August 2001 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 tombreed at home.com Sat Aug 4 13:42:12 2001
From: tombreed at home.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Fw: GAS-L: ACHTUNG!
Message-ID: <004c01c11d0b$30bb1fa0$18e5b618@lakwod3.co.home.com>

Dr. Thomas Reed
The Biomass Energy Foundation 1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401303
278 0558; tombreed@home.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <A
title=tombreed@home.com href="mailto:tombreed@home.com">Thomas Reed
To: Robb
Walt ; <A title=gasification@crest.org
href="mailto:gasification@crest.org">gasification ; <A
title=Stoves@crest.org href="mailto:Stoves@crest.org">Stoves ; <A
title=vivie2000@cs.com href="mailto:vivie2000@cs.com">Vivian Reed
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:14 PM
Subject: GAS-L: ACHTUNG!

Dear Technikalische dumkopfen:

Came across this sign which could be posted on ALL gasifiers and MANY
stoves (preferably in Old English or German Script):

Das Machinen ist nicht fur Gerfingerpoken und Mittengraben;
Ist easy schnappen der Springenwerk, Blowenfusen und Poppen Corken mit
Spitzensparken.
Es is nicht fur gewerken by die Dumkopfen.
Keepen die hands in Das Pockets, Relaxen und Watch das Blinkenlights!

(With apologies to our German members....

TOM REED

Dr. Thomas Reed
The Biomass Energy Foundation 1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401303
278 0558; <A
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gif00064.gif
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 5665 bytes
Desc: "href="mailto:tombreed@home.com">tombreed@home.com"
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stoves/attachments/20010804/9d0d0f9c/gif00064.obj
From ronallarson at qwest.net Sun Aug 12 14:26:22 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Summary of the present status of the "Shell dialog"
Message-ID: <005a01c1235b$ef4d4820$577ee13f@computer>

Stovers - My apologies to those "stoves" list
members who have also signed up for the ongoing stoves dialog being carried
out
for the Shell Foundation. You can
totally ignore this message - which is identical to one I just sent off to
"Shell".

To those of you have NOT been listing in, I
apologize for not saying more on the "stoves" list over the pst few weeks.
The "Shell" dialog has been very good, with many "stoves" members contributing a
lot. I have looked back at two other "Shell" dialogs and believe
we stoves enthusiasts are taking this opportunity very very
seriously. I recommend looking back at the Shell-stove dialog summaries -
prepared by a Jonathan Sinton (at UC Berkeley). There are 3 so far, but
the 4th will probably appear today or tomorrow. The following is my
contribution for the fifth and final week - which is my attempt to set
down my thoughts into how the Shell Foundation money should be allocated among
the many stoves areas that need funding. I hope those who have
differeing views will jump in with your thoughts. It is not too late to be
a participant. If you might want to apply for Shell Foundation funds, you
should certainly get your views expressed this week. Almost everything for
the pst four weeks has been on biomass stoves - with only a bit on kerosene and
solar cooking.

To get to that web site - try:

<A
href="http://www.shellfoundation.org/dialogues/household_energy/resources/">http://www.shellfoundation.org/dialogues/household_energy/resources/

The rest of this is what I just sent
in. (Ron (first "signature"))

Hi again to
“Dialoguers” <?xml:namespace prefix
= o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Whew! I sure am glad to get
to this point. The end is in sight.
As usual, I am going to work
from the background paper, and the three proposed questions, so as to assist
Jonathan. For this week, Kirk wrote as his introducion (my
inserts in parentheses, and with apologies for the altered formatting):

“Week 5: Role for SEP (“Project
Week”)
A wide variety of activities, ranging from
(A) basic
research in stove design 
(20%)
to
(B) field
epidemiology studies 
(30%)
on
(C)
demonstrating innovative financial arrangements (30%)
and
(D) estimating
cost-effectiveness for policy,

(10%)
could
contribute to reducing the deaths and illnesses due to household energy use
suffered by women and young children in the developing world. “

This breakout into 4 main categories looks OK as a first approach at
organization. The above totals only
90%. The remaining 10% I would
retain for other valid cross-cutting purposes – such as E1 - support of
management, E2. information
exchange, E3 - hiring short term experts on topics such as materials, testing,
finances, etc. E4 - travel by experts for evaluation and E5 - educational
purposes.

Below, I answer the three Week-5 questions (called Q5-1, Q5-2, and Q5-3)
in terms of these five categories A-E with justifications for this dollar
split. I start by rearranging
what Kirk has written in the backgrounder for his set of 9 basic questions
(KSQ-1, etc.) and his set of 7 recommendations (KSR-1, etc.) which I organize
first under question Q5-1 into the 5 above categories A through E. After each of Kirk’s 16 sentences,
I comment on each – all of which I find to be good. I can’t see any topic left out.
Q5-1 “What
activities would most benefit from funding from and participation by a private
charity like the Shell Foundation’s Sustainable Energy Programme? “
(A) “Basic
research in stove design” (20%)
KSQ-4
“Review successes and failures of current and past programs to design and
disseminate improved stoves with lower emissions and/or chimneys in order to
distill lessons learned.”

(Great project topic. It would be inefficient for each
stove researcher to do this background work – maybe to even have two programs
doing this. But there is a lot of
data to collect. Kirk clearly has
already done a lot of this – anyone else? Maybe small honoraria for others
to pass on the results of their own stove developments to Kirk’s (or other)
group in some standard format? Big
problem is that most stove developers will not have the right or standard
equipment to do this work, as it applies to emissions. Maybe purchase 5-6 test units and send
them around the world to labs that can do the work – each retaining the test
equipment for a month or so?
Probably one test-set-up each permanently in China and India and one each
that moves around the 5 continents?
There should be a standard stove and fuel combination that is tested in
each place for emissions. Probably
no need to send equipment for measuring efficiency – but there needs to be
consensus on the methodology. )
KSQ-5
“Intensified research to design and disseminate truly smokeless stoves
with extended lifetimes (cost-effectiveness greatly depends on lifetime).”
(Also one of my top
priorities. This need not be
expensive – but again the emission monitoring need is great – to prove
smokelessness. I put my own
prejudice for charcoal-making stoves in this category, although it also fits in
the next.)
KSQ-7
“Research on biomass-based clean household fuels that have the double
advantage of being renewable when harvested and liquid or gaseous when
burned.“
(Great question. Pyrolysis gases, biogas, methanol are
here. Using the pyrolysis gases
from charcoal making falls here if it can be done with storage and on a small
enough scale This is great place to
work with other Shell main funding categories (“Modern biomass”). There is a chance that briquettes (with
holes) are in this category.

(Summary – I go as low as 20%, because research should be relatively
cheap. I personally would like to
see more. Hope to see a
recommendation added to the three questions.)
(B) Field
epidemiology studies (30%)
KSR-2
“Identification and funding of empirical studies, to establish
credibility in the health community that such interventions will actually reduce
disease;”
(I am putting all of Kirk’s
thoughts with the words “health” and “disease” here in B – the category “C”
should have some medical/epidemiology aspects as well. Maybe there is a training
evaluation component that links B and C projects.)
KSR-7
“Support for complementary work on exposure- response relationships,
surveys, and device testing and development.”
(This is Kirk’s area. Much work needed probably besides this
topic. This is important to fund
because Shell is already sold on the health implications of stoves – and better
proof of health impacts should free up more donor money.)

(Summary – although only 2 recommendations and no question under B, it
cannot go lower than 30% because this is the area emphasized in the background
paper, and presumably what Shell has bought into. The other areas should be supportive on
category B, so that emissions testing is taking place under A and C (making the
emissions aspect one that can be called 20 + 30 + 30 = 80%, when viewed with that
lens)
(C) “ Demonstrating innovative financial arrangements
“ (30%)
 
I put all demonstrations and field implementation in this category. This is more than “financial” – but I
like keeping the word “financial” – because that is a huge problem in gaining
acceptance. Kirk’s questions and
recommendations in this category are (with my comments still in parentheses when
near something from Kirk in “quotes”):
KSQ-1
“How to include education and training for improved kitchen hygiene as
part of the primary health care package, healthy child package, water and
sanitation package, maternal and child health package, etc.”
(Great question – worthy of many
projects. Somewhat the opposite of
the next one – which I interpret is based on $.)
KSQ-6
“Conduct systematic program of research to evaluate the effectiveness of
various policy measures to encourage households to move up the "energy ladder"
to cleaner fuels faster than they would otherwise. “
(Great question again. But I would leave off the ladder
anything that is not at least potentially sustainable – at least with Shell SEP
funds. I would place studies of
using methanol here.)
KSR-5
“Early seeking of support from leaders in target countries to allow
coordinated policy- and micro-level interventions, that will deliver change in
patterns of household energy use and convince others to follow similar
approaches”
(This seems necessary prior to
conducting actual interventions. It sounds like it should not be high cost.)
(Summary – this cannot be less than 30%, as this is
where much of the stove action is today and Shell will be looking for some
positive acceptances. But the
emission numbers are sufficiently bad that I doubt we will find many stove
projects ready to go at first. I
would put a hard-to-meet thermal efficiency goal (30%?) and the same for
combustion efficiency (99%?). This
can be relaxed if projects are not available at first that can meet these two
goals at an acceptable cost.)
(D)
Estimating cost-effectiveness for policy, (10%) (I put all the macro
issues from Week 4 here)
KSQ-3
“Conduct research on ways that different sectors can implement programs
with exposure reduction potential, for example, fuel pricing in the energy
sector.”
(I like the idea of policy
analysts giving guidance on this – shouldn’t be too expensive.)
KSQ-8
“Research on the international policy implications of promoting household
technologies that both reduce health impacts locally and help achieve
greenhouse-gas reduction goals globally “
(This is perhaps better under E –
but I think the research Kirk is proposing is largely economic. Do cost sharing on greenhouse gas
topics.)
KSQ-9
“there is need to conduct rigorous economic analyses to demonstrate the
cost-effectiveness of such measures in achieving health benefits, such as
extending healthy life-years, and reducing the risk of climate change, such as
carbon-dioxide-equivalent emissions.”
(Similar to above. Look for co-funding from the Shell group
looking at GW)
KSR-4
“Consideration of opportunities for effecting change via macro-economic
and health policies at the national level, in addition to micro- and
community-level interventions;”

(I place this here – because I am
lumping :macro” under “economics”.)
(Summary – I go as low as 10%,
because I think the economic models largely exist – and this is mainly a
question of data collection and peer review on methodology. The participants in all other areas can
be required through the RFPs to feed data in to these economics and policy
researchers.)
(E)
Other (10%)
KSQ-2 “How to develop co-funding for
exposure-reduction efforts among sectors (health, energy, housing, environment)
in the worst affected regions.”

