March 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 woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Thu Mar 1 02:09:10 2001
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Yudkevich Yury)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_Forwarding_Norbert_Steinm=FCller_on_branchwood_densifi?==?iso-8859-1?Q?cation_question?=
In-Reply-To: <200102050905.EAA26552@crest.solarhost.com>
Message-ID: <001601c0a21f$66f21180$7d3fefc3@a1g0h5>

> > Subject: wood pellets/briquettes for cooking

You can receive a lot of information about pellet in Swedish Bioenergy
Association fax +46 8 441 70 89 and Swedish Pellet Club jed@algonet.se
You can look http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/amandus or fax +49 (0)
40 727 71-100 Group KAHL (Reinbek, Germany)
Yury Yudkevich, Russia

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Mon Mar 5 09:24:03 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Trials and other thoughts
Message-ID: <a8.11f0ce71.27d4f36e@cs.com>

Lucky we called this the "stoves" list, and not the "Cooking Stoves" list,
since there is suddenly a lot of interest in heaters, with natural gas prices
rising.

Congrats to John Davies for getting a clean (blueish) burn with sufficient
air. Here's a few comments:

LIGHTING: We find that the gasifier stoves ignite very well with a layer of
woodchips soaked in alcohol - ethanol, methanol or isopropyl. The alcohol
gives a nice blue flame which it then passes on to the rest of the fuel after
the surfaces are preheated.

AIR FUEL RATIOS:

I'm not surprised that John had trouble burning the charcoal afterwards. The
Air-Fuel ratios, as I said a few days ago are

Generating Volatiles <1.5/1
Burning Volatile Gas ~5/1
(varies with moisture content)
Generating CO from charcoal 6/1
Burning the CO from charcoal 1/1

So it is necessary to greatly increase the lower air supply when the
volatiles have been consumed. In addition, the temperatures generated during
CO generation are in the 1000 C range, so be sure the bottom of the unit is
well insulated.

It is necessary to be careful in this stage, because if the flame isn't
maintained there is some danger of CO poisoning.

TOM REED

In a message dated 3/2/01 2:07:26 PM Mountain Standard Time,
jmdavies@xsinet.co.za writes:

Subj:GAS-L: Re: Trials and other thoughts
Date:3/2/01 2:07:26 PM Mountain Standard Time
From: jmdavies@xsinet.co.za (John Davies)
To: gasification@crest.org

Hi All,

Firstly I must say thank you to the many people who have responded to my
stove project requests.
With a special thanks to Tom, Alex and Prof. Bhattacharya. and not
forgetting Vernon for introducing me to this excellent and helpful forum.

As a result of your positive feedback, I succeeded in improving the flame at
the burner.
This was done by mixing more air into the gas, resulting in a flame that has
a blue component and hisses and rumbles in a similar way to a high pressure
propane gas burner.

This was achieved by making 4 cuts of about 1 1/4" transversely across the
perimeter of the 2" gas pipe. the lower side of the cuts was depressed
inward about 1/3" leaving triangular vertical air inlets. These were spread
90 degrees apart and spread out along the length of the pipe at 20, 40, 60,
and 80% . This has the effect of sucking air into the gas flow on the way
up the pipe, This extra small volume of air has made the flame hotter, and
has allowed the primary air to be throttled giving control to the burning
rate.

The latest burn:

FUEL
Dry hardwood twigs ( privet ) varying in size from 3/16" to 1/2" diameter
and length of between 1 to 3 ". with a mass of 700g. the upper 100g being
wetted with kerosene to start the process.

LIGHTING
This was sluggish and took about 5 minutes. after which the burner was
placed. Another 4 primary holes should speed up this process.

IGNITING THE BURNER
The ignition flame had to be maintained for about 5 minutes before a self
supporting flame was established.
Again about 6" high. The extra primary air as above will help again.

THE PYROLYSING BURN
As the flame height increased the eight primary air holes were plugged one
at
a time. controlling the flame at a constant height with the chimney diameter
filled with flame.. In order to keep the chimney diameter filled with flame
the top section had to be removed reducing the length above the burner holes
to 5".

