October 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 larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 2 07:55:10 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Non-member question on reading resources
Message-ID: <v01540b01b239b7c590d5@[204.133.28.9]>

Stovers - can anyone add to my comments below? How should we assist
queries like this? Please include Jack as a cc in your responses.

Jack - I don't know of any simple readily available book that will help
you. I sending your message on to the full list and see if anyone knows of
something easy to obtain and low cost.

Have you looked at our web page run by Alex English at:

http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html ?

I am interested to hear what our members suggest. Ron

>
>Sir;
>
>I am in the process of instructing my grandchildren (15) (and their
>parents) in the alternative ways of making cooking devices that are used
>throughout the various countries in the world. I would appreciate any
>words of wisdom (design resource material/s) you may have or will point
>me in the correct direction to help me in my endeavor.
>
>
>Thanking you in advance for your time and effort.
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Jack Grody

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
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Fri Oct 2 08:43:32 1998
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Woodcoal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Non-member question on reading resources
Message-ID: <199810021254.QAA29160@ns.alkor.ru>

Dear Jack and stovers,
I think, remarkable sample of the simple and perfect engineering it of
"hibacy" - device used in Japan. It is a clay or wooden pot. The wooden pot
has inside copper sheet. The new updating "hibacy" has inside grid-iron and
controlled aperture for air under a grid-iron. In a pot put chaircoal and
light it. On a pot it is possible to put a lattice and to prepare food.
"Hibacy" use frequently for heating a room, heat hands, leg etc. I think,
at this a simple and ancient design have the large future. It will become
a part of a life and ornament in many countries. It will help to decide
many problems, which arise at preparation of food in the countries of
Africa and Asia.
I would like, that this question was considered more in detail by
Japanese, if they are in our network. I have exhausted the knowledge by
this information, but I think the connoisseur can tell much more.
Sincerely Yury Yudkevitch (Rossia)
----------
> Îò: Ronal W. Larson <larcon@sni.net>
> Êîìó: stoves@crest.org
> Êîïèÿ: jack grody <jdgrody@erinet.com>
> Òåìà: Non-member question on reading resources
> Äàòà: 2 îêòÿáðÿ 1998 ã. 15:08
>
> Stovers - can anyone add to my comments below? How should we assist
> queries like this? Please include Jack as a cc in your responses.
>
> Jack - I don't know of any simple readily available book that will help
> you. I sending your message on to the full list and see if anyone knows
of
> something easy to obtain and low cost.
>
> Have you looked at our web page run by Alex English at:
>
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html ?
>
> I am interested to hear what our members suggest. Ron
>
> >
> >Sir;
> >
> >I am in the process of instructing my grandchildren (15) (and their
> >parents) in the alternative ways of making cooking devices that are used
> >throughout the various countries in the world. I would appreciate any
> >words of wisdom (design resource material/s) you may have or will point
> >me in the correct direction to help me in my endeavor.
> >
> >
> >Thanking you in advance for your time and effort.
> >
> >Respectfully,
> >
> >Jack Grody
>
> 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
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 2 15:25:20 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: non-member request for health info
Message-ID: <v01540b00b23a739684c9@[204.133.28.5]>

Stovers: The following request for help just came in. I hope list-members
will suggest other help that Julia might use beyond that which I offer
below. Again, I hope that responses will be sent to both Julia and to the
list.

Julia: This has been a major topic on the stove list, with much of the
information coming from list member Kirk Smith, so you might do a search
for his name. Probably every member of our list is concerned about this
aspect of much rural stove use. Kirk has indicated that indoor air
pollution from stoves may be the world's (and presumably Nicaragua's) most
serious health problem.

One of Kirk's recent stove-health contributions is located on our
Stoves Webpage, maintained by Alex English:
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

In addition, I hope you will contact list-member Rogerio Miranda
<rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni>, who is well versed on stoves and the health
issue, probably especially in Nicaragua. Rogerio also runs a list similar
to "stoves" in the Spanish language: Bioenergia.

Lastly, I am signing you up for "stoves", given your closeness to
the our list interests. Feel free to drop off whenever you wish. Please
let us know how your project is developing - and especially more about the
particular "chimneys" you are promoting.

Best of luck. Ron

>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
>From: jhavelin <jhavelin@scf-fs.usc.edu>
>To: stoves@crest.org
>Subject: request for health info
>Browsing for info on nica, I came across a recent exchange from the stove
>list in which someone mentioned info on the adverse health effects of
>smoke exposure. I am very interested in getting some simple info
>(to be distributed to/by a local health promoter in a rural
>county/comarca in Nicaragua).
>
> We are funding a chimney project for the town of Asedades, to
>begin in November, and the U.S. supervisor of the project is bringing the
>funds/info down on October 16, so I would appreciate any suggestions you
>can send beforehand.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Julia
> jhavelin@scf.usc.edu
>

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

From gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in Sat Oct 3 05:06:04 1998
From: gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in (Priyadarshini Karve(SBO))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Dr!! Priyadarshini
In-Reply-To: <v01540b04b236d24c18e5@[204.133.28.43]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.981003144630.11253B-100000@physics>

Dear Dr. Larson and all stovers,
Thank you very much.
With regards,
Priyadarshini Karve.

On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, Ronal W. Larson wrote:

> Stovers - In an off-list message from Priyadarshini, regarding the stoves
> conference (of Jan. 2000), there was this interesting new information:
>
>
> > My Ph.D. viva voce is over and so I have become a Doctor now! Most
> >importantly, I am now free to concentrate fully on my work with ARTI.
> > With regards,
> > Priyadarshini Karve.
>
>
> On behalf of all stoves list members, Congratulations to Dr. Priyadarshini!!
> 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
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>

From gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in Sat Oct 3 05:32:53 1998
From: gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in (Priyadarshini Karve(SBO))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Non-member question on reading resources
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01b239b7c590d5@[204.133.28.9]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.981003150730.11253G-100000@physics>

Dear Mr. Grody,
We are promoting a number of simple but efficiet wood and biomass
burning cookstoves in the states of Maharashtra and Goa in India. We have
some pamphlets/booklets/articles on these stove designs as well as the
basic design concepts used. However most of this material is in the local
language, i.e. Marathi. If you have any friends who know Marathi (a lot of
Marathi speaking people are settled in US and elsewhere in the western
world, so this is quite probable) this material can be useful to you. Let
me know if you are interested.
With regards,
Priyadarshini Karve.

On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Ronal W. Larson wrote:

> Stovers - can anyone add to my comments below? How should we assist
> queries like this? Please include Jack as a cc in your responses.
>
> Jack - I don't know of any simple readily available book that will help
> you. I sending your message on to the full list and see if anyone knows of
> something easy to obtain and low cost.
>
> Have you looked at our web page run by Alex English at:
>
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html ?
>
> I am interested to hear what our members suggest. Ron
>
> >
> >Sir;
> >
> >I am in the process of instructing my grandchildren (15) (and their
> >parents) in the alternative ways of making cooking devices that are used
> >throughout the various countries in the world. I would appreciate any
> >words of wisdom (design resource material/s) you may have or will point
> >me in the correct direction to help me in my endeavor.
> >
> >
> >Thanking you in advance for your time and effort.
> >
> >Respectfully,
> >
> >Jack Grody
>
> 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
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>

From krksmith at uclink4.berkeley.edu Sat Oct 3 08:55:50 1998
From: krksmith at uclink4.berkeley.edu (Kirk R. Smith)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Health impact of stove smoke
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00b23a739684c9@[204.133.28.5]>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19981003140701.009b43d4@uclink4.berkeley.edu>

It is probably a bit extreme to call it the most important health problem,
although it is certainly important enough. At this point, worldwide, it
seems that air pollution (indoor and outdoor) probably rivals dirty water
as a source of ill-health with each responsible for 6-8 percent of the
global burden of ill-health (mortality and morbidity). Indoor, mostly
stove smoke, is some 80% of the air pollution total. These might be
compared to the largest single "cause," malnutrition, which is credited
with 15%, but is dropping. By 2010, tobacco smoking is expected to exceed
malnutrition at about the 12% level.

Best/K

Kirk R. Smith
UC Berkeley

At 01:38 PM 10/2/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Stovers: The following request for help just came in. I hope list-members
>will suggest other help that Julia might use beyond that which I offer
>below. Again, I hope that responses will be sent to both Julia and to the
>list.
>
>Julia: This has been a major topic on the stove list, with much of the
>information coming from list member Kirk Smith, so you might do a search
>for his name. Probably every member of our list is concerned about this
>aspect of much rural stove use. Kirk has indicated that indoor air
>pollution from stoves may be the world's (and presumably Nicaragua's) most
>serious health problem.
>
> One of Kirk's recent stove-health contributions is located on our
>Stoves Webpage, maintained by Alex English:
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
>
> In addition, I hope you will contact list-member Rogerio Miranda
><rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni>, who is well versed on stoves and the health
>issue, probably especially in Nicaragua. Rogerio also runs a list similar
>to "stoves" in the Spanish language: Bioenergia.
>
> Lastly, I am signing you up for "stoves", given your closeness to
>the our list interests. Feel free to drop off whenever you wish. Please
>let us know how your project is developing - and especially more about the
>particular "chimneys" you are promoting.
>
>Best of luck. Ron
>
>>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 17:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
>>From: jhavelin <jhavelin@scf-fs.usc.edu>
>>To: stoves@crest.org
>>Subject: request for health info
>>Browsing for info on nica, I came across a recent exchange from the stove
>>list in which someone mentioned info on the adverse health effects of
>>smoke exposure. I am very interested in getting some simple info
>>(to be distributed to/by a local health promoter in a rural
>>county/comarca in Nicaragua).
>>
>> We are funding a chimney project for the town of Asedades, to
>>begin in November, and the U.S. supervisor of the project is bringing the
>>funds/info down on October 16, so I would appreciate any suggestions you
>>can send beforehand.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Julia
>> jhavelin@scf.usc.edu
>>
>
>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
>For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>
>
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Sat Oct 3 09:25:05 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: CHARCOAL ACTIVATION
Message-ID: <199810030935_MC2-5B6F-4B0B@compuserve.com>

Dear Caretakers (Message 3):

The STOVES group at CREST has become a major source of information on small
scale charcoal making around the world. This has happened because when you
burn the volatiles from wood you are left with charcoal.

Maybe now we are going to become a source on ACTIVATED CHARCOAL as well,
since you can't get to AC without passing through cooking charcoal as a
stage in the heating.

COOKING CHARCOAL is made by heating wood, biomass,... to 450C. It has NO
activated charcoal properties, and still contains about 10% of the original
volatiles. ACTIVATED CHARCOAL is made by heating this further to 750C in
steam or 850C in CO2 for an HOUR.

Susanne Machler in Mexico (?) asked a week ago how to make and activate
charcoal. There has been a private (4 way) discussion on charcoal
activation here. I am attaching the files to bring you up to date on
Susanne's question and the considerable response from me, Danny Day
(Scientific Carbons, Inc.,;danday@scientificcarbons.com).

Dan Day sent an extended note on small scale AC manufacture yesterday,
complete with a drawing of his suggested activation unit. He is in the
process of making a very large unit for commercial production, but says he
doesn't mind sharing the necessary data needed for small scale production.
In particular, he has given a very simple test for degree of activation
that anyone can perform.

Danny: Can you retransmit you letter to Susanne along with the attached
picture to STOVES and BIOENERGY members at CREST? I'm not sure I can
forward attached files.

Does anyone here have opinions as to whether CREST should become involved
with AC, formerly a commercial only activity?

Thomas B. Reed: The Biomass Energy Foundation
1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401
303 278 0558V; 303 278 0560F
E-mail: reedtb@compuserve.com
~~~~~
Message from Sue Machler in Mexico. She wants to make AC from her ready
supply of coconut shells (not husks).

Thank You!

..ever so much for your reply regarding the activated charcoal. Please
accept my apologies for taking so long to reply. I have been down with
the flu. I have been using the time to create a web site, which I will
be posting soon. I would be willing to do the drawings of your
suggestions and with your consent post them to my site. I will await
your reply on that.

Thanks as well for your offer to continue to help me. I am currently
sourcing the parts that I will need. I was thinking of welding a type of
stop cock (tap) on the bottom of the drum to regulate the flow of air
easier.

Now to the coconuts themselves, is there anything more specific one
should know abou the shells? (Apart from them being dry and as clean as
possible?) I am currently working on a 12 ft. solar concentrator, which
I have no clue what sort of temperatures we will get with this, but
please if you know of another process which might be aided in the high
temperatures achieved here, I would appreciate it if you could tell me a
bit more about this. I am up and quite fit now so I dont expect to take
so long again in replying.

BTW, strangely enough, although there is a lot of talk on the newsgroup
of practical help, yours was the only practical and positive suggestion.
I think I will do a posting regarding this soon. It is tragic, because I
think a wider amount of people are coming to your groups for help,
(another Mexican fellow asked recently re coconut char too) and a lot of
times recieve a lot of mail from people telling us of all the reasons
why OUR IDEAS wont work...now apart from trying something downright
impossible, where is the spirit of aiding the putterer to at least get
something going? What if he makes a breakthrough? After all, those of us
who DEPEND on these tips and tricks, LIVE on what we try, and are by no
means worse off!

I am sure you know exactly what I mean, as I gather you have lived and
worked abroad. Is it the "head knowledge" shining through, or is it just
plain ignorance of the dependence of people on these simple systems?
More "bush power!!" :)

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Yours truly,
Sue Maechler.

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 19:41:45 -0400
From: Tom Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
Subject: Activated Charcoal.
To: "Susanne Machler" <greensue@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Day, Danny" <sai@sowega.net>, "Parker, Harry W."
<mihwp@ttacs1.ttu.edu>

Dear "Susanne": (Why is your "name" in quotes?)

The NUMBER 1 problem in the world is clean, efficient cooking for 3
billion people in developing countries. We are addressing this problem
here at
STOVES.

The NUMBER 2 problem is providing clean water for these same people, so
we are interested in making activated charcoal from biomass. We hope you
will try to make charcoal for water cleanup, but charcoal alone won't kill
pathogens.

~~~~
The very best activated charcoal (Iodine number 1200) is made by passing
steam or CO2 over coconut shell charcoal at about 800C. That is probably
beyone your capability. However, you could make a tall verticlal kiln
from a 30 gal drum, fill it with chacoal and light it at the bottom through
a
one inch diameter hole. Control firing rate by partly plugging this
hole. Put in a grate of expanded steel about 1 inch from the bottom. The
combustion of the bottom layer would create heat and CO2 which might
make a good activated charcoal. Let the charcoal mass get to about 800 C
(bright red heat) for about 1/2 hour. Then plug up the bottom air hole and

cool.

You don't have any charcoal you say??? Then take a 30 gallon drum and
fill it with coconut shell chips aabout 1/4-1/2 inch on a side. Make air
hole in the bottom and light the shells ON THE TOP. The layers will burn
down progressively, creating charcoal at about 500C. Be sure to have a
propane torch ready to burn the volatile gas as it comes off or you will
fill
the valley with SMOKE. Maybe you should put a 6 inch diameter chimney on
the drum to make it easier to burn the gases and give more draft.

I wish I had a simple test to give you for testing the iodine number or
surface area of the charcoal made this way.

I will send this description to others interested in making ACTIVATED
charcoal for water purification and see if anyone can improve it.

PLEASE let us know of your progress and we will try to help or learn
from your experience.