(Sounds like a job for the leadership – not an RFP area)
KSR-1
“Agreement with multi-lateral, bi-lateral and other donor agencies, who
are already supporting parallel and related initiatives, to work together
towards common objectives”

(Looks rather like KSQ-2) (I put this as a management
issue. We need people doing this
who understand the world of donors.
Maybe this should be placed under “D”? if thought of as an economics
topic.)
KSR-3
“Support for independent validation of innovative policies to promote
fuel-switching, change in practice via health education, and use of
more-efficient stoves in order to determine which interventions and which agents
of change are most effective;”
 (This is a hard one to categorize – since
it is cross-cutting. I therefore
put this as a management and evaluation topic.)
KSR-6
“Targeted communication of process and results to promote adoption of
best practice; and”
(This needs to be a requirement
for every funded project – but also there needs to be a central information
“Czar” to assure this happens – probably best on the web.)

(Summary – Shell must have some money set aside to do this – but there
needs to be some funds for the unusual and the above evaluative work. 10% is strictly a guess.)

Q5-2.
“What specific issues that should be well understood are now poorly
characterized? “
I place the lack of a computer model
in this category. I would put at
least 5% of the total effort into developing such a model. I am thinking of something that puts out
efficiency and emissions given:

-
fuel (type, weight, moisture content, dimensions),
-
stove (materials and dimensions, especially on air control),
-
means of ignition (top or bottom, starter energy content),
-
cook pot characteristics (material in the pot, desired temperatures,
desired cook times, power levels, energy levels, dimensions, materials, outer
convective shielding, etc),
-
operator behavior over time (stoking, adding more fuel, etc), and
others.
I know of no model now that comes
close to this. Equally hard
combustion problems are well-modeled for rocket motors, engines, power plants –
and even burning buildings and forests.
I think the problem is lack of funds to attract top
mathematically-oriented researchers.
I have met only two people currently working on stove modeling, so there
is plenty of room to do more.
 This
will be an iterative process, with others validating the models with
experiments. I know of one 20-year
old experiment - modeling combination (consuming one “pellet”)
b. A stove design book.- or even a
checklist. This should contain all
the heat transfer formulas, material properties (lifetimes at different
temperatures, thermal conductivities/resistivities, etc), material cost ranges ($/kg, $/sqm at different thicknesses), failure
rate principles, manufacturing methodologies (riveting, welding, rolling,
crimping, etc – with cost estimations, etc) .Best test methods and equipment;
ways to calibrate test equipment.
This “volume” (or a web site) should act like an expert – ask any question
after describing all important design decisions and get back good numerical
answers – and maybe suggestions for change. Maybe a second volume on fuels and
combustion principles – energy contents, chemical balances, means for monitoring emissions. I generally favor local production of
stoves, so this should include highly technical material – but for very simple
local use – as could be explained by trained engineers/scientists in a local
language. We should be able to
justify bricks with different characteristics and different costs in terms of
simple payback times. (This
book need not get into discount rates and internal rate of return – only initial
costs and monthly savings.)
c. An intervention principles book - same ideas as above – for rural clinic
staff.
d. A
respiratory infection principles book –same ideas.
e. A
simple guidebook for purchasers of stoves.
How to make a “wise” decision, that involves the costs of fuel, stove,
exhaust mechanism, lifetimes, labor costs, income potential, and health
risks. (There may be a nomogram
lurking in here somewhere)
There are plenty of other "not well characterized" topics
already captured in Question Q5-1.

I
haven’t specifically mentioned solar cookers/dryers/water purifiers – but many
of the design book ideas apply there as well. There is plenty known about solar design
– but I am not aware that it is easily accessed. I would set aside a minimum floor of 10
to 15% for funding solar alternatives – more is not excluded, if for good
projects.

The whole world of charcoal making I find abysmal. Way too little pyrolysis gas is flared,
and little that is flared is used productively. I would set a goal of at least 15% of
total funds for awards involving charcoal production and use.

The world of processed fuels is worth exploring in some way (briquettes,
crop residues, seed oils, biogas, etc).
A minimum of 15% this way?

Last but not least is the world of instrumentation. I am glad to see Kirk emphasizing
this. This could be an RFP or award
area all by itself. We won’t be
producing better or even acceptable stoves until we can measure them
consistently – and we all can agree on the right measurement. How about a minimum of 10% for
instruments research?
(I have shown a lot of percentages – but many are
overlapping. That is - a seed oil
stove project can have technology development aspects, epidemiology, and
intervention – all in Africa, by a brilliant but unknown peasant. I have made an attempt to set the goals
to 100% only in the Q1 five-way split.
This warning on percentage goals applies to the Q3 response as well.)

Q5-3
“Are there specific examples of existing successful models (whether in
research , financial innovation, cost-effectiveness, or other areas) that the
Sustainable Energy Programme could follow?”

I hope the Shell program will look closely at the way the MacArthur
Foundation rewards bright people with a single cash award that allows a number
of years of independent activity –
no questions asked – no report due.
All done on the basis of past performance. The only ground rule is that the
recipient has some relationship to HEH.
I would commit about 10% of the Shell money this way. I can think of 3-4 stove people who
would qualify and there are probably at least that number in China and India,
that I never heard of.(and who would be much cheaper to reward). Some extra support (such as equipment,
scholarship money, and travel is probably appropriate, but the award itself
might be enough.

I also would set aside some prize money – as was done for the first human
powered air crossing of the British Channel (solar also?, Proof of Fermat’s Last
Theorem?) I suggest the goal
is 50% thermal efficiency, 99.9% combustion efficiency, and commercial
acceptance proven by sales of 10,000 (or 100,000?) units. The “Shell Challenge”
Prize –maybe $1 million? If
it is given in the first year, I will be amazed, but that cost would be worth
every penny.

Save some funds for giving awards to the most successful prior-year grant
awardees as selected by an impartial panel. Maybe just an added year or two of
support without having to compete via proposals. Maybe also a cash award if $5000? (maybe the award magnitude should be
tied to average wages in each country.

Set quotas for getting started in some places that should have the
talent, but from which no proposals are arriving. Every continent must be involved. Accept proposals in more than
English. Look for signs of genius
and motivation even if not already working on stoves, and even if not
technically trained.. I would set a
minimum of 50% for money to go to countries not in either the G-8 or NATO (Which should lead to something like 80%
of the total person-hours in the developing country world)..

Write to people whose background
is good and encourage proposals in specific areas. Don’t only wait passively and assume
that the best will want to compete – or will find out about the possible funding
in time. But make sure that
invitees know the magnitude of the total funds available, what is expected as
outcomes, and how many invitees there are.
A special invitation to compete should not be a guarantee of winning, but
it should be an honor to receive an invitation.

This is not going to be a short term project. If Shell is not committed
to at least a 5 year program, I wouldn’t get started. Or if a shorter period is all that can
be guaranteed, make that shorter period well known. Individual grants are better for more
than year, but if at all risky, a single year that can be recompeted is OK.
Other:

Again – Whew! Hope this
helps Jonathan and Kirk in organizing a bit. My hat is off to Kirk for having
captured the stove field very well.
I only wish I knew more about the health issues that must now be the
center of focus.

I expect many differences with my % numbers, but offer them with the
feeling that is what Shell is looking for from our web "advisory" group.

Ron

From lanny at roman.net Tue Aug 14 17:19:08 2001
From: lanny at roman.net (Lanny Henson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Lanny's Stove Project
Message-ID: <007901c12506$265942a0$1dba3cd0@default>

Lanny's Stove Project
My name is Lanny Henson. I became a subscriber to this list about 3 years
ago. I was looking for information about charcoal and clean combustion because I
was designing a barbecue cooker. The cause of this list has stuck my interest
and I think that it would be fun to design some stoves so I am going to spend
some hobby time and build a few. I have a background in designing and
fabricating airflow systems and custom sheet metal parts.

I have a few questions before I start.
1 Can you feed limited air to charcoal and get an efficient burn? Does
charcoal need secondary air to burn efficiently? What causes CO and is energy
wasted if it does not get to CO2?
2 What is the ratio of combustion air needed to burn wood gas? Someone wrote
6 to 1. If this is correct, would that be 6 parts gas and one part air?
Lanny Henson

From ronallarson at qwest.net Sat Aug 18 13:55:22 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
In-Reply-To: <3F078B30BD9FD21190830090273A70A901DD4AD6@rapexch1.fao.org>
Message-ID: <00de01c1280e$9abe4ae0$90f2b4d1@computer>

Stovers:

1. Although there will be some more messages, the very interesting
five-week stoves/health dialog that has been going on at
www.shellfoundation.org is now mostly complete. I just sent in my last (I
think) comment which related to the only national stove program that has had
consistently good reviews - that in China.

2. Kirk Smith began my interest in this when he wrote to the Shell dialog
on the 9th saying:

>The 1993 review of the Chinese improved stove program (which at that time
registered 130 million as having been >introduced since 1981) can now be
downloaded from
http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/krsmith/Publications/publications.htm

>See the section on "Improved Solid-fuel Stoves"

2. This rare input from Kirk seemed worthy of following up. At first, I
had some difficulty downloading it, but eventually could get it through a
local library (with faster access), as even after re-entering it is over 6
MB. I recommend it to others interested in
"optimum" national program design - since China seemed (still seems) well
ahead of the rest of us. Since they are rarely mentioned (Kirk's is the
only one I remember), I presume
most of us know almost nothing about how the Chinese proceeded.

4. My summary going in just now to "Shell" said:

" 1. I thought we had one more day of dialog, so will only say that I
finally got around to the paper on the Chinese stove program written by Kirk
Smith. I conclude from his paper that the Chinese did many things right -
and there is much to emulate there. For example the Chinese had a
nationally funded R&D program alone of 1200 people in 25 different R&D
labs!!. The total government subsidy (mostly for government employee
salaries, including many more national, regional, county, and village
workers) included about 100 times as many as those doing R&D. Still the
national total funding was only about 3% of that expended by stove buyers,
and the total of all government expenditures was about 20%. This gave a
total after 7 years of about $200 million for more than 100 million stoves
(costing stoves buyers about a total of US$10 each). There was no
government subsidy for materials and labor. These (3% central funding, $10
stove, limited stove subsidy, etc) look like good targets for proposers to
Shell (after taking due account of the big difference in populations,
government type, the purchasing power of a dollar, the Chinese starting
point, etc. )."

Afterthought - I believe the US national effort on improved rural
cookstoves does not reach one fulltime paid worker (a guess) - and I think
that is not very smart given the way the rest of the world views us.