When the 4th hole was plugged the diameter of the flame reduced leaving an
air gap which caused cooling of the chimney sides, and smoky perimeter
around the flame. this cooling effect led to the flame dying. 2 plugs were
removed ant the flame recovered, after which 1 was replaced. the rest of the
burn was constant with 3 of the 8 holes plugged.

The burn time was about 25 minutes, after which the flame rapidly died At
this point the bottom third of the fuel container could be seen glowing
through the ceramic wool insulation.

The CHARCOAL BURN.
It was not possible to obtain a flame at this stage, and the heat produced
was reducing rapidly. All 8 holes were opened and the charcoal temperature
increased, burning without any smoke. A good simmering heat continued for
another 25 minutes. and the last remaining embers took about 15 minutes to
burn out.
An additional 4 holes would have allowed a shorter but hotter burn during
this stage.

THE FLAME CHARACTERISTICS..
The flame was spear shaped with the centre having double the height of that
of the sides. while some blue could be seen throughout the flame, the centre
was more yellow and the sides more blue. This is obviously an air mixing
problem. dividing the gas pipe into 3 smaller pipes below the burner should
have the effect of equalising the flame characteristics, ( a longer burner
mixing chamber might also work and be simpler) and allow increased primary
air throttling with a cooler longer initial burn.

CONCLUSION. Further improvement is possible, but the system will become more
complicated.

FUTURE PLANS.
As a home heating system is the aim, with burn times of up to six hours, or
longer. The next logical step is to follow the system introduced by Prof.
Bhattacharya. and developing it for the purposes of water and space heating.
Naturally further burner development will follow.

One last burn will be conducted with this pile of tins, incorporating the
extra holes and the longer air/gas mixer.
Then onto something more sophisticated.

Keep Bio-Gassing,
John Davies.

PS. Tom would you be so kind as to add this to the Stoves list. I promise to
sign up there in a few days.

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Tue Mar 6 18:09:06 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Vermiculite and asbestos... NOT
Message-ID: <a8.12085bd2.27d6e34e@cs.com>

This from the site

http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/asbestos/verm.htm

Vermiculite
What is it?
Vermiculite is the mineralogical name given to hydrated laminar
magnesium-aluminum-iron-silicate
which resembles mica in appearance. All vermiculite ores contain a range of
other
minerals that were formed along with the vermiculite in the rock. Vermiculite
ores from some
sources have been found to contain asbestos minerals but asbestos is not
intrinsic to vermiculite
and only a few ore bodies have been found to contain more than tiny trace
amounts.
Vermiculite mines are surface operations where ore is separated from other
minerals, and then
screened or classified into several basic particle sizes.

When subjected to heat, vermiculite has the unusual property of exfoliating
or expanding into
worm-like pieces (the name vermiculite is derived from the Latin
'vermiculare' - to breed worms).
This characteristic of exfoliation, the basis for commercial use of the
mineral, is the result of the
mechanical separation of the layers by the rapid conversion of contained
water to steam. The
increase in bulk volume of commercial grades is 8 to 12 times, but individual
flakes may exfoliate
as many as 30 times. There is a color change during expansion that is
dependent upon the
composition of the vermiculite and furnace temperature.