Yours truly,
TOM REED

~~~~~
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 11:27:46 -0400
From: Danny Day <danday@scientificcarbons.com>
CC: "MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU" <MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU>,
Thomas Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: ACTivated Charcoal.

Susanne Machler wrote:

> CC: "MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU" <MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU>,
> Thomas Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Re: Activated Charcoal.
>
> >Seriously, if there is anything that I can do for you let me know.
>
> Well,before the flood of questions begin....let me again just thank you
> all for your kind help. For now,and forevermore, (no, amens yet :)
> please keep doing a good job of passing on these types of ideas to
> people like myself, at the grassroots.
> I had actually asked Tom about an idea using old stopcocks to regulate
> air, and indicated that we are trying to build a solar concentrator
> from a 12 ft satellite dish. I dont know yet what type of temperatures
> to expect but what do you think, (I have no experience on the matter,)
> would higher steam temperatures give a better charcoal activation?

Yes, because the chemical reaction C+H20->CO+H2 is very endothermic and
requires temperatures at 750C-800C. That is why the air addition into the
center 5 gal container helps by burning the H2 and CO preferentially and
assist in keeping the temperature up. Increasing the steam temp would also
help, how much trouble you go to to get superheater steam and how much it
would increase activation would be consideraqtion though. You can get
better activation also by leaving it in longer.

>>If the temperature rises two or three degrees you probably have a
> 300-700 m2/g. 4-5,degrees, 700-1000m2/g.
>
>>"The very best activated charcoal (Iodine number 1200) ......
>
> Can someone explain the quality indexes given here? Is it to read that I
> get an active surface area of 1200 m2/g for the very best activated
> charcoal ?..>> (Iodine number 1200) ?

Until you get over 1200 m2/gr, iodine and surface area "generally"
correlate
well and can be used (for most applications) interchangably. In our lab we
measure both following ASTM specifications because people are paying us for
very accurate charecterizations of carbons but in reality an iodine or
thermal rise test would work well where you just wan to insure that you
have
a reasonably good carbon. I am trying to give you only those references to
things that you can implement with resources available at the local grocery
or hardware store. Tom and I talked and he recommended a charecterization
kit. That is a good idea. I will work on that.

>
>
> Collecting material at present, will keep you posted as to my results,
> and I will post a few comments about the design sent to me soon.
>
> Thanks a lot...really am grateful for the help.
> Sue Maechler..
>
> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 01:44:59 -0400
> From: Danny Day <danday@sowega.net>
> To: Susanne Machler <greensue@hotmail.com>
> CC: "MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU" <MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU>,
> Thomas Reed <REEDTB@compuserve.com>
> Subject: Re: Activated Charcoal.
>
> Tom, Susan and Harry:
>
> Sorry I have seemed quiet on the subject but my the sai@sowega.net
> address
> is an old address and not
> current. My new address, is danday@scientificcarbons.com.

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Sat Oct 3 09:25:17 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: World vs US Poverty
Message-ID: <199810030935_MC2-5B6F-4B06@compuserve.com>

Dear Caretakers:

We are occasionally reminded that over 20%(?) of the US population lives
below the "poverty level" (as defined by some statistical criterion).

If we applied the same criterion to the world would we find that over 80%
of the world lives in poverty? (Way below?? Do we need a definition of the
REALLY poor here?)

Less easy to define but probably more important would be a world "Misery
level". Some rich people are miserable; many poor people are happy, but
there is certainly some correlation between poverty and misery, so reducing
one reduces the other.

It is my impression that most of the people on these lists are interested
in reducing world misery.

COMMENTS?

Yours for a better world, TOM
REED

This is the first in a series of questions addressing world poverty and
misery in a group where we have the potential to DO SOMETHING rather than
wring our hands.

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

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Sat Oct 3 09:25:15 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Better Food and Water for a better world
Message-ID: <199810030935_MC2-5B6F-4B07@compuserve.com>

Dear Caretakers: (Message 2)

Last year Paul Hait (maker of Pyromid stoves - Paul are you out there?)
said he had been at a Stanford(?) conference that identified

Cooking

Clean Water

as the greatesst problems in the world (as defined by the needs of the 6
billion residents, 3-4 billion of whom have not solved these problems
satisfactorily).

We here at STOVES have the potential to solve both problems. Some of our
stoves burn only the volatile 75% of the wood while leaving the remaining
25% as a cooking charcoal - OR charcoal for activating for water
purification.

1) Water can be made potable by boiling on our stoves. (I recently became
aware that tea drinking is healthy primarily because it is necessary to
boil the water. Otherwise one drinks cholera cocktails.) Boiling water is
a poor solution to the problem, but probably better than dying.

2) Water can be made potable by passing through (a) activated charcoal,
(b) chlorintating and (c) polishing through more charcoal. I have long
been vaguely aware of the use of AC in water purification, but only after
talking to Danny Day at Scientific Carbons in Blakely GA have I unserstood
the need for both AC and chlorine
(* Maybe a few billion people don't have access to chlorination pills but
they are very cheap and could be distributed. MAYBE we should be using
ozone from the air, made in small ozonizers. Now we need to get electric
power to these same people for an ozonizer.)

AC does NOT remove pathogens, but it does remove tannins, ... , etc., large
organic molecules that color and polute the water. If one simply adds
chlorine before removing these, they become chlorinated and could be worse
than the pathogens. In step b the chlorine kills the pathogens. In step c
the AC removes any final chlorinated molecules that remain.

This makes sense to me, but I am not a water expert, and I hope some of you
will correct me if I am wrong.

So, we here at STOVES already know how to make the charcoal. Now we need
to know how to activate it on a small scale. See next note to Susanne
Machler.

COMMENTS? (If you know a water expert, forward this to him. None of us
are more than six steps away from averyone on earth, so "Ask not for whom
the bell tolls - it tolls for you.)

Your coinhabitant,
TOM REED

From rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni Sat Oct 3 18:58:07 1998
From: rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni (Rogerio Miranda)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: request for health info
Message-ID: <3.0.2.16.19981003162311.4e77d50c@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>

>>Subject: request for health info
>>Browsing for info on nica, I came across a recent exchange from the stove
>>list in which someone mentioned info on the adverse health effects of
>>smoke exposure. I am very interested in getting some simple info
>>(to be distributed to/by a local health promoter in a rural
>>county/comarca in Nicaragua).
>>
>> We are funding a chimney project for the town of Asedades, to
>>begin in November, and the U.S. supervisor of the project is bringing the
>>funds/info down on October 16, so I would appreciate any suggestions you
>>can send beforehand.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Julia
>> jhavelin@scf.usc.edu

Julia and all: We run a NGO here in central america (nicaragua and
Honduras) focused on the development and modernization of the wood energy.
One of our interest areas is definitely wood stoves and it impacts on
resources and health. We have been collecting info from this list about
health efects caused by wood smoke, and also we run a pilot project in
Honduras where we facilitate improved woostoves dissemination, in which
indoor air contamination is one of the main focus. In this case we
facilitate credit for families to buy the chimney and the "plancha" for
cooking.

We will be very interested in collaborating with you. please tell us more
about this project, where in Nicaragua is ASEDADES ? What kind of stove
design are you working with? what kind of chimney ? How the funding will
work ? donation or credit ? Where the families get the fuelwood from ?

I believe your approach is appropiate. From my view point promoting wood
stoves we have mainly two reasons: first increase eficiency to reduce wood
demand ("deforestation") and reduce smoke, and second to reduce smoke
through by use of chimney. Because the stoves built around here are mainly
artesanal (less quality control of dimensions and materials) and also
because cookers usually are not trained to use the appropiate technique in
cooking with its improved stove(they cook as they did with traditional
stoves), it is less likely to claim any significant improvemente in
efficiency or fuel savings. However, it seems more likely that promoting
the use of chimney we can significantly reduce the indoor smoke level (Once
I read that perhaps 90% reduction of CO and TSP??, please correct me if
this is wrong). So, in my opinion, promoting chimney is more effective in
improving peoples life quality, and also it should be the priority.

Looking forward to interact with you.

rogerio

From danday at scientificcarbons.com Sun Oct 4 03:56:32 1998
From: danday at scientificcarbons.com (Danny Day)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Activated Charcoal.
Message-ID: <199810040756.DAA21869@solstice.crest.org>

Text of original message in response to Susanne's request for a method
of making activated chacoal.

Subject:
Re: Activated Charcoal.
Date:
Thu, 01 Oct 1998 01:44:59 -0400
From:
Danny Day <danday@sowega.net>
To:
Susanne Machler <greensue@hotmail.com>
CC:
"MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU" <MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU>, Thomas Reed
<REEDTB@compuserve.com>

Tom, Susan and Harry:

Sorry I have seemed quiet on the subject but my the sai@sowega.net
address is an old address and not current. My new address, is
danday@scientificcarbons.com.

Susanne:

Tom's suggestions are good.

"The very best activated charcoal (Iodine number 1200) is made by
passing
steam or CO2 over coconut shell charcoal at about 800C. That is probably

beyone your capability. However, you could make a tall verticlal kiln
from
a 30 gal drum, fill it with chacoal and light it at the bottom through a

one inch diameter hole. Control firing rate by partly plugging this
hole.
Put in a grate of expanded steel about 1 inch from the bottom. The
combustion of the bottom layer would create heat and CO2 which might
make a
good activated charcoal. Let the charcoal mass get to about 800 C
(bright
red heat) for about 1/2 hour. Then plug up the bottom air hole and
cool. "

Harry's suggestions are good too:

"My addition to your 30 gallon steel drum kiln would be internal
insulation. An inch or three of K-wool in an industrial situation. "

with his suggestion of water.

Here are my suggestions.

Take a 30 gal drum and put the holes like Tom suggested, make a hole on
the side right near the bottom of the drum so that a 1" metal pipe will
snugly slid through. Then take a 55 gal drum and make a hole about the
same size but a 3/4" higher from the bottom than you did with the 30 gal
drum. If you put the 30 gal drum down inside the 55, the two holes
would line up. Just for fun, go ahead and make sure that is the case.
If 3/4" is not right then figure the right amount necessary.

You are going to need two peices of steel screen approximately 18 1/2"
inches in diameter. Find 5 or 6 rocks, 1.5" to 2" in diameter. Space
them equally around in the bottom of the 30 gal drum. Lay one of your
screens down in the bottom. It will be supported by the rocks. The

hole you made in the side of the drum will now be below the screen. Now
put charcoal on top of the screen filling it up about 10 inches from the
screen. As this burns, it will be your heat source for activation.
Next you need about 20 feet of 3/8 copper tubing. At the top of the char
directly above the hole near the bottom of the drum, punch a hole in the
30 gal drum so that the copper tube will slid through, yes you guessed
it, snugly. Now you will also need to punch a hole in the 55gal drum the
same number of inches above its hole.
Again, if you put the 30 gal drum inside the 55, the holes would line
up. Lets go ahead and punch all the rest of these matching holes we
need. About 3" above that hole punch (or drill) a hole in the 30 gal
drum that a 1/2" steel pipe will fit through snugly. Just like before,
make a matching hole in the 55gal drum.

Next get two pieces of 1/4 steel rod 20" long, if you can't find steel
rod you can use coat hangers, it will just take more of them. With
steel rod, take a steel punch and use it to make a hole (just big enough
for the 1/4 rod to slide through) in the side of the 30 gal drum about
13" from the bottom. Make another hole in the 30 gal drum on the other
side exactly opposite of that one (180 degrees). Now slide the 1/4 rod
all the way through. It will leave a an inch or so hanging out on each
side.
Now make another hole 90 degrees around the drum and 1/4" higher. Make
your opposing hole again and slide the other rod through this hole.
This is your upper grate support. If you use coat hanger use 4 or more
coat hangers and make your holes with a nail. Bend the coat hangers
down on the outside of the drum so they can't be pulled back through.
They will likely have to be replaced every time you activated but they
are cheap.

Now go ahead and put the 30 gal drum down inside the 55. Insert a
10-11" long piece of 1" pipe with a valve on one end and the other end
open into the bottom holes lined up in the drums. Next take the copper
tubing leaving both ends open and roll the tubing into a spiral. If
you bought it new then it came in a coil. If so, take the center and
tighten up the center of the coil so it forms a spiral like the eye on
an electric stove. Now lay spiral down flat on top of the char and push
the outside end of the tubing out throught the hole and through the hole
that lines up on the 55 gal drum. Push out about 4 feet of tubing
outside the 55 gal drum. Inside the drum bend the end of the tube at the
center of the spiral up so that it points toward the top of the drum.
This will be your steam coil. The char shrinks down as it burns and the
copper coil will fall down with it so don't try to support it just let
the coil have plenty of free movement.

Now you need a water vessel. This can be any container that you can
stick a tube in the bottom and seal around it with bathroom caulk. It
needs to hold about 3 gallons. A 5 gallon container will be fine. Take
a 8 foot piece of rubber tubing, punch a hole in the bottom of the water
vessel and seal the tube in place with silicone caulk(or any good
sealant like aquarium sealer). Take the other end and hook it to a

valve (needle valve are best but even a old faucet valve will work).
After the sealant has dried, fill the vessel with 3 gallons and it up
about 6 feet off the ground. Now open the valve slowly and adjust
until it takes about 5 minutes for a quart to flow out. Leave the valve
in this position, it has now been set. Take a clamp or a pair of vice
grips and pinch off the rubber hose above the valve and fill the vessell
back to 3 gallons of water. Leave the top off otherwise you will create
a vacumn and the water will not flow. If you don't have a valve you can
use another clamp as your metering valve. Hook the open end of the
valve to the copper tube coming out the side of the 55 gal drum.

Now you might want to sprinkle a little kerosene or diesel fuel down on
the char next to the hole you made . This will help you light it.
Don't use gasoline. Its vapors could make a nasty explosion in a
confined space. Take the other screen and lay it down on your upper
screen support.

Now take a metal 5 gal container (see if you can get a stainless steel
one. Coconut oil "popcorn butter" for theaters, food contaoiners, use
stainless steel. Make sure you get the top so it will seal.) and make a
hole on the side near the bottom so 1/2" pipe will slid through snugly.
Take a 10 penny nail and make 1/8" holes equally spaced about every 2
inches around the bottom of the 5 gal container. Make another row two
inches up off set so that the holes are still the same distance apart.
Continue this process until your last set of holes are 2" inches from
top.Make sure the top is on the container and set it down in the drum on
the middle of the screen. You need a 12-14" 1/2" pipe with a valve on
one end and open on the other. Push the open end of the pipe through the
hole in the 55gal drum and on through the 30 gal drum, and into the 5
gal container as they should line up. Take some damp clay and push
around the pipe openings to seal it off. You are almost finished.
Fill around the 5 gal container with char but do not go above the top.
Now put the top on the 30 gal drum. The top needs to be sealed as tight
as you can make it. For a worse case, put some paper strips over the
edges and weight the top down with heavy rocks. The top should have a
2-3" opening. Leave this open. Now you need a stack. This can be an
piece of pipe 3 to 4 inches in diameter, 3-4 feet long that you can set
over the plug opening. Make sure it fits down flush on the top.

Finally , fill around between the 30 and 55 gal drums with char from
with one of your previous carbonization runs, as it makes a fairly good
insulator. The 30 gal drum may not last very long but it should give
you several batches.

First close the top valve. Lighting the unit requires pushing a small
piece of kerosene soaked cloth through the 1" pipe out inside the drum
under the screen and next pushing a hot coal through the pipe. Now use
a piece of tubing to blow air into the bottom chamber. As the char
begins to burn and produce smoke, give it a few minutes until the
exhaust is very hot. Next open the air valve mid way up the drums.
Wait for about 15 minutes then take off the clamp and let the water

flow. The bottom valve should stay open all the way until the water is
gone. Then close both valves. You should have been running since
ignition for about an hour and half to two hours. Fill the water vessel
completely full and open the valve all the way. You should get a big
cloud of steam coming out. Continue until no more visible steam is
escaping. Take off the stack and cool the top with water until it is
cool enough to remove, then soak the char around the 5 gal container
with water. It will not hurt it and it will insure that it doesn't
catch fire and you lose all your hard work.

After it has been soaked well, then you can take it out and let it dry.
Segregate it into top middle and bottom. To test each segment, take 15
ml of mineral oil in a small bottle put a thermometer in the mineral
oil, take 1 gram of your carbon dry in an oven for one hour then then
let it come to room temperature.Put it in the bottle with the oil and
shake gently. If the temperature rises two or three degrees you
probably have a 300-700 m2/g. 4-5,degrees, 700-1000m2/g. You will
probably get about 10 pounds of low to medium quality activated carbon.
If you can't get the quality you need, just give us a call.
We ship anywhere in the world.<smile>

Seriously, if there is anything that I can do for you let me know.

Danny Day (danday@scientificcarbons.com)
Scientific Carbons, Inc.
The Source for activated carbons from renewable resources
and appropriate commercial scale manufacturing technologies
for producing high grade activated carbons.
253 North Bay Street
Blakley, GA 31723
912-723-6757
912-723-6771 fax

http://www.scientificcarbons.com (scheduled for opening 11/1/98)

http://www.scientific-ag.com (9/30/98)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The original message included a scale drawing of this unit. Email me a
request and I will be happy to send it to you.

If you think you want to go into the business of producing activated
carbons, don't do it this way. We manufacture and market high quality
equipment, (through partnerships) that produce high grade activated
carbon and electricity. Additionally, as each feedstock needs a lot of
good research work to isolate the product catagories that can be made,
we have an extensive product development lab that for the last few
months has worked 24 hours a day in developing new products from biomass
feedstocks.

Our lab services can indicate whether or not a biomass material (or its
char) can be made into a marketable activated carbon and potential
markets. We are a USDA Alternative Agricultural Research and
Commercialization Company (AARC) as well as a Georgia Institute of
Technology Advanced Technology Development Center Company (ATDC). We
have several skilled scientist on staff with many years experience in
manufacturing activated carbon. All that said and done, we are a
commercial enterprise that earns its money by marketing high grade
activated carbon, state of the art manufacturing technology and
performing engineering, design and fabrication services as well as
conducting all ASTM, AWWA activated carbon charecterization services. In

other words, we are not in the business of freely giving away
information.

Yet, there is a huge need for inexpensive activated carbon in remote
locations for water remediation. That is why we think that manufacturing
and application information should be easily available in the public
domain. So we did something about it. For those that want background
information on activated carbon, including historical papers and
applications, go to a web site we started http://www.acrl.org, the
online Activated Carbon Research Library. It has a long way to go
before it becomes a repository for all activated carbon papers and
links, but it is growing with its sponsors help.

From larcon at sni.net Sun Oct 4 09:15:50 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Forwarding more on activated charcoal
Message-ID: <v01540b02b23d27d3716a@[204.133.28.16]>

Stovers: This just in from Danny Day as a follow-up to Tom Reed's message.

Ron

>Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1998 00:43:19 -0400
>From: Danny Day <danday@scientificcarbons.com>

>To: "stoves@crest.org" <stoves@crest.org>,
> "bioenergy@crest.org" <bioenergy@crest.org>
>Subject: Re: Activated Charcoal.
>
>Text of original message in response to Susanne's request for a method
>of making activated chacoal.
>
>Subject:
> Re: Activated Charcoal.
> Date:
> Thu, 01 Oct 1998 01:44:59 -0400
> From:
> Danny Day <danday@sowega.net>
> To:
> Susanne Machler <greensue@hotmail.com>
> CC:
> "MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU" <MIHWP@TTACS.TTU.EDU>, Thomas Reed
><REEDTB@compuserve.com>
>
>Tom, Susan and Harry:
>
>Sorry I have seemed quiet on the subject but my the sai@sowega.net
>address is an old address and not current. My new address, is
>danday@scientificcarbons.com.
>
>Susanne:
>
>Tom's suggestions are good.
>
>"The very best activated charcoal (Iodine number 1200) is made by
>passing
>steam or CO2 over coconut shell charcoal at about 800C. That is probably
>
>beyone your capability. However, you could make a tall verticlal kiln
>from
>a 30 gal drum, fill it with chacoal and light it at the bottom through a
>
>one inch diameter hole. Control firing rate by partly plugging this
>hole.
>Put in a grate of expanded steel about 1 inch from the bottom. The
>combustion of the bottom layer would create heat and CO2 which might
>make a
>good activated charcoal. Let the charcoal mass get to about 800 C
>(bright
>red heat) for about 1/2 hour. Then plug up the bottom air hole and
>cool. "
>
>Harry's suggestions are good too:
>
>"My addition to your 30 gallon steel drum kiln would be internal
>insulation. An inch or three of K-wool in an industrial situation. "
>
>with his suggestion of water.
>
>Here are my suggestions.
>
>Take a 30 gal drum and put the holes like Tom suggested, make a hole on
>the side right near the bottom of the drum so that a 1" metal pipe will
>snugly slid through. Then take a 55 gal drum and make a hole about the
>same size but a 3/4" higher from the bottom than you did with the 30 gal
>drum. If you put the 30 gal drum down inside the 55, the two holes
>would line up. Just for fun, go ahead and make sure that is the case.
>If 3/4" is not right then figure the right amount necessary.
>
>You are going to need two peices of steel screen approximately 18 1/2"
>inches in diameter. Find 5 or 6 rocks, 1.5" to 2" in diameter. Space
>them equally around in the bottom of the 30 gal drum. Lay one of your
>screens down in the bottom. It will be supported by the rocks. The
>hole you made in the side of the drum will now be below the screen. Now
>put charcoal on top of the screen filling it up about 10 inches from the
>screen. As this burns, it will be your heat source for activation.
>Next you need about 20 feet of 3/8 copper tubing. At the top of the char
>directly above the hole near the bottom of the drum, punch a hole in the
>30 gal drum so that the copper tube will slid through, yes you guessed
>it, snugly. Now you will also need to punch a hole in the 55gal drum the
>same number of inches above its hole.
>Again, if you put the 30 gal drum inside the 55, the holes would line
>up. Lets go ahead and punch all the rest of these matching holes we
>need. About 3" above that hole punch (or drill) a hole in the 30 gal
>drum that a 1/2" steel pipe will fit through snugly. Just like before,
>make a matching hole in the 55gal drum.
>
>Next get two pieces of 1/4 steel rod 20" long, if you can't find steel
>rod you can use coat hangers, it will just take more of them. With
>steel rod, take a steel punch and use it to make a hole (just big enough
>for the 1/4 rod to slide through) in the side of the 30 gal drum about
>13" from the bottom. Make another hole in the 30 gal drum on the other
>side exactly opposite of that one (180 degrees). Now slide the 1/4 rod
>all the way through. It will leave a an inch or so hanging out on each
>side.
>Now make another hole 90 degrees around the drum and 1/4" higher. Make
>your opposing hole again and slide the other rod through this hole.
>This is your upper grate support. If you use coat hanger use 4 or more
>coat hangers and make your holes with a nail. Bend the coat hangers
>down on the outside of the drum so they can't be pulled back through.
>They will likely have to be replaced every time you activated but they
>are cheap.
>
>Now go ahead and put the 30 gal drum down inside the 55. Insert a
>10-11" long piece of 1" pipe with a valve on one end and the other end
>open into the bottom holes lined up in the drums. Next take the copper
>tubing leaving both ends open and roll the tubing into a spiral. If
>you bought it new then it came in a coil. If so, take the center and
>tighten up the center of the coil so it forms a spiral like the eye on
>an electric stove. Now lay spiral down flat on top of the char and push
>the outside end of the tubing out throught the hole and through the hole
>that lines up on the 55 gal drum. Push out about 4 feet of tubing
>outside the 55 gal drum. Inside the drum bend the end of the tube at the
>center of the spiral up so that it points toward the top of the drum.
>This will be your steam coil. The char shrinks down as it burns and the
>copper coil will fall down with it so don't try to support it just let
>the coil have plenty of free movement.
>
>Now you need a water vessel. This can be any container that you can
>stick a tube in the bottom and seal around it with bathroom caulk. It
>needs to hold about 3 gallons. A 5 gallon container will be fine. Take
>a 8 foot piece of rubber tubing, punch a hole in the bottom of the water
>vessel and seal the tube in place with silicone caulk(or any good
>sealant like aquarium sealer). Take the other end and hook it to a
>valve (needle valve are best but even a old faucet valve will work).
>After the sealant has dried, fill the vessel with 3 gallons and it up
>about 6 feet off the ground. Now open the valve slowly and adjust
>until it takes about 5 minutes for a quart to flow out. Leave the valve
>in this position, it has now been set. Take a clamp or a pair of vice
>grips and pinch off the rubber hose above the valve and fill the vessell
>back to 3 gallons of water. Leave the top off otherwise you will create
>a vacumn and the water will not flow. If you don't have a valve you can
>use another clamp as your metering valve. Hook the open end of the
>valve to the copper tube coming out the side of the 55 gal drum.
>
>Now you might want to sprinkle a little kerosene or diesel fuel down on
>the char next to the hole you made . This will help you light it.
>Don't use gasoline. Its vapors could make a nasty explosion in a
>confined space. Take the other screen and lay it down on your upper
>screen support.
>
>Now take a metal 5 gal container (see if you can get a stainless steel
>one. Coconut oil "popcorn butter" for theaters, food contaoiners, use
>stainless steel. Make sure you get the top so it will seal.) and make a
>hole on the side near the bottom so 1/2" pipe will slid through snugly.
>Take a 10 penny nail and make 1/8" holes equally spaced about every 2
>inches around the bottom of the 5 gal container. Make another row two
>inches up off set so that the holes are still the same distance apart.
>Continue this process until your last set of holes are 2" inches from
>top.Make sure the top is on the container and set it down in the drum on
>the middle of the screen. You need a 12-14" 1/2" pipe with a valve on
>one end and open on the other. Push the open end of the pipe through the
>hole in the 55gal drum and on through the 30 gal drum, and into the 5
>gal container as they should line up. Take some damp clay and push
>around the pipe openings to seal it off. You are almost finished.
>Fill around the 5 gal container with char but do not go above the top.
>Now put the top on the 30 gal drum. The top needs to be sealed as tight
>as you can make it. For a worse case, put some paper strips over the
>edges and weight the top down with heavy rocks. The top should have a
>2-3" opening. Leave this open. Now you need a stack. This can be an
>piece of pipe 3 to 4 inches in diameter, 3-4 feet long that you can set
>over the plug opening. Make sure it fits down flush on the top.
>
>Finally , fill around between the 30 and 55 gal drums with char from
>with one of your previous carbonization runs, as it makes a fairly good
>insulator. The 30 gal drum may not last very long but it should give
>you several batches.
>
>First close the top valve. Lighting the unit requires pushing a small
>piece of kerosene soaked cloth through the 1" pipe out inside the drum
>under the screen and next pushing a hot coal through the pipe. Now use
>a piece of tubing to blow air into the bottom chamber. As the char
>begins to burn and produce smoke, give it a few minutes until the
>exhaust is very hot. Next open the air valve mid way up the drums.
>Wait for about 15 minutes then take off the clamp and let the water
>flow. The bottom valve should stay open all the way until the water is
>gone. Then close both valves. You should have been running since
>ignition for about an hour and half to two hours. Fill the water vessel
>completely full and open the valve all the way. You should get a big
>cloud of steam coming out. Continue until no more visible steam is
>escaping. Take off the stack and cool the top with water until it is
>cool enough to remove, then soak the char around the 5 gal container
>with water. It will not hurt it and it will insure that it doesn't
>catch fire and you lose all your hard work.
>
>After it has been soaked well, then you can take it out and let it dry.
>Segregate it into top middle and bottom. To test each segment, take 15
>ml of mineral oil in a small bottle put a thermometer in the mineral
>oil, take 1 gram of your carbon dry in an oven for one hour then then
>let it come to room temperature.Put it in the bottle with the oil and
>shake gently. If the temperature rises two or three degrees you
>probably have a 300-700 m2/g. 4-5,degrees, 700-1000m2/g. You will
>probably get about 10 pounds of low to medium quality activated carbon.
>If you can't get the quality you need, just give us a call.
>We ship anywhere in the world.<smile>
>
>Seriously, if there is anything that I can do for you let me know.
>
>Danny Day (danday@scientificcarbons.com)
>Scientific Carbons, Inc.
>The Source for activated carbons from renewable resources
>and appropriate commercial scale manufacturing technologies
>for producing high grade activated carbons.
>253 North Bay Street
>Blakley, GA 31723
>912-723-6757
>912-723-6771 fax
>http://www.scientificcarbons.com (scheduled for opening 11/1/98)
>http://www.scientific-ag.com (9/30/98)
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>The original message included a scale drawing of this unit. Email me a
>request and I will be happy to send it to you.
>
>If you think you want to go into the business of producing activated
>carbons, don't do it this way. We manufacture and market high quality
>equipment, (through partnerships) that produce high grade activated
>carbon and electricity. Additionally, as each feedstock needs a lot of
>good research work to isolate the product catagories that can be made,
>we have an extensive product development lab that for the last few
>months has worked 24 hours a day in developing new products from biomass
>feedstocks.
>
>Our lab services can indicate whether or not a biomass material (or its
>char) can be made into a marketable activated carbon and potential
>markets. We are a USDA Alternative Agricultural Research and
>Commercialization Company (AARC) as well as a Georgia Institute of
>Technology Advanced Technology Development Center Company (ATDC). We
>have several skilled scientist on staff with many years experience in
>manufacturing activated carbon. All that said and done, we are a
>commercial enterprise that earns its money by marketing high grade
>activated carbon, state of the art manufacturing technology and
>performing engineering, design and fabrication services as well as
>conducting all ASTM, AWWA activated carbon charecterization services. In
>other words, we are not in the business of freely giving away
>information.
>
>Yet, there is a huge need for inexpensive activated carbon in remote
>locations for water remediation. That is why we think that manufacturing
>and application information should be easily available in the public
>domain. So we did something about it. For those that want background
>information on activated carbon, including historical papers and
>applications, go to a web site we started http://www.acrl.org, the
>online Activated Carbon Research Library. It has a long way to go
>before it becomes a repository for all activated carbon papers and
>links, but it is growing with its sponsors help.
>

From mheat at mha-net.org Sun Oct 4 11:33:14 1998
From: mheat at mha-net.org (Norbert Senf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Non-member question on reading resources
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01b239b7c590d5@[204.133.28.9]>
Message-ID: <199810041543.LAA04074@tor-smtp2.netcom.ca>

A good article from Scientific American is available online:

Cookstoves for the Developing World by DANIEL M. KAMMEN

http://www.wws.princeton.edu/programs/stpp.articles/cookstoves.html

Best.........Norbert Senf

At 06:08 AM 02/10/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Stovers - can anyone add to my comments below? How should we assist
>queries like this? Please include Jack as a cc in your responses.

>>Sir;
>>
>>I am in the process of instructing my grandchildren (15) (and their
>>parents) in the alternative ways of making cooking devices that are used
>>throughout the various countries in the world. I would appreciate any
>>words of wisdom (design resource material/s) you may have or will point
>>me in the correct direction to help me in my endeavor.
>>

----------------------------------------
Norbert Senf---------- mheat@mha-net.org
Masonry Stove Builders
RR 5, Shawville------- www.mha-net.org/msb
Quebec J0X 2Y0-------- fax:-----819.647.6082
---------------------- voice:---819.647.5092

From mheat at mha-net.org Sun Oct 4 11:40:30 1998
From: mheat at mha-net.org (Norbert Senf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: non-member request for health info
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00b23a739684c9@[204.133.28.5]>
Message-ID: <199810041550.LAA05261@tor-smtp2.netcom.ca>

While not providing exactly what was asked for, the following site is worth
checking out. The lady running it is dedicated to the elimination of
woodburning, unfortunately. It has a very extensive bibliography on the
health effects of wood smoke:

http://www.imaja.com/imaja/bi/BurningIssues.html

Best............Norbert Senf

At 01:38 PM 02/10/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Stovers: The following request for help just came in. I hope list-members
>will suggest other help that Julia might use beyond that which I offer
>below. Again, I hope that responses will be sent to both Julia and to the
>list.
>
>
----------------------------------------
Norbert Senf---------- mheat@mha-net.org
Masonry Stove Builders
RR 5, Shawville------- www.mha-net.org/msb
Quebec J0X 2Y0-------- fax:-----819.647.6082
---------------------- voice:---819.647.5092

From rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni Sun Oct 4 16:04:07 1998
From: rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni (Rogerio Miranda)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: WOOD ENERGY FORUM: NICARAGUA
Message-ID: <3.0.2.16.19981004132723.4e1713c8@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>

WOOD ENERGY FORUM: NICARAGUA

This past September 9-10th, 1998, the First National Wood Energy Forum was
held in Managua, Nicaragua. This event was an initiative of PROLEÑA
(Association for Wood Energy Development of Nicaragua) and CATIE (Tropical
Agronomy Center for Research and Education). The purpose of this meeting
was to gather more than 140 representatives from the commercial fuelwood
sector of Nicaragua for the first time, to evaluate and discuss the main
limitations and recommendations for the sustainability of the sector.

In Nicaragua today fuelwood is the major energy source as well as the major
forest product. It is estimated that 58% of all energy consumed is from
fuelwood, and 70% of all wood consumed is also as fuelwood. The total
fuelwood consumption is estimated at 2.0-2.5 million tons per year, with
90% of that total for home cooking, and 60% going through commercial
channels. However, it is also estimated that 95% of the commercial
fuelwood is not harvested in a sustainable way, and also 90% of all
fuelwood consuming households use open or semi-open fires without a
chimney. Therefore there is a need for modernization of fuelwood production
and utilization in Nicaragua, and the National Forum was to address this need.

The final declaration of the Forum makes an urgent call for coordination
between government and private institutions that are working in the sector,
to immediately eliminate barriers to fuelwood sector development and to
implement policies, strategies, projects and programs to facilitate and
promote the modernization of this sector, with special emphasis on
guaranteeing the sustainable management of forest resources and to
increase efficiency and rational use of fuelwood.

Also the Forum declaration points out that: government agencies lack
resources to properly carry out their tasks of regulating, monitoring and
supporting the modernization process; land ownership nationwide must be
properly secured as a fundamental base to sustainable management of the
forest resources; the legal paperwork requirement for harvesting and
commercialization of fuelwood is burdensome; tax and other costs are
excessively high; there is a tremendous lack of incentives and technical
assistance for sustainable forest management and energy efficiency; there
are economic and cultural barriers to energy efficiency; and although
there is no substantial evidence of deforestation caused by commercial
fuelwood harvesting, there is clear evidence of forest degradation.

Finally the Forum Declaration also recommends that the taxes paid by the
commercial fuelwood sector should be reviewed and as a priority should be
reinvested back into the sector for finance regulation, monitoring,
incentives and technical assistance. Additionally, the municipal
governments should take a more active role in regulating and planning the
sector, new market opportunities for fuelwood as for power generation
should be developed, a massive program of improved woodstoves and
alternative fuels should be implemented, the National Police should change
their manner of dealing with fuelwood merchants, and a national fuelwood
master plan should be developed.

As result of this national Forum, the CDI (Interinstitutional Wood Energy
Committee) formed by PROLEÑA, the Ministry of Environment and Natural
Resources, the Ministry of Public Health, the Nicaraguan Forest Institute
and the Nicaraguan Energy Institute will meet regularly and coordinate
actions to implement the recommendations from the Forum. International
cooperating agencies as FAO, the World Bank and the Interamerican
Development Bank will consider these recommendations as input for their
projects and programs that support the wood energy sector of Nicaragua.

For the full declaration and more information about this Forum, please
contact PROLEÑA/Nicaragua through Rogerio Carneiro de Miranda/ Main
Technical Advisor/ at <rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni> , Telefax (505)
2762015-2705448, or Apartado Postal C-321, Managua, Nicaragua.

From btremeer at dds.nl Sun Oct 4 16:35:31 1998
From: btremeer at dds.nl (Grant Ballard-Tremeer)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Non-member question on reading resources
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01b239b7c590d5@[204.133.28.9]>
Message-ID: <000001bdefd7$7aecfa80$2f0deed4@blackthorn>

Dear Jack and Stovers

The following book gives useful background on how cooking devices are made
and used in many countries - it's a technical book but quite readable...

Stewart, B, 1987, Improved Wood, Waste and Charcoal Burning Stoves - A
Practitioners' manual, Intermediate Technology Publications, London. ISBN
0946688656. Price £12.95/US$25.00. Order from orders@itpubs.org.uk. Website:
http://www.oneworld.org/itdg.publications.html.

Less interesting (more technical), but also good: Baldwin S.F, 1987, Biomass
Stoves: Engineering Design, Development, and Dissemination, Volunteers in
Technical Assistance (VITA), Arlington. Available from VITA, 1815 North Lynn
Street, Suite 200, Arlington, Virginia 22209-2079, USA.

Regards
Grant

-------------------
Grant Ballard-Tremeer
btremeer@dds.nl; http://www.energy.demon.nl
-------------------

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Mon Oct 5 08:53:45 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: BEAN NUTRITION
Message-ID: <199810050904_MC2-5B9F-E045@compuserve.com>

Dear Caretakers:

I am not a nutrition expert (only read parts of Diet for a Small Planet),
but I understand that a diet of rice (or grains) and beans (or legumes)
supplies all the needed amino acids and vegetarians can be at least as
healthy as omnivarants.

I demonstrated the turbo cook stove to Ron White of NREL and Eric Oiori
Nyarko , programme officer at the Ministry of Mines and Energy in Ghana the
last Monday.

Ron told me that cooking intensity control exercises an disproportionate
control on world nutrition. Beans take 4 hours to cook (simmer), longer
if not presoaked. So people who need them often don't eat beans.
~~~~~
One advantage of wood-gas stoves (as opposed to wood stoves) is that there
is a much greater degree of control. The turbo cook stove burns at full
intensity for 45 minutes on 400 g of peanut hull pellets. Would it burn 4
hours at minimum intensity? I'll check it out.