5. The following expands on the above:

a. a reduction in bureaucracy by having funds/support flow directly
from central government to the implementing groups (located at the county
level) - bypassing the provincial level. (In every funding case, we
obviously are better off reducing bureaucracy, but for many countries this
just may not be possible. But I do think that an RFP warning that Shell is
looking out for unnecessary bureaucracy may be helpful - it seems to have
been important in China and this hasn't been an issue for discussion yet.)

b. Stove programs in China go back to the 50's and 60's
(unsuccessful), with an announced recent start date of 1982. Kirk points
out however that there were activities beginning in 1978. (The conclusion I
draw from this is that we must think of a long term program - and work first
in countries that have already demonstrated some progress (not even success)
towards defining what makes for a good stove.)

c. The Chinese program seems to have called for 90% local acceptance
for improved stoves. (This is much higher than we have been discussing. I
now
conclude that if we set our sights low, then that may be all we get.)

d. The magnitude of the Chinese government support (3 levels) was about
20% above the expenditures by the purchasers - and covered none of
the material and labor costs - only promotional and education costs, which
went to the producers, not the purchasers. (I conclude that we should not
overly subsidize to "bribe" purchasers. This finding in China is consistent
with what I know of the success of US subsidies.)

e. The Chinese set up local manufacturing units in each county, with an
expected 25% "profit" - to cover loans and investments. Their entire
program was very entrepreneurial. (I conclude that other countries should
be similarly entrepreneurial, with a local emphasis.)

f. The Chinese program accepted 100 new counties each year (there are
2300 counties in China - so I guess a county must be on the order of 1/2
million people). Maybe still have not gotten all involved (about 5% each
year, with about 200 being nominated (so half are disappointed). It was an
honor to be invited into
the program and difficult to be accepted. I think support only existed for
three years. (I conclude the obvious - don't
accept everyone; demand promises and goals.)

h. The Chinese program dealt only with rural stove users. (I need to
better understand the reason - but I guess this may have something to do
with the availability of electricity, etc - Presumably Shell may also have a
preference for rural users.)

i. Research is conducted by a consortium of 25 research institutions.
(I conclude that Shell will probably want more than a single R&D location)

j. The program seems to have been targeted at middle income users.
(Presumably, the higher income are already past using wood. Perhaps the
lowest income users cannot afford any stove? Too remote? This was a
surprise to read. )

k. Because of differences in purchasing power (7:1 against the US
dollar), the average Chinese citizen was identified as being relatively
affluent (even than India) - with stoves already better than most around the
world even before
the improved stove program began. (Presumably this would mean that improved
stove programs might be more successful in more affluent areas of the
world.)

l. There was a significant use of stove competitions between regions.
p 945. (I like this one especially. This has to be very cost effective.)

m. The total stove cost seems to have been about $10 (approximately
1990 dollars?), on top of which was about 3% national funds and 17% from
provincial and local treasuries. Kirk, et al state this is a record minimum
amount. The authors estimate (I think) that a dollar goes 7 times further
in China than in the US. (I conclude that applicants to Shell should be
thinking it will be very difficult to achieve this low a total - and that it
will be wise to bring in every conceivable level of government.)

n. The actual stove design is not clear to me - but I think was a
site-built unit with some manufactured parts. In a typical year 15 million
stoves would be built with a village technician force of 140,000 - or about
100 stoves per technician - or about 2 built per worker-week. This also
required a manufacturing workforce about 20% more. To this should be added
a government work force of about 11,000 full time equivalents (about 3 times
that many but with stove duties taking up only about 1/3 time) - or about 1
government worker per 15 private sector workers. The government labor costs
totaled about $0.40 per stove of subsidy - this apparently the only
subsidy - and not seen by the consumer. A very small part of the government
labor force were doing R&D and upper level management - perhaps 15%. (I
conclude from this that applicants to Shell should carefully analyze (more
than I have) all the levels of government that could be involved and be sure
they are well balanced - with the majority located at the county/village
level - with perhaps multiple jobs to do).

o. Tax relief amounted to a 10-15% contribution - and I am not sure if
that is included above.

p. I think there was essentially no monitoring of health impacts in the
Chinese program. Page 95, Item (v) seems to indicate that the coal stoves
are bad and
are predominantly an urban program -which were not included in the above. I
hope someone can report back on the coal briquettes - which are either
always or mostly with holes - as has been noted on the stoves list as we
talked about the work of Richard Stanley. I gather the coal stoves had
(have?) a strong band of supporters - and perhaps mainly because they
require little attention during use. The coal fuel sounds like it may be
subsidized.

q. In 1992, there were getting ready to move up to stoves with greater than
30% efficiency rating. (I conclude that Shell should review and report on
the Chinese last decade's efforts before we settle for much less.
Fortunately, I have heard a rumor that Kirk will soon be returning to
China.)

There is more - but I have run out of time for today. I would sure like to
know more about the dimensions, performance (efficiency, emissions, cost,
and lifetime), and appearance of both the 1992 and 2001 best stoves.

Comments?

Ron

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

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

From ronallarson at qwest.net Mon Aug 20 01:10:24 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Fw: Ron Larson on China and other stoves programs
Message-ID: <005701c12935$fdfff4a0$43afa0d8@computer>

Stovers:

This is a continuing exchange on the last message re the Chinese stove
program. I have given some responses to Nikhil Desai, but encourage others
to do also, especially should you have read the 1993 "World Development"
article by Smith et al. (I have tried to learn more about the three Chinese
co-authors but have not yet been able to learn much.)

Here is all that I said on the "Shell" list at the same time I am sending
this response to "stoves"

"Dialoguers:

This is in partial response to yesterday's message from Nikhil Desai -
which I thought was going to be about the 1993 paper in "World Development"
about the 1982-1989 years of the Chinese Improved Stoves Program.

I may be wrong, but it appears that Nikhil has not yet read that paper
by Kirk Smith and his three Chinese co-authors. I also think Nikhil did not
read the longer account I said I was sending to "stoves". Accordingly, his
remarks are mostly comments and questions that I feel he has raised
earlier - (except for a new strong support for coal).

It took me some time to come to this conclusion, so I wrote a too-long
response which I now think is only appropriate to be sent to "stoves". This
I am doing concurrently - mainly so those on this or the "stoves" list have
a place for continued dialogue on the Chinese program, as this list is
trying to gracefully close down.

Ron"

(The following was not sent to "Shell")

----- Original Message -----
From: <Ndesai@worldbank.org>
To: <dialogue@shellfoundation.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: Ron Larson on China and other stoves programs

>
> Ron:
>
> Thank you. I wasn't able to track the full reports on India-China stoves
> programs, and all I know is from the Barnes/Smith/Openshaw summary and
Chapter
> 10 of the World Energy Assessment. The China stoves program description
there is
> at least ten years old, and I wonder:
>
> (a) what has happened since then - whatever the problem was, was it
"solved"?
> (WEA Chapter 10 cites a figure of 175 million rural stoves from 1982 to
1999. If
> each one of them went to a different household, surely some problem is
solved,
> but I can't tell just what. As Jonathan would readily testify, Chinese
energy
> statistics are sometimes in dispute, and I don't recall any information -
in
> English language - on further evaluation of the program since the 1991/2
Barnes,
> et al. exercise.)
>
It is not clear yet whether you have read the Smith article on which I
was commenting - or my extended comments in this "stoves" list. The paper I
am referring to had Smith and three Chinese co-authors - not including
Barnes.

My perception is that the main goal of the Chinese was on increasing
efficiency - in order to reduce operating costs and preserve the
environment. Apparently they now feel they can get past 30%, so presumably
they were getting close in 1992. Your previous computations on the
superiority of kerosene should be redone with a 30% efficiency rather than
12%.

> (b) if "the problem" wasn't, and isn't, "solved", what might a stoves
program in
> China might look like in 2002-2012 (a very different China, to say the
least)?
> (WEA says there are pressures to reduce subsidies for stoves programs in
both
> India and China. I wonder what the replacement market for the 175 million
> improved stoves in place might look like. Would Shell monies for India and
China
> be better spent by directing 90% to subsidizing modified stoves programs,
and at
> most 10% to the needs of the foreign research class like you, Kirk, and
even the
> likes of me?)
>
1) I believe the Chinese program is essentially sustainable already
(little use of or return to inferior stoves); the Indian program is
apparently not. I doubt anyone feels the problem is seen as solved by
either nation - especially as more is learned on the serious health and
global warming issues associated with most stoves - especially the coal
stoves in China.
2) Like you, I have suggested a larger percentage to the countries now
using biomass stoves. The exact percentages should be dependent on the
proposals received and the areas to be emphasized. See more below on using
Chinese program experts.

> (c) what would you say about the massive increase in LPG and natural gas
> consumption that has taken place in China in the last ten years and likely
to
> accelerate in the next ten years? (I bet a good 10% of the 175 million
improved
> biomass stoves in place would be replaced by kerosene or LPG. Imported.

From tombreed at home.com Mon Aug 20 07:37:21 2001
From: tombreed at home.com (Thomas Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Wood GAS stoves
Message-ID: <009601c1296a$e1166ce0$18e5b618@lakwod3.co.home.com>

Dear Shell Foundation:

I belive you are having a debate on wood stoves and I would like to add the
following comments. If this is not the forum, please send on.

