a peasant
village of
200 families in the coastal region of Peru, persuaded only eleven
housewives to
boil water. From the viewpoint of the public health agency, the local
health
worker, Nelida, had a simple task: to persuade the housewives of Los
Molinas to
add water boiling to their pattern of daily behavior. Even with the aid of
a
medical doctor, who gave public talks on water boiling, and fifteen village
housewives who were already boiling water before the campaign, Nelida=s
diffusion campaign failed. To understand why, we need to take a closer
look at
the culture, the local environment, and the individuals in Los Molinas.

Most residents of Los Molinas are peasants who work as field hands on local
plantations. Water is carried by can, pail, gourd, or cask. The three
sources
of water in Los Molinas include a seasonal irrigation ditch close to the
village, a spring more than a mile away from the village, and a public well
whose water most villagers dislike. All three sources are subject to
pollution
at all times and show contamination whenever tested. Of the three sources,
the
irrigation ditch is the most commonly used. It is closer to most homes,
and the
villagers like its taste.

Although it is not feasible for the village to install a sanitary water
system,
the incidence of typhoid and other water-borne diseases could be greatly
reduced
by boiling the water before it is consumed. During her two-year campaign
in Los
Molinas, Nelida made several visits to every home in the village but
devoted
especially intensive efforts to twenty-one families. She visited each of
these
selected families between fifteen and twenty-five times; eleven of these
families now boil their water regularly.

What kinds of persons do these numbers represent? We describe three
village
housewivesCone who boils water to obey custom, one who was persuaded to
boil
water by the health worker, and one of the many who rejected the
innovationCin
order to add further insight into the process of diffusion.

Mrs. A: Custom-Oriented Adopter. Mrs. A is about forty and suffers from a
sinus
infection. The Los Molinas villagers call her a Asickly one.@ Each
morning,
Mrs. A boils a potful of water and uses it throughout the day. She has no
understanding of germ theory, as explained by Nelida; her motivation for
water
boiling is a complex local custom of Ahot@ and Acold@ distinctions. The
basic
principle of this belief system is that all foods, liquids, medicines, and
other
objects are inherently hot or cold, quite apart from their actual
temperature.
In essence, hot-cold distinctions serve as a series of avoidances and
approaches
in such behavior as pregnancy, child-rearing, and the health-illness
system.

Boiled water and illness are closely linked in the norms of Los Molinas; by
custom, only the ill use cooked, or Ahot@ water. Once an individual
becomes
ill, it is unthinkable to eat port (very cold) or drink brandy (very hot).
Extremes of hot and cold must be avoided by the sick; therefore, raw water,
which is perceived to be very cold, must be boiled to make it appropriate
to
consume.

Villagers learn from early childhood to dislike boiled water. Most can
tolerate
cooked water only if a flavoring, such as sugar, cinnamon, lemon, or herbs,
is
added. Mrs. A likes a dash of cinnamon in her drinking water. The village
belief system involves no notion of bacteriorological contamination of
water.
By tradition, boiling is aimed at eliminating the Acold@ quality of
unboiled
water, not the harmful bacteria. Mrs. A drinks boiled water in obedience
to
local norms, because she perceives herself as ill.

Mrs. B: Persuaded Adopter. The B family came to Los Molinas a generation
ago,
but they are still strongly oriented toward their birthplace in the Andes
Mountains. Mrs. B worries about lowland diseases that she feels infest the
village. It is partly because of this anxiety that the change agent,
Nelida,
was able to convince Mrs. B to boil water.

Nelida is a friendly authority to Mrs. B (rather than a Adirt inspector@ as
she
is seen by other housewives), who imparts useful knowledge and brings
protection. Mrs. B not only boils water but also has installed a latrine
and
has sent her youngest child to the health center for a checkup.

Mrs. B is marked as an outsider in the community of Los Molinas by her
highland
hairdo and stumbling Spanish. She will never achieve more than marginal
social
acceptance in the village. Because the community is not an important
reference
group to her, Mrs. B deviates from village norms on health innovations.
With
nothing to lose socially, Mrs. B gains in personal security by heeding
Nelida=s
advice. Mrs. B=s practice of boiling water has no effect on her marginal
status. She is grateful to Nelida for teaching her how to neutralize the
danger
of contaminated water, which she perceives as a lowland peril.

Mrs. C: Rejector. This housewife represents the majority of Los Molinas
families who were not persuaded by the efforts of the change agents during
their
two-year water-boiling campaign. In spite of Nelida=s repeated
explanation,
Mrs. C does not understand germ theory. How, she argues, can microbes
survive
in water that would drown people? Are they fish? If germs are so small
that
they cannot be seen or felt, how can they hurt a grown person? There are
enough
real threats in the world to worry aboutCpoverty and hungerCwithout
bothering
about tiny animals one cannot see, hear, touch, or smell. Mrs. C=s
allegiance
to traditional village norms is at odds with the boiling of water. A firm
believer in the hot-cold superstition, she feels that only the sick must
drink
boiled water.

Why Did the Diffusion of Water Boiling Fail?