Alternatively, I have found that after all the volatiles have burned out of
the fuel, if I am not careful to exclude ALL air (very difficult) the stove
may be hot to the touch 12 hours later. (I think that I mentioned that I
was awakened at 2 AM by our CO alarm ringing above the stove.) Charcoal
will "burn" at incredibly low temperatures and low intensities. Could this
be useful for slow cooking?

I would welcome comments on any of these points.

Yours truly, TOM REED

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Mon Oct 5 08:54:00 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: BioEnergy '98 conference
Message-ID: <199810050904_MC2-5B9F-E04C@compuserve.com>

Dear Dave, Harry et al:

Hey guys, take it easy. Invective is unacceptable here at CREST. (See
attached fight.)

a) I generally find Harry Parker's position that of a realist in today's
world, and many of the rest of us are working toward a world which will
have to develop from that reality. I'm glad to have both his technical and
general comments. We can all stand constructive criticism. I hope Harry
will continue to comment in this forum, even if I don't always agree with
him.

b) I have also been deleting multiple announcements from Dave on the
BioEnergy '98 conference, but it is so easy with E-mail that I just smile.
Smile, Harry.

c) I am afraid that Harry's views on the "pep squad" nature of many
scientific meetings are close to my own. I have been attending biomass
meetings sponsored by government agencies for 20 years. I almost always
learn something new, but often from discussions with real people in the
halls. The amount of REAL information presented is usually pretty dilute
and all of us are there in part to enjoy the trip and meet people in the
field. So I guess we'll have to keep having meetings. Does Dave's reaction
suggest that Harry's comments were too close to the bone for comfort?

Smile when you say that, guys. Yours truly, TOM
REED

Harry;

So easily fatigued. I for one am fatigued about your rah rah spirit for
fossil fuels and your repeated attacks on those who accept funding for
anything other than your own pet projects.

I guess everybody but Harry is intellectually dishonest and a leach on
society.

By the way, I think that it's likely that you won't be missed at BioEnergy
'98 anyway.

David Rezachek

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

Harry W. Parker wrote:

> Dear Fred and all,
>
> I am becoming very fatigued at having to repeatedly delete
> announcements regarding the BioEnergy '98 conference! For that reason
> I make the following observation:
>
> It should be remembered that these BioEnergy meetings are just
> cheer-leader meetings and people are needed just for the "pep-squad" at
> the meeting. I have participated in two. Nothing much ever happens
> except plots for addition federal funding for bioenergy and blame aimed
> at the sources of economical energy which we depend on and enjoy, even
> as flying to the BioEnergy cheerleader meeting.
>
> Harry
<

From K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl Mon Oct 5 11:46:17 1998
From: K.K.Prasad at phys.tue.nl (K. K. Prasad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: request for health info
Message-ID: <199810051557.RAA17411@silicon.tue.nl>

Rogerio, Julia and all

One thing is uncontestable - a chimney gets rid of the obnoxious
stuff from the immediate vicinity of the stove and can thus be
expected to promote health of the cook and her family.

There is always a price to pay! To start with the cost is high. If
improperly designed a chimney stove can produce much lower efficiency
than an open fire. Consult the book "Wood Stoves Compendium" as to
how this can happen. Next chimneys require maintenance - they
require regular cleaning - this can be a chore if the chimney goes
through the top of the house into the outside atmosphere. Finally
unless thge combustion is clean, what one is doing is adopting the
"Not in my backyard" or NIMBY tactic. In the long term not a sound
proposition!

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
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni Mon Oct 5 16:40:35 1998
From: rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni (Rogerio Miranda)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: request for health info
In-Reply-To: <199810051557.RAA17411@silicon.tue.nl>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.16.19981005133559.53679698@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>

Dear Prasad, Julia and all:

I am trying hard to find reasons to really promote improved woodstoves(IW),
but within the actual conditions here in Central America is not an easy
task. For any argument in favor of IW, there for sure will be a question
about the doubtful effectivenes of that argument. For instance I basicaly
gave up in promoting IW as more fuel efficient than tratitional woodstoves.
The reasons are the same as we discussed early this year in Germany:
artesanal production that can't guarantee quality (dimensions and
materials) and cultural barriers (cultural and/or education). At the
momment I believe that in order to overcome this barriers, we have to do 3
thinghs:

1. set up a woodstove lab here in Nicaragua (not fancy, just the basics),
where we can continous develop new models and monitor the experiences we
get from the field.

2. push for a mass production scale, where quality control can be secured
and prices can be lowered.

3. developed a basic trainiing for housewifes in order to use a IW in an
adequate manner.

Another point would be the indoor air quality. It is true what you said
about the back firing of the chimney in terms of efficiency and NIMBY. But
with the help of a professional lab just around the corner from us, will
posible prevent us to continue using a badly designed chimney. In regard
cleaning, the Pilot Project which we run in Tegucigalpa, Honduras have
shown that the affordable metal chimneys can be easily cleanned only by
hitting it with a piece of wood, and taking the dirt out by a side hole in
the botton of the chimney (which indeed was an additional feature design
and introduced by one of the housewifes). In regard the NIMBY smoke, I
wonder if after all, the average concentration of the smoke affecting
each community member (of course will depend on local wheather conditions)
wouldn't propably be much lower than not having chimneys in the houses of
the community ? I belive from my good sense that is the case, although I
have not seen any data denying it.

Rogerio

At 04:57 PM 10/5/98 +0000, you wrote:
>Rogerio, Julia and all
>
>One thing is uncontestable - a chimney gets rid of the obnoxious
>stuff from the immediate vicinity of the stove and can thus be
>expected to promote health of the cook and her family.
>
>There is always a price to pay! To start with the cost is high. If
>improperly designed a chimney stove can produce much lower efficiency
>than an open fire. Consult the book "Wood Stoves Compendium" as to
>how this can happen. Next chimneys require maintenance - they
>require regular cleaning - this can be a chore if the chimney goes
>through the top of the house into the outside atmosphere. Finally
>unless thge combustion is clean, what one is doing is adopting the
>"Not in my backyard" or NIMBY tactic. In the long term not a sound
>proposition!
>
>Prasad
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Rogerio Carneiro de Miranda
ATP/PROLENA/Nicaragua
Apartado Postal C-321
Managua, Nicaragua
telefax (505) 276 2015
EM <rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From elk at net2000ke.com Tue Oct 6 11:41:38 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: The Stover's Friend
Message-ID: <199810061553.SAA17325@net2000ke.com>

From larcon at sni.net Wed Oct 7 09:48:18 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:06 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Non-member on BACKYARD BURNER DESIGN
Message-ID: <v01540b02b2407a6b947b@[204.133.28.26]>

Stovers: The following came in from non-list-member Larry Sullivan
<polymercanada@bc.sympatico.ca>. Burning of leaves/backrard trash is
indeed a bad burning sitation on our continent. Anyone able to offer
specific sources for good designs?

Larry: Could you relay us some of the sites you have located at for
designs - and what specific information you are looking for that is missing
from those sites? I personally have no knowledge of how to do this well,
and can assure you that this list has complained regularly of the
difficulty in firing loose trash such as tree leaves. My own preference
has been for composting all.

Our list would benefit a great deal from your describing what you
have found and what you have not.

Ron

LARRY SULLIVAN wrote:
>
> Dear Mr. Larson:
> I would be interested if you may help me find a simple design for
> a backyard burner. This is for burning yard debris and should be able to
> be assemble easily by the average homeowner. The problem is the large
> amounts of smoke from such burners which are ineffiecent. I have
> reviewed many net sites which give most of the info, but there is no
> point in reinventing the wheel if someone can provide the plans.
>
> Best Regards
> Larry Sullivan
> Nanaimo,B.C.,Canada

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

From elk at net2000ke.com Thu Oct 8 01:12:47 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- New Trials
Message-ID: <199810080524.IAA22503@net2000ke.com>

Stovers;I'm digging into the carbonising once again. Have two new designs on the drawing board. One is a more traditional approach using a cement slab kiln with a chimney at one end of an open heap of carbonising sawdust that hopefully will draw AND burn the smoke (smoldering sawdust smoke is almost as bad a tear-gas!), and another of my tall chimney designs. I'll use the same two round metal kilns as in the last experiments, but this time I'm going BIG on the stack- using six 45 gal drums. Five welded end-to-end making the chimney, and one crossways at the bottom, with a door, for the firebox which will burn some wood in order to provide a 'sparkplug' for burning the volatiles and establishing/maintaining the flue draft. I just hope I don't use so much firewood that there's a negative offset on the carbonised sawdust production. There's certainly lots of scrap wood around sawmills where this unit will hopefully find a home someday.Two 20 cm pipes (sections of my previous chimney) will lead from the base of the chimney- under the firebox grate- to beneath the two round (2m dia) open metal kilns. I'm using air-dried sawdust from the broad-toothed circular saws used to square up logs, so the particle size is about as big as it gets.Results soon.elk~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Elsen L. Karstad , P.O. Box 24371 Nairobi Kenyaelk@net2000ke.com tel/fax (+ 254 2) 884437

From ahe1 at cableol.co.uk Thu Oct 8 08:15:00 1998
From: ahe1 at cableol.co.uk (Andrew Heggie)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Non-member on BACKYARD BURNER DESIGN
In-Reply-To: <v01540b02b2407a6b947b@[204.133.28.26]>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981008112734.006b062c@mail.cableol.co.uk>

At 08:01 07-10-98 -0600, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
>Stovers: The following came in from non-list-member Larry Sullivan
><polymercanada@bc.sympatico.ca>. Burning of leaves/backrard trash is
>indeed a bad burning sitation on our continent. Anyone able to offer
>specific sources for good designs?
I agree with Ronal here, unless there is benefit to be had from the heat
produced I would prefer the disposal were left to the normal carbon cycle
composting route.
AJH

From larcon at sni.net Thu Oct 8 10:31:16 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Kevin Chisholm on BACKYARD BURNER DESIGN
Message-ID: <v01540b03b24277c448c9@[204.133.28.21]>

Stovers: This just in from list member Kevin Chisholm
<kchishol@fox.nstn.ca> in response to Larry Sullivan
<polymercanada@bc.sympatico.ca>. (Ron)

Kevin: I am surprised at the use of both the primary air slots at the
bottom and the blower at the top. Wouldn't the blower supply almost all
the needed air? How about using just a single blower at the bottom? What
is the origin for your design? (Ron

(The following from Kevin):
A simple design that works in the back yard is as follows:

1:Take a 45 gallon drum, and remove the top.
2: Starting about 6" from the bottom, make 4 vertical slots, about 8" vertical,
90 degrees apart.
3: Splay out the sides of the slot, in a manner to induce a clockwise flow of
primary air. Try to get an effective area of about 6"X2" for each slot.
4: Using a household vacuum cleaner in reverse, ie, the blowing mode, direct a
stream of air tangential and downward at about 30 degrees from the top of the
barrel.

Set a fire, and add more debris on top of it, adding more as the fire develops.
You can empirically determine how frequently you should add more debris.

Such a burner is as much fun as a 3 second charcoal lighting competition. :-)

Kevin Chisholm <kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>

From gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in Fri Oct 9 05:34:22 1998
From: gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in (Priyadarshini Karve(SBO))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: request for health info
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.16.19981005133559.53679698@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.981009144329.22745A-100000@physics>

Dear Dr. Miranda, Dr. Prasad and others,
I have followed the discussion regarding advantages and
disadvantages of chimney with interest.
I tend to agree with Dr. Prasad, on the basis of our experience in
India. We have generally found that chimneys are not favoured by
housewives. There are a number of reasons, some of which have already been
pointed out by Dr. Prasad (cost, maintainance, etc.). Another major
objection is as follows. Fitting a chimney means cutting a hole through
the roof. If the hole is not carefully sealed, rainwater seeps in onto the
stove along the sides of the chimney.
Although a metal chimney is cheaper, it is not always practical.
For one thing, it may rust. Secondly, it may be stolen for selling as
scrap!
Maintainace of the chimney is a problem not only due to the
practical difficulties involved in cleaning but also because of gender
bias! A stove is considered to be the responsibility of the women in the
house. On the other hand, the women believe that climbing on the roof and
cleaning the chimney should be done by the men.
The NIMBY aspect is also important. There is a misconception among
the general public that every stove with chimney is an 'improved' or
'efficient' stove. As the smoke is going out of the house anyway, the
designer may tend to ignore the quality of combustion. On the other hand,
keeping a check on emissions has to be a part of the process of designing
a chimneyless improved stove.
The three point approach suggested by Dr. Miranda is exactly what
we have been following in India for more than a decade or so. We have been
moderately successful in popularising the concept of improved stoves. The
high price of the improved stoves (as compared to the cost of a
traditional stove) is the only barrier to widespread use of these models.
At present the government subsidy is taking care of this problem, but this
is a temporary measure. We are concentrating our efforts on bringing down
the cost of improved stoves. From that viewpoint (as well as other
practical considerations), clay stoves are preferrable to metal stoves.
Mass production while maintaining proper dimensions is not a big problem,
if moulds are used.
With regards,
Priyadarshini Karve.

On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Rogerio Miranda wrote:

> Dear Prasad, Julia and all:
>
> I am trying hard to find reasons to really promote improved woodstoves(IW),
> but within the actual conditions here in Central America is not an easy
> task. For any argument in favor of IW, there for sure will be a question
> about the doubtful effectivenes of that argument. For instance I basicaly
> gave up in promoting IW as more fuel efficient than tratitional woodstoves.
> The reasons are the same as we discussed early this year in Germany:
> artesanal production that can't guarantee quality (dimensions and
> materials) and cultural barriers (cultural and/or education). At the
> momment I believe that in order to overcome this barriers, we have to do 3
> thinghs:
>
> 1. set up a woodstove lab here in Nicaragua (not fancy, just the basics),
> where we can continous develop new models and monitor the experiences we
> get from the field.
>
> 2. push for a mass production scale, where quality control can be secured
> and prices can be lowered.
>
> 3. developed a basic trainiing for housewifes in order to use a IW in an
> adequate manner.
>
>
> Another point would be the indoor air quality. It is true what you said
> about the back firing of the chimney in terms of efficiency and NIMBY. But
> with the help of a professional lab just around the corner from us, will
> posible prevent us to continue using a badly designed chimney. In regard
> cleaning, the Pilot Project which we run in Tegucigalpa, Honduras have
> shown that the affordable metal chimneys can be easily cleanned only by
> hitting it with a piece of wood, and taking the dirt out by a side hole in
> the botton of the chimney (which indeed was an additional feature design
> and introduced by one of the housewifes). In regard the NIMBY smoke, I
> wonder if after all, the average concentration of the smoke affecting
> each community member (of course will depend on local wheather conditions)
> wouldn't propably be much lower than not having chimneys in the houses of
> the community ? I belive from my good sense that is the case, although I
> have not seen any data denying it.
>
> Rogerio
>
>
>
>
>
> At 04:57 PM 10/5/98 +0000, you wrote:
> >Rogerio, Julia and all
> >
> >One thing is uncontestable - a chimney gets rid of the obnoxious
> >stuff from the immediate vicinity of the stove and can thus be
> >expected to promote health of the cook and her family.
> >
> >There is always a price to pay! To start with the cost is high. If
> >improperly designed a chimney stove can produce much lower efficiency
> >than an open fire. Consult the book "Wood Stoves Compendium" as to
> >how this can happen. Next chimneys require maintenance - they
> >require regular cleaning - this can be a chore if the chimney goes
> >through the top of the house into the outside atmosphere. Finally
> >unless thge combustion is clean, what one is doing is adopting the
> >"Not in my backyard" or NIMBY tactic. In the long term not a sound
> >proposition!
> >
> >Prasad
> >
> >
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Rogerio Carneiro de Miranda
> ATP/PROLENA/Nicaragua
> Apartado Postal C-321
> Managua, Nicaragua
> telefax (505) 276 2015
> EM <rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
> Stoves Webpage
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 9 19:43:47 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding (2): Kevin Chisholm on BACKYARD BURNER DESIGN
Message-ID: <v01540b04b242db11fe2a@[204.133.28.17]>

Stovers: This in as a followup to my questions to Kevin Chisholm. Kevin's
description reminds me of the speed and high heat with which fuel is
consumed with a small added air flow (as from a small fan). This was
Elsen's message on the 6th when he said:
"Forced draft......... There's something in it!"

Now the issue is when and where should it be used with stoves or
charcoal-making (unlike incinerators)? Ron

>"Ronal W. Larson" wrote:
>
>> Stovers: This just in from list member Kevin Chisholm
>> <kchishol@fox.nstn.ca> in response to Larry Sullivan
>> <polymercanada@bc.sympatico.ca>. (Ron)
>>
>> Kevin: I am surprised at the use of both the primary air slots at the
>> bottom and the blower at the top. Wouldn't the blower supply almost all
>> the needed air? How about using just a single blower at the bottom? What
>> is the origin for your design? (Ron
>
>I "designed" the burner for disposing of 25 gallons of spent soldering
>flux, which
>was a combination of an alcohol, saponifying agents, and organic acids. I
>started
>with the slotted drum, but things weren't happening in an exciting enough
>manner,
>so I tried a Shop vac in "blow mode." I tried it blowing in at the bottom
>slots,
>but found that when blowing down from the top, there was more total air
>induced.
>Specifically, there was the primary bottom air, the secondary air blown by the
>blower, and the tertiary air induced by the blower air. I burned the 25
>gallons in
>about 2.5 hours, in a smokeless manner. The drum was red hot over about
>1/2 of its
>area.
>
>There was a polyethylene 5 gallon pail that was damaged, so we put that in the
>burner for disposal. Without the air supply as described above, we had a slow,
>smoky flame, but with the air supplied as noted, we had smoke free
>combustion of
>the poly.
>
>One time previously, when using a similar system for burning of yard
>waste, I used
>the blower (a home vacuum cleaner in blow mode) with air only introduced at the
>base, and wth no slots. Combustion was indeed intense. The wood ash was
>converted
>to a molten slag. However, there was smoke coming off the top.
>
>I haven't tried the first system on solid fuel, but I would think that the
>abundant
>secondary and tertiary air supply, and the lovely swirl which this method
>induces
>would permit totally smokeless combustion of yard waste.
>
>
>Hope this addresses your question adequately.
>
>Kevin Chisholm

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 9 19:44:03 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding non-member request for information
Message-ID: <v01540b01b243e17e1311@[204.133.28.17]>

Stovers - Non-list-member Andy Donlan has forwarded the following request
for information on the ignition temperature of wood or similar materials -
and specifically for long term exposure at 100 C. Any experts on the stoves
list on this topic? (Comments to both the list and to Andy. Ron

(The rest from Andy:)

We are concerned about wood, in the presence of air, starting to burn if
maintained at a temperature of about 100C. Our
interest is that of public safety; at this time, stoves, furnaces, baseboard
heaters, heating cables, etc. may expose adjacent wood to temperatures close
to 100C, and we have been led to beleive that this could be a safety issue
because the wood may start to burn after long term exposure to such heat.

Do you
have any idea where I could find some information on this? Is it possible
to cause wood to burn by simply maintaining it at 100C in an oven? Any
comments would be appreciated. Thank you.

Andy Donlan
Easy Heat Ltd.
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
<ajd1@ionline.net>

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 9 19:44:08 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Sullivan(3) on BACKYARD BURNER DESIGN
Message-ID: <v01540b02b243e549f72e@[204.133.28.17]>

Stovers: Today a third message from Larry Sullivan on the incinerator
("eco backyard-burner") design problem he proposes. He asks for my and
other inputs, and I am sure I cannot contribute. Anyone else?
Ron

(The remainder from Larry:)
Thanks Ron for the forwarded info:

I have incorporated some of the suggestions. I will e-mail my latest
version (hope you can understand my skematics).

Essentially I'm interested in making a "eco backyard-burner"
via reducing the emissions and particle content. The problems are
reducing the tar content, reducing the ash content, and creating enough
heat to dry/and pyrolyze the burn material. The intent is to end up with
a clean burn stack (no-smoke) and as mentioned before,if one can end up
with some charcoal so much the better. The problem with back-yard
burners is the lower BTU and high moisture content.

Consequently a
ninsulated wrap (glassfiber rigid insulation) should create a kiln-like
enviroment. A 45 gal drum with lid on top and a screen on the bottom
which sits on a cut-down drum combustion chamber (2 ft) for the base (cut
at the ring crease so the top drum fits into). Four louvered slots
(primary intake) 8"x6" at about midway bent to create a vortex. A 6" flue
pipe running from the combustion chamber (base) through the top drum (to
keep the flue gas hot for draft) and exiting from the top into a cyclone
air cleaner.

The cyclone cleaner is the interesting part. The cyclone
cleaner is just vent/stove pipe with reducer collars. Using a 8" Tee
with a 6" intake for the flue pipe which exhausts into a 8" pipe (with a
deflection collar to force the exhaust one way). The 8" exterior pipe
has a 6" flue pipe running inside and extending 1-2 ft lower than the
entrance flue pipe to create a vortex (screws through both pipes to keep
it intact). If one can get enough velocity/draft this should force the
ash particles to the sides and hence fall to the bottom. Clean air is in
the centre of the vortex, hence clean air exit.

To create more draft the
6" flue pipe now exits into another 8" stack (via reducer
collar) extending the 6" flue pipe about 1' into the stack pipe. The
stack pipe is now louvered at the base to create a vortex/air intake to
create a secondary air intake to combust the remained wood gas and to
create more draft. It would be nice to think that one can create enough
draft now to make the downdraft and cyclone air cleaner work although a
4" flue pipe may be better to create more velocity, although it may be
wise to install a Tee pipe intersection at this point with a washroom
fan to create the draft.

I would be interested in your input. The idea should work although one
will only find out when it is built. I will wait to see if anyone can
see any flaws in the idea before I build it next week.
If it works I will send pictures

Best Regards
Larry Sullivan

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

From john at gulland.ca Sat Oct 10 08:31:02 1998
From: john at gulland.ca (John Gulland)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding non-member request for information
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01b243e17e1311@[204.133.28.17]>
Message-ID: <000101bdf44b$4bcb9680$2a36f8ce@jgulland.igs.net>

In response to Ronal's forward of Andy Donlan's information request.

> Do you
> have any idea where I could find some information on this? Is it possible
> to cause wood to burn by simply maintaining it at 100C in an oven? Any
> comments would be appreciated. Thank you.
>

North American safety test standards for wood stoves and fireplaces call for
maximum temperature rises (above ambient) on combustible material (wood)
adjacent to combustion equipment like wood stoves and chimneys of around 65°C
for continuous exposure (tested to equilibrium) and 97°C is the highest
permissible temperature I've seen for abnormal and short duration conditions
such as overfiring, blocked air outlet or emergency power interruption. It
would appear that 100°C is the very upper limit and then only for short periods.