Vermiculite is found in various parts of the world. Locations of the
predominant commercial
mines are in Australia, Brazil, China, Kenya, South Africa, USA and Zimbabwe.

~~~~~~~~~~~
So it would seem that all the worrying I have done about recommending
vermiculite for insulation , about possible asbestos contamination ... is
very unlikely. But maybe use a dust mask if handling a lot of it ANYHOW.

TOM REED BEF

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Tue Mar 6 18:09:18 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Fireballs! Increasing volume energy density and porosity
Message-ID: <3f.1197e54b.27d6e347@cs.com>

My sawdust balls turned out to be very hard - couldn't break them apart by
hand! I probably used more starch than necessary, but not much.

On my first try in the Turbo stove they smouldered and went out. They have
such low themal conductivity that only the surface charred (like burning
paper).

But today, I built a good chip fire on top of the fireballs and they burned
up nicely.

So, fireballs should be here to stay, considering your experience and mine....

TOM REED BEF .

In a message dated 3/5/01 3:41:20 AM Mountain Standard Time, vvnk@teri.res.in
writes:

Tom,
Several years ago we made low pressure briquettes of saw dust ,coconut pith
etc by adding a small amount of cattle dung and extruding the mixture in a
low cost ,low power extruder.The sun-dried briquettes were used in our
gasifier in a village called Dhanavas near Delhi. John Tatom has seen this
plant. This is slightly high tech compared to making dung cakes.We also
used molasses and starch as binders with equally good results,but the costs
were higher.
-Kishore(TERI)

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Thu Mar 8 07:15:49 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Volatile - Char burning difficulties
Message-ID: <7f.112cfc97.27d8ed3f@cs.com>

I too have trouble burning the charcoal in the same stove as the volatiles
from biomass. One solution is to accept the charcoal as a gift - it has high
value in many parts of the world.

The second solution is to get the Air-Fuel ratio right. You need six times
as much air to generate char-gas and 1/6th as much to burn the CO. I am
currently building a Turbo stove that will do that - I hope.

When CO is burned correctly there is no more beautiful flame pattern.

The Imbert gasifier nicely balances burning volatiles and char by having only
one air supply and if charcoal production increases, more is burned.

An ordinary fireplace solves the problem with large quantities of excess air,
burning first the volatiles (poorly, dirty) and then the charcoal.

It is the pesky nature of wood and coal and you need to work around it.

TOM REED BEF

In a message dated 3/7/01 12:16:40 PM Mountain Standard Time,
jmdavies@xsinet.co.za writes:

Hi All,

After several mails' to the gasification site, this is my first to the
stoves site. Subsequent to my last report, which may or may not have reached
the stoves site.

Lighting of the stove has been greatly improved by increasing the primary
air holes from 8 to 16.

The Flame at the burner has been further improved by doubling the length of
the mixing zone under the burner.
This has produced an almost perfect flame, of even spread and height. Short
and blue with yellow tails with a height of about 3", sticking to the burner
surface and very hot. This has come at a price, a stable flame is only
achieved where the gas volume is in a very narrow band, any change to the
primary air resulted in a flame out. More primary air was needed but the
flame duration was still about 25minutes. The charcoal produced was less. It
is suspected that some was reduced to gas during the first stage. This might
explain the dramatic increase in heat, with the same duration burn.

A flame at the burner was still not achieved during the charcoal burn. I am
sure that persistence would pay off, but it is now time to divert my
experiments to the cross draft " Institutional Stove " . This direction is
in order to try and produce another tin can stove, with continuous heat
output and a gas of constant quality and volume which will better suit a
finely tuned burner.

The next stove will require more thought and effort as horizontal pipes will
have to be joined to the combustion can. The requirement would be that the
stove be built entirely from waste, using simple hand tools.
This will be the only way to bring this technology to the poorest of the
poor, which in turn could create jobs in that community and clean up the
thick environmental smog in which they live, from the improper burning of
low grade coal, which is their only affordable source of heating.

Any ideas for this type of construction will be welcome.

Regards,
John Davies.
Secunda.
South Africa.

PS. The stove sketch can be seen at :
http://www.geocities.com/kenboak/index.html
Thanks to Ken Boak who has kindly added it to his personal web site.