This intensive two-year campaign by a public health worker in a Peruvian
village
of 200 families, aimed at persuading housewives to boil drinking water, was
largely unsuccessful. Nelida was able to encourage only about 5 percent of
the
population, eleven families, to adopt the innovation. The diffusion
campaign in
Los Molinas failed because of the cultural beliefs of the villagers. Local
tradition links hot foods with illness. Boiling water makes less Acold@
and
hence, appropriate only for the sick. But if a person is not ill, the
individual is prohibited by village norms from drinking boiled water. Only
individuals who are unintegrated into local networks risk defying community
norms on water boiling. An important factor regarding the adoption rate of
an
innovation is its compatibility with the values, beliefs, and past
experiences
of individuals in the social system. Nelida and her superiors in the
public
health agency should have understood the hot-cold belief system, and it is
found
throughout Peru (and in most nations of Latin America, Africa, and Asia).
Here
is an example of an indigenous knowledge system that caused the failure of
a
development program.

Nelida=s failure demonstrates the importance of interpersonal networks in
the
adoption and rejection of an innovation. Socially an outsider, Mrs. B was
marginal to the Los Molinas community, although she had lived there for
several
years. Nelida was a more important referent for Mrs. B than were her
neighbors,
who shunned her. Anxious to secure social prestige from the higher-status
Nelida, Mrs. B adopted water boiling, not because she understood the
correct
health reasons, but because she wanted to obtain Nelida=s approval. Thus
we see
that the diffusion of innovations is a social process, as well as a
technical
matter.

Nelida worked with the wrong housewives if she wanted to launch a
self-generating diffusion process in Los Molinas. She concentrated her
efforts
on village women like Mrs. A and Mrs. B. Unfortunately, they were
perceived as
a sickly one and a social outsider, and were not respected as social models
of
appropriate water-boiling behavior by the other women. The village opinion
leaders, who could have activated local networks to spread the innovation,
were
ignored by Nelida.

How potential adopters view the change agent affects their willingness to
adopt
new ideas. In Los Molinas, Nelida was perceived differently by lower-and
middle-status housewives. Most poor families saw the health worker as a
Asnooper@ sent to Los Molinas to pry for dirt and to press already harassed
housewives into keeping cleaner homes. Because the lower-status housewives
had
less free time, they were unlikely to talk with Nelida about water boiling.
Their contacts outside the community were limited, and as a result, they
saw the
technically proficient Nelida with eyes bound by the social horizons and
traditional beliefs of Los Molinas. They distrusted this outsider, whom
they
perceived as a social stranger. Nelida, who was middle class by Los
Molinas
standards, was able to secure more positive results from Housewives whose
socioeconomic level and cultural background were more similar to hers.
This
tendency for more effective communication to occur with those who are more
similar to a change agent occurs in most diffusion campaigns.

Nelida was too Ainnovation-oriented@ and not Aclient-oriented@ enough.
Unable
to put herself in the role of the village housewives, her attempts at
persuasion
failed to reach her clients because the message was not suited to their
needs.
Nelida did not begin where the villagers were; instead she talked to them
about
term theory, which they could not (and probably did not need to)
understand.
These are only some of the factors that produced the diffusion failure in
Los
Molinas.

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.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

From msaiet at mannesmann.com.br Mon Jul 20 08:54:32 1998
From: msaiet at mannesmann.com.br (Ansgar Pinkowski)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: charcoal production
Message-ID: <35B23607.F31D893A@mannesmann.com.br>

Dear Ronald,
thank you for your Welcome E-Mail. Let me introduce myself a little bit.

I´m a german mechanical engineer and working in Brazil in an german
steel and tube plant in teh energy departement.
Our plant has a production af nearly 500.000 tons of steel per year and
our two blast furnaces are using as raw-material charcoal instead of
coke. To produce the nearly 240.000 tons of charcoal per year, we have a
forest company, called MAFLA, which has a lot of eucalyptus plantations
in the state of Minas Gerais. Each farm has a lot of charcoal kilns
which are similar to the Missouri kilns with a rectangular form and a
capacity of nearly 80 tons. The prodution is semi-automatic which means
that the charging and discharging is made by truck and caterpillar, but
the process controll is still made by closing and opening wholes in the
side-walls of the kiln.
My personal interest is based on a graduate resarch that I began in
1998. We want to study the process of carbonisation and the heat
transfer in the kiln to make the charcoal production more efficient and
reduce costs. We are going to amke some experients with using the
wood-tar from the furnace to make heat or using the heat of one furnace
in the cooling state for drying the wood in another furnace. These test
are made together with the University of Minas Gerais.
You see there is a lot of work to be done. What I need first is a good
base of literature and a overview of what is going on in the world in
research activities about industrial charcoal making.
If anyone can help me I would be very pleased. I think this discussion
forum is a very good oportunity to make contact with the right persons
all over the world.
Be sure that I will acompany every notice and help where I can.

Many regards

Ansgar Pinkowski
MANNESMANN S.A.
Superintendence of Energy
Usina Barreiro
Av. Olinto Meireles 65
Belo Horizonte-MG
30640-010
Tel. ++55 31 328 2985
Fax.: ++55 31 328 2695

begin: vcard
fn: Ansgar Pinkowski
n: Pinkowski;Ansgar
org: MANNESMANN S.A. Superintendence of Energy
adr: Usina Barreiro; C.P. 1453; 30 640-010 Belo Horizonte - MG; Brazil;;Privat: Rua Adolfo Pereira 95 Apt. 302, Anchieta, ; 30 310 350 Belo Horizonte-MG;;;Brazil
email;internet: msaiet@mannesmann.com.br
title: Energy-analysis
tel;work: ++55 31 328 2985
tel;fax: ++55 31 328 2695
tel;home: ++55 31 223 0904
x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
version: 2.1
end: vcard

From CAMPBELLDB at cdm.com Mon Jul 20 14:15:34 1998
From: CAMPBELLDB at cdm.com (Dan Campbell)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Indoor biofuel air pollution and respiratory health: role of confounding
Message-ID: <199807201831.OAA08585@cdm.com>

ARILIST (Acute Respiratory Infections Mailing List)
Date: 20 Jul 98 13:57:02 -0400
From: "Dan Campbell" <CAMPBELLDB@cdm.com>
Subject: Indoor biofuel air pollution and respiratory health: role of
confounding factors

Send an email to campbelldb@cdm.com if you would like info on how to obtain
copies of the article just published by Dr Nigel Bruce; et.al.