Hope this helps.
Regards,
John
This is for business: http://www.gulland.ca/
This is for pleasure: http://www.wood-heat.com/

From larcon at sni.net Sat Oct 10 23:58:09 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding: ARTICLE: Pollution causes 40% of deaths
Message-ID: <v01540b00b245dae9c8fd@[204.133.28.7]>

Stovers - The following article was sent to me by a list member (Cathy
Flanders) who is also the list manager for a very active list entitled
"iaq" (Indoor Air Quality). The list has been concentrating on items other
that cook-stove smoke, but there are numerous persons on that list who are
obviously knowledgeable about health aspects of pollution.

The rest from Cathy:

Ronal -

Thought this NNI article might be of interest to you & your colleagues...it
reveals pretty shocking numbers!!!

Regards,
Cathy Flanders
IAQ List Manager
Fax: 972-527-6608
rkfabf@aol.com

Friday 9th October, 1998

Pollution causes 40% of deaths

NEW YORK (NNI): Forty percent of deaths worldwide are caused by pollution and
other environmental factors, and climate change will make matters worse,
Cornell University scientists found in a study released recently.

After studying population trends, climate change, increasing pollution levels
and emerging diseases, 11 graduate student researchers led by Cornell ecology
professor David Pimentel concluded that human inability to control their own
pollution is killing them. And they found that increased temperatures caused
by global climate change will lead to a whole new round of deaths and injury
related to extreme weather events and tropic diseases moving north.

The study group found that millions of people would become "environmental
refugees", forced to flee their home areas in a desperate search for fuel
wood, building materials, and food, as they strip their land bare of trees and
fertile soils.

They found that over population and crowding in villages and cities would lead
to the re emergence of old deadly diseases like the "Black Plague". They also
found that each year air pollutants adversely affect the health of 4-5 billion
people, and the trend looks likely to worsen, with the number of automobiles
growing three times faster than the rate of population growth.

The snail-borne disease schistosomiasis causes an estimated 1 million deaths
annually and is expanding its range as human activities provide more suitable
habitats in contaminated fresh water.

Smoke from indoor cooking fires that burn wood and dung is estimated to kill 4
million children each year. -- Lack of sanitary conditions contributes to 4
million deaths worldwide each year, mostly among infants and young children in
developing countries.

From larcon at sni.net Sun Oct 11 18:58:04 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Sullivan (4) - BIO-BACKYARD BURNER WORKS!!
Message-ID: <v01540b00b246ead8ca0a@[204.133.28.19]>

Stovers: this just in from Larry Sullivan
Larry - Congratulations. Please send the photos to Alex English (who is on
a trip and may take a while to acknowledge) Ron

(Rest from Larry today).

>Dear Ron:
> I just finished building my bio-backyard burner, I had to adapt a few
>things(ofcoarse) but it seems to work beautifully. I had to add the
>washroom fan to the stack and I closed of the primary vents in the
>combustion chamber and used smaller pipe to get enough downdraft. I do
>have some smoke comming out but it apears to mostly water vapour. If I
>wanted to have no smoke I believe if I venting the smoke into 20 ft or
>so of big-O drainage pipe buried in the ground(with open end) this
>should act as a good heat sink to condense the water vapour. The inside
>of the pipe doesn't have much creasote or soot and the cyclone cleaner
>does act like a heat exchanger so the the smoke comming out of the top
>is just warm. I used 6" of fiberglass insulation to wrap the burner and
>this help to give enough heat to dry even wet wood,the burner was red
>hot.I shut off the fan after a good burn and in the morning there was
>some good charcoal. So it also appears that this may also be a good
>little backyard charcoal making stove.
> I will take some pictures and make up some decent diagrams with
>instructions and e-mail you next week sometime.
>
>Best Regards
>Larry Sullivan - polymercanada@bc.sympatico.ca

From rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni Mon Oct 12 11:14:09 1998
From: rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni (Rogerio Miranda)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: request for health info
Message-ID: <3.0.2.16.19981011201958.78678afa@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>

Dear Priyadarshini, Prasad, Julia and Others:

Within this discussion, what can we conclud about promoting Improved
Woodstoves ?

If today, according to official statistics, about 70% of the Nicaraguan and
Honduran households uses fuelwood for cooking, and from our experience
80-90% of thoses households uses it in a open or semi-open fire without
chimney.

But if in general, yet...

IW can not guarantee higher efficiency for normal/regular/average users
IW can not guarantee better air quality for the community
IW can not guarantee quality material at affordable price/cost

So, why bother to promote IW to urban and rural families ?

I understand, at least in our case here in Central America, that probably
in the future (perhaps 10 to 50 years) most of those families will be then
using a LPG stove. But, while it doesn't happen, should we promote IW? What
do you think ?

rogerio

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Mon Oct 12 13:31:04 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: The REAL efficiency of electric and wood-gas stoves
Message-ID: <199810121341_MC2-5C6C-F1D8@compuserve.com>

Dear Stoves (and gasification, since I am talking about wood-gas, not wood
stoves):

ELECTRIC STOVE MEASUREMENTS

INTRODUCTION: In researching, designing and building renewable energy
stoves, it is important to know the competition - the performance level
reached with fossil fuels in 100 years of development by GE, Phillips and a
billion US and European housewives. The modern electric and gas stove is
truly a wonder of industrial evolution (and the Industrial Revolution).
Almost all my meals have been cooked on one or the other (exceptions,
camping, barbecue, foreign travel meals) - no complaints.

STOVE TESTS: This morning (5 AM) I decided to characterize our (Whirlpool)
electric kitchen stove as a benchmark we should shoot for in designing
renewable energy stoves. It has an oven, two large (17.5 cm diam) and 2
small (13 cm diam) "burners" (interesting we keep the old name). I
measured the voltage as 248 V (Radio Shack Micronta Digital Auto Range
meter - $20) and current 8.3 and 5.7 amps (Micronta clamp on AC meter)
respectively on each, giving a power level of 2058 W for the LARGE and 1414
W for the SMALL burner. While I am sure there are other power levels
available, these are representative of most electric stoves in the U.S. and
probably Europe. Since it would be easy to make these burners any other
size, I think we can presume that this represents the preference of three
generations of housewives (and husbands) in stove buying and using.

While few people have looked at the construction of the metal burner coil,
it is the heart of the stove and oven. It has a Kanthal metal heat
resistant cover, flat on top, swagged over a magnesium oxide insulation
encasing a tiny resistance coil. (That is why there is no electrical shock
hazzard). The coil by itself has so little surface area that it would burn
out immediately. The MgO conducts the heat to the larger kanthal surface
where it only reaches about 900 C, cooled by conduction to the pot or by
radiation.

TURNDOWN: Another very important feature of the modern stove is that it
can bring water to a boil quickly, then simmer at very low power. This is
achieved by an ingenious switch (Robertshaw) that intermittently turns the
power on, then off for various periods thereby avoiding the need for
variacs, silicon controlled rectifiers or saturable core reactors that
could do the same job at 10X the cost. It operates by heating a bimetallic
switch with the current, much like the turn signal on your car. Turning
the switch changes the distance the contacts must move.

I used a stop watch to measure the fraction of time the power was on for
the complete switch cycle and multiplied this fraction to give the
following table:

POWER LEVEL VS SETTING ON WHIRLPOOL ELECTRIC KITCHEN
STOVE
Setting Small - Watts Large - Watts
HI 1414 2058
MED-HI 848 1470
MED 530 1457
MED-LO 298 515
LO 118 144

Incidentally, my laboratory assistant (and wife), Vivian Reed, has
complained that the temperature control on the stove burners is difficult.
I suggested that it might be her imagination. Note that the steps are not
regular on the large burner and the Med Hi setting is essentially the same
as Med, so much for theory.

EFFICIENCY: I measured the efficiency of the electric stove the same way I
measure that of my biomass stoves, ie by boiling water. Not only is this
relevant to cooking, but it is simple and quite accurate due primarily to
the HIGH heat of vaporization of water, 550 cal/g, 2300 J/g (or ml).

I measured 500 ml(g) of water and poured into an open copper bottom cook
pan (7 ¼ in diam X 3 ¼ in tall. I set it on the small burner (5 ½ in
diam), turned it to Hi, and measured the following time-temperatures:

Time (min) 0 1 2 3 :56 15
Temp (C) 26 33 49 75 94 94
(Note: water boils at 94 C here in the "mile high" (5,280 ft) city.

I then measured the water remaining as 190 ml, so water vaporized = 310
ml.

I calculated the overall efficiency of bringing the water to boiling as

Eff(boiling) = Heat to pot/Heat in
= [500 ml x 1 cal/C-ml x (94-26 deg C)x 4.186J/cal] / [1440
J/secx900 sec]
= 48.5%
I also calculated the overall efficiency of water boiling for the 4 min
heating and 11 min boiling as

Eff(boiling) = Heat to pot/Heat in
= {[(94-26)x1x4.186x500] + [310x550cal/g(to
vaporize)x4.186]}/[15x60secx1414J/s] = 67.6%

I have measured this efficiency before more casually and known that
electric heating is efficient, these are VERY impressive numbers!

THE DOWNSIDE:
Cost: Our electric stove probably cost $500 (came with house) and will
certainly last 50 years if needed. However, it is attached to an electric
system that is attached to a meter that is attached to a power line that
goes to the Four Corners power plant that might add another few thousand
dollars to the cost of the privilege of electric cooking, and another few
thousand dollars for less clean air and more CO2.

REAL EFFICIENCY:
If we assume that the power arrives at my house (generation and
transmission losses) with 33% efficiency, then the OVERALL efficiencies are
16% for bringing to a boil and 23% for the full 15 minute cycle. Not much
more than a three stone stove. We won’t have much trouble beating that
with wood-gas stoves (approximately 40-50% efficient).

GAS STOVES: Not having a gas stove, I can’t make the equivalent
measurements on gas, but I hope someone else will (or this shouldn’t be
called a stove development network). If you have natural gas, you can get
a small boy to read the meter before and after the tests. (1000 Btu/ft3,
HHV). If you use propane, you can weigh the tank before and after to
determine fuel used.

If anyone knows someone in the stove industry, you might send this to
him/her and hope they can supply us the official figures from the electric
and gas industries. (I’ll try and send to Don Klass formerly IGT. Does
anyone have his E-mail address?)

Yours for truth in energy…
TOM REED

From cknowles at igc.org Mon Oct 12 15:21:24 1998
From: cknowles at igc.org (Cynthia Knowles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: BEAN NUTRITION and cooking
Message-ID: <2.2.16.19981012152816.39ef85e8@pop.igc.org>

Dear Tom,

The heat produced by slow cooking allows women in rural areas of some
developing countries (my experience extends to Central America and the
Caribbean only) to simmer basic foods cooked in water that would otherwise
burn (or the water would evaporate too quickly) if cooked continuously with
a very high flame or not be fully cooked before all the wood has burned
away. Sustaining a large flame requires burning great amounts of fuelwood
and considerable attention to adding that wood (then you must add safety
considerations to the equation). In addition, the quality of wood used will
determine whether one can produce a strong flame and/or a low flame with a
strong intensity for any lengthy period. Low quality woods burn quickly and
leave only ash; higher quality woods burn for longer periods and leave
embers, essential for slow cooking and simmering. Of course the technical
experts on this list have greater knowledge on this subject than I do. From
a practical perspective, cooking at low intensities is not only useful but
essential.

Cynthia Knowles

At 09:04 AM 10/5/98 -0400, Tom Reed wrote:
>Dear Caretakers:
>
>I am not a nutrition expert (only read parts of Diet for a Small Planet),
>but I understand that a diet of rice (or grains) and beans (or legumes)
>supplies all the needed amino acids and vegetarians can be at least as
>healthy as omnivarants.
>
>I demonstrated the turbo cook stove to Ron White of NREL and Eric Oiori
>Nyarko , programme officer at the Ministry of Mines and Energy in Ghana the
>last Monday.
>
>Ron told me that cooking intensity control exercises an disproportionate
>control on world nutrition. Beans take 4 hours to cook (simmer), longer
>if not presoaked. So people who need them often don't eat beans.
> ~~~~~
>One advantage of wood-gas stoves (as opposed to wood stoves) is that there
>is a much greater degree of control. The turbo cook stove burns at full
>intensity for 45 minutes on 400 g of peanut hull pellets. Would it burn 4
>hours at minimum intensity? I'll check it out.
>
>Alternatively, I have found that after all the volatiles have burned out of
>the fuel, if I am not careful to exclude ALL air (very difficult) the stove
>may be hot to the touch 12 hours later. (I think that I mentioned that I
>was awakened at 2 AM by our CO alarm ringing above the stove.) Charcoal
>will "burn" at incredibly low temperatures and low intensities. Could this
>be useful for slow cooking?
>
>I would welcome comments on any of these points.
>
>Yours truly, TOM REED
>
>Thomas B. Reed: The Biomass Energy Foundation
>1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401
>303 278 0558V; 303 278 0560F
>E-mail: reedtb@compuserve.com

******************************************
Cynthia L. Knowles
Enersol Associates, Inc.
A Member of
The Global Transition Group
55 Middlesex Street, Suite 221
North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA
Tel: (978)251-1828/29; Fax: (978)251-5291
E-mail: cknowles@igc.apc.org

From NFPWest at aol.com Tue Oct 13 13:01:48 1998
From: NFPWest at aol.com (NFPWest@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: request for health info
Message-ID: <dc334d8.36238991@aol.com>

Dear Rogerio, Prasad, Julia and other Stovers,

In regards to the health question that you have been discussing, let me add my
two cents worth. I have worked on stoves off and on for many years beginning
with the Lorena stoves and the chefina (a modified Lorena with adobe bricks)
in Guatemala in the 80's as a Peace Corps volunteer. More recently as Director
of the New Forests Project, I have worked on improved stoves (Finlandia style)
in Honduras in conjunction with PROLENA/Honduras and AHDESA (the Honduran
Association for Development), both non-profit organizations.

The efficiency of the clay or adobe type stoves, including LORENA, Chefina and
now the Finlandia has been an on-going problem. Our experience in the
community of Suyapa in Honduras is that if used correctly, the improved wood-
burning stoves can save from 10 - 30% in fuelwood used over the traditional
open cooking methods. Training and follow-up are key to making sure that the
stoves are used and maintained correctly, including cleaning out the chimneys.

However, the follow-up interviews (done by a Canadian volunteer for PROLENA
and a consultant sent in by New Forests) with the Honduran women who now have
stoves and others who have shown interest in building their own stoves in the
future, indicates that their (the womens') main interest is in the health
aspect of the stoves, i.e., getting the smoke out of the kitchen to protect
their health and that of their family members. As a result of these findings,
we are now promoting the stoves with the community members primarily for the
health benefits, with the fuelwood and economic savings being secondary
benefits.

Well, this change in emphasis for the stove project was a real eye-opener for
me being a forester who is interested in stopping deforestation. It
emphasizes once again the benefits of a multi-disciplinary approach to
development, including the social scientists and the technical specialists in
projects.

We have now received funding to build 500 improved stoves in Honduras over the
next year. From reading the discussions on the stove list, I am interested in
testing out the hot-box that has been discussed by Dean Still of Aprovecho and
K. Prasad.

How can I get some plans/drawings for the building of the hot boxes? Is it
better to have the hot box incorporated into the stove or to have the hot box
as a separate unit? Any other suggestions or experiences from those who have
tested the hot boxes or who have introduced them into people's homes would be
welcome. Please advise.

Stuart Conway
Trees, Water and People
633 S. College Ave.
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
Tel: 970-484-3678
FAX: 970-224-1726
e-mail: nfpwest@aol.com

P.S. I have left New Forests Project to start my own non-profit called Trees,
Water and People. TWP continues to work on reforestation, watershed
protection and appropriate technology (solar cookers and improved wood-burning
stoves) in Central America.
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From NFPWest at aol.com Tue Oct 13 13:16:58 1998
From: NFPWest at aol.com (NFPWest@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: reply to request for health infoRe: request for health info
In-Reply-To: <dc334d8.36238991@aol.com>
Message-ID: <17e0b285.36238d6b@aol.com>

Dear Mr. Conway,
We have recently designed a mud stove with a hotbox as a part of
the stove. We are still studying it and have not yet introduced it in any
user households, but our laboratory trials have shown promising results.
We believe that there is a definite advantage in (a) making the hotbox an
integral part of the stove and (b) using clay for making the hotbox.
The reason for (a) lies in our own experience of promoting
portable metal hotboxes. We found that the portable boxes get used more
for storage than for their intended purpose. The reason for (b) is the low
cost and design ease. The prepared clay that is used for making mud stoves
provides sufficient insulation on its own without having to use any other
insulating material. So the hotbox is just a clay cylinder. The lid also
can be made of earthenware. With such a hotbox we have been able to bring
down the fuel consumption by 30% or more. Of course, the performance of
the hotbox will depend on the type of clay used and may vary from place to
place, but the preliminary results are really encouraging.
With regards,
Priyadarshini Karve.

On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 NFPWest@aol.com wrote: (in part)

> We have now received funding to build 500 improved stoves in Honduras over the
> next year. From reading the discussions on the stove list, I am interested in
> testing out the hot-box that has been discussed by Dean Still of Aprovecho and
> K. Prasad.
>
> How can I get some plans/drawings for the building of the hot boxes? Is it
> better to have the hot box incorporated into the stove or to have the hot box
> as a separate unit? Any other suggestions or experiences from those who have
> tested the hot boxes or who have introduced them into people's homes would be
> welcome. Please advise.
>
> Stuart Conway
> Trees, Water and People
> 633 S. College Ave.
> Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
> Tel: 970-484-3678
> FAX: 970-224-1726
> e-mail: nfpwest@aol.com

From gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in Wed Oct 14 03:55:59 1998
From: gpk at physics.unipune.ernet.in (Priyadarshini Karve(SBO))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: rural cookstoves and deforestation
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.981014125727.14334C-100000@physics>

Dear stovers,
Time and again I come across statements that cite deforestation as
one of the consequences of using traditional inefficient cookstoves in
rural households in the third world. I wish to point out that it is a
misconception that fuelwood is consumed for domestic cooking in rural
households. In fact, this misconception is also an important reason why
many stove designs that are highly efficient in laboratory fail to perform
satisfactorily in field. This happens because the laboratory tests are run
exclusively for wood as fuel, so that the stove dimensions are optimised
for the burning characteristics of wood. But in reality, a rural houswife
hardly ever uses fuelwood. The most used fuel in rural households is
agrowaste, which is available in large quantities and free of cost.
On the other hand, fuelwood is consumed in large quantities for
community cooking, i.e., in hotels, hostels, bakerys, confectionarys, etc.
So the right strategy for stoves research would be as follows:
As far as domestic cookstoves are concerned, the health related
issues are more important than fuel saving. It is necessary to concentrate
on stove designs that can burn variety of agrowaste materials in a clean
and efficient manner. Developing universally applicable designs is nearly
impossible in this case, considering the wide variety of possible fuels.
Therefore devising inexpensive ways to convert agrowaste into more
standard fuel forms (biomass briquettes, char or woodgas) and designing
stoves for these fuels can also be a fruitful approach.
Stoves using fuelwood need to be designed for large scale cooking.
It is possible to have very efficient stoves in this case because one can
design pot-specific stoves. Thus it is possible to achieve very high heat
transfer efficiency.
The community stoves has a tremendous commercial potential and we
have found that these can also be used for generating awareness about
improved cookstoves. However it appears to be a neglected area in the
discussions among stovers, and therefore I am raising this issue. At ARTI,
we have designed several community cookstoves and have successful8ly
popularised these in commercial as well as charitable establishments.
These stoves bring down the fuelwood consumption by half and the price of
the stove is recovered within an year or so. The average life of the
stoves (both clay as well as metallic ones) is 8 to 10 years. We have
recently started working on special purpose cooking systems, and as a
first step have developed a design of a bakery oven. We actually sell the
community cookstoves as well as the design know-how to generate additional
funds to support our stoves research and popularisation programme!
With regards,
Priyadarshini Karve.

From elk at net2000ke.com Wed Oct 14 04:31:41 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Deforestation and Wood fuel
Message-ID: <v01520d00b24a3c1c0d7d@[195.202.65.96]>

Priyadarshini Karve. states:

>it is a misconception that fuelwood is consumed for domestic cooking in rural
>households.

I beg to differ. Obviously such a statement must be made in a regional context.

Here in E.Africa, deforestation is directly linked to household fuel
requirements, and agro-waste is rarely utilised as cooking fuel - unless it
is wood (like tea and coffee prunings), of course.

I'd be very interested to see the global demographics of household fuel
consumption by type and quantity. Such a survey must be available
somewhere- even at a 'guesstimate' level, and would be a valuable overview
to all stovers.

On this list we have a unified purpose based on varied priorities, no?

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From Auke.Koopmans at fao.org Wed Oct 14 04:56:08 1998
From: Auke.Koopmans at fao.org (Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Deforestation and Wood fuel
Message-ID: <01J2YIQZ54HE8Y539F@faov02.fao.org>

Elsen Karstadt writes based on Priadarshis statement on deforestation and
woodfuel:

I'd be very interested to see the global demographics of household
fuel
consumption by type and quantity. Such a survey must be available
somewhere- even at a 'guesstimate' level, and would be a valuable
overview
to all stovers.
===============

Very rough estimates made by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris
show the following for biomass energy consumption data for 1995:

Africa (average of 54 countries with 705 million people) use 294 kg oil
equivalent in the form of biomass with 91% used in the domestic sector and
60% consisting of wood.

Latin Amercia (average of 26 countries with 478 million people) use 166 kg
oil equivalent in the form of biomass with 48% used in the domestic sector
and 54% consisting of wood.

East Asia (average of 14 countries with 583 million people) use 174 kg oil
equivalent in the form of biomass with 93% used in the domestic sector and
70% consisting of wood.

South Asia includes India (average of 6 countries with 1219 million people)
use 157 kg oil equivalent in the form of biomass with 87% used in the
domestic sector and 79% consisting of wood.

China (average of 1 countries with 1206 million people) use 172 kg oil
equivalent in the form of biomass with 100% used in the domestic sector and
43% consisting of wood.

Sorry at this moment I do not have total energy consumption in the domestic
sector handy so it may be difficult to make direct comparisons. Do remember
that these are very rough figures based on best estimates/guestimates and
that real life may show considerable differences. Besides, average data hide
a lot. For some Southeast Asian countries (part of the Regional Wood Energy
Development Programme) please refer to our webpage

Regards,

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

From elizabethb at itdg.org.uk Wed Oct 14 06:34:37 1998
From: elizabethb at itdg.org.uk (Elizabeth Bates)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199810141034.GAA08467@solstice.crest.org>

Dear All
I don't usually have much to contribute to the network, but read the
material as it arrives to find out what might be interesting to our
journal readership.
I edit the journal Boiling Point which is `a technical journal for
those working with stoves and household energy. It deals with
technical, social, financial and environmental issues, and aims to
improve the quality of life for poor communities living in the
developing world. Issue number 41 of the journal `Boiling Point' is
about to be published. The theme for this edition is `Household Energy
- the urban dimension'. If anyone is not on our database to receive
`Boiling Point' and would like to receive a copy of this edition, or
would like to be added to our database to receive the journal twice
per year, can they please let me know, giving their full postal
address. It should be ready for dispatch in the next 2-3 weeks.
As this issue goes into print I am now looking for potential authors
for the next edition whose theme is `Environmental impacts of
household energy'. The articles we seek are about 1500 words long, and
we really need illustrations (either line drawings or photographs) The
topics we hope to publish include:
- Positive responses within the household energy sector to the
problems of deforestation
- The impacts of electrification on the external environment (power
station emissions etc)
- Implications for household energy programmes of international
policies on global warming
- Gender-related decision-making and how that affects the local
environment
-Determining the importance of the contribution of household
emissions to the overall urban environment (especially relative to
other emissions)
- Environmental implications of moving up the `fuel ladder'
- Work being done on `clean' alternatives; wind, micro-hydro,solar
etc. and their impacts
- Coal as a household fuel and its effect on the environment
- The environmental implications of charcoal use
This list is not intended to inhibit authors from writing on other
topics, so if there is something which you feel should be addressed,
please feel very welcome to submit a paper or papers to me either as
typescript (or manuscript) or on disc (ideally Wordperfect or ASCII)
or by e-mail.

Thank you

Elizabeth Bates
Email: elizabethb@itdg.org.uk
Intermediate Technology
Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development
Bourton Hall
Bourton-on-Dunsmore
Warwickshire
CV23 9QZ
Tel:+44-1788 661100
Fax:+44-1788 661101

Url: http://www.oneworld.org/itdg
Intl: http://www.itdg.org.pe
Company Reg No 871954, England
Charity No 247257

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Wed Oct 14 08:54:20 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Don't count on propane....
Message-ID: <199810140905_MC2-5CA1-BD3C@compuserve.com>

Dear Roger et al:

Roger said....I understand, at least in our case here in Central America, that probably
in the future (perhaps 10 to 50 years) most of those families will be then
using a LPG stove. But, while it doesn't happen, should we promote IW? What
do you think ? ...rogerio

Unfortunately, propane is only a small fraction of all hydrocarbons,
so demand determines price. As the cost of oil rockets (2010?) propane
will go up even faster.

So, go for wood-gas for stoves, solves all the problems noted.