Wood (and biomass) is very difficult to burn cleanly and efficiently because

1) It burns in TWO stages - first pyrolysis, then charcoal burning
2) Being a solid, it is impossible to mix it with the correct proportion
of air for complete combustion.
~~~~~~~~
My specialty is gasification of wood, and in fact I am the moderator for
GASIFICATION, as Ronal Larson is the moderator for STOVES at the Center for
Renewable Energy and Sustainable Technology, CREST. Once wood is converted
to woodgas, it can be mixed properly for clean combustion.

We (with the Community Power Corporation) have now developed a Wood-Gas
stove that addresses the above problems and hope to deploy it around the
world. The "Turbo Stove" can be burned in a closed room without emissions
and has the same cooking power as a 3 kW electric stove. For more
information, go to www.woodgas.com and www.gocpc.com. We are working with
various NGOs, Government agencies etc. in different countries, but
bureaucracies are agonizingly slow.

I am surprised that there has been no mention of this in your current stove
discussion, since Ron was involved in early developments of the stove and I
see him every few weeks.

Yours truly, TOM REED for a better world

Dr. Thomas Reed
The Biomass Energy Foundation
1810 Smith Rd., Golden, CO 80401
303 278 0558; tombreed@home.com

BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Reed;Thomas;B;Dr.
FN:Thomas B Reed
NICKNAME:Tom
ORG:Biomass Energy Foundation;Publication, Consulting, Engineering
TITLE:President
TEL;WORK;VOICE:303 278 0558
TEL;HOME;VOICE:303 278 0558
TEL;CELL;VOICE:303 913 2074
TEL;WORK;FAX:303 278 0558
TEL;HOME;FAX:303 278 0558
ADR;WORK:;;1810 Smith Rd.;Golden;CO;80401;USA
LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:1810 Smith Rd.=0D=0AGolden, CO 80401=0D=0AUSA
ADR;HOME;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:;;1810 Smith Rd=0D=0A=0D=0A;Golden;CO;80401;United States
LABEL;HOME;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:1810 Smith Rd=0D=0A=0D=0A=0D=0AGolden, CO 80401=0D=0AUnited States
X-WAB-GENDER:2
URL;HOME:http://www.woodgas.com
URL;WORK:http://www.woodgas.com
BDAY:20010315
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:tombreed@home.com
REV:20010820T112555Z
END:VCARD

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From michelle.foulhoux at wanadoo.fr Mon Aug 20 07:50:40 2001
From: michelle.foulhoux at wanadoo.fr (Scieries du Forez)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: mail list
Message-ID: <007f01c1296d$a2ccf640$0201a8c0@estelle>

Thank you not sending me message any
more.
Bests regards.
E.
Foulhoux

From psanders at ilstu.edu Mon Aug 20 09:14:33 2001
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Briquettes with hole (or holes)
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20010820074449.00e57a40@mail.ilstu.edu>

Greetings Stovers,

I returned from Mozambique a couple of day ago. In brief, we are in the
briquette making business (pilot studies) in Maputo, MZ, and thus far the
summary word is "success." Apolinario is my assistant there. And we made
contact with combustion specialists at the main university with
Engineering. Those guys (including Antonio Tsamba) know all about the
Stoves listserve and are anxious to meet Tom Reed (Dr. Gassification) and
any others who would like to go the southern Africa or could meet them in
Sweden where they are doing doctoral degrees. Much more to report in a
later message.

The messages from Ron about the Shell discussions have been of great value,
in part because I have not gone directly to the Shell discussion. For
those of us who have not gone to the Shell discussion, a mighty THANK YOU
to Ron !!!!

My question:

One hole or many holes in the briquettes?

Richard Stanley and we in MZ are using one hole (about 2 cm diameter in a
10 cm diameter - 10-12 cm high cylindrical shape.). It works great by all
that I can see. I am even starting to look at what shape of stove is
optimum for their use.

But I have a feeling that the briquettes by others have several or even
many holes, as in a porous-type material through which air could be blown
or flow.

Please send to the stoves list serve a description of the "briquettes with
holes" that you use or make or know.

You all know that I believe in the "multitude" of different
stoves-and-combustibles that each serve specific purposes best.

Paul
Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From rstanley at legacyfound.org Mon Aug 20 22:35:43 2001
From: rstanley at legacyfound.org (Richard Stanley)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:58 2004
Subject: Briquettes with hole (or holes)
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20010820074449.00e57a40@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <3B81C849.7D133437@legacyfound.org>

Paul,

Its good to hear from you and to know that you are now back in the loop of the
stoves group. Alot has happened since I initially talked you through the
first holey briquette process we have been promoting. Ron has indeed rendered
a level of modicum to the various dialogues and indeed, I agree, we owe him a
big thanks for that. Since we last corresponded, a teacher from Durban area in
South Africa wrote for project training as did an entrepreneur in Dar es
Salaam, in my 'ole stomping ground of Tanzania.

Ron and and others have been instrumental in technically articulating the burn
cycle of the briquette. Although we had observed that it burned in two stages
(ref. our article in the Feb 2001 issue of Chemical Innovation). What we did
not understand that the hole is allowing the briquette to undergoe some form
of pyrolsis which in effect is making it very efficient. As shared with Ron,
the first is a convective stage (licking flames) lasting about 40% of the burn
cycle. The second, is a stage of glowing red embers generally induced through
the hole. The radient heat evidenced during the red glowing ember stage, is
very distance-dependent (roughly in proportion to the inverse of the square of
the distance between embers and pot ). This leads to the conclusion that if a
stove design were to be specialised to the briquettes, one would want to have
a means of raising the grate or lowering the pot to maximise the efficiency of
the briquette.

Ron had suggested a screw type mechnism to raise the grate: I reverted to a
spring clip (similar to some backyard barbeques) to do same or less
practically, to lower the pot. Whatever emerges as the best design appropriate
to any one area (and that will no doubt vary widely) should take advantage
of these two distinctive heat regimes.

Another factor in the design is the need for ash removal. the briquette
generates huge volumes of ash which must be removed almost automatically (ie
induced to fall down and away form teh embers, to allow the embers to retain
their radient effect and to allow continued air flow to them. Such stoves as
the Kenyan jiko clay lined jiko or the Haitian CARE stove with its several 5/8
" to 3/4" diameter holes is insufficient to allow ash removal from the kind
of briquettes we are promoting, without lots of futzing around--and the
village woman with baby on her back and three other tasks at hand has little
time for futzing...

Seems that Approvecho 's Larry Wineuski or Dean Stills are very well into
efficient stove design and I hope they are coming into the discussion to offer
their advice. (Word has it that they are or will shortly be down in Guatemala
on a stove training extenision assignment for a few weeks).

I will be heading down to Comitan (State of Chiapas at the end of September
and on into Atitlan Guatemala to comtinue spreading the gospel of holey
briquettes doing TOT and getting some r& d done on some new press and
processor designs developed and tested through our emerging partners there)
but will at all costs continue to keep in touch with you all.

Kind Regards,

Richard Stanley

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From ronallarson at qwest.net Mon Aug 20 23:58:03 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Lanny's Stove Project
In-Reply-To: <007901c12506$265942a0$1dba3cd0@default>
Message-ID: <016401c129f4$bb6fa620$a17ce13f@computer>

Lanny and Stovers:

Sorry for not getting back to
you sooner. Your first message came at a bad time as the "Shell" dialog
was dying down. Below are a few first answers:
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Lanny Henson
To: <A href="mailto:stoves@crest.org"
title=stoves@crest.org>stoves@crest.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 3:12
PM
Subject: Lanny's Stove Project

Lanny's Stove Project
My name is Lanny Henson. I became a subscriber to this list about 3 years
ago. I was looking for information about charcoal and clean combustion because
I was designing a barbecue cooker. The cause of this list has stuck my
interest and I think that it would be fun to design some stoves so I am going
to spend some hobby time and build a few. I have a background in designing and
fabricating airflow systems and custom sheet metal parts.
(RWL): This is a great
time to raise this issue, as the subject of clean combustion of charcoal is
not well understood by most of us. Your background with air flow
is perfect to help us all out.

>I have a few questions before I start.
>1 Can you feed limited air to charcoal and get an efficient burn? Does
charcoal need secondary air to burn efficiently? What causes CO and is energy
wasted if it does not get to CO2?
(RWL): Q1 - I say
no, but am a little nervous about this answer because of your next question
about secondary air. You need to have sufficient air eventually,
but maybe this can be done in two stages. For most charcoal ue however,
I think it is safe to say there is only a single air supply. We talk
about primary and secondary air when we are describing a charcoal-makings
stove.
Q2. My answer is no - not necesssary - but again
maybe a possibility. Very close to the charcoal surface, I believe we
are getting CO - but we have CO2 shortly thereafter.
Q3. CO certainly comes from a situation with
insufficient air - and yes there is energy loss if the reaction to get CO does
not continue to get the CO2. But we are more concerned these
days in the health aspects of CO - people die from charcoal fires emitting too
much CO. On the "shell" list recently we have heard of national or world
standards. Let us know if you want those numbers on what is considered
safe.
In the case of CO2 flowing past hot charcoal, you
can also have the reaction CO2 + C = 2 CO - which is a good reaction if you
desire the gases (and then you certainly need secondary air).
>2 What is the ratio of combustion air needed to burn wood gas? Someone
wrote 6 to 1. If this is correct, would that be >6 parts gas and one part
air?
Lanny Henson
(RWL): In order to get some practice on this
sort of thing, I went to the web site called "<A
href="http://www.woodgas.org">www.woodgas.org" (maintained by Tom Reed)
and found a formula for wood gas as 20% CO, 12% H2, 3% CH4, 15%
CO2, and 50% nitrogen. Using the molecular formulas above and
molecular weights of 12 for C, 1 for Hydrogen, and 16 for O, you can do a
chemical balance using mole equivalents, which for the first three ingredients
(if the total is 100 grams) are 20/28 = .71; 12/2= 6, and 3/16 = .1875, so we
need (.71+6)/2 + 2*.1875)=3.73 moles or 3.73*32=119 grams of Oxygen.
Because the air is only about 23 % oxygen (this is by weight, not by volume -
which is 0.21), then the air needed is larger by a factor of about 1.19/.23=
5.18 which is pretty close to the factor of 6 which you cite (but not in your
direction - the weight of the required air is the
larger). Practically, to get complete combustion, you need
to think of at least the factor of 6.
In case (like me) you are rusty
on this sort of chemistry - a mole is the number in grams of
the molecular weights of each part of the formula. So one mole of
CO (weight 28) reacts with one/half mole of O2 (or 1/2 of 32 grams = 16 grams)
to give one mole of CO2 (weight 44 grams). A mole always contains the
Avogadro number of molecules - 6.02 E23. Three more numbers may be
helpful. The production of CO2 releases 94 kcal per mole (or per 12
grams) of C; the production of water releases about 69 kcal per mole (or 2
grams) of hydrogen; and 1 kilocalorie is 4.187 kilojoules.
But I am pretty sure you will
not be using woodgas, in any way, with your starting fuel of charcoal.
Assuming this is mostly carbon, the right formula is C+O2 = CO2. This
means every 12 grams of charcoal (carbon) requires 32 grams of oxygen and
32/0.23 = 139 grams of air. Thus the weight ratio for your barbecue