"Indoor biofuel air pollution and respiratory health: the role of
confounding factors among women in highland Guatemala," by N. Bruce,
L.Neufeld, E. Boy
and C. West. IN: International Journal of Epidemiology 1998: 27:454-458.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation has highlighted a problem which is likely to be common to
observational studies in many settings where substantial differences in
levels of exposure exist between sub-groupings of the population arising
from
improved stoves or fuels.

In light of this, controlled intervention studies offer a powerful research
option, since households using the improved stoves should not then differ
(substantially) from those continuing to use open fires. It must be said,
however, that despite the uncertainty confounding brings to the question of
whether biofuel smoke exposure causes COLD and ALRI, the weight of evidence
does represent a reasonable case for this being so.

This issue could be argued to be of little policy relevance if either a
moderate reduction in exposure from these very high levels guaranteed useful
health gain, or large and sustainable reductions in exposure were easy to
achieve, but the former is uncertain and the latter very rarely the case.

Thus, levels of particualate exposure in homes with so-called improved
stoves are reported to be lower than for traditional fires, but still in the
range
of 1130 ug/m3 total suspended particulates (TSP) to 4600 ug/m3 TSP.

It is for these reasons that intervention studies involving direct
measurement of exposure offer the best means of obtaining the information
required to
help drive the development and implementation of measures capable of
reducing
the
very substantial global health burden believed to result from biofuel indoor
air pollution.

To unsubscribe to the ARILIST, please send an email message to
arilist@erols.com with the command ARI-UNSUBSCRIBE as the Subject.

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From english at adan.kingston.net Mon Jul 20 22:47:53 1998
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: pictures
Message-ID: <199807210257.WAA16366@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Stovers,
I have added two pictures of the drum and chimney assembly that I
used for flaring the gasses while making charcoal.

Check the Stoves webpage.

Alex

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Tue Jul 21 23:41:50 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Dr. Yury on activities in Russia
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1db0779a444@[204.133.28.4]>

Stovers - I received this message today in response to some off-list
questions to Dr. Yury. I don't believe Dr. Yury will mind my sharing his
response. To understand the first part, list members will have to look at
a diagram from Dr. Yury at the Alex English web site. It seems that Dr.
Yury was successfully experimentally 20 years ago in flaring of quite moist
wood. I thought that his sketch was possibly only a conceptual idea - but
not so. We should look forward to more on receiving a translation of Dr.
Yury's notes. Ron

(Larson)
> Dr. Yury - you had a diagram on Alex' website which showed two
> coupled kilns for making charcoal - the output of one kiln being used to
> dry the subsequent kiln. Questions:
>
> 1. Have you tested this in actual practice?
> 2. How large is the initial moisture content typically in the
> second kiln?
> 3. Could your system be modified to allow top lighting? (as
> described in last few days by Alex?

(From Dr. Yury):
Dear Ron,
I worked 20 years ago on the experienced kiln in Nizhni Novgorod. This kiln
was made with my participation. Its design is one half of my figure. The
experiences were successful by results of, but the gases and pairs were
burnt under the boiler for reception of hot water. My figure, this offer to
try to make 2 furnaces and to use warmly more effectively.
20 years ago we were not possible did not manage an industry, that such
kilns need to be built. Everyone considered, that are necessary only
Lambiott kilns to large productivity (50,000 meters of cubic wood per one
year). Certainly, that I have drawn not there is a ready design. I think,
much can be thought up by those who wants them to construct. For example
at us was 2 variants 1) Make removing isolation and to remove on a period
of cooling and 2) to take out a hot basket and to insert it into a special
tank for cooling. I have sent this circuit because the networks have
appeared questions on simply ways of reception charcoal. The humidity of
wood can be on my accounts up to 60%.
If the humidity more the fire wood needs to be added in furnace . I shall
try to translate my accounts of such kilnat the next winter and to send
you.

(Larson - In response to notification that Dr. Yury would be hosting Dr.
Grant Ballard-Tremeer. My conclusion from this response is that Dr. Yury
must be a very good host. I hope Dr. Grant will add a bit more.))
>
> To both Dr. Yury and Dr. Grant: This sounds like a very valuable
meeting.
> I hope you can individually describe your meeting for the benefit of the
> rest of the list readers - especialy surprises, or new items to work on,
> etc. Perhaps each should write about the other person.
> Regards Ron

We, Dr. Grant Ballard-Tremeer and I have carried out together one day. I
have acquainted him with a pro-rector of academy on a science. There was a
short conversation about work Dr. Grant and our work. We have shown our
museum of a wood (animals, birds, insects, plants) and greenhouse. Our
collections are begun 200 years back and replenish today. I have shown
your letter. I have helped Dr. Grant and his three friends to put up at a
hostel of academy. Mine assistent drove him in the most beautiful places of
St. Petersburg. He has carried in St. Petersburg 5 days and weather all
time was good.
Sincerely Yury Yudkevitch

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From btremeer at dds.nl Wed Jul 22 14:07:01 1998
From: btremeer at dds.nl (Grant Ballard-Tremeer)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Dr. Yury on activities in Russia
In-Reply-To: <v01540b03b1db0779a444@[204.133.28.4]>
Message-ID: <000b01bdb59c$61e0f3e0$2f0deed4@blackthorn>

Hi everyone,
> (Larson - In response to notification that Dr. Yury would be hosting Dr.
>Grant Ballard-Tremeer. My conclusion from this response is that Dr. Yury
>must be a very good host. I hope Dr. Grant will add a bit more.))