From jmdavies at xsinet.co.za Fri Mar 9 13:47:44 2001
From: jmdavies at xsinet.co.za (John Davies)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: GAS-L: air ratios
Message-ID: <006b01c0a8c8$d3358700$bed4ef9b@p>

Kevin wrote,

>Am I missing something here? It looks like the air requirement to gasify
the char is the same as the air >requirement to burn the CO resulting.

>Where does the "factor of 6" come in?

I am also pondering this fact, although at my last burn a blue flame was
seen just above the burning charcoal.
at the bottom of the gas tube.

John.

Gasification List is sponsored by
USDOE BioPower Program http://www.eren.doe.gov/biopower/
and PRM Energy Systems http://www.prmenergy.com
-
Other Sponsors, Archives and Information
http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/gasification-list-archive
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml

From jmdavies at xsinet.co.za Tue Mar 13 07:45:54 2001
From: jmdavies at xsinet.co.za (John Davies)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Fw: Tin Can Stove
Message-ID: <003701c0abbc$0c5b8660$c9d4ef9b@p>

> Hi All,
>
> After several mails' to the gasification site, this is my first to the
> stoves site. Subsequent to my last report, which may or may not have
reached
> the stoves site.
>
> Lighting of the stove has been greatly improved by increasing the primary
> air holes from 8 to 16.
>
> The Flame at the burner has been further improved by doubling the length
of
> the mixing zone under the burner.
> This has produced an almost perfect flame, of even spread and height.
Short
> and blue with yellow tails with a height of about 3", sticking to the
burner
> surface and very hot. This has come at a price, a stable flame is
only
> achieved where the gas volume is in a very narrow band, any change to the
> primary air resulted in a flame out. More primary air was needed but the
> flame duration was still about 25minutes. The charcoal produced was less.
It
> is suspected that some was reduced to gas during the first stage. This
might
> explain the dramatic increase in heat, with the same duration burn.
>
> A flame at the burner was still not achieved during the charcoal burn. I
am
> sure that persistence would pay off, but it is now time to divert my
> experiments to the cross draft " Institutional Stove " . This direction
is
> in order to try and produce another tin can stove, with continuous heat
> output and a gas of constant quality and volume which will better suit a
> finely tuned burner.
>
> The next stove will require more thought and effort as horizontal pipes
will
> have to be joined to the combustion can. The requirement would be that the
> stove be built entirely from waste, using simple hand tools.
> This will be the only way to bring this technology to the poorest of the
> poor, which in turn could create jobs in that community and clean up the
> thick environmental smog in which they live, from the improper burning of
> low grade coal, which is their only affordable source of heating.
>
> Any ideas for this type of construction will be welcome.
>
> Regards,
> John Davies.
> Secunda.
> South Africa.
>
> PS. The stove sketch can be seen at :
> http://www.geocities.com/kenboak/index.html
> Thanks to Ken Boak who has kindly added it to his personal web site.
>
>
>

From J.R.Rouse at lboro.ac.uk Tue Mar 13 10:10:34 2001
From: J.R.Rouse at lboro.ac.uk (Jonathan Rouse)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
Message-ID: <E14cqQf-0004lf-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>

Hi,

I am involved in a little work on improved stoves and health at the
moment and an old question has cropped up. If a stove burns with
less VISIBLE smoke does this necessarily mean that its
emissions are less harmful? I realise that a poorly ventilated fire
may produce lethal carbon monoxide, but other than that...

I remember some discussions about grates and emissions about a
year ago. I have a feeling someone said that the introduction of
grates can create less smokey BUT MORE TOXIC emissions.
Anyone know / remember more about this? Is it particulates or
gaseous hydrocarbons which are really poisonous?

Cheers

Jon

---------
Jonathan Rouse
Research Assistant
Water, Engineering and Development Centre
www.lboro.ac.uk/wedc/

From stoves at ecoharmony.com Tue Mar 13 11:37:46 2001
From: stoves at ecoharmony.com (eco Ltd automated message)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
In-Reply-To: <E14cqQf-0004lf-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <LMBBLPFKOFEHFDOEMIGHKEAHDAAA.stoves@ecoharmony.com>

Hi Jon

Good question! The message is essentially that both particulates and
CO have a negative impact on health and need to be reduced, and it's
not sufficient just to reduce one (ie the visible smoke).

There is now growing evidence that particulates increase the risk of a
range of health problems including acute lower respiratory infections