should be about 139/12 = 11.6 (about twice the number above). But even
this is not a good number - as you need an excess air ratio to make sure you
are producing very little CO. If you only consume half the oxygen in
your air stream, you will need about 23 times as much weight of air as of
charcoal. From the numbers here you should find an energy number close
to 30 Megajoules per kilogram of charcoal. If you convert a kg of
charcoal in an hour, the power is 30E6 Joules/3600 seconds or about 8.3 kJ/sec
= 8.3 kWatts. As air density at ambient temperatures is around a kg
per cubic meter, this will take around 20-25 cu meters of air.
Sorry for the delay getting back
to you. I hope someone else will check my work. It has been a long
time since we on this list went through these sort of computations (if
ever). So we now look forward to hearing how you handled the clean
charcoal conversion problem. Remember what we want is how to get very
low CO, while not putting so much air through the system that the efficiency
is low. I should also warn that we generally believe that radiative
transfer is more important than convection when dealing with charcoal - so you
want the pot pretty close to the charcoal.
Best of luck. Ron (a
EE, not an ME or ChE)

From ronallarson at qwest.net Tue Aug 21 09:45:48 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Fw: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
Message-ID: <005b01c12a47$40b47f20$e67ee13f@computer>

Stovers:

I have partly read the material which Auke has recommended below from
FAO/RWEDP. This is an excellent supplement to and quite different from the
paper prepared by Kirk Smith et al. There are many photographs and costs
for each (which will be hard for most countries to achieve - these are fine
looking stoves). Enough detail for a good start to see the thinking of the
stove designers. I will make some more comments later - especially on the
final pages which deal with testing.

Jonathan: This particular paper doesn't seem to be on the "Shell" stove
resource list (which stovers should look at also). The RWEDP list is there,
but I didn't see this one for China.

Auke: Thanks very much for providing this great lead. We look forward to
more on coal briquettes.

Ron

----- Original Message -----
From: Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP) <Auke.Koopmans@fao.org>
To: 'Ron Larson' <ronallarson@qwest.net>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 12:33 AM
Subject: RE: Comments on the Chinese stove program.

> Ron,
>
> For some more information on stoves used in China under the Improved Stove
> Programme see our website at http://www.rwedp.org/fd40.html. Although the
> Chinese stove programme can be considered a success, there have also been
> negative stories about it. Most of the negative parts concern the
> heavy-handed manner in which some of the counties pressured the potential
> users to accept an imporved stove. Cutting off fuelwood quotas to people
who
> did not accept the stove to just breaking away the old stoves so that
people
> had to take a new stove are some of the stories doing the rounds.
> Unfortunately I have no way of checking in how far this has been a general
> approach in the stove Chinese programme.
>
> With regard to coal briquettes, I will look in my files as I should have
> quite a bit of info on the coal briquettes and stoves used (both cooking
and
> space heating). This may take some time as at the moment I am a bit
> overloaded with other work.
>
> Regards,
>
> Auke Koopmans
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ron Larson [SMTP:ronallarson@qwest.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2001 12:48 AM
> > To: Stoves@crest.org
> > Subject: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
> >
> > Stovers:
> >
> > 1. Although there will be some more messages, the very interesting
<snip>

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Tue Aug 21 11:17:57 2001
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Yudkevich Yury)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: FORUM
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010630121513.00e37ed0@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <01f301c12a53$d95eb7c0$633fefc3@a1g0h5>

Tom Miles, Peter Verhaart, Ron Larcon, Alex English and Tom Reed,
I had a rest on a resort and just now has read these letters. I shall not
manage to tell better than Piet. I appreciate Stoves list highly. I
consider it as the important part of my life and work.
Regards,

Yury Yudkevich Sanct-Petersburg , Russia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Verhaart" <pverhaart@optusnet.com.au>
To: "Tom Miles" <tmiles@teleport.com>
Cc: <stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: FORUM

.....
> I would like to express my great appreciation for the way you have and are
running the Stoves List. I am sure a great many like myself enjoy the
results of your efforts.
> Piet

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Miles" <tmiles@teleport.com>
To: "Yudkevich Yury" <woodcoal@mailbox.alkor.ru>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: FORUM
......
> Thank you for your posting regarding the St. Petersburg International
timber Industry Forum. I have forwarded it to my colleagues working on the
USAID FOREST, sustainable forestry program in Siberia and the Russian Far
East.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tom Miles
> Bioenergy Lists Administrator
>
> Thomas R Miles tmiles@trmiles.com
> T R Miles, TCI Tel 503-292-0107
> 1470 SW Woodward Way Fax 503-292-2919
> Portland, OR 97225 USA
>
>

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From ronallarson at qwest.net Tue Aug 21 17:29:54 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
In-Reply-To: <NEBBIKKDDKCJGEMGMHJPMEMNCDAA.steinmue@uni-hohenheim.de>
Message-ID: <009f01c12a88$1e922e60$6c79e13f@computer>

Norbert (cc to "stoves" as others may have also lost the earlier
directions):

The following web site will get you to the right part of Kirk's web
site. Then about 1 page down there is a section entitled "Improved Solid
Fuels Cookstoves" with three PDF files that can be downloaded. You want the
first which has a title: One Hundred Million Impproved Cookstoves ub China:
How Was It Done?"
http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/krsmith/Publications/publications.htm

Unfortunately, it is still downloading quite slowly (for me about 5
minute per page) - much slower than it should for some unknown reason. Also
I had to do it page by page - again not somehthing that usually happens for
me. You will want to try this download from a fast modem.

The third item was new - giving a number of other stoves papers by
name - but only by title - not for download. The China paper citation is
given there in full. (in a 1993 "World Development" issue).

Kirk's paper is excellent - but it is a program description - not on the
stoves themselves. The paper recommended recently by Auke is at the other
extreme.

Please let me know if you have any trouble.

Ronal

----- Original Message -----
From: Norbert Steinmüller <steinmue@Uni-Hohenheim.DE>
To: Ron Larson <ronallarson@qwest.net>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 9:05 AM
Subject: AW: Comments on the Chinese stove program.

> Dear Ron,
> is the paper prepared by Kirk Smith et al. available online?
>
> Thanks
> Norbert Steinmueller
> TropenNetzwerk Hohenheim e.V.
>
>

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From dkammen at socrates.Berkeley.EDU Tue Aug 21 19:29:25 2001
From: dkammen at socrates.Berkeley.EDU (Daniel M. Kammen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
In-Reply-To: <NEBBIKKDDKCJGEMGMHJPMEMNCDAA.steinmue@uni-hohenheim.de>
Message-ID: <3B82EE89.39143311@socrates.berkeley.edu>

These papers, all on the www, provide combustion, emissions, and exposure
information for stoves in Africa, but not China:

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~rael/ezzati-kammenEHP_2001.pdf

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~dkammen/cookstoves.pdf

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~dkammen/saatkampkammenmasera.pdf

- Dan

Ron Larson wrote:

> Norbert (cc to "stoves" as others may have also lost the earlier
> directions):
>
> The following web site will get you to the right part of Kirk's web
> site. Then about 1 page down there is a section entitled "Improved Solid
> Fuels Cookstoves" with three PDF files that can be downloaded. You want the
> first which has a title: One Hundred Million Impproved Cookstoves ub China:
> How Was It Done?"
> http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/krsmith/Publications/publications.htm
>
> Unfortunately, it is still downloading quite slowly (for me about 5
> minute per page) - much slower than it should for some unknown reason. Also
> I had to do it page by page - again not somehthing that usually happens for
> me. You will want to try this download from a fast modem.
>
> The third item was new - giving a number of other stoves papers by
> name - but only by title - not for download. The China paper citation is
> given there in full. (in a 1993 "World Development" issue).
>
> Kirk's paper is excellent - but it is a program description - not on the
> stoves themselves. The paper recommended recently by Auke is at the other
> extreme.
>
> Please let me know if you have any trouble.
>
> Ronal
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Norbert Steinmüller <steinmue@Uni-Hohenheim.DE>
> To: Ron Larson <ronallarson@qwest.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 9:05 AM
> Subject: AW: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
>
> > Dear Ron,
> > is the paper prepared by Kirk Smith et al. available online?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Norbert Steinmueller
> > TropenNetzwerk Hohenheim e.V.
> >
> >
>
> -
> Stoves List Archives and Website:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
>
> Stoves List Moderators:
> Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
> Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
>
> Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
> http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

--
____________________________________________________________
Daniel M. Kammen
Professor of Energy and Society
Director, Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory (RAEL)
Energy and Resources Group (ERG)
310 Barrows Hall
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720-3050

Tel: 510-642-1139 (Office)
Tel: 510-642-1640 (ERG Front Desk)
Fax: 510-642-1085 (ERG Fax)
Tel: 510-643-2243 (RAEL)
Fax: 510-643-6344 (RAEL)
Email: dkammen@socrates.berkeley.edu

Web Pages:
Kammen http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~dkammen
RAEL http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~rael
ERG http://socrates.berkeley.edu/erg
____________________________________________________________

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From ronallarson at qwest.net Wed Aug 22 17:12:30 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Comments on the Chinese stove program.
In-Reply-To: <NEBBIKKDDKCJGEMGMHJPMEMNCDAA.steinmue@uni-hohenheim.de>
Message-ID: <00d901c12b4c$0a6cdce0$e9f2b4d1@computer>

Dan and Stovers:

Thanks very much for forwarding these articles. This is in part to ask
for more - if you have them.

I successfully downloaded all three and was very impressed by the amount
of work involved. For others I will say that there is plenty of data on
health impacts that can be directly attributed to stoves emissions. I
thought the case was clearly made in both Kenya (papers 1 and 2) and Mexico
(paper 3).

I can only generally follow the medical (and statistical) aspects of
your work, and presume most "stoves" list members will only slowly catch up
with researchers like Kirk Smith, Grant Ballard-Tremeer and yourself (and I
am sure we have a few more emissions testers on the list, who I should
exclude from this catch-up posture I am in.).

However, this list can perhaps do some important stove improvement
testing that will lead to better stoves eventually. First we will need to
get some low-cost monitors for particulates and CO - the two variables you
have reported on (maybe there are others needed?). We have had some
discussion on this list about using low-cost fire/smoke detectors (as low as
$10 for simple battery operation)-some of which I think operate on
monitoring CO or particulates (or both). Could you, Kirk, or others give us
some idea of specifications that might work? Is there anything like a