Yes, indeed - a very good host. And I'm very grateful to Yury for his help.
I must say I haven't been able to assimilate all my experiences yet having
just arrived home yesterday after 41 hours of train travel (14 from St
Petersburg to Minsk and 27 from Minsk to Amsterdam the next day). Enjoyable
but tiring!

St Petersburg is stunning. Not very tourist friendly (yet) but filled with
interesting sights. Luckily I had Russian speaking companions. You can't
walk 100 metres without bumping into something Peter the Great built. And he
had very good taste even if he was a merciless Tsar. And of course Pushkin
died there, plus people like Tchaikovsky, Mussorgsky etc.

Unfortunately there wasn't much time spent discussing stoves! But it was
good to make personal contact with Dr Yury. Yury has very much experience in
charcoal production - he showed me an interesting classification of charcoal
production techniques which I think covers all possible options.
Unfortunately we didn't have a chance to discuss the influence on feedstock
on charcoal production; the academy's Pro-reactor uses logs as far as I can
gather.

Regards,
Grant

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From celtic2 at ibm.net Wed Jul 22 21:21:12 1998
From: celtic2 at ibm.net (Stephen Allen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: One Stove?
Message-ID: <199807230130.BAA61390@out1.ibm.net>

Just a few thoughts on stoves, and gasification in general.

I have been experimenting with a GW Metal airtight stove. This
heater/stove, is a 20 gallon body, with a rotary primary air intake valve,
in the front lower area of the stove. It has provisions for a 6inch
chimney, (with damper). There is also a 10inch covered opening on the top
of the stove for refueling.

When set up as described in the instructions, the unit spews white smoke
from the 48inch chimney, (the unit was tested outside).

Purely by accident, it was discovered, that if the 10inch refueling cover,
was left open, the air would draft into this opening, and up the chimney.
Best of all there was NO!! visible smoke whatsoever, from the chimney, or
anywhere else. A pot with 2 quarts of cold water, boiled in 4.5 minutes,
with no carbon on the pot at all.

Closing the primary intakes makes no difference to the stove as it is
getting its air higher up.

It seems that PRIMARY, and SECONDARY air intakes have no fixed meaning.
Primary is simply wherever the stove can get air for combustion, and
secondary, is no more than the carburation, need to combine air and
resulting gases into a combustible mixture. The configuration of these two
vent points can vary widely, and can easily be confused with one another.

PS. This stove runs with no smoke, is this gasification, or complete
combustion. What is the difference???

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Thu Jul 23 14:34:35 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Introduction with offer to help
Message-ID: <v01540b00b1dce39100fe@[204.133.28.30]>

This is to introduce Kevin Chisholm from Nova Scotia - who said:

>Dear Ronal
>
>I came across one of your previous postings on charcoal and
>charcoal stoves.

I have been posting mostly as the list coordinator for "stoves" - a
free list maintained by the US DOE (mostly). I am taking the liberty of
signing you up so that our conversations (including this one) can be public
and others on the list can join in in a similar way. You will get much
better guidance from the whole list than from myself.

One correction - I have almost never written on charcoal stoves -
but rather on charcoal-making stoves - which I concentrate on below.

>
>Where is your project now? Are you pleased with its
>performance? Can you tell me something about it? Where are
>you?

I am quite pleased with the progress of charcoal-making stoves over
the last several years (but not of my own contributions which have mostly
been on paper.). There are some dozen persons I think doing work regularly
and (at least in Nairobi) people using them every day successfully. There
are many contributions going back over some three years (see also the
bioenergy list before the stoves list was formed). The main place to see
some of the past work is on a web page maintained by Alex English
(http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html)

I live in Golden, Colorado. The list today has 143 members in
about 35 countries.

>
>I am an Engineer, just love this stuff, designed
>incinerators and combustion equipment, and forging furnaces
>and wood stoves, etc. Have a bunch of land, and have lotsa
>trash wood. Was toying with the possibility of charcoaling
>the trash.
>
>Perhaps you could drop me a note, and we can figure if we
>have mutual interests.
>
>Kevin Chisholm
>Sydney, Nova Scotia.