Tom Reed

Thomas B. Reed: The Biomass Energy Foundation
1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401
303 278 0558V; 303 278 0560F
E-mail: reedtb@compuserve.com

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

From mheat at mha-net.org Wed Oct 14 09:03:36 1998
From: mheat at mha-net.org (Norbert Senf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: rural cookstoves and deforestation
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.981014125727.14334C-100000@physics>
Message-ID: <Version.32.19981014073922.00f3d4c0@mha-net.org>

At 01:38 PM 14/10/98 -0500, Priyadarshini Karve wrote:

> The community stoves has a tremendous commercial potential and we
>have found that these can also be used for generating awareness about
>improved cookstoves. However it appears to be a neglected area in the
>discussions among stovers, and therefore I am raising this issue.

Another possible consideration may be commercial bakeovens. We have been
working for a number of years with a high-mass, highly insulated design
developed by Alan Scott. It appears to be very efficient. For example, a
Finnish authority quoted me a figure of 400 gm of wood per kg of dough as
good efficiency for a bakeoven. In a 2 m X 3 m oven that we recently built,
the owner appears to be getting roughly double that. We have some info.
about this oven online at

http://mha-net.org/msb/html/bakeov08.htm

and more general information at

http://mha-net.org/msb/html/bakeoven.htm

Best.........Norbert Senf

From larcon at sni.net Wed Oct 14 12:43:39 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Chisholm on Forced vs Induced Draft Charcoaling
Message-ID: <v01540b02b24a7c2a0d4c@[204.133.28.43]>

Stovers:
Kevin Chisholm has responded to my last introduction to his last
forwarded message on forced ventilation, when I said:

> Now the issue is when and where should it be used with stoves or
> charcoal-making (unlike incinerators)? Ron

Below, Kevin gives an excellent (but partial) answer to my
statement of the issue. What I was thinking of was when should charcoalers
(like Elsen, with sawdust) build tall chimneys and when should they prefer
to use blowers? I was mainly thinking of the difficulty of providing
electricity in a remote location - and thinking that perhaps a blower would
be needed for sawdust, but not for wood. My guess is that Elsen would
still prefer the chimney to the blower when he is operating in a remote
location, especially if the load were one kW (which can probably be reduced
a lot for Elsen's "five-barrel" chimney design). The remote electricity
could cost something like $.50 per kWh and Elsen might not see that as
worthwhile (where labor is low cost).

The other part of the problem would seem to be in the uniformity
(or nonuniformity) of flow through the sawdust bed. I would guess that (in
the absence of constant tending) most of the air flow (whether forced or
natural draft) would go through one or a few larger passages. Is there any
difference likely with updraft or downdraft? Elsen (and Kevin below) is
using downdraft, because he has concluded there is a need for constant
tending and continuing additions of sawdust. But perhaps there is a batch
design (maybe updraft) that would be inherently more uniform??

Another group of list members prefer to produce their charcoal in a
batch mode, with the sawdust (or leaves or other) contained in separate
closed containers and the pyrolysis gases providing the heat input for the
drying/pyrolysis. A blower does not seem necessary here, but one instead
has to put one's funds into the many batch containers.

Elsen's first (still unsuccessful) efforts were with augers. Other
designs have used other types of moving beds. Others have suggested that
the sawdust should be compressed into briquets. I mention all this to say
that the problem of optimally turning sawdust (or leaves, etc) in remote
locations does not yet seem to have been solved. Ron

(The remainder from Kevin:)

Dear Ron, et al

The question is not one of "forced draft" or "induced draft", but rather,
differential pressure across a bed. The differential pressure is the
driving force,
and it doesn't fundamentally matter if the "delta P" results from sucking
or blowing
through the bed.

In practise, however, there can be huge practical consequences as to the method
employed to create the "delta P" across a bed.

Forced draft systems generally require a mechanically powered fan system.
Suction
systems can be created without machinery and mechanical power input. However, a
suction system can be assisted with a mechanical draft fan, but if it passes the
products of combustion, it is subjected to the temperature conditions of
the gas.

In general, forced draft systems supplying a given weight of cold air to a
charcoaling furnace will require a smaller fan, with less HP draw, than
would the
same system employing a suction fan on the products of combustion that induced a
similar weight of combustion air.

The practical problems associated with a forced draft fan on a charcoal
installation
would be as follows:
1: Introducing pressurized air to the top of the wood bed.
2: Sealing the pressure side of the system. (This usually means an "air
lock" on the
fuel wood supply, if the system is fed continuously.)

If a "closed top" stove is employed, with an air gate across the wood
supply entry
point, then the system can be operated on a "semi-continuous batch basis".
In Elk's
case, he could start his stoves in the present manner, with a shallow bed of
sawdust, and the fuel feed port open, to get a uniform bed of coals , then
flood the
system with sawdust, close the fuel feed port, and turn on a forced draft
fan. His
production rate would be proportional to the increase in air flow which the
forced
draft permitted. He would have to "refuel with new wood" appropriately more
frequently.

The temperature of the "off gases" would probably rise, simply because
there is a
greater flow rate, and there would be proportionally less heat loss to the
surroundings. Similarily, the stack would get much hotter, probably to the point
where excess temperatures would cause rapid scaling and oxidation of mild
steel. A
liner of local fireclay would be enormously helpful in extending the life of the
mild steel stack.

A simple axial flow fan can be made easily from an old rotary lawn mower. Simply
heat the blade and bend it, to increase the pitch. I would guess at about
20 degrees
for the outer 6" on each end. Mount above a vertical pipe about 1" to 2"
greater in
diameter than the blade. This crude fan system would probably yield a 5 to
10 times
increase in hourly production of charcoal.

As a point of interest, a 1 HP fan will deliver about 4,000 Standard Cubic
Feet per
Minute (SCFM) at 1" H2O static pressure at 100% efficiency. Assuming 25%
efficiency,
this would suggest about 1,000 SCFM at 1" static pressure. This is enough
air flow
to burn about 12 pounds of wood per minute completely, or to produce 25 to
50 pounds
of charcoal per MINUTE.

I hope this crude concept outline indicates the potential for the use of forced
draft on a charcoal system.

Kevin Chisholm

From elk at net2000ke.com Thu Oct 15 03:36:52 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Deforestation and Fuelwood
Message-ID: <v01520d01b24b6612fc38@[195.202.65.95]>

Stovers;

I sit here in my office on the outskirts of Nairobi flanked on two sides
with the remnants of an indigenous forest. Fuelwood predation has reduced
this forest in size and quality - it's now more bush than forest. This is
still an official Government 'protected' forest. The depredation continues
daily as streams of women carry out bundles of sticks- both fresh and
'windfall' during the day, and teams of more determined poachers fell and
remove entire trees during the night. There is a great econonomic intentive
here that is countered by low risk of punishment. As far as I can
determine, nearly all of this wood (primarily the hardwood, Brown Olive) is
used for domestic fuel. Possibly a small proportion ends up in the hands
of curio wood carvers.

>As far as I am concerned the rural fuel use is a mystery.

Further from the urban areas great tracts of bushland has been reduced to
shrubland by charcoal manufacturers. Efforts to collect wood are certainly
minimised around the home- with backyards being denuded of trees first- if
a forest is half an hours walk away, you can be sure that trees not
protected by their owners will be removed if they happen to be closer to
home than the forest is. It's logical when you live a here-and-now,
hand-to-mouth existance, isn't it? And it's only getting worse as the
population increases. Per-capita income decreases along with a diminished
buying power of the currencies this income is measured by.

The family 'shamba' (farm) has been divided time and again as adult
offspring claim their share of the family assets. It's sad to see tall
cyprus trees surrounding these tiny farms with just a tuft of green foliage
at the very top.....all lower branches have been stripped off for firewood.

Just picture an East African city as a termite mound.... the depredation of
forests for both timber and fuelwood extends in a radial pattern outward.
At the furthest reaches the pattern becomes more patchy- due to road access
mainly- and is confined to wood harvested for charcoal production. Timber
harvesting can be more easily controlled (though poaching is rampant) than
woodfuel collection. The forest resources are rapidly diminishing under
this pressure.

Why differentiate between rural and urban? Wood, in one form or the other
is still the primary domestic cooking fuel in Africa- urban or rural.

>The fact that people are using ag. residues and dung is predicated
>upon the fact that the forests disappeared before the current lot
>arrived on the scene.

It's happening here now. Maybe dung will be used more commonly once all
woody vegetation has disapeared from the scene, but here at present very
few people indeed use dung as a fuel. Dung is used as a building material
when mixed with mud, and as an insect repellent (smoke) within houses in
small quantity. I've just interviewed several of my staff here from
different tribes and areas within Kenya to confirm this.

SURELY a more efficient wood burning stove would help. So would a more
efficient charcoal stove. So would the stop-gap of fossil fuel use. And,
hey- why not reduce emmissions while we are at it? Maybe people who are
healthier can plan their lives beyond tomorrow......

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From elk at net2000ke.com Thu Oct 15 06:44:52 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <v01520d0cb24badd8d911@[195.202.65.95]>

Stovers;

I won't make a habit of sharing my scrapbook with you on a daily basis, but
this additional clipping from one of the loal newspapers helps to
underscore some of the current issues being discussed on the list:

Daily Nation, Thurs. 15/10/98

DC ACCUSES REFUGEES OF POACHING

Refugees fro Liboi and Dadaab are killing giraffes, who's meat is a
delicacy in the camps, Garissa District Commissioner Salim Ali Mola said
yesterday.

..............the article goes on about this, and concludes with:

Mr. Mola, who was speaking at the Garissa Farmers Training Center where he
officially opened a workshop, also complained about wanton destruction of
trees around the camps.
He said that hundreds of acres of forests had been cleared by the
refugees in the past few months.
He blamed this on a decision by the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees to give tenders to businessmen and refugees to
supply firewood to the camps.
The DC said destruction of forst areas denied local pastoralists
access to grazing.
He asked the UN agency to start programmes to rehabilitate the
deforested areas.

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From NFPWest at aol.com Thu Oct 15 12:30:09 1998
From: NFPWest at aol.com (NFPWest@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Solar Cookers
Message-ID: <c39524a7.36262512@aol.com>

Hi Cynthia,

Thank you for the information on your research into stove use in the Dominican
Republic. Your preliminary findings that women are most concerned with the
health aspects of the wood stoves are consistent with what I have heard and
read at our pilot stove building project in Suyapa, Honduras. Please send me
your report when it is completed.

As far as solar cookers are concerned, I have mixed feelings about them at
this point. Our project staff on the south coast of Guatemala have been
promoting and training men and women on the construction and use of solar
cookers for about five years. The first couple of years we were promoting the
cardboard model from Solar Cookers International. However, we found that the
cardboard did not hold up well under the hot, humid conditions of the south
coast.

Over the last two years, we have been promoting the Sunstove, solar cooker
made of a plastic outer shell and with recycled aluminum printing plates for
reflectors. With both cookers, people showed a lot of interest initially and
attended training sessions, but only about 20 people from the five communities
where we have been introducing the Sunstove have bought the cookers even with
the financing (revolving fund) that we made available.

There are several factors working against adoption of the solar cookers in
Central America. I think that the main problem is a cultural one in that the
solar cookers are just too different from the traditional cooking method for
most people. Another problem is the time factor in that the solar cooker is a
slow cook method compared to a fire (more like a crock pot). A third factor is
weather conditions. If it becomes cloudy, then the solar cookers don't cook as
well or at all.

Due to our experience in Guatemala, I am more interested at this point in the
improved wood stoves that are closer to the traditional cooking methods and
are therefore more easily adopted by people in Central America. I have not
given up entirely on solar cookers, however. I think that they can be
introduced in conjunction with improved wood-burning stoves, if the cost of
the cookers is kept low and some type of financing with low monthly payments
is made available. Solar cookers will never entirely replace other cooking
methods anyway due to the factors that I mentioned above, but can play a part
in moving people away from fuelwood or at least reducing the amount of
fuelwood and other fuels used for cooking.

I have several newsletter articles on our solar project in Guatemala. Send me
your fax number if you are interested in receiving them.

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

From elk at net2000ke.com Thu Oct 15 13:07:22 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Secondary Air for Chimney- Carbonising Sawdust
Message-ID: <199810151719.UAA01675@net2000ke.com>

From larcon at sni.net Thu Oct 15 15:56:24 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: El fadil news - Another PhD
Message-ID: <v01540b03b24bbf7721cd@[204.133.28.16]>

Stovers: This is to congratulate still another stoves list member for
gaining his/her PhD!!

I hope that one of you may be in a position to offer El Fadil a
Post-Doc or similar position. I urge that they contact El Fadil or myself.
I met El Fadil at the Harare-Zimbabwe ISES conference several years ago
and we have continued our dialog since, mostly off-list. I will be glad to
supply a strong character reference to any on the list who may be able to
assist El Fadil in finding a suitable position for a recent PhD (who can
speak at least four languages including German, Arabic and English).

El Fadil:
I also hope we can stay in contact. I know that Sudan has only
very limited opportunities for gaining access to the Internet. However,
when you are able to do so, I hope you will let myself and others on the
stoves list know about stoves-related happening in Sudan.

As to your return to Sudan (if my first paragraph is not
successful), there may be some disappointments in not receiving a Post-Doc
position outside the Sudan. However, I presume that you will be able to
teach at the University of Khartoum and continue some research at the Solar
lab at Soba. You will have a very strong group of associates and your
return will undoubtedly make a big difference. There are many
opportunities even in the private sector there (I am thinking of Dr. Salih
Hamadto's experiences) and I know of your own deep commitment to helping
solve some of the serious wood energy problems that Sudan faces. Your
return will be very important for the Sudan. Please say hello to my friends
there. Best of luck. Ron

>Dear Dr. Larson,
>
>I have the pleasure to infrom you that on Oct. 12. 98 I have
>successfully obtained the Ph.D. degree with an overall grade of
>execellent. Unfortunately, I didn't succeed to get any postdoc
>position or any other job. The only alternative is to return back to
>Sudan.
>Best regards and I will keep in contact.
>
>El Fadil

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

From larcon at sni.net Thu Oct 15 15:56:35 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Elsen Karstad on Deforestation and Fuelwood
Message-ID: <v01540b05b24bda316945@[204.133.28.16]>

Stovers: I am just adding a few comments on the (abbreviated) dialog below
from Elsen - which is mainly in response to a comment from Dr.
Priyadarshini Karve that indicated that wood is much less used in India
than is ag wastes.

>Stovers;
>
>I sit here in my office on the outskirts of Nairobi flanked on two sides
>with the remnants of an indigenous forest. Fuelwood predation has reduced
>this forest in size and quality - it's now more bush than forest. This is
>still an official Government 'protected' forest. The depredation continues
>daily as streams of women carry out bundles of sticks- both fresh and
>'windfall' during the day, and teams of more determined poachers fell and
>remove entire trees during the night. There is a great econonomic intentive
>here that is countered by low risk of punishment. As far as I can
>determine, nearly all of this wood (primarily the hardwood, Brown Olive) is
>used for domestic fuel. Possibly a small proportion ends up in the hands
>of curio wood carvers.

(Larson comments #1. First, I write as one of the few on the list
who has been in Elsen's office. It must indeed be dismaying to see this
illegal activity occuring when it need not. The solution is not obvious -
and it is only going to get worse. Here are some questions:

a. To Elsen - Assuming that many locals are concerned about your
adjacent disappearing government forest - what do they see as the best
means of solution? Will locally hired guards work? Can a low cost
seedling program help?
How big a subsidy would be needed to offer low-cost (not free)
sustainable fuels?
How big a deal is efficiency in solving this problem?

b. To Priyadarshini Karve: - I believe that many or most trees in
India are government owned and taking them (or any part?) could result in
heavy fines. Could you clarify the Indian law on this - especially on
collecting dead limbs. How widely is this law (if true) obeyed or ignored
and why?
How much use is there of charcoal in India?

c.. To anyone familiar with community woodlots: What are the
accepted means used to prevent over-collection of the type described by
Elsen?

>
>>As far as I am concerned the rural fuel use is a mystery.
>
>Further from the urban areas great tracts of bushland has been reduced to
>shrubland by charcoal manufacturers. Efforts to collect wood are certainly
>minimised around the home- with backyards being denuded of trees first- if
>a forest is half an hours walk away, you can be sure that trees not
>protected by their owners will be removed if they happen to be closer to
>home than the forest is. It's logical when you live a here-and-now,
>hand-to-mouth existance, isn't it? And it's only getting worse as the
>population increases. Per-capita income decreases along with a diminished
>buying power of the currencies this income is measured by.
>
(Larson Point #2 on population - I have just finished reading the
latest book(let) from WorldWatch (#143, "Beyond Malthus: Sixteen Dimensions
of the Population Problem", Lester Brown, Gary Gardner, and Brian Halweil,
Sept. 1998, 89 pp. This booklet of course doesn't get into the specific
developing country cooking problems this list has been discussing, that are
exemplified by Elsen's last paragraph. However, I have already seen #143
cited a few times and I think it will have even more importance soon - and
it allows me to get at some of the points that I see need to be discussed
in relation to Elsen's last paragraph.

Brown et al mostly look at the century between 1950 and 2050, with
usually one good Figure or Table for each of these 16 "dimensions". I
couldn't find data for Kenya, but I would guess that the authors would
predict approximately a 200% increase in population for Kenya between 1998
and 2050. That for Ethiopia is 244% (213 million over 62 million). India
is projected to only grow by 57% - but this adds 557 million people -
giving it the "honor" of overtaking China as being the most populous
country.

The point is that if Nairobi is seeing this sort of catastrophe
now, think what it will be like with three times the present population.
India already has three of the world's 14 megacities (greater than 10
Million population): Bombay, Calcutta, and Delhi. I mention this because
the booklet projects an increase of the world's urban population by 50%
(from about 46% to 69%) So where Elsen now sees a problem on Nairobi's
outskirts - it might become 4 or 5 times worse (not 3 times worse) by 2050.

Two final example booklet statistics:

1). By 2050, the forest area in Africa will drop from 1995's 0.32 hectares
per capita to 0.11. (Asia goes from .12 to .08! Europe and Russia grow
from 1.1 to 1.28 as it has already stabilized and will drop population
further. The world average drops from .59 to .36). Can this group help to
change these forest projections? Who else?

2) The world's per capita annual energy consumption has changed from about
0.7 ton of oil equivalent to about 1.7 today and projected to grow to about
2.7 in 2050. I am pretty sure that these statistics do not includes
biomass. Although most of the projections include even larger percentage
growths for developing countries, I personally doubt that those who are
using wood stoves today will even get up to the 1950 numbers. In 2050,
their heirs will still be using wood and/or crop residues. Hopefully the
delivered services will be comparable - but done more efficiently. This is
an area where we can certainly be helpful.

The point of offering these few points (there are 14 more to
discuss) is to follow up on Elsen and point out the need for greater
attention to population pressures and the negative future for many many of
our list "clients". We have our work cut out for us and I thank Elsen for
giving this opportunity to say again how serious the population problem is.
The term "Malthus" carries a lot of negative connotations, but Brown et al
have statstics to show that a lower projection can be a much more
comfortable one. Other comments?

<snip>
>
>SURELY a more efficient wood burning stove would help. So would a more
>efficient charcoal stove. So would the stop-gap of fossil fuel use. And,
>hey- why not reduce emmissions while we are at it? Maybe people who are
>healthier can plan their lives beyond tomorrow......
>
>elk

(Larson Comment #3 - just to remind the list that some of us think
that a charcoal-making stove can go a long way in the efficiency and health
directions - and that Elsen has done some of the best work in this
direction, even though he has modestly not said so here. His interests
have gone well beyond sawdust-to-charcoal. Thanks again, Elsen - keep up
the good work.)

From kchishol at fox.nstn.ca Fri Oct 16 00:14:05 1998
From: kchishol at fox.nstn.ca (kchishol)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Secondary Air for Chimney- Carbonising Sawdust
In-Reply-To: <199810151719.UAA01675@net2000ke.com>
Message-ID: <3626CA2E.94FF837E@fox.nstn.ca>

Dear Elk:
May I suggest the following concept?
1: Introduce the pyrolysis gases tangentially into a 45 gal drum, near
one end, along with tangentially introduced combustion air.
2: Opposite the other end, and connected to it, build your "supplemental
wood stove, complete with its own air supply. Design the stove in a way
that there is provision to introduce primary air below the grates, to cool
them and extend their life, and to gasify the wood. Also include a secondary
air means above the fuel bed, to burn the wood volatiles.
3: Erect your stack common to both.
4: In the stack, install tangentially aligned tertiary air inlets.
OPERATION: Start a fire in the wood stove, to induce initial draft.
Then ignite a shallow bed of sawdust in the charcoal stove. As it catches,
and the sawdust volatizes, adjust air inlet to the pyrolysis gas burner,
to get these gases burning. This will take a while, until the underground
passages get up to temperature. Add more sawdust to the charcoal stove,
as sufficient draft develops. When the sawdust is pyrolysing well, stop
adding wood, close off wood stove air inlets, and do final tuning of air
requirements witht eh tertiary air inlets in the stack.
NOTE: 1: If things work well, you will have temperatures in the burner
sections which make the steel shells red hot. This will cause scaling.
To minimize scaling, line the inside of the burners and the base
of the stack with fireclay, to a thickness of about 2"
2: It would be enormously helpful to your Staff to have a stack temperature
gauge. They could then adjust air inlets to maximize temperatures attained
in the stack, and thereby maximize the draft created.
Hope these concepts are helpful.
Kevin Chisholm

Elsen Karstad wrote:
Stovers-
your input is required;
I would
appreciate some advice on the configuration of secondary air inlets for
my 6-drum chimney which is currently in production. This will be drawing
air (pyrolysis gasses) from beneath the two 2m. dia. downdraft sawdust
carbonising kilns.
The
basic idea:
Drum
one will be positioned horizontally half buried, as the base of the chimney.
This drum will be the fire-box, burning the 'sparkplug' wood and be connected
to the kilns on either side of the chimney via 20 cm dia pipes. Volatiles
drawn from beneath the bed of carbonizing sawdust via these pipes
and enter the bottom (horizontal) drum beneath a grate that supports
the wood. An access door will be cut into one end of the drum to feed in
wood and clear ash as needed. This will be as airtight as is practical.
What
I'm deliberating over is how to ensure that the volatiles are burnt effectively.
This will increase the flue draft and hence airflow down through the carbonising
sawdust- determining the overall rate of pyrolysis. I recall the
'wick' and the 'blunt object' from previous charcoal-making stove designs.
Then there is the secondary air pre-heating aspects of the 1can and 2can
stoves..... Hmmmm.
With
all the room a chimney made of 5 vertically stacked 200 liter drums affords,
maybe a clever method of introducing secondary air just above the
burning wood (or just below....?) can be considered. I've a couple ideas,
but I have a strong feeling that I'm missing out on something obvious here.
Suggestions
solicited!

elk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Elsen
L. Karstad , P.O. Box 24371 Nairobi Kenya
elk@net2000ke.com
tel/fax (+ 254 2) 884437

From greensue at hotmail.com Fri Oct 16 01:02:00 1998
From: greensue at hotmail.com (Susanne Machler)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Poverty and Kowledge
Message-ID: <19981016051303.25502.qmail@hotmail.com>

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:49:00 +0300
To: stoves@crest.org
From: elk@net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Subject: Deforestation and Fuelwood

Stovers;

I sit here in my office on the outskirts of Nairobi flanked on two sides
with the remnants of an indigenous forest. Fuelwood predation has
reduced
this forest in size and quality - it's now more bush than forest. This
is
still an official Government 'protected' forest. The depredation
continues
daily as streams of women carry out bundles of sticks- both fresh and
'windfall' during the day, and teams of more determined poachers fell
and
remove entire trees during the night. There is a great econonomic
intentive
here that is countered by low risk of punishment. As far as I can
determine, nearly all of this wood (primarily the hardwood, Brown Olive)
is
used for domestic fuel. Possibly a small proportion ends up in the hands
of curio wood carvers.

>As far as I am concerned the rural fuel use is a mystery.

Further from the urban areas great tracts of bushland has been reduced
to
shrubland by charcoal manufacturers. Efforts to collect wood are
certainly
minimised around the home- with backyards being denuded of trees first-
if
a forest is half an hours walk away, you can be sure that trees not
protected by their owners will be removed if they happen to be closer to
home than the forest is. It's logical when you live a here-and-now,
hand-to-mouth existance, isn't it? And it's only getting worse as the
population increases. Per-capita income decreases along with a
diminished
buying power of the currencies this income is measured by.

The family 'shamba' (farm) has been divided time and again as adult
offspring claim their share of the family assets. It's sad to see tall
cyprus trees surrounding these tiny farms with just a tuft of green
foliage
at the very top.....all lower branches have been stripped off for
firewood.

Just picture an East African city as a termite mound.... the depredation
of
forests for both timber and fuelwood extends in a radial pattern
outward.
At the furthest reaches the pattern becomes more patchy- due to road
access
mainly- and is confined to wood harvested for charcoal production.
Timber
harvesting can be more easily controlled (though poaching is rampant)
than
woodfuel collection. The forest resources are rapidly diminishing under
this pressure.

Why differentiate between rural and urban? Wood, in one form or the
other
is still the primary domestic cooking fuel in Africa- urban or rural.

>The fact that people are using ag. residues and dung is predicated
>upon the fact that the forests disappeared before the current lot
>arrived on the scene.

It's happening here now. Maybe dung will be used more commonly once all
woody vegetation has disapeared from the scene, but here at present very
few people indeed use dung as a fuel. Dung is used as a building
material
when mixed with mud, and as an insect repellent (smoke) within houses in
small quantity. I've just interviewed several of my staff here from
different tribes and areas within Kenya to confirm this.