standard test for either, so there could be an easy calibration?

Assuming we can get past that problem, the part of your papers (in #2) I
found most intriguing was that the metal jiko gave lower CO than almost
anything else - and lower than the two improved jikos (charcoal burners).
The particulates were higher for the metal jiko however. I wonder if you
have (or anyone has) an explanation for this behavior? Is there a
way that the ceramic jikos could be modified to retain that nice feature of
the metal jiko? My guess is that the metal unit operates a little cooler.
Is that the reason? Is there more or less air flow in one or the other?
If noone can supply a rationale, I suggest this is a good topic for some
experimentation by list members. Should we be adding insulation to the
metal jiko? Or are these anomolous results?

Anyway, this is to say thanks for the articles, hope you can suggest
more that would give us leads towards better designs, and to hopefully say
thanks in advance for any thoughts on the chemistry/physics of what is going
on with the several jikos. Your support for the improvements offered by
charcoal will be appeciated by some on the list - while others will not be
so happy. Personally, I am happy, as there is hope for better combustion of
charcoal produced in charcoal-making stoves (which I think will
soon/eventually prove better than the wood or charcoal stove alternatives).

Ron

----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel M. Kammen <dkammen@socrates.Berkeley.EDU>
To: Ron Larson <ronallarson@qwest.net>; <stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Comments on the Chinese stove program.

> These papers, all on the www, provide combustion, emissions, and exposure
> information for stoves in Africa, but not China:
>
> http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~rael/ezzati-kammenEHP_2001.pdf
>
> http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~dkammen/cookstoves.pdf
>
> http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~dkammen/saatkampkammenmasera.pdf
>
> - Dan
>
> Ron Larson wrote:
>
<SNIP>

> Daniel M. Kammen
> Professor of Energy and Society
> Director, Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory (RAEL)
> Energy and Resources Group (ERG)
> 310 Barrows Hall
> University of California
> Berkeley, CA 94720-3050
>
> Tel: 510-642-1139 (Office)
> Tel: 510-642-1640 (ERG Front Desk)
> Fax: 510-642-1085 (ERG Fax)
> Tel: 510-643-2243 (RAEL)
> Fax: 510-643-6344 (RAEL)
> Email: dkammen@socrates.berkeley.edu
>
> Web Pages:
> Kammen http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~dkammen
> RAEL http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~rael
> ERG http://socrates.berkeley.edu/erg
> ____________________________________________________________

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From bhatta at ait.ac.th Thu Aug 23 05:36:55 2001
From: bhatta at ait.ac.th (S.C. Bhattacharya)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Going on Leave: temporarily unsubscribe
Message-ID: <3B84A9FE.38F237DB@ait.ac.th>

unsubscribe

-------------------------------------------------------------------
S. C. Bhattacharya Voice : (66-2) 524 5403 (Off)
Professor 524 5913
(Res)
Energy Program
Asian Institute of Technology Fax : (66-2) 524 5439
PO Box 4, Klong Luang 516 2126
Pathumthani 12120 ICQ : 18690996
Thailand e-mail: bhatta@ait.ac.th
-------------------------------------------------------------------

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From VHarris001 at aol.com Fri Aug 24 00:44:22 2001
From: VHarris001 at aol.com (VHarris001@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Pulse Burners?
Message-ID: <d4.b3c5ebe.28b734d1@aol.com>

Pulse burners have been used successfully in central heating systems. I'm
wondering if research is been done on using pulse burners for stoves,
gasifiers or digestion gas?.

Some pulse burners are valveless, helping to minimize service problems in a
developing-country environment. Pulse burners create their own vacuum which
can be used to draw air through the stove or system. Pulse burners create
their own exhaust pressure, which will increase heat transfer and will
eliminate the need for a draft chimney. Pulse burners are lean-burn engines,
so are quite efficient. And finally pulse burners generate a tremendous
amount of heat, most of which could be recouped since no heat is needed for
the draft chimney.

I suppose the problems to overcome would include how to start the pulse
burner and how to reliably silence it in the third-world environment. It
would be disappointing to hear pulse burners blasting through the silence of
an otherwise quiet village.

Anyone up to speed on the status of pulse engine use in gasification, stoves
or digestion?

Vernon Harris

From dstill at epud.net Fri Aug 24 02:38:58 2001
From: dstill at epud.net (Dean Still)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Pulse Burners?
Message-ID: <003801c12c1f$fe47a100$3e15210c@default>

Dear Vernon,

Dr Larry Winiarski, Technical Director at Aprovecho, studied
pulse jet combustion at OSU. It was the subject of his thesis. The real experts
in pulse jets, the Lockwoods, moved here so that they could continue studying
together. Ray Lockwood built helicopters, race cars etc. with pulse jet engines.
At Aprovecho, we've built pulse jet outboard motors from 55 gallon drums, crop
dryers, heaters, and engines. The most vernacular version was a valveless pulse
jet engine made completely from sand and clay.

Watching a U shaped metal tube generate great force as a jet
engine is amazing. On the other hand, we haven't yet come up with an application
that seems suitable to simpler situations. We have built prototypes of valveless
pulse jets powered by the sun to lift water from wells that might be suitable
but the design needs more development. Maybe you would be
interested?

I once took my class of students on a ride in a 16' rowboat
powered by two pulse jet outboard engines sitting on top of two burners. Lots of
noise and heat as we banged our way around. Not very fast but classy in an
arcane fashion...

Larry is in Nicaragua for the next month working on a clean
burning incinerator/kiln in the dump in Managua but when he gets back you might
want to chat with him? (541) 753-4921.

Best,

Dean Still
Aprovecho
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">

From elk at wananchi.com Fri Aug 24 07:46:26 2001
From: elk at wananchi.com (elk)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
Message-ID: <000c01c12c92$216ca460$f440083e@default>

Stovers;

Now this is at the far end of the energy spectrum
from stoves - but maybe charcoal does provide a link.....

Can anyone give me some tips on how to construct a
refrigerator or cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation? I've heard that such
devices were common 'round Kenya several decades ago, and often used charcoal as
a medium for the evaporation of water that trickled over in some
fashion......

Ideas? Memories? Reference books?

rgds;

elk

--------------------------Elsen L.
Karstadelk@wananchi.com<A
href="http://www.chardust.com">www.chardust.comNairobi
Kenya

From kchishol at fox.nstn.ca Fri Aug 24 09:27:40 2001
From: kchishol at fox.nstn.ca (Kevin Chisholm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <000c01c12c92$216ca460$f440083e@default>
Message-ID: <NEBBLHHHOLFOEGCILKHEGELODAAA.kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>

Dear
Elk

What you are
talking about is "evaporative cooling", where water is trickled over a medium,
and air is drawn through the moist medium. The water evaporates, and in the
process, cools the air.

Evaporative
coolers work best when there is low Relative Humidity, ie, when there is a
relativly large difference between the "Dry Bulb Temperature", and the "Wet Bulb
Temperature."

(Dry Bulb
"DB", temperature is the temperature seen by a normal thermometer in the air
space. Wet Bulb "WB" temperature is the temperature seen when an otherwise
identical theremometer is covered with a wet cloth, and forced air circulation
is employed to evaporate water at the maximum rate. When the Relative Humidity
is 100%, the air is incapable of holding any more water, and the WB temp is
identical to the DB temp.)

Evaporative
cooling will definitely lower the "DB" temperature, but at the expense of
raising the WB temperature. In doing so, the Relative Humidity, RH, is
increased. Thus, when the "cooled air" is flowed over a person, it does not have
the local cooling effect on the person, because it is more saturated, and can
not evaporate as much perspiration.

You can
design evaporative coolers, using a "Psychrometric Chart". They tell you all
about air flows required to evaporate a desired quantity of water, and remove a
desired BTU content. Do a net search for "Psychrometric chart". They are a bit
confusing to understand, but are a good starting point. Any HVAC text (Heating,
Ventillating and Air Conditioning) will have full
information.

Concerning
charcoal.... it would be an excellent medium for the presentation of moisture to
an air flow. The concept would be as follows:

 Place two screens, with say 1/2"
openings, about 4" apart. Fill this space with lump charcoal. Across the top,
run a perforated pipe, and then flood with water continuously. Then draw air
through the moistened charcoal.

Note also
that ther is a cooling effect on the exit air, as well as the remaining water,
ie, the water is cooled by evaporation also. This is the basic principle of a
"Cooling Tower" or a "Cooling Pond."

BTW....
"Evaporative Cooling Systems" are also known in the trade as "Swamp
Coolers".

Hope this
helps.

Kevin
Chisholm
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
-----Original Message-----From: elk
[mailto:elk@wananchi.com]Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 7:58
AMTo: stoves@crest.orgSubject:
refrigeration
Stovers;

Now this is at the far end of the energy spectrum
from stoves - but maybe charcoal does provide a link.....

Can anyone give me some tips on how to construct
a refrigerator or cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation? I've heard that
such devices were common 'round Kenya several decades ago, and often used
charcoal as a medium for the evaporation of water that trickled over in some
fashion......

Ideas? Memories? Reference books?

rgds;

elk

--------------------------Elsen L.
Karstadelk@wananchi.com<A
href="http://www.chardust.com">www.chardust.comNairobi
Kenya

From psanders at ilstu.edu Fri Aug 24 09:56:57 2001
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Pulse Burners?
In-Reply-To: <d4.b3c5ebe.28b734d1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20010824085835.01a22ba0@mail.ilstu.edu>

I think we need a couple of leads to the best websites to show us more
about pulse burners.

So far, sounds good except for being noisy, hard to start, and (?) large.

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From psanders at ilstu.edu Fri Aug 24 10:49:21 2001
From: psanders at ilstu.edu (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <000c01c12c92$216ca460$f440083e@default>
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20010824093712.00e55e40@mail.ilstu.edu>

Would it be unrealistic to think that the "surplus" heat
generated in charcoal production could be used to provide refrigeration
in remote communities?

Campers have long used refrigerators run by burning propane

I think we are discussing "cooling" and not
"freezing", but freezing might also be possible.

In our discussions of energy from "stoves (broad definition)"
to be used for cooling, we do NOT need to discuss the refrigerator
"box", of which there are ample types available at low
costs.

Without doubt, the arrival of refrigeration in a Third World community is
a MAJOR accomplishment and offers many benefits for breaking the problems
of poverty.

As ELK implied, we need some references and web links. Is there a
"refrigeration" listserv that focuses on the developing
societies the way our "stoves" listserv does?

For my personal involvement, I would like to set up a
"coldroom" in a rural Mozambique community.

Paul

At 01:58 PM 8/24/01 +0300, elk wrote:
Stovers;

Now this is at the far end of the energy
spectrum from stoves - but maybe charcoal does provide a
link.....

Can anyone give me some tips on how to
construct a refrigerator or cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation?
I've heard that such devices were common 'round Kenya several decades
ago, and often used charcoal as a medium for the evaporation of water
that trickled over in some fashion......