The list has a lot of members with backgrounds like yourself - but
none to my recollection has offered their services in the way you have just
done - and that is why I am sending this to the full list. I hope there
are others who would like to contribute just for the fun and challenge of
it.
Mostly we on this list are contributing to attempts to better the
cooking process for developing countries. The motivations are many -
efficiency is very low, concern for deforestation, global warming, etc. -
but mostly these days the concerns are about the health implications of
poor cookstove practices. We have several list members who are leading the
worldwide efforts on this side - and they are reporting that stoves appear
to be the pricipal culprit in the world's largest health problem - mainly
for women and children. So our challenge is to make them safer - less
smoky - while still affordable.
The charcoal-making stove seems to have that potential - although I
am not aware of any direct comparative results. As near as we can tell,
what you are asking about is a new approach - and therefore there are huge
gains still to be made. The key to making charcoal cleanly is to separate
primary and secondary air and to start the pyrolysis process at the top
(usually of vertically stacked wood). The pyrolysis zone travels downward
against a small primary air flow creating highly combustible gases which
when mixed with secondary air allows a controllable clean flame.
Because of this discussion on stoves that make charcoal, the list
has also spent a lot of time extending this to larger charcoal-making
units, still with the emphasis on both flaring and "waste" heat
utilization. In general, charcoal-making all over the world is presently
done very badly.
I urge you to try making one of any size (after reading Alex' page)
and see if you can use your background to make some improvements. Mainly,
these must involve very low cost. I like especially your idea of working
on forges - that idea has not come up at all on the list. A
charcoal-making (rather than charcoal-using) could be a very important
advance. All of us working on this type of stove have been amazed at the
high temperatures we have been achieving.
Best of luck. I'll bet you (and some others who are listening in
but have not yet tried the top-down pyrolysis-stove) can gain a great deal
of satisfaction of helping to solve one of the world's biggest problems.
This approach may not ever be a winner - but at least it seems to be new
and one that has still received little input from persons like yourself who
have a little spare time to devote to improving a new basic concept.
Besides your idea of a forge built with this different approach -
other ideas that have been proposed, but which do not seem to have been
attempted, are for bakeries, kilns, brick-making, water distillation or
purification, and similar areas. If these can all be done cleanly, while
simultaneously producing charcoal (i.e. income) for the users, I believe a
great service will have been performed.
So thank you for your offer to help - I think you will find a
fertile field for using your imagination. There are plenty of others on
the list ready to jump in with helpful ideas, I'll bet, if you have some
surprising result. We are moving towards a stoves conference in India in
January 2000 - so you have less than 18 months to boggle our minds.
Good luck - we look forward to hearing whether you have found the
stoves/charcoal area to be fun and satisfying.

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Thu Jul 23 23:38:47 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Response to Stephen Allen
Message-ID: <v01540b02b1dd07b67f11@[204.133.28.30]>

Summary: This is to respond to Stephen Allen's message of yesterday on
definitions of primary and secondary air.

Stephen said:

<snip>

>It seems that PRIMARY, and SECONDARY air intakes have no fixed meaning.
>Primary is simply wherever the stove can get air for combustion, and
>secondary, is no more than the carburation, need to combine air and
>resulting gases into a combustible mixture. The configuration of these two
>vent points can vary widely, and can easily be confused with one another.
>
(Larson): In my use of the terms "primary" and "secondary", I am
always interested in pyrolysis - the making of charcoal. Then I believe
that the distinction is very important. It often seems that it is almost
impossible to shut pyrolysis down because so little primary air is needed
for pyrolysis to occur. But some is required - to create CO. Too much air
and one obtains CO2 instead. I suppose any extra air in charcoal making
can be called secondary air - but when one wants charcoal, one doesn't want
CO2.

It seems that most rural charcoal-making has only primary air - no
secondary. Usually the pyrolysis gases are only vented. However, with the
correct size unit and a chimney attached, the use of secondary air allows
combustion of these pyrolysis gases and a useful capture of
otherwise-wasted energy.

With ordinary combustion in a stove, the two types of air are
presumably indistinguishable and a single air source can suffice - one
hopefully sees little CO in the output gases. Perhaps the first production
of gases can be with input air that is termed primary air, but the
distinction seems academic.

Now for discussion of gasification, which I believe is intended to
achieve full conversion to combustible gases; charcoal as a co-product is
not of interest in gasification devices. In general, I perceive that
gasification is intended to create gases that can be transfered to a
different location for productive uses in a device such as an engine or
turbine. The air at the different location should presumably be called
secondary air. I think that most (all?) gasifiers use mechanical
fans/blowers to move the gases.

On this list, I believe there has been only very limited discussion
of gasification for cooking; Tom Reed once reported on a fairly large
Chinese outdoor gasifier that used a blower I believe to move the
combustible gases inside ( a few meters away) to a large modern-looking
stove. I don't believe there was any gas storage or natural draft. Tom?

I also see a need to talk about the "combustible mixture", which
Stephen has identified. In all the simple charcoal-making stoves, I
believe the flame is a diffusion flame - not premixed. The flame looks a
lot like that from a candle or match - where the outside air diffuses into
the interior combustible gases. In the charcoal-making stoves, the reverse
occurs. The interior part of the flame is air and the combustible gases
diffuse inwards. It probably would be nice to have pre-mixing, but there
is a certain advantage as well from the draft obtained by a chimney of
small height (comparable to the diameter or a little more) filled with very
hot gases. This draws in both the primary air needed to create charcoal
and the secondary air needed to combust the pyrolysis gases.

If one does not extinguish the pyrolysis process when all wood has
turned to charcoal, the charcoal will be consumed. This will be clean
enough if the primary air vents are opened, but can be pretty smoky of the
primary air is constrained. As with combusting wood, I think that the
separation into primary air and secondary air is then again academic.
However, some stovers also use the term secondary air to mean any air
introduced above the firebed to ensure complete combustion.

All of the above comes from someone who has only a second-hand
knowledge of the definitions. But as there has been so much use of the
terms on this list, I feel a need to justify their use with charcoal-making
stoves. It is possible to have a charcoal-making stove with a single input
port - but I don't see any advantage to trying to do so. I think most of
us working with these stoves are controlling only the primary air and
letting the natural draft control the secondary air. Anyone on the list
finding it advantageous to control the secondary air?