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From elk at net2000ke.com Fri Oct 16 01:29:24 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:07 2004
Subject: Woodfuel and Deforestation
Message-ID: <199810160541.IAA03616@net2000ke.com>

Ronal asks; a. To Elsen - Assuming that many locals are concerned about youradjacent disappearing government forest - what do they see as the bestmeans of solution? Will locally hired guards work? Can a low costseedling program help? How big a subsidy would be needed to offer low-cost (not free)sustainable fuels? How big a deal is efficiency in solving this problem?A movement is afoot right now, and it involves targeting land that has been land that has been allocated by the Kenya Gov't to politically 'connected' people via irregular procedure. It's quite a ground-swell reaction and last week a developer's site within a Nairobi forest was burnt down together with several pieces of construction equipment- bulldozers etc. While this does not concern woodfuel harvesting, it is underscoring the value of forests to the masses. I believe that the concerned Gov't custodial departments will wake up a bit and start to more actively protect forests here. They are under close public scrutiny now, or so it seems. Another demo is planned for the same forest that is adjacent to my offices. This time the complaint is the irregular issue of building-stone quarrying permits for within this indigenous forest.So- a solution seems to have surfaced of it's own accord- the press, an active NGO force and opposition parties (democracy). Reforestation is necessary, and a local NGO group - the Green Belt Movement- seems prepared to undertake this. With the proper funds, of course.Protecting the biodiversity of an indigenous forest while concurrently managing it's sustainable resources, like woodfuel is difficult and does require a lot of manpower. I feel it is possible here though, and with the multi-faceted value of such forests becoming more apparent, there is a move toward a greater degree of protection. Whether sufficient action will be taken in time to save forests such as the one near my office is in doubt though.I believe that there is a big future in woodfuel tree plantations for Kenya, and this would seem to be economically sustainable under the current and foreseeable economic conditions here. Both charcoal and woodfuel can be produced in a sustainable fashion, with charcoal produced in areas more distant from the urban market. The major inhibitor has been time-scale. Waiting a minimum of six years before beginning to harvest the first of the product is a difficult factor to accommodate in a country with bank interest rates of 30%.Efficient woodstoves, as we all know, could reduce the depredation on forests, particularly forests proximal to urban areas, by whatever the equation allows.... The % decrease in fuel demand multiplied by the number of households using the equipment..... not hard to attain a significant impact in theory......... but that's what's been frustrating us, hasn't it?elk~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Elsen L. Karstad , P.O. Box 24371 Nairobi Kenyaelk@net2000ke.com tel/fax (+ 254 2) 884437

From cknowles at igc.org Fri Oct 16 08:57:56 1998
From: cknowles at igc.org (Cynthia Knowles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Solar Cookers
Message-ID: <2.2.16.19981016090933.47c7f612@pop.igc.org>

Dear Stuart,
I concur with your comments on the feasibility of solar cooking. Before
organizing promotion and education, we thought it be best to investigate
some details first (needs, cooking practices, likes, dislikes, stove
attributes, expectations from a cooking device) before investing in
promotion and education. We had some gaps in our market research but have
studied the relationship between propane use and income conditions.

See additional comments below:

At 12:38 PM 10/15/98 EDT, NFPWest@aol.com wrote:
>Hi Cynthia,

>Over the last two years, we have been promoting the Sunstove, solar cooker
>made of a plastic outer shell and with recycled aluminum printing plates for
>reflectors. With both cookers, people showed a lot of interest initially and
>attended training sessions, but only about 20 people from the five communities
>where we have been introducing the Sunstove have bought the cookers even with
>the financing (revolving fund) that we made available.

STUART: Do you manufacture the Sunstove or import them from South Africa (I
thought that was the only location of manuf.)? I spoke to Richard Wareham
this summer and he is planning to manufacture in Mexico in the future.
>
>There are several factors working against adoption of the solar cookers in
>Central America. I think that the main problem is a cultural one in that the
>solar cookers are just too different from the traditional cooking method for
>most people. Another problem is the time factor in that the solar cooker is a
>slow cook method compared to a fire (more like a crock pot). A third factor is
>weather conditions. If it becomes cloudy, then the solar cookers don't cook as
>well or at all.

>Due to our experience in Guatemala, I am more interested at this point in the
>improved wood stoves that are closer to the traditional cooking methods and
>are therefore more easily adopted by people in Central America. I have not
>given up entirely on solar cookers, however. I think that they can be
>introduced in conjunction with improved wood-burning stoves, if the cost of
>the cookers is kept low and some type of financing with low monthly payments
>is made available. Solar cookers will never entirely replace other cooking
>methods anyway due to the factors that I mentioned above, but can play a part
>in moving people away from fuelwood or at least reducing the amount of
>fuelwood and other fuels used for cooking.

STUART: Based on limited field trials and experiments with women, we also
felt that solar cooking would be best promoted as a complement to current
methods, based on what, when and HOW they cook. And the use of propane
stoves has not reduced their dependency on wood: no woman would soften
beans, or would rarely cook tough meats or boil large amounts of tubers with
propane; that would waste expensive gas. On the other hand, solar is great
for several foods and I emphasize this.

We have not come to final conclusions just yet on whether promotion is a
sound investment. We'll send the final report when available.
>
>I have several newsletter articles on our solar project in Guatemala. Send me
>your fax number if you are interested in receiving them.

I'd appreciate any info. See fax # below (in signature)

Thanks Stuart,
Cynthia Knowles

>Stuart Conway
>Trees, Water and People
>
>
******************************************
Cynthia L. Knowles
E-mail: cknowles@igc.apc.org
Enersol Associates, Inc.
A Member of
The Global Transition Group
55 Middlesex Street, Suite 221
North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA
Tel: (978)251-1828/29; Fax: (978)251-5291

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 16 09:27:33 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: mail delivery problems
Message-ID: <v01540b0eb24cfab07018@[204.133.28.47]>

This is to alert the list that I am having mail delivery problems getting
through to Priyadarshini Karve <gpk@physics.unipune.ernet.in>. If anyone
near Pune can alert her to the fact that her list is not delivering all her
mail, it will be helpful. Thanks Ron

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

From greensue at hotmail.com Fri Oct 16 18:50:10 1998
From: greensue at hotmail.com (Susanne Machler)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Deforestation and Fuelwood
Message-ID: <19981016230114.3877.qmail@hotmail.com>

OOoops! I am so sorry for sending a mail of Elsen without the relevant
attachment below.

I have to really THANK all of you on these lists who have helped us
(http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/myindex.htm ) in the past and
are dedicated to doing so in the future. To all who think that to
discuss over technical trivia, in endless threads close to the 102
percent efficiency mark, and those who have the expertise but choose to
ignore requests for help on these lists, beware..maybe you should stop
reading here.

I was moved and touched by the report of Elsen there in Kenya. Economic
frustration is something that drives folks to all sorts of things.
Although we on the homestead don't suffer many of these effects because
of our efforts, there are folks out there eating from the filth and
garbage, and going to some very desperate ends to feed clothe and care
for themselves. It caused me really to think how blessed we really are
here in the Caribbean.

I have been procrastinating for a long time now about writing to these
newsgroups after a message by Tom Reed on the gasification list,
concerning my request for help in making activated charcoal for water
purification use, as I write this, the news is going in the background.
The price of water has just been increased by 20 percent!! Isn't this
paradoxical for "XAYMACA" (Arawak Indian name for Jamaica) meaning
...land of wood and water? More power to my attempts to catch the God
given rain showers ....free as can be....As I speak we are collecting
material to effect trials, and will be glad to disseminate this to
anyone who needs help, or has a similar problem.

I have been overwhelmed by the amount of information accessible and
shared in these groups although there are still some folks (flamers) who
still need to grow up. I was disappointed though, before approaching Tom
Reed and was sharing with Tom the reluctance of many knowledgeable
people to HELP... with PRACTICAL ideas and suggestions . I find it
relates to Elsens comment..

>> Maybe people who are healthier can plan their lives beyond
tomorrow...... (and flame and find 100 faults with putterers ideas, and
end off threads without having dealt with the PROBLEM...)

For the more practical of you on the group, those like our homestead
manager, who gets dirt, oil grease and lots of other things under his
fingernails.... They will understand the yearning to sometimes have
something up and running to experiment with, that works enough to eke
out an existence. Sometimes it spells the only chance for those people
to survive. Have any of you ever seen the joy on the faces of folks who
have just seen how you show them how easy setting up a garden is with a
bit of dedication?
( http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/dumpgard.htm ) Has anyone on
the group tried eating a few crackers and sugar and water for the DAY..
and then work for 8 hours in the roasting sun 35 degrees simply because
the garden is the only way to get food? Has anyone of you burnt coal
with thorn bushes to sell the coal in the market to feed the family? We
from the homestead had the joy of seeing a community realize that self
help is definitely sometimes the only way out, even if the efficiencies
are low, and the process is not yet perfect.
I would like to "large up" (Jamaican slang for acknowledge praise to)
Tom Reed, Harry Parker and Danny Day for their help in this respect.
Mr. Day, for example helped even though he makes HIS lifebread from the
same technology, drawings and all, that I asked about. I guess he
realizes that if a homestead like ours makes clean water with his
drawing, and are able to help 300 people indirectly dependent on us (if
even for ideas) , that we will be more inclined to deal with him when we
are economically better off than someone who spoke from a well fed
position to tell us why this and that wont work? Even if you did a
one/off I still respect that move Sir! We drink live and eat from what
we discuss, many of you just theorize and unfortunately fritter away
arguing while precious time flies...

(Or am I simply treading on the putterer/ hobby-man vs. scientist
divide?)

I herald your help as having been HIGHLY exemplary. Lets face it.
Although the newsgroups are sometimes dominated by geographic groupings,
and market competition exists, let us remember that there are those who
act as catalysts in weird and wonderful places and in no way pose a
threat!!Our even low/efficiency thingie-mi-jigs often bring in the meals
and get th job done!! Isnt that another definition of Quality?

I think the knowledgeables like to have the A1 model up and working
before speaking to anyone, without realising that the man in the woods
and bushes sometimes just needs something that runs to survive. Hey
"knowledgeables", maybe you need to see a bushman burning coal , or
hillmen burning wood in what is effectually a two stage gasifier.
Chariots, trucks of wood with hydraulic brakes, water wheels, pumps,
ploughs, hammermills etc all built of JUNK and what those of us in the
know would call RUBBISH is what these persons use to make their living.

>>It's logical when you live a here-and-now, hand-to-mouth existence,
isn't it?

Yes Elsen I agree, although not so affected we try to alleviate the
plight of many so affected and yes, they do find what you said VERY
logical and sometimes, as in your case unfortunately practical.

OK Sue you ask so where is this going...well I would like to suggest a
few points...

** NEVER THINK your inputs are unimportant. Sound Technical uplifting
and forward thinking comment, with a sense of urgency are welcome too.

** ALWAYS envision a hungry father and poverty stricken mother beside
you asking you the technical question so that he/she can eat tomorrow.

** ASK ...Is that negative comment necessary, that flame, that time
wasting peoples time who might have gotten further with their queries?
That time online might have bought a meal for the family!!

** DON'T INSTINCTIVELY cling on to renewable energy ideas as if they
were ours...countless tribes and tongues have unlocked and lost many of
Natures secrets. Those in the renewable field should be setting a bench
mark in terms of readiness to assist. Have the joy of seeing your ideas
reach the direct and indirect lives of hundreds of people.I personally
think my conribution could be a collection of ideas that could be posted
on http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/eco.htm

Many folks are clinging to general ideas that are soon in public domain
instead of speaking to the user of these technologies as a friend, so
that development of the next stage will be like a long drink with an old
friend discussing this and that...

** LOOK INTO using the experiences of homesteads such as Colibri Cove
and so may other be a FREE experience curve generator, laboratory,
feedback source ... whatever.
( http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/myindex.htm )

I hope that the folks on the groups can realize that some of their
suggestions have been implemented over days and months and that many of
them are ALREADY leaving a living legacy? Not in vain..!!

Why ACT urgently ??

>>you can be sure that trees not protected by their owners will be
removed if they happen to be closer to home than the forest is.
>>and it's only getting worse as the population increases.
>>Per-capita income decreases along with a diminished
buying power of the currencies this income is measured by.
>>The family 'shamba' (farm) has been divided time and again as adult
offspring claim their share of the family assets. It's sad to see tall
cyprus trees surrounding these tiny farms with just a tuft of green
foliage at the very top.....all lower branches have been stripped off
for firewood.

And many more stories I could share as well..

There is still room to help. For those not offended by my tirade, there
is also opportunity to help as you can see at...
( http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/quest.htm )

and for those willing to take a look overseas....
( http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/workie.htm )

Still love you all,
Shalom, and out Sue.

OOoops!! Many apologies for mailing wihout the intended attachment!!

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 10:49:00 +0300
To: stoves@crest.org
From: elk@net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Subject: Deforestation and Fuelwood

Stovers;

I sit here in my office on the outskirts of Nairobi flanked on two sides
with the remnants of an indigenous forest. Fuelwood predation has
reduced
this forest in size and quality - it's now more bush than forest. This
is
still an official Government 'protected' forest. The depredation
continues
daily as streams of women carry out bundles of sticks- both fresh and
'windfall' during the day, and teams of more determined poachers fell
and
remove entire trees during the night. There is a great econonomic
intentive
here that is countered by low risk of punishment. As far as I can
determine, nearly all of this wood (primarily the hardwood, Brown Olive)
is
used for domestic fuel. Possibly a small proportion ends up in the hands
of curio wood carvers.

>As far as I am concerned the rural fuel use is a mystery.

Further from the urban areas great tracts of bushland has been reduced
to
shrubland by charcoal manufacturers. Efforts to collect wood are
certainly
minimised around the home- with backyards being denuded of trees first-
if
a forest is half an hours walk away, you can be sure that trees not
protected by their owners will be removed if they happen to be closer to
home than the forest is. It's logical when you live a here-and-now,
hand-to-mouth existance, isn't it? And it's only getting worse as the
population increases. Per-capita income decreases along with a
diminished
buying power of the currencies this income is measured by.

The family 'shamba' (farm) has been divided time and again as adult
offspring claim their share of the family assets. It's sad to see tall
cyprus trees surrounding these tiny farms with just a tuft of green
foliage
at the very top.....all lower branches have been stripped off for
firewood.

Just picture an East African city as a termite mound.... the depredation
of
forests for both timber and fuelwood extends in a radial pattern
outward.
At the furthest reaches the pattern becomes more patchy- due to road
access
mainly- and is confined to wood harvested for charcoal production.
Timber
harvesting can be more easily controlled (though poaching is rampant)
than
woodfuel collection. The forest resources are rapidly diminishing under
this pressure.

Why differentiate between rural and urban? Wood, in one form or the
other
is still the primary domestic cooking fuel in Africa- urban or rural.

>The fact that people are using ag. residues and dung is predicated
>upon the fact that the forests disappeared before the current lot
>arrived on the scene.

It's happening here now. Maybe dung will be used more commonly once all
woody vegetation has disapeared from the scene, but here at present very
few people indeed use dung as a fuel. Dung is used as a building
material
when mixed with mud, and as an insect repellent (smoke) within houses in
small quantity. I've just interviewed several of my staff here from
different tribes and areas within Kenya to confirm this.

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Sun Oct 18 08:04:15 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: By Hook and By Crook...
Message-ID: <199810180815_MC2-5D0F-3CA0@compuserve.com>

Dear Susanne, ELK and all concerned with deforestation:

Here is a footnote on history that I hope others will expand on. The lord
of the manor in medeivel days granted the wood to his peasants that they
could get "by hook or by crook (sheppherd?)". All other wood taken was
poaching and punished accordingly.

Wood famines occur regularly in history. When the pilgrims landed in
Massachusetts England had already lost much of its forest. When they saw
the forest they said "Wow, we could never burn that down" and got busy
immediately. By the time of the Revolution (150 years later) Boston was
receiving firewood from as much as 200 miles away. On a world basis we
have converted 1/3 of the fertile lands of the world to dessert. They make
wonderful museums of failed civilizations. Now with chain saws and steel
plows we are working on the other 2/3.

However, this is not always an irreversible process. Now that we don't
burn much wood, New England is in danger of disappearing back into the
trees. Trees were rare in China in 1930 due to "free" use of trees. They
had a BIG reforestation program under Mao to combat the "sand dragon" and
now boast about 10% forest. Same for Korea. The U.S. heard the dust bowl
message loud and clear in the early 1930s and fundamentally changed its
farming habits to prevent errosion with shelter belts, contour plowing.....

So, deforestation is not a one way street. I hope others have more facts
on deforestation/reforestation.

Yours truly, TOM REED

From elk at net2000ke.com Mon Oct 19 07:36:22 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- Chimney & 2ndary Air
Message-ID: <v01520d00b250f9974d23@[195.202.65.93]>

With reference to the new chimney being built for my downdraft sawdust
carbonising trials:

Kevin Chisholm has suggested a design for the introduction of secondary air
to my 6-drum chimney. Thanks Kevin, though I feel that the complexity of
your design, which includes four fresh air inlets in addition to the two
pipes supplying volatile gasses from beneath the twin pyrolysis beds- and a
separated firebox, is a tad complex. I need to maximise the flue draft
generated by the chimney- perforating the system with primary, secondary
and tertiary air inlets seems to defeat the purpose.

I like your idea of tangental inputs- this should streamline gas flows.

I assume that (and from previous experience), there will be enough oxygen
mixed in with the volatile pyrolysis gasses to allow the wood in the
bottom (horizontal firebox) drum to combust without additional primary air.
Air is being drawn down through twin 2m.dia open kilns. Not all oxygen will
be consumed in the pyrolysis.

The question then is: do I add a single secondary input above or below the
firebox 'sparkplug'- my feeling is that its best above, as any wood in the
middle of a continuously combusting supply of volatile gasses won't last
long.

In the absence of further input, my intention is to inject secondary air
directly into the flame from the wood fire- this would be above the grate
supporting the wood (through which the volatile gasses rise).

How about pipes injecting secondary air? Anybody with similar experience?

I like the sound of 'Direct Injection Pyrolysis of Sawdust' - DIPS for
short. Or 'Exhaust-Linked Kombustion' - ELK..... apologies all, I
degress.

Another question for the group- again, with reference to general chimney
design: I feel that the 5 vertically stacked 45 gal (200 liter) drums may
result in sub-optimal flue vacuum- a chimney too wide for it's hieght.
Obviously, more drums could be added, but cost and low-flying aircraft have
to set an eventual practical limit.... Is it possible to actually increase
the chimney's flue draw (vacuum) via the use of an internal restriction-
like the proverbial bluff object or a damper, or wick, or a bottleneck..?

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Mon Oct 19 09:36:13 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: TRENDS in RENEWABLE ENERGIES
Message-ID: <199810190947_MC2-5D21-8E4F@compuserve.com>

>From our friend, Jim Arcate....

Please post if you think it would be of interest to Gasification, etc.

Thank you.

Jim Arcate
www.techtp.com

=============
Canadian Association for Renewable Energies

http://www.cyberus.ca/~doitrite/renewables.html

Since 1997, CARE has produced a weekly email newsletter on TRENDS in
RENEWABLE ENERGIES that is designed to showcase the growth of renewable
energies in Canada and abroad, to highlight the fortes and deficiencies of
various renewable energy technologies, and to indicate how conventional
combustion energy options are coping in the Climate Change debate. The
content serves as a heads-up notice on important trends.

From john at gulland.ca Mon Oct 19 13:06:29 1998
From: john at gulland.ca (John Gulland)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- Chimney & 2ndary Air
In-Reply-To: <v01520d00b250f9974d23@[195.202.65.93]>
Message-ID: <000001bdfb84$2f88ef00$1e36f8ce@jgulland.igs.net>

E. L. Karstad wrote:

> Another question for the group- again, with reference to general chimney
> design: I feel that the 5 vertically stacked 45 gal (200 liter) drums may
> result in sub-optimal flue vacuum- a chimney too wide for it's height.
> Obviously, more drums could be added, but cost and low-flying aircraft have
> to set an eventual practical limit....

Since my particular area of expertise is the behavior of chimneys, I've been
most interested in the recent threads regarding the use of chimneys on wood
stoves to improve health and, of course, Elk's charcoal adventures.

To get the greatest pressure difference (draft) at the base of a chimney, you
make it as tall as is practicable and you maximize the difference between the
outside temperature and the average temperature of the gases inside the flue.
Height is the easy part, but in order to maximize temperature difference,
assuming a given exit temperature from the firebox, you must reduce heat loss
from the chimney. Note that draft is influenced by the AVERAGE temperature in
the flue, so if the gas cools as it rises through the chimney, you will loose
temperature difference and therefore draft.

To reduce heat loss from the chimney, you can insulate it. You can also cause
the gas to flow more quickly through it to reduce the time available for heat
transfer. To do this, you reduce the diameter of the chimney to a point at
which velocity is maximized, yet friction does not impede flow significantly.
Reducing chimney diameter also dramatically reduces the surface area available
for heat transfer.

> Is it possible to actually increase
> the chimney's flue draw (vacuum) via the use of an internal restriction-
> like the proverbial bluff object or a damper, or wick, or a bottleneck..?
>
I doubt it very much since draft is a very weak force and friction is in direct
oposition.

Therefore, I would suggest that a much smaller diameter chimney would give you
better performance and would also be easier to erect and support.

When talking about chimneys, I like to use the analogy of an engine, as follows:
If the chimney serves as the engine of a woodburning system by driving the flow
of combustion air and exhaust, then the fuel it uses is heat and the power it
develops is draft. A high-performance chimney maximizes power by using its fuel
efficiently: it resists heat loss through its walls and it flows the exhaust
quickly to the exit.

It might by too costly and difficult to insulate your chimney, but it might
actually be cheaper to use a smaller diameter one and get your performance gain
that way.

Hope this helps.
Regards,
John
This is for business: http://www.gulland.ca/
This is for pleasure: http://www.wood-heat.com/

From larcon at sni.net Mon Oct 19 16:45:46 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- Chimney & 2ndary Air
Message-ID: <v01540b08b251397117fd@[204.133.28.24]>

Elsen - This is a try at your several questions of today. As a warning to
all, I am going to try to supply these answers only on the basis of my
experience with charcoal making in the "updraft" charcoal-making stove
(CMS) design with which Elsen is very familiar. It seems to me that
keeping as close to a CMS as possible should be the way to avoid mistakes.
The downdraft designs have not een developed for charcoal making. You said:

<snip>

>I assume that (and from previous experience), there will be enough oxygen
>mixed in with the volatile pyrolysis gasses to allow the wood in the
>bottom (horizontal firebox) drum to combust without additional primary air.
>Air is being drawn down through twin 2m.dia open kilns. Not all oxygen will
>be consumed in the pyrolysis.

(Ron): This last item scares me. In the updraft design, all
oxygen is always consumed (I believe), or you have real problems
(combusting the charcoal if a large pathway exists). Do you believe you
have excess oxygen because the entire bed is not participating in
charcoaling? That is not a desireable attribute when you are trying to
maximize production by increasing area.

>
>The question then is: do I add a single secondary input above or below the
>firebox 'sparkplug'- my feeling is that its best above, as any wood in the
>middle of a continuously combusting supply of volatile gasses won't last
>long.

(Ron): I question the concept of (and need for) a firebox
"sparkplug" - because it is something not used in the CMS. I'd rather see
(initially controllable?) secondary air inlets as close to the sawdust/char
as feasible, with flame attachment at these secondary air holes (maybe many
hundreds - two few will probably not allow flame holding) as in the CMS.
If the flame went out, I think an electric spark igniter should be able to
re-ignite (or a blowtorch or match).

The CMS has not needed secondary air control - with apparently
enough extra air added automatically as we change power levels (and draft)
by changing the primary air openings. In your downdraft configuration,
this might be possible as well - after you figure out the right size and
configuration.

This design assumes many small diffusion flames (that combine) - no
pre-mixing. More below.

>
>In the absence of further input, my intention is to inject secondary air
>directly into the flame from the wood fire- this would be above the grate
>supporting the wood (through which the volatile gasses rise).

(Ron): One fear (and hope) is that you will have only pyrolysis
gases coming through from below and therefore they would put the sparkplug
fire out.

Also, I fear that you will be losing a lot of your draft at this
"sparkplug" point. However, perhaps the fuel supply door can be used to
control the amount of secondary air. My preference (as stated above) is to
do away with this "sparkplug" all together - mainly in order to maintain a
maximum draft.
>
>How about pipes injecting secondary air? Anybody with similar experience?

(Ron): This is my main reason for responding. In larger (5
gallon, or 20 liter) size containers with the CMS, I found it helpful (to
get more complete combustion in a shorter height) to have one or more pipes
right in the middle of the vertically stacked wood bringing secondary air
to the middle of the flame rather than only from the many outside perimeter
secondary air holes. The flame also attached to these (and there was some
easy pre-heating of the secondary air). With your open top design, I guess
these can be many L-shaped tubes, whose horizontal portion extend out far
enough to be able to control the amount of secondary air flow (if you get
too much - which I doubt). But I think you should still also have the many
peripheral secondary air holes as well.