Ideas? Memories? Reference books?

rgds;

elk

--------------------------
Elsen L. Karstad
elk@wananchi.com
www.chardust.com
Nairobi Kenya

Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 -
7/00
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State
University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice:
309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items:
www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

From kchishol at fox.nstn.ca Fri Aug 24 11:19:09 2001
From: kchishol at fox.nstn.ca (Kevin Chisholm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20010824093712.00e55e40@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <NEBBLHHHOLFOEGCILKHECEMBDAAA.kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>

Dear Paul

I am
attaching a copy of a Psychrometric Chart... hope it does not cause problems
with the List.

It can be
seen that if one had 90 degrees F and 15% Relative Humidity, the Wet Bulb
Temperature would be 60 F, and one could be able to cool an environment to 60
degrees F. HOWEVER, the real problem is that one does not get 90F and 15% RH!!
:-(

The key and
most important thing is to get an understanding of the Relative Humidity that
will exist in the area you want to accomplish the evaporative cooling. If the
temperature is 85 Degrees F, and the RH is 80%, the maximum degree of cooling
available by evaporation is only 5 degrees, to 80 deg F Wet
Bub.

Kindest
regards,

Kevin
Chisholm
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
-----Original Message-----From: Paul S. Anderson
[mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu]Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 11:53
AMTo: elk; stoves@crest.orgCc: Bob and Karla Weldon; Ed
Francis; Robb Walt; Tsamba--Alberto Julio; clucas33@yahoo.com;
clucas@zebra.uem.mzSubject: Re: refrigeration
Would it be unrealistic to think that the "surplus" heat generated
in charcoal production could be used to provide refrigeration in remote
communities?

Technically, it would indeed work. However, there is
a practical problem in that the "flare gases" must be used at the site of the
charcoal production, and that may not be the location where the refrigeration
effect is desired.
Campers have long used
refrigerators run by burning propaneI think we are discussing
"cooling" and not "freezing", but freezing might also be possible.In
our discussions of energy from "stoves (broad definition)" to be used for
cooling, we do NOT need to discuss the refrigerator "box", of which there are
ample types available at low costs.Without doubt, the arrival of
refrigeration in a Third World community is a MAJOR accomplishment and offers
many benefits for breaking the problems of poverty.As ELK implied, we
need some references and web links. Is there a "refrigeration" listserv
that focuses on the developing societies the way our "stoves" listserv
does?For my personal involvement, I would like to set up a "coldroom"
in a rural Mozambique community.

This is not
a trivial matter. Quality construction practises are required, where the room
is well insulated and air tight, AND vapor tight from the outside. This
is counter-intuitive; the vapor barrier must be on the "warm side", which in
the case of a "cold room in a hot place" is the
outside.

This
a straight-forward design project and involves very few unknowns for a
HVAC Engineer. There is absolutely no need to "re-invent the
wheel."

Best wishes
with your project.

Kevin
Chisholm PaulAt 01:58 PM 8/24/01 +0300, elk
wrote:
Stovers; Now this is at
the far end of the energy spectrum from stoves - but maybe charcoal does
provide a link..... Can anyone
give me some tips on how to construct a refrigerator or cool-room 'powered'
by water evaporation? I've heard that such devices were common 'round Kenya
several decades ago, and often used charcoal as a medium for the evaporation
of water that trickled over in some fashion...... Ideas? Memories? Reference
books? rgds; elk --------------------------Elsen L. Karstad<A
href="mailto:elk@wananchi.com">elk@wananchi.com<A
href="http://www.chardust.com/"
eudora="autourl">www.chardust.comNairobi
Kenya 
Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 -
7/00
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360;
FAX: 309-438-5310E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: <A
href="http://www.ilstu.edu/~psanders"
EUDORA="AUTOURL">www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
Psychrt.gif

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gif00065.gif
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 9959 bytes
Desc: "http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm"
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stoves/attachments/20010824/ceb0203e/gif00065.obj
From keith at journeytoforever.org Fri Aug 24 11:28:46 2001
From: keith at journeytoforever.org (Keith Addison)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20010824093712.00e55e40@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <v04210103b7ac241422c7@[192.168.0.200]>

http://www.jademountain.com/appliances/refrigeration/isaac.html
Isaac Solar Icemaker - Up to 1000 pounds of ice per day!

"a low cost and reliable method of making significant quantities of
ice in areas without electricity."

Keith Addison

>Would it be unrealistic to think that the "surplus" heat generated
>in charcoal production could be used to provide refrigeration in
>remote communities?
>
>Campers have long used refrigerators run by burning propane
>
>I think we are discussing "cooling" and not "freezing", but freezing
>might also be possible.
>
>In our discussions of energy from "stoves (broad definition)" to be
>used for cooling, we do NOT need to discuss the refrigerator "box",
>of which there are ample types available at low costs.
>
>Without doubt, the arrival of refrigeration in a Third World
>community is a MAJOR accomplishment and offers many benefits for
>breaking the problems of poverty.
>
>As ELK implied, we need some references and web links. Is there a
>"refrigeration" listserv that focuses on the developing societies
>the way our "stoves" listserv does?
>
>For my personal involvement, I would like to set up a "coldroom" in
>a rural Mozambique community.
>
>Paul

>At 01:58 PM 8/24/01 +0300, elk wrote:
>
>>Stovers;
>>
>>Now this is at the far end of the energy spectrum from stoves - but
>>maybe charcoal does provide a link.....
>>
>>Can anyone give me some tips on how to construct a refrigerator or
>>cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation? I've heard that such
>>devices were common 'round Kenya several decades ago, and often
>>used charcoal as a medium for the evaporation of water that
>>trickled over in some fashion......
>>
>>Ideas? Memories? Reference books?
>>
>>rgds;
>>
>>elk
>>
>>
>>--------------------------
>>Elsen L. Karstad
>><mailto:elk@wananchi.com>elk@wananchi.com
>>www.chardust.com
>>Nairobi Kenya
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
>Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
>Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
>E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From kchishol at fox.nstn.ca Fri Aug 24 12:52:02 2001
From: kchishol at fox.nstn.ca (Kevin Chisholm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <v04210103b7ac241422c7@[192.168.0.200]>
Message-ID: <NEBBLHHHOLFOEGCILKHEEEMCDAAA.kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>

Dear Keith

While the Isaac System appears technically feasible, it is rather costly.
The largest unit on their Home Page will produce about 68 pounds of ice ber
day, and it costs $US11,750; Approximately 15 such units, costing about
$175,000 + freight would be required for a 1,000 pound per day installation.

There would be some requirement for "make-up" of ammonia....

Kindest regards,

Kevin Chisholm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Addison [mailto:keith@journeytoforever.org]
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:34 PM
> To: stoves@crest.org
> Subject: Re: refrigeration
>
>
> http://www.jademountain.com/appliances/refrigeration/isaac.html
> Isaac Solar Icemaker - Up to 1000 pounds of ice per day!
>
> "a low cost and reliable method of making significant quantities of
> ice in areas without electricity."
>
> Keith Addison
>
>
> >Would it be unrealistic to think that the "surplus" heat generated
> >in charcoal production could be used to provide refrigeration in
> >remote communities?
> >
> >Campers have long used refrigerators run by burning propane
> >
> >I think we are discussing "cooling" and not "freezing", but freezing
> >might also be possible.
> >
> >In our discussions of energy from "stoves (broad definition)" to be
> >used for cooling, we do NOT need to discuss the refrigerator "box",
> >of which there are ample types available at low costs.
> >
> >Without doubt, the arrival of refrigeration in a Third World
> >community is a MAJOR accomplishment and offers many benefits for
> >breaking the problems of poverty.
> >
> >As ELK implied, we need some references and web links. Is there a
> >"refrigeration" listserv that focuses on the developing societies
> >the way our "stoves" listserv does?
> >
> >For my personal involvement, I would like to set up a "coldroom" in
> >a rural Mozambique community.
> >
> >Paul
>
> >At 01:58 PM 8/24/01 +0300, elk wrote:
> >
> >>Stovers;
> >>
> >>Now this is at the far end of the energy spectrum from stoves - but
> >>maybe charcoal does provide a link.....
> >>
> >>Can anyone give me some tips on how to construct a refrigerator or
> >>cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation? I've heard that such
> >>devices were common 'round Kenya several decades ago, and often
> >>used charcoal as a medium for the evaporation of water that
> >>trickled over in some fashion......
> >>
> >>Ideas? Memories? Reference books?
> >>
> >>rgds;
> >>
> >>elk
> >>
> >>
> >>--------------------------
> >>Elsen L. Karstad
> >><mailto:elk@wananchi.com>elk@wananchi.com
> >>www.chardust.com
> >>Nairobi Kenya
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
> >Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> >Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> >E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
>
>
> -
> Stoves List Archives and Website:
> http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
>
> Stoves List Moderators:
> Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
> Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
>
> Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> -
> Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
> http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
> For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
>
>
>
>

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From dstill at epud.net Fri Aug 24 13:23:49 2001
From: dstill at epud.net (Dean Still)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration/pulse jet outboard
Message-ID: <003f01c12c45$b38ccfc0$6f15210c@default>

Dear friends,

Larry, Frank Hall, and I spent two years re-creating the Icy-Ball, a heat
driven ammonia absorption refrigerator used extensively in the US in the
1930's before rural electrification. We eventually ( number 18) built it out
of two propane cylinders, (one five gallon, one three gallon) connected by a
steel pipe. The heat boils ammonia from water in the bigger tank. The
ammonia gas flows to the other tank where the pressure developed in the
closed system forces the gas to liquefy. Then the apparatus is removed from
the heat. As the pressure drops, liquid ammonia returns to a gaseous state
and returns to the first tank where it is chemically attracted to the water
and is absorbed. The phase change occurs inside a insulated box where the
user places the cool, smaller tank. In our re-creation two gallons of
antifreeze were cooled 45 degrees F. by one 90 minute charge using about
10,000 BTU's of heat from a wood fire. But Larry was always worried about
someone blowing themselves up by forgetting the thing on the hot stove. Ours
ran at about 250 psi. We gave it to some engineers at the U of Texas and
don't advise it for regular use.

After having fun messing around with the Icy-Ball we visited a factory that
repaired Servel refrigerators. The Servel works using heat and ammonia but
it is made from tubing only. Much simpler and reliable, it seemed to us.
Running a A.T. version of the Servel on solar, wood, charcoal, seemed a
simple conversion. So one of these days we intend to get back to the project
unless someone gets there first? We would recommend this approach.