Stephen closed by saying:

>PS. This stove runs with no smoke, is this gasification, or complete
>combustion. What is the difference???

I would guess that you have "complete combustion." If you are
generating any charcoal, we have to have more discussion.

Other views?

Stephen - thanks for your report. It certainly seems strange that the
official mode of operation worked so poorly compared to your modification.
Can we assume, however, that at the begining and end of a wood charge that
there is some smoke exiting the fuel port?

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Fri Jul 24 07:51:28 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Fred Hottenroth, Jr. and Sr.
Message-ID: <199807240800_MC2-5412-2AD8@compuserve.com>

Dear Stovers:

I reported extensively on the "SIERRA" stove of the ZZ Corp. recently.
Here's more news.

Fred Sr (now 91) has been treated for a bleeding ulcer, but is still
interested in world stoves, as is his son, Fred Jr. I just talked to him.
(I think there is also a Fred III, not interested in stoves - yet).
Fred(s) is one of the few people that have made the commercial manufacture
of cooking stoves successful. They make a number of stoves. Fred's primary
motivation is selling stoves in 3rd World countries, but currently most of
their stoves are sold in this country.

Last year ZZ Corp. began to sell the Sierra type (updraft, forced
convection) in Nepal. They worked fine with the 1 1/2 V fan-battery.
However, the Nepalese found that it really hummed on 3 V and roared on 5V,
(but burned out the liner).

Fred mentioned that there is a new sheet metal, ZINCALUM that resists high
temperatures much better than galvanized steel. Does anyone have
experience with that?

The Hottenroths have sold the business now, but Fred Jr. keeps in touch
with the new owners.

If any of you are in the Long-Beach-Los Alimitos area, you should stop in
their shop and see the mass production of small wood cook stoves.

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

From msaiet at mannesmann.com.br Fri Jul 24 11:00:39 1998
From: msaiet at mannesmann.com.br (Ansgar Pinkowski)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Secandary air
Message-ID: <35B8A531.4AF79444@mannesmann.com.br>

Dear Ronald,
reading your question in the answer to Stephen Allen message if it is
necessary to control the secondary air apears a doubt:
>From my point of view all the experiences of burning the gases during
the pyrolyse process are made to find a way to utilize the energy in
other processes f. ex. in a second stove, increasing the yield of making
charcoal and reducing the pollution problem.

What is the heat value of the gas and are there some knowledge about the
variation of this value during the process ?

To prevent that the flame goes out it is necessary to work with air
inlet a little bit more than necessary. But on the other side exist the
risk to input too much oxygene in the second stove, burning the
charcoal.
Another possibility could be to eliminate the primary inlet air in the
second stove and working with many more air in the first on. The rest
oxygen in the burned gas perhaps can be used as primary air in the
second process.
These are only some theoretical thougts about the problem but it would
be very interesting to know if there are some experiences about it.
We in our stoves are condensing the burned gas, seperating the wood-tar.
Some years ago we used the tar to burn it in the heating furnaces in our
steel plant, but because of operating problems and big variations of the
quality we stopped it. Now we want to try to re-input it in the
charcoal-making process by burning it.

Regards

Ansgar

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From kchishol at fox.nstn.ca Sat Jul 25 23:34:34 1998
From: kchishol at fox.nstn.ca (Kevin Chisholm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Charcoal Prices and Specifications
Message-ID: <E0z0HjF-0003ja-00@mail1.halifax.istar.net>

Dear Stovers

I would appreciate some helpful input on charcoal prices and
specifications. Specifically, I would like to explore the possibility
of producing charcoal here in Nova Scotia from waste wood having no
higher use, and then exporting it to areas where it is needed.

1: Species would be maple, birch, poplar, and alder, as hardwoods,
and spruce and fir as softwoods.
1:1 Must the species be hardwoods only, or is softwood acceptable
also?
1:2Are there any simple specifications, covering moisture,
hardness, fines, sizing, ash, surface area, igniteability,
volatiles, etc?

2: Is "run of kiln" charcoal acceptable, OR must it be briqueted?

3: Is the main market for fuel grade charcoal, OR is there a
significant market for simple charcoal for other purposes?

4: Are there simple processes for charcoal activation, so that
higher value markets could be accessed?

5: Is there a preferred packaging size and material? (For example, 20
kg bags, poly, suitable for outside storage?)

6: What would be a reasonable price, in $US per tonne, in
appropriate packaging, to use for economic evaluation? Assume prices
FOB the port of entry to the market country.

7: What quantities could be sold at these prices, in terms of tonnes
per year?

8: What is considered a "reasonable yield", in terms of kG Charcoal
per kG of bone dry wood feed?

9: Are there any circumstances where the condensibles from the
charring process can be collected and processed profitably? OR: Is is
far better to simply use them as a source of heat for drying the feed
wood?

10: Are there health hazards to workers cleaning or handling the
condensibles resulting from charcoal production?

11: Would someone know if there is a good "Mass and Energy Balance"
for a reasonable charcoaling operation accessible somewhere on the
net?

12: Would anyone have a general feel for the "minimum economic plant
size" for commercial charcoal production?

There are people from many countries on this list. To minimize "list
clutter", if you posted to me, I would assemble a Summary Report and
re-post the responses to the list.

Any inputs would be very much appreciated.

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

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 26 01:11:59 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Ansgar on large scale charcoal production
Message-ID: <v01540b03b1d9ab3ee96b@[204.133.28.20]>

Ansgar:
Thanks for your introductory message about Brazilian charcoal kilns
a week ago. Yours is the first such message on large scale charcoal
making. I think your responses to a few questions below may help many on
the list to better answer your questions. However, we probably feel we can
learn a lot more from you than the reverse. Remember, we are a list
started on stoves - not charcoal. And our charcoal interests have mostly
been at a small scale.