In the batch-type wood-burning CMS, we have all controlled the
pyrolysis rate by controlling the primary air supply - needing to keep it
very small, as you know. The total primary air aperture might be typically
less than 1% of the pyrolysis cross section. In your downdraft design,
these two areas are equal. Your pyrolysis rate is then controlled by the
operator who controls the thickness of the sawdust bed above the active
pyrolysis zone. Has it been your experience that the operator can do this
well? What is the greatest thickness of sawdust/char that you have been
able to achieve (or expect to be able to get)? What is the mesh of the
"grate" (screen) that the sawdust/char sits on? (This is not introducing
any significant air resistance?) Can the operator use a rake (or hoe or
shovel) to keep the pyrolysis front upward movement uniform across the
whole bed? How does he/she know which part is moving fastest? I have
always been amazed that in the CMS the whole pyrolysis front generally
seems to move downward at the same speed - and I am trying to determine if
the same is true (in reverse) for a down draft design.

>
>I like the sound of 'Direct Injection Pyrolysis of Sawdust' - DIPS for
>short. Or 'Exhaust-Linked Kombustion' - ELK..... apologies all, I
>degress.
>
>Another question for the group- again, with reference to general chimney
>design: I feel that the 5 vertically stacked 45 gal (200 liter) drums may
>result in sub-optimal flue vacuum- a chimney too wide for it's hieght.
>Obviously, more drums could be added, but cost and low-flying aircraft have
>to set an eventual practical limit.... Is it possible to actually increase
>the chimney's flue draw (vacuum) via the use of an internal restriction-
>like the proverbial bluff object or a damper, or wick, or a bottleneck..?
>
>elk
(Ron): I don't think the blunt body will help with the draft. I
see its purpose in keeping the flame more stable.

After considering all this, I don't feel good about what I have
offered. However, I see some merit in (and therefore feel a need to
mention) an up"draft" design in which a 45 gallon drum is packed (as
loosely as possible) maybe half-way full of sawdust, with secondary
airholes above that level and a blower used to create a sizeable positive
pressure below the sawdust (maybe one blower for many drums). The pressure
will have to be adjustable so that there is always a draft rather than
positive pressure in the top part of the barrel. (Or maybe there should be
powered secondary air as well.)

This is going a long way away from your downdraft design - but I
think the power level can be quite small for the blower only if we think
downward movement of the pyrolysis front. I know you don't want to have a
power requirement, but it may be defensible (on cost grounds) if small.
You need pressure - not much air flow. I still like the idea of a batch
operation also as in the CMS (for reduced labor).

I haven't heard much about your putting the charcoal out after
production, but this sort of design should be possible to quench relatively
easily. How convenient is your present method?

Enough for today. Sorry this is not more helpful - but I just am
concerned about what you have written. Ron

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

From larcon at sni.net Mon Oct 19 16:45:56 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding:Non-memberrequest for charcoaling design
Message-ID: <v01540b01b25119588d80@[204.133.28.24]>

Stovers: Does anyone have a summary of material already given on this list
along the lines of a 50 gallon drum used for m,aking charcoal? Names and
dates of the best material will be helpful.

"Billo": There have been many descriptions given, but I don't have a
single best design myself to supply. Make sure that you look at Alex
English' website:
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

I hope you can find a way to use the waste heat and that, if not, you look
for designs that flare rather than simply vent the pyrolysis gases. Good
luck. Ron

>I would like to request any information you would be willing to forward
>on the construction of a charcoal making kiln with large yield. This yield
>needs to be fairly large. (enough to heat house and greenhouse) but not so
>large as a commercial kiln. I have a good supply of hardwood available, I
>can start a fire, I have a modicum of building experience, but can not sort
>my way through the info on the net. I am in possession of a "2can charcoal
>making stove" plan sent to you by elk@arcc, and this looks promising, but
>am looking for something along the lines of 50 Gal. steel drum size (I have
>acces to several of these).
>
>thank you in advance for any information you can pass on
>
>Bill

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

From greensue at hotmail.com Tue Oct 20 02:59:09 1998
From: greensue at hotmail.com (Susanne Machler)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding:Non-memberrequest for charcoaling design
Message-ID: <19981020071018.22963.qmail@hotmail.com>

Hi Billo,
Check out our site below, go to our links and look under charcoal, I had
the same need and the pages should be there, if not contact me directly!
http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/myindex.htm

Yours truly Sue!!

Check these out too...
http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/Charmake.htm
http://www-cmrc.sri.com/CIN/JulyAugust96/Article01.html
http://chi.hearth.com/addcalc.html
http://hearth.com/
http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/charcoal/index.html
http://www.gorp.com/zzstove/sierra.htm

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:59:39 -0600
To: stoves@crest.org
From: larcon@sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Subject: Forwarding:Non-memberrequest for charcoaling design
Cc: billo@Hub.ofthe.Net

Stovers: Does anyone have a summary of material already given on this
list
along the lines of a 50 gallon drum used for m,aking charcoal? Names
and
dates of the best material will be helpful.

I hope you can find a way to use the waste heat and that, if not, you
look
for designs that flare rather than simply vent the pyrolysis gases.
Good
luck. Ron

>I would like to request any information you would be willing to forward
>on the construction of a charcoal making kiln with large yield. This
yield
>needs to be fairly large. (enough to heat house and greenhouse) but
not so
>large as a commercial kiln. I have a good supply of hardwood
available, I
>can start a fire, I have a modicum of building experience, but can not
sort
>my way through the info on the net. I am in possession of a "2can
charcoal
>making stove" plan sent to you by elk@arcc, and this looks promising,
but
>am looking for something along the lines of 50 Gal. steel drum size (I
have
>acces to several of these).
>
>thank you in advance for any information you can pass on
>
>Bill

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

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Tue Oct 20 07:38:57 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Microwave and gas cooking efficiency
Message-ID: <199810200749_MC2-5D45-C0AA@compuserve.com>

Dear Stoves & Gasification:

Onar said...

>Let me hasten to add that the heating system with the highest net
efficiency (as well as the greatest potential for increased gross
efficiency) is the microwave oven. I'm not sure about the actual numbers,
but I am positive that it is significantly higher than for electrical
stoves. It's definitely more than 85%, but I'm not sure how much. This is
yet another example where *refined* energy ultimately can lead to greater
gross efficiencies.