Best,

Dean

PS The pulse jet outboard is made from the top and bottom of a new 55 gallon
drum, welded together leaving a 3/4" gap. Eight 1/2" tubes pierce the bottom
into the gap and then are long enough to stay underwater. The fire hits the
underside in front of the tubes. But it is really just an oddity, uses way
too much energy and makes an incredible racket. Lots of fun for a class,
though...Pulse jets are an art that is looking for a use. Larry keeps on
returning to simpler steam driven engines for pumping water, etc.

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From keith at journeytoforever.org Fri Aug 24 15:27:36 2001
From: keith at journeytoforever.org (Keith Addison)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <NEBBLHHHOLFOEGCILKHEEEMCDAAA.kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>
Message-ID: <v0421010ab7ac45db12ee@[192.168.0.200]>

Dear Kevin

Oh. :-(

I wasn't really touting it, but it arrived in my mailbox at the same
time as Paul's question about a cold room in a rural Mozambique
village.

Another thought (?) that crossed my mind was the "cold chain", the
series of arrangements health workers, eg, use to get serum, blood
samples and so on into and out of rural areas with no power supply.
There should be a lot of info around on that, and some of the ideas
could be applicable.

Much appeciated your description of swamp coolers, by the way.

Regards

Keith

>Dear Keith
>
>While the Isaac System appears technically feasible, it is rather costly.
>The largest unit on their Home Page will produce about 68 pounds of ice ber
>day, and it costs $US11,750; Approximately 15 such units, costing about
>$175,000 + freight would be required for a 1,000 pound per day installation.
>
>There would be some requirement for "make-up" of ammonia....
>
>Kindest regards,
>
>Kevin Chisholm
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Keith Addison [mailto:keith@journeytoforever.org]
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:34 PM
> > To: stoves@crest.org
> > Subject: Re: refrigeration
> >
> >
> > http://www.jademountain.com/appliances/refrigeration/isaac.html
> > Isaac Solar Icemaker - Up to 1000 pounds of ice per day!
> >
> > "a low cost and reliable method of making significant quantities of
> > ice in areas without electricity."
> >
> > Keith Addison
> >
> >
> > >Would it be unrealistic to think that the "surplus" heat generated
> > >in charcoal production could be used to provide refrigeration in
> > >remote communities?
> > >
> > >Campers have long used refrigerators run by burning propane
> > >
> > >I think we are discussing "cooling" and not "freezing", but freezing
> > >might also be possible.
> > >
> > >In our discussions of energy from "stoves (broad definition)" to be
> > >used for cooling, we do NOT need to discuss the refrigerator "box",
> > >of which there are ample types available at low costs.
> > >
> > >Without doubt, the arrival of refrigeration in a Third World
> > >community is a MAJOR accomplishment and offers many benefits for
> > >breaking the problems of poverty.
> > >
> > >As ELK implied, we need some references and web links. Is there a
> > >"refrigeration" listserv that focuses on the developing societies
> > >the way our "stoves" listserv does?
> > >
> > >For my personal involvement, I would like to set up a "coldroom" in
> > >a rural Mozambique community.
> > >
> > >Paul
> >
> > >At 01:58 PM 8/24/01 +0300, elk wrote:
> > >
> > >>Stovers;
> > >>
> > >>Now this is at the far end of the energy spectrum from stoves - but
> > >>maybe charcoal does provide a link.....
> > >>
> > >>Can anyone give me some tips on how to construct a refrigerator or
> > >>cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation? I've heard that such
> > >>devices were common 'round Kenya several decades ago, and often
> > >>used charcoal as a medium for the evaporation of water that
> > >>trickled over in some fashion......
> > >>
> > >>Ideas? Memories? Reference books?
> > >>
> > >>rgds;
> > >>
> > >>elk
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>--------------------------
> > >>Elsen L. Karstad
> > >><mailto:elk@wananchi.com>elk@wananchi.com
> > >>www.chardust.com
> > >>Nairobi Kenya
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Fulbright Prof. to Mozambique 8/99 - 7/00
> > >Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> > >Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> > >E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
> >
> >
> > -
> > Stoves List Archives and Website:
> > http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
> > http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
> >
> > Stoves List Moderators:
> > Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
> > Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
> >
> > Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
> > -
> > Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
> > http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
> > http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
> > http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
> >
> > For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
> > http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>-
>Stoves List Archives and Website:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
>http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
>
>Stoves List Moderators:
>Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
>Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net
>
>Sponsor the Stoves List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
>-
>Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
>http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
>http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
>
>For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Chamber.htm

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From VHarris001 at aol.com Sat Aug 25 00:08:36 2001
From: VHarris001 at aol.com (VHarris001@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration/pulse jet outboard
Message-ID: <d9.19808093.28b87dd5@aol.com>

Dean

Hi Dean,

The interesting point I was attracted to about the pulse burner is it's
ability to generate vacuum to draw air into the gasifier stove, burn the
wood-gas, pump the exhaust through the stove and out the vent tube. If a
pulse burner were optimized for wood gas, it seems that it could provide the
draft for stoves while efficiently and cleanly burning the gas for heat (not
for boating or flying thrust :-)).

If the heat were not used for cooking or space heating, it could be used for
generating steam - perhaps even supercharging the boiler.

Thoughts?

Vernon Harris

From VHarris001 at aol.com Sat Aug 25 00:30:57 2001
From: VHarris001 at aol.com (VHarris001@aol.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: Pulse Burners?
Message-ID: <130.92654d.28b88325@aol.com>

Larry is in Nicaragua for the next month working on a clean burning
incinerator/kiln in the dump in Managua but when he gets back you might
want to chat with him? (541) 753-4921.

Best,

Dean Still
Aprovecho

Yes, I would like to chat with Larry once he returns. I wonder if a pulse
burner could be used to generate the draft, and thoroughly incinerate the
waste-gas, in a two-stage combustion trash incinerator?

The Lockwood Pulse-Jet engine patent can be seen on the US Patent and
Trademark Office web page (www.uspto.gov). The patent number is 3,462,955.

Vernon Harris

From shuster at zol.co.zw Sat Aug 25 10:39:45 2001
From: shuster at zol.co.zw (shuster)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:59 2004
Subject: refrigeration
In-Reply-To: <NEBBLHHHOLFOEGCILKHEEEMCDAAA.kchishol@fox.nstn.ca>
Message-ID: <000201c12d6f$651b6b00$15f6fcd8@Default>

IN REPLY MY EXPERIENCE MIGHT BE OF SOME USE,
> > >
> > > >Would it be unrealistic to think that the "surplus" heat generated
> > > >in charcoal production could be used to provide refrigeration in
> > > >remote communities?
> > > >
> > > >For my personal involvement, I would like to set up a "coldroom" in
> > > >a rural Mozambique community.
> > >
> > > >At 01:58 PM 8/24/01 +0300, elk wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Stovers;
> > > >>
> > > >>Now this is at the far end of the energy spectrum from stoves - but
> > > >>maybe charcoal does provide a link.....
> > > >>
> > > >>Can anyone give me some tips on how to construct a refrigerator or
> > > >>cool-room 'powered' by water evaporation? I've heard that such
> > > >>devices were common 'round Kenya several decades ago, and often
> > > >>used charcoal as a medium for the evaporation of water that
> > > >>trickled over in some fashion......
> > > >>
> > > >>Ideas? Memories? Reference books?
FOLLOWING THE DESIGN OF A TYPICAL ROUND HUT WITH THATCHED ROOF AS FOUND ALL
OVER AFRICA .THE ROOF IS SUPPORTED +- EVERY 1MT BY A POLE
AROUND THE CIRCUMFERENCE.PLACE 12MM BIRD WIRE BOTH SIDES (TOP TO BOTTOM) TO
FORM A CAVITY EQUAL TO THE DIAMETER OF THE POLE.FILL CAVITY WITH CHARCOAL.
AT THE TOP OF THE CAVITY AND RUNNING THE FULL
CIRCUMFERENCE IS A 1 INCH POLYPROPYLENE PIPE WITH SUITABLE PERFORATIONS TO
ALLOW ENOUGH WATER TO KEEP THE CHARCOAL WET.[A SECOND PIPE HALF WAY DOWN THE
WALL IS A GOOD IDEA]
PLACE A LENGTH OF STOVE FLUE STICKING THROUGH THE APEX OF THE THATCHED ROOF
TO AID A DRAUGHT VIA THE CHARCOAL WALLS AND OUT THE FLUE.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLES LAST MUCH BETTER IN THE "COOL ROOM" BUT WE FOUND THAT
OUR REFRIGERATORS AND DEEP FREEZES OPERATED 100%
BETTER WHEN OPERATED INSIDE THE "COOL ROOM"
REFRIGERATORS AND DEEP FREEZES THAT OPERATE EITHER ON 12 VOLT,LPG OR 220
VOLT ARE MANUFACTURED IN RSA AND OF EXCELLENT QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY.
BEING INVOLVED IN GASIFICATION I LIKE THE IDEA OF RECOVERING THE AIR
CONDITIONING SYSTEM FROM A LARGE AUTO ,AND DRIVING IT WITH A SMALL
4 CYL DIESEL ENGINE RUN ON WOOD GAS.[THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH POWER TO
SIMULTANEOUSLY DRIVE A 380 VOLT ALTERNATOR
IF YOU ARE EVER IN HARARE PLEASE GIVE ME A CALL ON 091-326687 OR HARARE
300857

REGARDS
ASHLEY
GAS AFRICA

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

From tmiles at trmiles.com Sat Aug 25 19:31:03 2001
From: tmiles at trmiles.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:37:00 2004
Subject: Pulse Burners?
In-Reply-To: <003801c12c1f$fe47a100$3e15210c@default>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010825160951.00db9800@pop3.norton.antivirus>

Dean,

I think the MTCI/Thermochem, Inc. pulse enhanced gasifier comes from the
Lockwood lineage. It uses a pulse combustor to indirectly heat sand in a
fluidized bed, generating high quality gas and making it possible to gasify
difficult fuels at low temperatures. See
http://www.oit.doe.gov/forest/pulscomb.shtml

In the mid 70s we asked Larry to gasify straw in an updraft gasifier he was
developing. At the time he attracted the attention of the county police
while running a pulse combustor on woodgas in his backyard because a
neighbor thought someone was loose in the woods with a machine gun.

About the same time I was involved in a commercial scale project to use
pulse combustors to dry chicken (layer) manure and fish waste, and later in
the pilot scale tests of the MTCI gasifier. We found it difficult to get a
uniform dry ash product from the pulse fired dryer. We kept overheating and
burning the manure. The MTCI/Thermochem gasifier showed great promise at
the pilot scale but has yet crack the industrial market.

Tom Miles

At 02:41 PM 8/23/01 -0700, Dean Still wrote:
>Dr Larry Winiarski, Technical Director at Aprovecho, studied pulse jet
>combustion at OSU. It was the subject of his thesis. The real experts in
>pulse jets, the Lockwoods, moved here so that they could continue studying
>together. Ray Lockwood built helicopters, race cars etc. with pulse jet
>engines. At Aprovecho, we've built pulse jet outboard motors from 55
>gallon drums, crop dryers, heaters, and engines. The most vernacular
>version was a valveless pulse jet engine made completely from sand and clay.

Thomas R Miles tmiles@trmiles.com
T R Miles, TCI Tel 503-292-0107
1470 SW Woodward Way Fax 503-292-2919
Portland, OR 97225 USA

-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/current/
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html

Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Alex English, english@adan.kingston.net

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

BioEnergy Lists: Improved Biomass Cooking Stoves

August 2001 Biomass Cooking Stoves Archive