(You said):
>Dear Ronal,
>thank you for your Welcome E-Mail. Let me introduce myself a little bit.
>
>I´m a german mechanical engineer and working in Brazil in an german
>steel and tube plant in the energy departement.
>Our plant has a production af nearly 500.000 tons of steel per year and
>our two blast furnaces are using as raw-material charcoal instead of
>coke. To produce the nearly 240.000 tons of charcoal per year, we have a
>forest company, called MAFLA, which has a lot of eucalyptus plantations
>in the state of Minas Gerais. Each farm has a lot of charcoal kilns
>which are similar to the Missouri kilns with a rectangular form and a
>capacity of nearly 80 tons. The prodution is semi-automatic which means
>that the charging and discharging is made by truck and caterpillar, but
>the process controll is still made by closing and opening wholes in the
>side-walls of the kiln.

Q1. Could you tell the list more about the "Missouri kiln"
(dimensions and method of starting the charcoaling especially. Is the kiln
bottom or top lit? - height and number of chimneys, etc).
I think your pyrolysis gases are probably vented, not flared. On
this list, we have emphasized clean conversion - mainly through
top-lighting and flaring. If you are not already doing so, is flaring a
possibility through conversion of the kilns - or is there no motivation to
flare in your location?
Is there any possible use for the energy in the waste gases
(possibly by moving the kilns closer to the steel plants?

>My personal interest is based on a graduate resarch that I began in
>1998. We want to study the process of carbonisation and the heat
>transfer in the kiln to make the charcoal production more efficient and
>reduce costs. We are going to amke some experients with using the
>wood-tar from the furnace to make heat or using the heat of one furnace
>in the cooling state for drying the wood in another furnace. These test
>are made together with the University of Minas Gerais.

(Larson): The early kilns sometimes but not always attempted to
condense the wood tars - not for burning but for the chemicals. Can you
say more about the difficulty and economics of capturing those
condensables?

>You see there is a lot of work to be done. What I need first is a good
>base of literature and a overview of what is going on in the world in
>research activities about industrial charcoal making.
>If anyone can help me I would be very pleased. I think this discussion
>forum is a very good oportunity to make contact with the right persons
>all over the world.
>Be sure that I will acompany every notice and help where I can.
>
>Many regards
>
>Ansgar Pinkowski
>MANNESMANN S.A.
>Superintendence of Energy
>Usina Barreiro
>Av. Olinto Meireles 65
>Belo Horizonte-MG
>30640-010
>Tel. ++55 31 328 2985
>Fax.: ++55 31 328 2695

Ansgar - Thanks for this response and offer. As I was preparing this
follow-up you sent another e-mail to the list, covering some of the above -
which I shall get to immediately. I hope the list can help a little.
Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 26 01:12:09 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Past stoves conferences?
Message-ID: <v01540b02b1e00cab366b@[204.133.28.23]>

Stovers: Priyadarshini is making excellent progress with her plans for the
Pune stoves conference in January, 2000. There are a few persons who have
volunteered to help try to raise funds to defray expenses for some
participants who might not otherwise be able to come. (Let Priyadarshini or
myself know if you would like to suggest a name.)
One way to make that "sell" to a potential sponsor is to know more
about past stoves conferences or workshops (either international or single
country). I remember reading about one that was sponsored by VITA (or
USAID?) on stove measurement techniques - maybe 10 or 15 years ago. But I
don't know of any others - yet I know there were some.

These may have been restricted to (or known only to) specific
country representatives. But these might be the most important - don't
think only of international conferences.

Therefore (and to have a common format), it would probably help all
of us (but especially Priyadarshini and potential sponsors) in many ways if
we could have some general discussion and detail on:

a) Name of the conference
b) Publication means and citation number (if any)
c). Date(s)
d) Sponsor(s) and key organizer(s)
e) Location (City, country)
f) Special Topic(s) Covered
g) Total number in attendance.
h) Openness and cost
i) Any follow-up activity coming out of the conference.
j) Persons (especially list members) known to have attended.
k) Whether you know how to obtain the agendas, proceedings, etc.

Thanks in advance to all who can help (and don't fear jumping in if you can
only add a few of the above leads - you might jog someone else's memory).

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 26 01:12:35 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Meeting with heating stove experts
Message-ID: <v01540b07b1e06866c3c6@[204.133.28.23]>

Last week I met for a few hours with list members John Crouch and
John Gulland, Both are active in and expert in the US and Canadian heating
stove markets and the considerable current problems in decreasing sales (in
favor of natural gas). I was able to buy a really good book on chimneys
and wood stoves/wood fireplaces - authored by John Gulland.

I am now quite concerned about the serious problems that the wood
stove industry faces in getting cooperation from architects and builders in
their lack of consideration for the necessary design features in a home for
clean wood burning. The two Johns know how to design - but their task is
difficult.

The problems in developing countries are not at all the same - as
the homes there are never as tight as modern homes in the US and Canada.
Since we have so many members in Europe, I wonder if the same woodstove
introduction problems are occuring there?

The need I now see is for home designers interested in renewable
energy to plan for the very small wood stoves that are needed with passive,
energy conserving solar architecture.

Or maybe I am wrong - has this problem been solved for solar
architects? Any other thoughts on the modern wood stove business?