Onar.
<

Sorry Onar, but you are only half correct. Microwave energy is very
efficient for much cooking because it only heats the object being cooked
(provided it couples, water and other polar molecules). Unfortunately,
the generation of microwaves from standard AC is at most 50% efficient (and
the AC is 30% after generation and transmission losses). So.... gas stoves
may be the most efficient use of PRIMARY energy, even though they are less
efficient in transferring that energy. See below.
~~~~~
I visited our local appliance store the other day. They have a dozen
different electric stoves and maybe six gas stoves, more expensive, feature
for feature. From this I conclude that Golden housewifes "cook with gas"
half as much as with electricity. Many good cooks prefer gas - it is
instantaneous heat and you can SEE the flame.

I picked up a GE TRUETEMP gas and electric stove brochure. Typical power
levels are

Gas Electric Coal/gas used for
Electric heat
Btu/hr kW
High 12,000 3.5 2.5 8.33
Low 9,500 2.8 1.8 6.0
Simmer 5,000 1.5

The above figures suggest that the gas stove requires more power for the
same cooking rate by a ratio of 3.5/2.5 or 40% more heat required with gas
than electric. Also, the lack of a special simmer burner on the electric
stove.

Yours for biomass gasification/stoves
TOM REED

From ahe1 at cableol.co.uk Tue Oct 20 14:19:29 1998
From: ahe1 at cableol.co.uk (Andrew Heggie)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Firebote
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981020152242.006c99bc@mail.cableol.co.uk>

In response to Tom Reed's "by hook or by crook" note, just a few comments
about our apparent common history:

I do not know the exact use of the term "by hook or by crook" I surmise it
meant as Tom suggested dead branches removed from larger trees, in coppice
with standards and hedgerows, with only the aid of a crook. The hook
referred to would be a light billhook and again I surmise would have been
restricted to that which could be gathered in a single blow or sweep to
restrict the stem size. Firewood in this instance would nearly always have
been in the form of bundles or faggots and there is some evidence to
suggest that the coppice cycle lengthened (and hence the stems grew to a
larger diameter before cutting) as iron became more readily available i.e.
as cutting tools became better larger wood could be economically cut.

However in referring to the English medieval system you are talking about
an already well regulated wood management. England was down to less than
12% woodland cover by Roman times and the woodland that remained was highly
valued, as evidenced by the earthworks which delineated woodland. Further
rights in common like firebote ( the right to gather firewood) were
generally attached to land or household and as such there was no free for
all. All persons with such rights (i.e. householders) were known as
commoners as they held these rights in common with others over the land
which actually belonged to the landlord (Lord of the Manor, church, crown
etc.) and they were well defined to conserve the resource. The timber and
other normal use of the land remained in the possession of the landlord.

Tom rightly says records of fines show how valuable woodmass was to the
economy, though it is felt that the "crimes" were treated as misdemeanours
and tried by the peergroup of commoners, the fines almost being used as a
form of local taxation.
My chief reference for this very rough clarification would be Arthur
Rackam's "The History of the Countryside".

Whilst the above is rather off topic it illustrates how much worse Kenya's
predicament appears to be, from ELK's description, than what happened here.
Ours is a very benign climate for tree growth.
Not only did a mass movement of refugees not occur here in the period,
there was a 30% loss of population in these times due to disease.

The English countryside recovered from being a cereal provider for the
Romans, the North African deserts did not.

Theorising from my very parochial viewpoint and not disagreeing with the
gist of Tom's points, it seems de afforestation which was linked to the
gaining of an export crop (cereal in Roman times, wool later) and not in
sourcing wood for fuel use, in a stable regime and falling population is
nothing like the situation now in Kenya with an apparently exploding
population. Apologies for the long contorted sentences!
AJH
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Wed Oct 21 21:06:24 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Skip Hayden on "Combustion Canada 99"
Message-ID: <v01540b01b253c8475799@[204.133.28.5]>

Stovers: The following just in from list member Skip Hayden. I have been
very impressed by the high quality of the Canadian list member
contributions - so on that basis this should be a worthwhile conference.

Skip: This got bumped because you are signed on to "stoves" with a new
e-mail address. Please advise if I should change you over. Ron

(The remainder from Skip):

> We are holding a conference, Combustion Canada 99, on combustion and
> global warming in Calgary next May and invite your participation. The
> deadline for abstracts is short - October 30. If you require further
> information please do not hesitate to contact me.
> Skip Hayden, Technical & Conference Chair, Combustion Canada 99
> Tel: (613) 996-3186; Fax: (613) 992-9335
> e-mail: skip.hayden@nrcan.gc.ca
>
> A detailed Call for Papers follows:
>
> Combustion Canada '99
>
> May 26 - 28, 1999
> Telus (formerly the Calgary) Convention Centre
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>
> CALL FOR PAPERS
>
> Combustion and Global Climate Change
> Challenges & Solutions
>
> Conference Organizers:
>
> <<...>>
> <<...>>
>
>
>
> ABOUT THE CONFERENCE
>
> In the context of international efforts to mitigate global climate
> change, the goal of Combustion Canada 99 is to present new and innovative
> technology concepts and solutions that can significantly reduce greenhouse
> gas (GHG) emissions from combustion, emissions which account for nearly
> 90% of Canada's total GHG production. Utilities, industry and individual
> consumers require improvements to conventional energy systems, along with
> novel R&D and applications, to lower the emissions of CO2 and other GHG's
> over the near and longer term, in an economically effective fashion.
> Conference sessions will focus on sector-specific combustion technologies,
> efficiency improvements, low/zero CO2-emitting fuels and capture
> technologies, and full life cycle emissions/costs, including trends in the
> transportation sector. Plenary sessions will provide current viewpoints
> and information on national issues, such as technology policy and
> initiatives, and on international activities such as joint implementation
> and emissions trading.
>
> CC '99 Sub-themes:
> i) Biomass and MSW combustion
> ii) Residential-Commercial combustion systems
> iii) Efficient Electricity generation
> iv) Transportation engines/systems and fuels
> v) Industrial Combustion systems
> vi) Fossil fuel production, flaring & transport
> vii) Advances in expert systems, simulation techniques and modelling
> viii) CO2 capture/sequestration
>
> Abstract Submissions
>
> The Program Committee for Combustion Canada '99 is soliciting abstracts of
> no more than 300 words, accompanied by a brief professional biography,
> before October 30th, 1998. Abstracts will be selected for their relevance
> to the conference theme, their scientific and technical content,
> originality, and practical application. Authors selected will be notified
> by November 30, 1998. Draft papers must be received no later than
> February 15, 1999 for review. Final papers incorporating recommended
> changes must be received no later than March 31, 1999 to be included in
> the Conference Proceedings. Instructions regarding final paper format
> will be included with notice of acceptance.
>
> Send your abstract submission to:
>
> CC '99 Coordinator
> CEIA
> 350 Sparks St., Suite 208
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA K1R 7S8
> Tel.: (613) 236-6222; Fax: (613) 236-6850
> E-mail:
>
> Paper title:
> __________________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Sub-theme #: 1st choice _____ 2nd choice _____
> Author(s):
> ________________________________________________________________
> ____________
> Affiliation: ___________________________________
> Address: ___________________________________
> ____________________________________________
> Prov./State:_____________; Country: _____________________
> Postal code: ____________
> Telephone: __________________
> Fax: ________________________
> E-mail: _____________________________________
>
>
>

From kmbryden at iastate.edu Wed Oct 21 21:25:58 1998
From: kmbryden at iastate.edu (mark bryden)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Combustion Canada 99
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981021204101.0083aba0@pop-1.iastate.edu>

Skip,

Who are the sponsoring organizations?

Mark Bryden
___________________________________________________________
Mark Bryden, Ph.D. Assistant Professor
kmbryden@iastate.edu Iowa State University
ph: 515-294-3891 3030 Black Engineering Bldg
fax: 515-294-3261 Ames, Iowa 50011-2161
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From elk at net2000ke.com Thu Oct 22 11:36:02 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- Ongoing Discussion (Chimneys)
Message-ID: <199810221548.SAA03450@net2000ke.com>

From rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni Thu Oct 22 18:31:27 1998
From: rmiranda at sdnnic.org.ni (Rogerio Miranda)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: request for health info
Message-ID: <3.0.2.16.19981022143811.2eff7a56@ns.sdnnic.org.ni.>

Dear Friends: I just would like to share two feed back that I got from our
last week discussion.

Rogerio

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Rogerio, I got your message from the stove list. There is a definite
reduced risk to health by having a chimney on a stove as it removes the
smoke from the house. I've had, more well to do Indians, that have had a
house for sleeping and a house for cooking so they sleep better without the
smoke. Now that they have a chimney they sleep in the same room. The
adobe base also serves as a snack bar as it is usually made bigger than the
stove size. Check out the ROOTFUEL that Dr. Gene Swarz is promoting. I
sent you his address. This, I believe, would work well for those that buy
fire wood in Managua and other cities. TED

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Dear Roger
>
>I very much agree with your fundamental approach to the problem. There is
a famous
>saying "The smart contractor is he who knows what jobs NOT to take."
>If this "job" is not going to yield results which are worth the effort,
then don't waste
>time starting it.
>
>However, I do feel that inherently there will be real benefits, for the
reasons shown
>below....
>
>
>Rogerio Miranda wrote:
>
>> Dear Priyadarshini, Prasad, Julia and Others:
>>
>> Within this discussion, what can we conclud about promoting Improved
>> Woodstoves ?
>>
>> If today, according to official statistics, about 70% of the Nicaraguan and
>> Honduran households uses fuelwood for cooking,
>
>With that much wood being burned, poor combustion efficiencies will result
in a
>significant tonnage of dangerous pollutants being sent to the local
environment. An IW
>will inherently result in less unburned combustibles in the off gases from
the stove,
>and there will inherently be an improvement to the environment of the
local environment.
>
>> and from our experience
>> 80-90% of thoses households uses it in a open or semi-open fire without
>> chimney.
>
>If the present stove systems vent directly into the living space, with
cross drafts
>being depended upon for removal, an IW will inherently be better, in that
there are less
>PAH's and incompletely burned nasties being vented into the living space.
There would be
>a two-fold benefit: 1: Less wood would be burned, and 2: the "pollutants
per pound of
>wood" would be reduced. There is almost a "squared relationship" forming
here!!! ... 1/2
>the wood, and 1/2 the pollutants per pound equals 1/4 the total
pollutants. ALSO: Given
>that there are no external stacks or chimneys in the standard housing
construction, a
>short "stub chimney" entirely within the living space would be helpful to
system
>efficiency, it would be cheap, it would not get stolen, and there is no
roof hole
>required.
>
>> But if in general, yet...
>>
>> IW can not guarantee higher efficiency for normal/regular/average users
>
>IW can indeed guarantee a higher efficiency, in that if it couldn't, it
wouldn't be an
>IW!!!
>
>> IW can not guarantee better air quality for the community
>
>If it is indeed an IW, community air quality is guaranteed to improve.
>
>> IW can not guarantee quality material at affordable price/cost
>
>This is where the fun begins!!! How can an IW be made in a manner that it
is affordable,
>and will last?
>
>> So, why bother to promote IW to urban and rural families ?
>
>1: Less fuel requirements
>2: Less "inside pollution"
>3: Less community pollution.
>4: Indigenous fuel
>5: Jobs for the local economy.
>
>> I understand, at least in our case here in Central America, that probably
>> in the future (perhaps 10 to 50 years) most of those families will be then
>> using a LPG stove. But, while it doesn't happen, should we promote IW? What
>> do you think ?
>
>Definitely promote the IW!!! Reasons are as follows:
>1: Wood energy comes from the biosphere, and LPG is a fossil fuel; the
biomass fuel
>results in less impact on the Greenhouse Effect by avoiding the increase
in fossil fuel
>consumption.
>
>2: The people are supporting a local and indigenous economy, in the form
of the wood
>fuel industry, where the LPG industry growth will be at the expense of
jobs to the rural
>economy. (It is easy to create jobs in the City, but hard to create
replacement jobs in
>the woods where the wood is!!)
>
>3: The cost of a propane stove installation is most likely greater than
the cost of an
>IW system.
>
>4: Inside venting of a propane stove is also bad. While not as bad as an
obviously smoky
>wood stove, there is indeed a problem with inside venting of LPG and NG
stoves. The gas
>fuels are not at all the cure-all they may be initially portrayed as
being. Please see
>the following site for insights into environmental sensitivity problems
associated with
>inside venting of gas fueled applicance:
> http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/6847/
>
>4: If you run out of gas, you can't cook, and need cash money to buy more
fuel. You have
>a better chance of being independant by using an IW stove.
>
>5: You could probably implement a IW stove programme more completely, and
on a more
>widespread basis than you could implement a LPG stove conversion program,
in a given
>period of time. With no definite start date on the LPG program, then an IW
program will
>inherently accomplish more than will an indefinite and uncertain LPG stove
conversion
>program.
>
>I hope you find these thoughts helpful. Anything else I can do, please let
me know.
>
>Kevin Chisholm
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Rogerio Carneiro de Miranda
ATP/PROLENA/Nicaragua
Apartado Postal C-321
Managua, Nicaragua
telefax (505) 276 2015
EM <rmiranda@sdnnic.org.ni>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 23 16:41:52 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- Ongoing Discussion (Chimneys)
Message-ID: <v01540b02b25662b862cb@[204.133.28.39]>

(Ron): elk - Thanks for the prompt response. Just a few more thoughts
and questions below (and then a new somewhat unrelated idea). You said:

<snip>:

>elk- I've got two circular carbonising beds of 2 m dia. each feeding gasses
>into the chimney. From previous experience I find that there is enough
>oxygen in the gasses to allow the 'sparkplug' wood to burn. I agree that
>this indicates inefficiency, but there it is...... hopefully I can
>overcome that with subsequent modifications.

(Ron): Have you seen complete pyrolysis within the 2 meter
diameter? What is the heighth of the (presumably steel?) retaining ring?
What is the final heighth of the charcoaled sawdust - when you close off
operations? Could the oxygen (air) be leaking in from the outside? What
is the method of sealing?

>
> (Ron - earlier): I question the concept of (and need for) a firebox
>"sparkplug" -
>
(elk):
>It has two functions- one is to establish and maintain a chimney draft in
>order to allow for the 'downdraft' carbonisation of the sawdust. The
>second is to be the sparkplug- keeping the volatiles flaring. Seems to
>work, and the actual wood consumption is minimal compared to sawdust
>inputs.
<snip>
(Ron):
I agree that the fire is initially needed to create the downdraft - but
once the downdraft is started, the firebox would not seem to be needed.
You should get most of the drafting from the fired pyrolysis gases
themselves, with greater simplicity because of a lack of air holes that are
compromising the desired draft. As an aside - I was thinking of getting
the draft started with crumpled newspapers (or something similar). I'd
like to hear from Professor Prasad or others from Eindhoven about how they
handled this start-up issue with their downdraft stove work.

As to being a sparkplug, this need should mainly be a function of
the quality of the pyrolysis gases. Is the sawdust pretty dry (or could it
me made to be dry?) to start with? Do you need the "sparkplug" because the
sawdust is wet?

My hope is that the pyrolysis gases are pretty good throughout the
"burn" and that if a sparkplug is needed it could be very small - maybe an
electric spark, or something closer to a cigarette lighter in size - and
only used when needed.

> (elk):
>Your other observations and advice have been considered. I am increasing
>the amount of perforations in the sheet metal kiln bottoms. I'll try valved
>secondary air injection pipes for more control and less flue suction loss.
>
(Ron): Hope these help. Can you describe the perforations you are
using? Is there a seal made between the (steel?) sides and the bottom?
Good luck.

(elk)::
>I don't think several drums operating along the lines of a Charcoal Making
>Stove will give the output I need. I have tried a couple variations on that
>theme already. 0.2 m3 is the capacity of a drum, right? That's not much
>carbonised sawdust at the end of the day considering the density of dried
>loosely packed sawdust at a conversion of 24%. You are right- such a system
>would need to be mechanised with forced draft.

(Ron): Right, but my hope would be that one drum might be utilized
several times a day - with the speed of pyrolysis for a single drum somehow
optimized by controlling the pressurization. And that one person might be
able to keep up with half-a-doze drums. The benefit is supposed to be
mainly by not needing much of a chimney.
I also need to mention that in an upward flow of air, that the
sawdust is naturally fluffed up a bit, which should be good, whereas in
downdraft, there is a natural tendency to tighter packing, which should not
be good. If your downdraft design doesn't work, I hope you'll try an
updraft blower once with your same 2-meter circles (with a depth that is
unknown but respectably large).

>
(elk):
>I still rely on airtight drums to extinguish the carbonised sawdust.

(Ron): Do your workmen try to quickly shovel the sawdust out of
the 2-meter circles? Does the sawdust flare up - or is it more well
behaved?
>
>At this rate, I should have the six-drum apparatus ready to fire up in a
>week.
>
>All the best; >elk

(Ron): Again - good luck.

Before leaving, though, let me add a few more thoughts on sawdust
pyrolysis - based on a quick test run yesterday trying to pyrolyze sawdust
within a charcoal making stove (CMS), while Alex English and his wife Chris
were visiting.

Before getting into our results, let me say that Alex is now
heading home in a new (used) pickup with new (used) camper top, He has
visited about six list members after picking the pickup/camper up in
California. It was fun and educational to have Alex and Chris here for a
short time and to repay his hopitality to my wife and I this past summer
(Chris not being present then).

What Alex and I tried was inserting a smaller inner can (8.5 cm
diameter and 19 cm height - a little too tall) into (mostly) the upper part
of a two-can standard CMS design (each can of 15 cm dia. and 17.5 cm
height). I didn't feel it combusted very well (not uniform
circumferentially), but it converted well enough (no quantitative
measurements to report) and the flame level was controllable (seemed to
react more slowly - as would be expected) by the usual primary air control.
The pyrolysis gases had to exit downward through the bottom open end of
this otherwise totalled closed, inverted smaller can (and then combusted
like all the other pyrolysis gases - but now more near the outside of the
inner small can.).

The important point is that pretty good sawdust pyrolysis had
occurred. (This took about an hour - we had to leave for about a half
hour and are not sure exactly what transpired. The pyrolysis flame was out
and some combustion of charcoal had occurred, when we returned.) The
sawdust in the (air-free) central small can seemed to have been converted
more than 95% to charcoal (there was only a small amount of sawdust that
only achieved a dark brown color).

Because there was modest success (almost complete pyrolysis in the
time available even though the combustion itself seemed a little worse), I
intend to try this sawdust pyrolysis idea a bit more. However, now I'm
going to try putting the sawdust on the outside, rather than the inside.
This should provide a strong beneficial insulative effect. I'll use an
inverted (large part down) partial conical (frustum) design for the
combustion region - to try to make the air flow more uniform. Thus, I'm
thinking of something with an upper exit hole of about 7 cm diameter. This
would leave the max width of the sawdust about 0.5*(15-7)=4 cm - about
what the radius we had this last time. Any thoughts from anyone on this
geometry?

Now the problem is getting an airtight container (except for the
holes still at the bottom - near the secondary air input holes). I am
thinking of a few larger "filler" holes in the upper horizontal "washer"
surface of the sawdust container and covering these with another flat plate
that hopefully fits close enough to prevent much gas leakage. I am worried
that this won't be good enough and could lead to a lot of noxious gas
leakage. Anyone able to suggest a better way to close this "can" up?

What I am describing is somewhat like the "Grover torus" design -
in which air tightness was assured in one design I saw with large outer
bolts. In another, there were two "outer downturned knife edges on the
washer shape" - each fitting into a sand filled groove. The difference
from the Grover design is that Grover had no control of his air supply.

Whew - now this sounds a lot more complicated than the simple
central inverted can! But I think this small design modification might be
worth it. The merit is supposed to be three fold. First is to have a more
efficient unit by having an outer insulation surrounding the combustion
zone (albeit that you have to replace the "insulation" every firing as it
pyrolyzes (hopefully eventually being worth the effort as it is turned into
briquettes eventually and reduces the time spent in finding large pieces..

The second benefit is supposed to be in finding a way to combust,
in a controllable fashion, the large amount of small hard-to-control
biomass that is most widely available in most rural areas (as Priyadarshini
Karve pointed out recently). That is, we don't need sawdust - the "upper"
input can be straw, leaves, etc. Actually, maybe the lower part can be
also - as I have successfully pyrolyzed raspberry stalks, pine cones etc.
The problem will be in finding the right combination of

As a third benefit, with the present proposed modification (if it
works), it should be possible to reduce the height of the lower wooden
pieces and get the same amount of cooking done with less valuable input
pieces. There should be the same amount of total charcoal (roughly 25%
presumably, albeit some needing briquetting).

This last discussion is not directly related to Elsen's problem
(and I apologize to all for mixing up these two approaches to
charcoal-making). However, it was interesting to Alex and I to see what
this "fluffy" charcoal from sawdust was like and sawdust is now on my mind.
The only new part of this interior can test is telling us a little more
about the dimensions (when using sawdust) that might work with one CMS
design. This last part is still "pie-in-the-sky".

I 'd sure like to hear what anyone thinks about my trying this out
with the above dimensions. Even better would be hearing that someone had
made it work.

Ron

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

From dstill at epud.org Sat Oct 24 01:00:09 1998
From: dstill at epud.org (Dean Still)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Heat transfer efficiency
Message-ID: <199810240511.WAA11087@seahorse.epud.net>

Dear Peter Verhaart:

We just enjoyed a very interesting visit from Alex English here at the
Research Center! He and Larry Winiarski had a chance to chat for a couple
of hours and for half a day, Alex and the rest of the stove crew here at
Aprovecho (the brawn not the brains), played contentedly with a simple
gasifying stove and then with a few versions of the Rocket.

Larry had played with gasification for ten years about 15 years ago but
perhaps the most useful part of their discussion was trading experiences
with gasifying whole bales of straw.

In passing, Alex commented on our testing procedure. He wasn't certain if
our percentages were comparable to others work. And you had commented a
while ago on the same subject. We assume that there are 8,600 btu's per
pound of dry wood. We measure the rise in a weighed sample of water
(sensible heat)and add the energy used to change water to steam (latent
heat) (1,000btu/pound). We add up the wood used at 8,600btu per pound and
see what percentage made it into the pot.

Alex had seen a more forgiving method used. Thanks so much for your
information of optimum flame output, pan size and amount of liquid. I will
factor this into what we are doing and sincerely appreciate some of the
most useful data I have received this year!

Most of our library was stolen about five years ago, unfortunately. So if
there is any easy way for you to send more reviews of the very valuable
work that you have done it is always greatly appreciated. I do think that
there is a lot of work that needs doing on complete combustion stoves. That
approach seems to have great merit to me.

Today, for example, we were testing a Rocket stove built out of clay and
sand, that includes a built in haybox also made from clay/sand. The entire
stove is 100% vernacular and would cost very little to make. We used 380.5
grams of wood, not oven dried, to bring 1205 grams of water and 1265 grams
of pinto beans to a rolling boil for ten minutes. There was very little
smoke made during the burn. The pot of beans and water was then placed in
the Haybox (full of straw) and after two hours the beans were soft and
mushy, a bit overcooked. 380.5 grams of wood cooked to completion 1265
grams of pinto beans.

A good Haybox, by the way is very easy to describe: 1.) has R-7 of
insulation (needed to cook pinto beans) 2.) keeps the insulation dry to
preserve the R-7, if using open cell material and 3.) allows almost no air
exchange. Simple, vernacular, fuel saving, improves indoor air quality.
Really neat!

Thanks again,

Dean

From larcon at sni.net Sat Oct 24 17:05:04 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding Thomas Stubbing contribution on "dry steam drying"
Message-ID: <v01540b04b257c5683a6d@[204.133.28.2]>

Stovers: I recently heard from new list member Thomas Stubbings
<heat-win@mcmail.com>, who has been developing a technique for charcoaling
that we have not discussed on this list (although it was described briefly
on the "gasification" list last January).

(Part I. Thomas said on the 20th):

This is just to thank you for providing Alex English's web site in
yesterday's message from which I have learnt much, especially from the
items on burning the pyrolysis gases.

If you look at my web site <http://www.dryers-airless.mcmail.com> you
will see that we are involved in a wide ranging development likely to
impact favourably on the viable creation of renewable fuels from
biomass.

A small grant application has now been made to support a feasibility
study aimed at developing energy-efficient charcoal making.

So far we have quickly dried split logs in superheated steam and then,
by raising the temperature of the recirculating superheated steam
atmosphere in the dryer to above 220 C, initiated exothermal pyrolysis,
turned the logs into lump charcoal and generated much smoke which we now
wish to burn so as to use the heat produced to dry around 8 times as
much newly cut wood as that from which the charcoal will be made.
<snip>
If you would like me to keep you both informed of this development
please let me know.

(Part II - I responded on the 21st (">") and received the following answers
on the 24th as follows):

> <snip> There are 3-4 people on our list who are doing something
> similar to you, I think. It might help you and they to pass your following
> message on to the full list. But I don't want to do so as you are
> describing something that seems likely to be proprietary (but I haven't yet
> looked at your web page yet - and will do so soon - your technology looks
> quite interesting.)

Our airless, i.e. superheated steam drying technology is already patented
internationally and in commercial use in the ceramic industry, so far in Europe
and North and Central America. Our web site
<http://www.dryers-airless.mcmail.com> outlines it and our aims, while the
attached paper which I presented to the 11th International Drying Symposium in
August is much more technical.

I don't think the idea of raising the temperature once wood is dry to initiate
pyrolysis or subsequently adding pyrolysis gas combustion equipment to the
dryer would be patentable and in any event would not be because the idea has
already been publicised.

<snip>

> Your interest in burning the exhaust "smoke" is of course very
> much what many of us are interested in. It seems to be the moisture
> content that is the biggest problem.

Yes, which is why we aim for bone dryness in wood at around 200 C before
raising its temperature to start gas production.

If your subscribers are not fully drying the wood before beginning to make
charcoal from it this could explain why it is 'the biggest problem' for them,
while which wood is used could also influence the burnability of the gases,
e.g. the gases from wood with a high turpine content may burn more readily.

(Part III - most of Thomas' material from last January sent to the
gasification list):

I have devised a concept whereby charcoal might be made in three lagged
chambers linked by valved ducts and having an adjoining, shared
indirect heater and condenser, each chamber having its own recirculation
fan.

To get the process started when all three chambers are loaded with moist
wood some oil or gas would be burnt into the indirect heater so as to
heat the first chamber in which air is recirculated to heat the wood.

Once both the atmosphere and the moist wood in that chamber have been
heated to above 100 degrees centigrade, the steam generated from some of
the wood's surface moisture at the rate of 27 cubic feet/lb of 1.67
cubic metres/kg replaces the chamber's initially contained air and
drying is completed in a recirculating amosphere of dry superheated
steam.

Meanwhile the around 250 to 300 degrees centigrade flue gases from the
first chamber's indirect heater are fed into the second chamber and
recirculated there to begin a conventional pre-drying process. As soon
as steam begins to be generated in the first chamber, this is fed into
the condenser and its energy used to heat ambient air to 95 degrees
before it is added to the flue gases recirculating in the second chamber
and accellerates that chamber's pre-drying stage.

Once the wood in the first chamber is dry the recirculating superheated
steam heats the dry wood to the around 245 degrees centigrade at which I
understand carbonisation begins.

When carbonisation in the first chamber begins the valves in the shared
ducting system are moved so that:

a) The gases produced in the first chamber replace the oil or gas being
burnt in the indirect heater,

b) The the seond chamber's atmosphere is recirculated over the indirect
heater enabling it to become superheated steam as described above
and that chamber's airless drying phase to begin, and

c) The third chamber's conventional pre-drying phase to begin.

Once carbonisation in the first chamber is complete, part or all of the
second chamber's superheated steam recirculation could be made to pass
through it, cooling the carbon without risk of it igniting and adding
its stored sensible energy to the second chamber's drying energy.

In any event the charcoal is then removed from the first chamber and
replaced with a fresh charge of moist wood.

The second chamber's wood then begins to carbonise and heat the airless
process beginning to take place in the third chamber the energy from
which begins to pre-dry the wood in the first chamber, and so on through
the operating sequence in a preferably 24 hours/day process.

With a UK forestry company interested and a willing system manfacturer
to hand, I am beginning the preparation of a schematic design and to
calculate the overall energy effect. There may even be a surplus of
carbonisation energy which could be used to dry other wood.

Your comments on this would be most welcome.

(Part IV. A few last questions from Ron larson):
1. Could you clarify whether your charcoaling concept is working or
in the development process?
2. Can you state something about the optimum scale? How much
electric power is required per unit output?
3. Some of our past "stoves" list discussion on this topic has
focused on wanting to pyrolyze in remote locations - taking the equipment
to the field rather than the logs to a central location. Would that be
possible in your design?
4. Thanks for your contribution and welcome to our list. Ron

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

From greensue at hotmail.com Sun Oct 25 01:08:24 1998
From: greensue at hotmail.com (Susanne Machler)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Ye olde zeolites
Message-ID: <19981025051908.3710.qmail@hotmail.com>

Hi again,
I realise that both groups might have a similar problem, namely the
filtration of gases. We need cooling, refridgeration on the homestead. A
few months ago, I was following a thread on using the thermal behaviour
of zeolites as an alternative adsorbent material.
It is a known fact that zeolites can be bought and easily manufactured,
with various atomis structures, and meshes, making effectively from my
laywomans uunderstanding, a perfect filter. Zeolites are used
extensively as filters for bad smells etc. Why is it I havent heard of
any enterprising persons, trying some more research here?
The stove, biogas, gasification, syngas, and other folks might find
these filters at atomic levels most useful. Think of a multistage filter
"straining" off the various gases at different levels....

Is this an idea, or is it my perfect world mind working on me ?

Say you heard it right here from me, the homesteader!! :)

Good luck, Sue
Sue Maechler
Colibri Cove
http://members.tripod.com/~colibri_cove/myindex.htm
greensue@hotmail.com
If you truly want to understand something, try and change it!!
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Stoves List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES:
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
Stoves Webpage
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

From REEDTB at compuserve.com Sun Oct 25 20:03:11 1998
From: REEDTB at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Gas/Electric/Biomass cooking efficiency
Message-ID: <199810252012_MC2-5DFA-B7AD@compuserve.com>

All:

Since all Humans cook, the world energy consumption and practices for
cooking are of international importance.

In my recent measurement of electric stove efficiency (~65%) I commented
that after power generation and transmission losses are taken into account
this is probably less than 20% efficient. DIRECT use of the natural gas
gives 30-50% efficiency, as does our wood gas stove.

Someone should get a grant (World Bank) to make this comparison. We spend
too much time measuring in our own little field and not enough cross
checking.

TOM REED

Message text written by Dick Glick
>
Hello Harry and All --

To add fire to the discussion and as an example of a step toward
conservation, I suggest the Laws of Thermodynamics would point to favoring
the direct use of natural gas rather than its use for power generation by
the electrical industry. You might want to examine the former application
rather than the latter in your next analysis.

The test case is before us, however, when we consider what energy
consumption in California would be if the energy derived from gas use there
were to be replaced by electricity generated by that gas.

Best, Dick
------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Harry W. Parker" wrote:

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Mon Oct 26 08:44:17 1998
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Woodcoal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: briquettes from charcoal
Message-ID: <199810261355.QAA00538@ns.alkor.ru>

Stoves,
I ask to help to find firm, which makes presses for manufacturing
briquettes from charcoal. We want to buy complete installation for
manufacture of briquette from charcoal. It should be press with cylinders.
The briquettes turn out in the form of lenses. Productivity 70.... 100 kgs
/hours.

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

From elk at net2000ke.com Tue Oct 27 07:00:47 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Calorific Content- Waste Fines Briquettes
Message-ID: <v01520d02b25b8e0cb6e0@[195.202.65.142]>

Stovers;

Joseph Githomi of KEFRI (Kenya Forestry Research Institute) has kindly
determined the calorific content of my 10% clay-bound, low pressure
extruded, sun-dried waste fines (vendor's waste dust) briquettes.

The values of 4 repetitions ranged from 3.327 to 3.411 kcal/g with an
average of 3.367 kcal/gram

Comments?

I am still producing between 1000 and 500 kg/day of briquettes. Demand
varies with the price of local 'bush' charcoal, though everything ends up
sold in the long run. We have done very little marketing to date. Obviously
there is a solid demand- anybody want a new industry? I'd be interested to
here about the availability of discarded vendor's fines from the other
countries on this list: Priyadarshini Karve? Yury Yudkevitch? Rogerio
Miranda?

---------------------------------------

Ronal/Tom- may I propose KEFRI to the list? The two researchers who have
visited my facility here are Joseph Githomi, Research Officer, and Nellie
Ndegwa, Research Scientist- both of KEFRI's Forest Products Research
Programme.

Their newly aquired e-mail address is: kefri@AfricaOnline.co.ke

Best Regards;

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From elk at net2000ke.com Thu Oct 29 04:02:19 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (E. L. Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Carbonising Sawdust- Downdraft Kiln Trials
Message-ID: <v01520d02b25e040d575e@[195.202.65.69]>

A bit late on the rplies here- apologies.

Q.- Ronal asks what is the hieght of the two 2m. diam pyrolysis rings,
depth of charcoal at the end of the burn and mehtod of sealing to prevent
air leaks.

A.- The rings- corrugated galvanised steel walls- around the perforated
bottom of the 2m. dia. kilns are 1 m. high. The depth of carbonised sawdust
in each of the two kilns after 8 hours of pyrolysis is only about 20 cm,
and while not perfectly even, the pyrolysis is fairly even accross the
entire kiln. Agitation - stirring the whole mass- for half an hour prior to
removal of the charcoal powder ensures that there is very little partially
charred sawdust.

The rings are sealed into the ground by piling dirt up against the outer
walls of the kilns- about 15 cm high. I'll moisten this dirt for the next
trials in order to help reduce air leaks- but I'm sure it's not 100%
airtight.... should be O.K. though.(?).

Q.- Do I need the 'sparkplug' wood fire at the base of the chimney to
ignite the volatiles because the sawdust is wet?

A.- No. The sawdust is air-dry. To approx. 10% I reckon. Further
research into allowing for wetter raw material is warranted if/once this
process gets up to a viable rate of throughput. Obviously it'd be nice to
avoid the necessity of preliminary drying, but I rather doubt if green
material straight from the sawmill will ever be used- it'd be too wet at ?
40% ? moisture.

Q.- Is the sparkplug necessary after the system is heated up and the
downdraft/flue vacuum is established?

A.- In my opinion the sparkplug- a any sparkplug, like an electric
spark as you suggest, Ronal, is needed to ensure continuous flaring of the
noxious volatiles (acrid white smoke). The downdraft function will proceed
in the absence of flaring, as the gasses are hot and will rise up the
chimney, but I assume that flaring increases flue vacuum and hence overal
rate of pyrolysis.

Q.- Describe the perforations in the bottom of the kilns.

A.- I've welded two nails onto a hammer and pounded thousands of 5 mm
punctures into the thin galvanised steel sheeting of the bottom of the
pyrolysis beds/kilns. I'd say the perforations comprise over 30% of the
sheet's area.

I've had some minor delays with construction on the 6-drum chimney/firbox
unit. Doesn't look like it'll be tested this week. Aiming for mid next week
now.

Your sawdust carbonising tests with Alex using the Charcoal Making Stove
are interesting ideed! How was the inverted can containing the sawdust
heated? Did you surround it with vertical sticks of wood?

Watch out for uncontrolled flaring with the grover design- My eyebrows have
grown back subsequent to my trials with 2 vertically stacked 45 gal. drums,
you'll be pleased to hear. Using sawdust itself as an upper sealant didn't
work- I ended up with randomly timed eruptions that spewed sparks and
flaring gas all over the place!

elk

_____________________________
Elsen Karstad
P.O Box 24371 Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/Fax:254 2 884437
E-mail: elk@net2000ke.com
_____________________________

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 30 22:24:28 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarded - biocoal production from agric. residues and byproducts fromagroindustry
Message-ID: <v01540b00b2600f3fb65f@[204.133.28.14]>

Stovers: The following message was preceded by an exchange in which
Wolfgang asked for information on the "Herreshof roaster" which we talked
about several years ago briefly - and which perhaps Auke Koopmaans may be
able to supply assitance. Can anyone offer other specific assistance for
Senegal in the GTZ program to produce charcoal from agricutural wastes?

Wolfgang: Please let me know if I should sign you up for the "stoves"
list. We are interested in charcoal making primarily in remote locations
and in smaller scale opportunities. And we find it to be a difficult topic
- with most charcoal making not capturing the value in the waste pyrolysis
gases. We hope you will find a means to flare rather than vent the
pyrolysis gases. The Herreshof is not of the type we have been discussing.
We should like to stay in touch as to what you are able to recommend to the
Senegalese. Best of luck.

Ron
>
>Thank you very much for your immediate reply. My aim is to make this
>information available to a GTZ-project on household energy in Senegal, where,
>hopefully, biomass (cotton stalks, rice husks, straw, palm oil mill residues,
>bagasse etc.) will be used for biocoal production. In my opinion, not much
>attention was paid to biocoal technologies and management during the past 8
>years. However, I am convinced that, on an individual basis, progress is
>achieved and lastest information might be made available. The above mentioned
>biomass is different in nature and needs different treatment. I would highly
>appreciate to learn about the experience of full-scale plants of different
>scale.
>
>Thank you very much for your kind consideration
>Yours sincerely
>Wolfgang Tentscher
>

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

From larcon at sni.net Fri Oct 30 22:24:34 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding a request on a "stove"-driven refrigerator - Icy Ball
Message-ID: <v01540b02b26027d97e24@[204.133.28.14]>

Stovers (especially Dean Still and Peter Verhaart): The following is a
possibly interesting adjunct to stove work. There are four parts below -
in the last of which I ask a few questions:

(Part 1 - the original request for information came in a few days ago from
a non-list member - John Smallman,19-2401 Ord Rd., Kamloops BC Canada V2B
7V8, phone 250-554-9333, who said):

>During a search on the internet I intercepted your letter re Icy Ball.
>I have owned an icy ball for some time, and now would like to try and
>see if its working.
>It sounds as if you've been there, done that?
>I have an instruction manual, and the original patent information, but
>that's all.
>
>Would appreciate contact, and any information you can give me.
>
>Until I intercepted your letter, I had no idea whether there were even
>any Icy Balls other than mine left!
>
>Do you - or anyone you know - have any other of the ancillary
>equipment? Like the heater, water bath, or ice chest???
>
>Look forward to your response.

(Part 2 - my first response)

>> John -
>> I remember the dialog on Icy Ball only vaguely. Can you give
>> exact date and I can go back and look it up. We (stoves@crest.org) are
>> a list devoted to improving simple developing country cookstoves....
>>I do not forward general requests like yours about "modern" devices
>>because >>they are outside our area of interest.

(Part 3 - a return note today from John):

>Ron - thanks. It was a note from Dean Still to Peter Verhaart, dated 4
>June.
>By the way - depends what you mean by "modern" devices. The IcyBall was
>manufactured from about 1927 to about 1933. It was a "non-electric"
>refrigerator that could, for example, be operated by a
>cookstove/woodstove. This no doubt was in some way connected to why it
>was passed along your "wires"!

(Part 4 - my new thoughts):

a. I was just coming back from visiting Elsen/Kenya at this time,
and I might have missed something from Peter or Dean. Could either or both
of you help John on the details of the the "Icy Ball"? On June 4, the
only thing that Dean said was: " We rebuilt the Icy-Ball, the original
ammonia/water absorption refigerator. Took two years."

b. I have never previously given thought to wood-fired
ammonia/water absorption refrigeration - which seems like it might be a
nice co-product in some cases. Could anyone on the list report on other
such products - and whether this product or any other seemed to have good
economic value? I am thinking especially of the use of the flared gases
from charcoal-making which might otherwise be wasted. In work I have done
in the Pacific, freezing (of fish) was felt to be the primary need for
raising income. Anyone able to venture a guess on the power levels needed
for refrigerators and/or freezers of any size?

c. I hope responses can be sent to (non-list member) John as well
as to the full list. (John - please let us know of any successes/failures
you might have in working with this unit - especially if done with a stove.

Ron

From elk at net2000ke.com Sat Oct 31 05:16:31 1998
From: elk at net2000ke.com (Elsen Karstad)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Icy Ball
Message-ID: <199810311028.NAA09160@net2000ke.com>

I'm intrigued by the possibilities here...Could the energy from the flared gasses produced during charcoal production - and I'm thinking of sawmill by-products (as usual)- be harnessed and turned into ice? I'm sure it could! Maybe the Icy Ball- whatever this is- could do it.I'd like to hear more about this. Ice has so many practical uses and is very rare and expensive in rural East Africa. I'd hazard a guess that 98% of all butcheries in Kenya have no means of refrigeration whatsoever. Always ready to re-invent the wheel........elk~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Elsen L. Karstad , P.O. Box 24371 Nairobi Kenyaelk@net2000ke.com tel/fax (+ 254 2) 884437

From larcon at sni.net Sat Oct 31 23:11:49 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding Peter Verhaart on "Icy Ball"
Message-ID: <v01540b01b2617f68e230@[204.133.28.37]>

>Dear Stovers,
>
> I did find some references to the "Icy Ball" refrigerator
>in a message
>exchange in June this year between Dean Still and Art Lilley.
>The refrigerator works intermittently and consists of two pressure vessels
>connected by a pipe. Initially the vessel to be heated contains strong
>NH3/water solution. As the one vesset is heated, the other is cooled to
>ambient temperature when a liquid containing a very high percentage of NH3
>condenses.
>At a certain stage, when the NH3 concentration in the liquid in the heated
>vessel has decreased sufficiently (if heating is continued, all the liquid
>in the heated vessel will end up in the cooled vessel), the hot vessel is
>cooled and the end containing the strong NH3 condensate is brought into
>contact with the produce to be refrigerated. The NH3 evaporates at a low
>temperature as the vapour/gas is absorbed in the water in the other vessel.
>With some ingenuity it could be made to work automatically, tipping over
>when sufficient liquid has collected at the cool end, dunking it into the
>refrigerator compartment, at the same time taking the boiler part out of
>the fire and into a cool breeze. One could think of two units working
>alternatively thus making constant use of the heat source.
>The efficiency will not be high but who cares when the alternative is no
>refrigeration.
>That is what I know about the process, the name "Icy Ball" was new to me.
>
>Regards,
>
>Piet
>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
>

From larcon at sni.net Sat Oct 31 23:11:53 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding: a request for health impact information
Message-ID: <v01540b03b261838ddb8d@[204.133.28.37]>

Stovers: Today, list member Salimol Thomos <salimol@cc.iitb.ernet.in>
sent the following message. Can anyone suggest some suitable references?
Ron

>sir
>i am a subscriber to the stoves list
>i am quantifying the health effects of emissions from biomass and coal
>combustion from stoves
>i would like to have the density of combustion aerosols (fine particulate
>material).
>from wood, coal,
>kerosene, LPG and crop residues
>any reference could be of valuable guidance
>
>thanks
>sincerely
>salimol thomas
>research scholar
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Miss. Salimol Thomas
>Research Scholar
>Centre for Environmental Sci & Engg
>Indian Institute of Technology
>Powai, Bombay 400 076
>India
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>e-mail : salimol@cc.iitb.ernet.in resi: room no:125,
>
>voice : 091 (22) 578 25 45 Extn 78 65/7864/7869/62 091 (22) 578 1039
>
>fax : 091 (22) 578 34 80
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

From larcon at sni.net Sat Oct 31 23:11:57 1998
From: larcon at sni.net (Ronal W. Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:08 2004
Subject: Forwarding: Charcoal from saw dust in the USA
Message-ID: <v01540b00b26187346a31@[204.133.28.37]>

Stovers: The following just in from Wolfgang Tentscher, who sent in an
earlier query about the "Herreshof roaster" and other charcoal making
apparatus. Are there any list members near Missouri who can perhaps
identify a phone number?

Wolfgang: I will look at the following website, but doubt that I can add
any more information. I do not know this facility. Our list may have some
knowledgeable individuals, but in general we are only interested in smaller
scale operations. Ron

>
>Dear Ron,
>
>A new charcoal kiln was constructed near Belle, Missouri, which uses sawdust
>from the surrounding area. The facility went on-line in 1994 . You can verify
>this in "http://rredc.nrel.gov/biomass/doe/rbep/se_waste/missouri.html".
>
>Do you know this facility and how I could get in touch with the owner? I am
>quite qurious how this works and anxious to know.
>
>Many thanks for your kind assistance.
>
>Best regards
>Wolfgang Tentscher
>

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

BioEnergy Lists: Improved Biomass Cooking Stoves

October 1998 Biomass Cooking Stoves Archive