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From larcon at sni.net Sun Jul 26 01:12:29 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Ansgar on Secondary air
Message-ID: <v01540b06b1e05dfb513f@[204.133.28.23]>

On 24 July, Ansgar Pinkowski said:

>Dear Ronald,
>reading your question in the answer to Stephen Allen message if it is
>necessary to control the secondary air appears a doubt:
>>From my point of view all the experiences of burning the gases during
>the pyrolysis process are made to find a way to utilize the energy in
>other processes f. ex. in a second stove, increasing the yield of making
>charcoal and reducing the pollution problem.
>
>What is the heat value of the gas and are there some knowledge about the
>variation of this value during the process ?

(Larson): On this list, we have usually been approximating the
value of the energy in wood at 18 Megajoules per kg and that of charcoal at
30 MJ/kg. If one obtains 25% (by weight) charcoal in the kiln or stove,
then the energy in the (75%) gas should be (18-30/4)/.75 = 14 MJ/kg.
Concerning the variation during production, this depends greatly on the
process. In the top-down conversion process, there seems to be very little
variation - the pyrolysis gases are driven off (upwards) at roughly the
same rate at all levels of the pyrolysis zone as it moves downwards.
In charcoal making with firing starting at the bottom, as you know,
the first stages drive off moisture and these first gases are apparently
usually too moisture-laden to be combustible.

>
>To prevent that the flame goes out it is necessary to work with air
>inlet a little bit more than necessary. But on the other side exist the
>risk to input too much oxygen in the second stove, burning the
>charcoal.

(Larson): The best way to use the flared exhaust gases to pre-dry
in a second kiln is an approach I do not understand. But others on the
list are more expert and I hope they will jump in. This was the subject of
my query to Dr. Yury on 21 July.

>Another possibility could be to eliminate the primary inlet air in the
>second stove and working with many more air in the first one. The rest
>oxygen in the burned gas perhaps can be used as primary air in the
>second process.

(Larson): I am afraid I am not following this - and especially as
it related to the message from Stephen Allen - or are you perhaps referring
to comments in the dialog with Dr. Yury? My understanding os that there is
no pyrolysis in the second kiln - only drying.

The main thing about your process that we need to understand is
your ability to start the charcoal making with seasoned wood. Can your
eucalyptus be dried for a year or must you start all charcoal making
immediately after cutting it?

>These are only some theoretical thoughts about the problem but it would
>be very interesting to know if there are some experiences about it.
>We in our stoves are condensing the burned gas, seperating the wood-tar.
>Some years ago we used the tar to burn it in the heating furnaces in our
>steel plant, but because of operating problems and big variations of the
>quality we stopped it. Now we want to try to re-input it in the
>charcoal-making process by burning it.
>
>Regards
>
>Ansgar

(Larson): I think it would be very interesting to analyze the
differences in complexity and efficiency between condensing the tars and
then combusting vs simply combusting all of the pyrolysis gases - or is
that what you meant? (I am not sure what you meant by "it" in the last
sentence.)

Have I addressed the right issues?

Regards Ron

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

Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

From tmiles at teleport.com Sun Jul 26 17:13:33 1998
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:00 2004
Subject: Bioenergy Email Lists and Commands
Message-ID: <199807262122.OAA09364@mail.easystreet.com>

BIOENERGY EMAIL LISTS and COMMANDS

The bioenergy mailing lists are hosted by the Center for Renewable Energy &
Sustainable Technologies(CREST) for industry, academia and government to
discuss biomass production and conversion to energy. There are five lists
at CREST.

o Bioenergy <bioenergy@crest.org>
Moderator: Tom Miles <tmiles@teleport.com>
Archive:<http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/bioenergy-list-archive/>
Digest: bioenergy-digest@crest.org

o Gasification <gasification@crest.org>
Moderators: Thomas Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
Estoban Chornet <Chornete@tcplink.nrel.gov>
Archive: <http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive>
Digest: gasification-digest@crest.org

o Anaerobic Digestion <digestion@crest.org>
Moderators: Phil Lusk <plusk@usa.pipeline.com>
Pat Wheeler <patrick.wheeler@aeat.co.uk>
Richard Nelson <rnelson@oz.oznet.ksu.edu>
Dave Stephenson <cdstephenson@tva.gov>
Archive: <http://www.crest.org/renewables/digestion-list-archive>
Digest: digestion-digest@crest.org

o Stoves (stoves@crest.org)
Moderators: Ronal Larson <larcon@csn.net>,
Alex English <english@adan.kingston.net >
Archive: <http://www.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/>
Digest: stoves-digest@crest.org

o Bioconversion <bioconversion@crest.org>
Moderators: Tom Jeffries <twjeffri@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Archive: <http://www.crest.org/renewables/bioconversion-list-archive/>
Digest: bioconversion-digest@crest.org

Current subscribers to the lists are engaged in the research and commercial
production of biomass crops and fuels, the conversion of biomass power in
commercial operating plants, the construction and testing of commercial
scale pilot facilities for combustion, gasification and anaerobic
digestion, testing and analysis of environmental impacts for bioenergy, and
promotion and planning of future bioenergy resources.

MODERATORS

This is a cooperative, volunteer effort that is now in it's fourth year. The
lists are moderated and managed by volunteers. If you want to help moderate
a list pease contact individual ist moderators or Tom miles, Bioenergy List
Administrator at <tmiles@teleport.com>.

BioEnergy Lists: Improved Biomass Cooking Stoves

July 1998 Biomass Cooking Stoves Archive