(ALRI) in young children (mostly pneumonia) and chronic obstructive
lung disease in adults, particularly women, and this is causes the
major impact on health. It also seems that the pollutants increase the
risk of perinatal mortality, low birth weight, TB, cataract and cancer
of the nasopharynx and larynx. Low birth weight is probably a result
of long term exposure to CO, cataract and cancer though appears to
come from the smoke particulates.

I recommend Dr Nigel Bruce's article reviewing this at
http://www.ehproject.org/PDF/Capsule/capsule3_ari.pdf (550KB) as well
as the work of Prof Kirk Smith, much of which is downloadable at
http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/krsmith/. Links to other useful resources
in this field are available from the "Resource Portal" at the HEDON
household energy network (http://ecoharmony.net/hedon)

Regards
Grant

-------------------
Grant Ballard-Tremeer, visit ECO Ltd on the web at
http://ecoharmony.com
HEDON Household Energy Network http://www.ecoharmony.net/hedon/
-------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Rouse [mailto:J.R.Rouse@lboro.ac.uk]
Sent: 13 March 2001 15:10
To: stoves@crest.org
Subject: Particulates and toxicity

Hi,

Cheers

Jon

---------
Jonathan Rouse
Research Assistant
Water, Engineering and Development Centre
www.lboro.ac.uk/wedc/

From stoves at ecoharmony.com Tue Mar 13 11:40:58 2001
From: stoves at ecoharmony.com (Grant Ballard-Tremeer)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
In-Reply-To: <E14cqQf-0004lf-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <LMBBLPFKOFEHFDOEMIGHAEAIDAAA.stoves@ecoharmony.com>

Hi Jon

Good question! The message is essentially that both particulates and
CO have a negative impact on health and need to be reduced, and it's
not sufficient just to reduce one (ie the visible smoke).

Regards
Grant

-------------------
Grant Ballard-Tremeer, visit ECO Ltd on the web at
http://ecoharmony.com
HEDON Household Energy Network http://www.ecoharmony.net/hedon/
-------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Rouse [mailto:J.R.Rouse@lboro.ac.uk]
Sent: 13 March 2001 15:10
To: stoves@crest.org
Subject: Particulates and toxicity

Hi,

Cheers

Jon

---------
Jonathan Rouse
Research Assistant
Water, Engineering and Development Centre
www.lboro.ac.uk/wedc/

From J.R.Rouse at lboro.ac.uk Tue Mar 13 12:09:57 2001
From: J.R.Rouse at lboro.ac.uk (Jonathan Rouse)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
In-Reply-To: <E14cqQf-0004lf-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <E14csHx-0007fe-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>

Dear Grant,

Thanks very much for your swift and helpful response. I am left
wondering however about other emissions (apart from smoke
particulates and CO) such as volatile hydrocarbons / organic
substances.

As I understand it, CO is only produced in large / dangerous
quanitities when there is an insufficient supply of oxygen to
combusting wood. Assuming a stove is well ventilated (hence CO
levels shouldn't be too low), and VISIBLE smoke emissions are
down, is it possible that some other invisible asties being emitted?
Is it possible the amount of these increases with better ventilation?
Is there any specific information on these?

I am sure there was a study sometime which suggested that
despite visible emissions decreasing, a stove could still be very
polluting, and I was under the impression that the pollutant was not
'just' CO.

Yours
Jon

---------
Jonathan Rouse
Research Assistant
Water, Engineering and Development Centre
www.lboro.ac.uk/wedc/

From mheat at mha-net.org Tue Mar 13 14:05:33 2001
From: mheat at mha-net.org (Norbert Senf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
In-Reply-To: <E14cqQf-0004lf-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010313112842.00d4f100@mha-net.org>

Hello Jon:

I was involved with emissions testing of masonry heaters a few years ago.
We did get higher emissions with grates, but they were PM emissions. I
believe there was some discussion of this on the list.

The emissions are quite complex, but roughly, in increasing order of
severity, you seem to get CO, then soot, then tars. The ordinary blue wood
smoke that results from smoldering is mostly small tar droplets. One reason
for their health effects is small size, smaller than 10 microns (PM-10),
which brings them into the biological size range. A blood corpuscle is 6
microns, I believe.

The other big health concern is polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH's),
some of which are carcinogens. An Austrian study back in 1985 compared
various hydrocarbons from an old technology heating stove to a masonry
heater. When you go from smoldering to smokeless burning, the reduction in
PAH's seems to be even more dramatic than the reduction in PM.

There's an extensive bibliography on the health aspects at
http://burningissues.org/

Best ...... Norbert

At 03:09 PM 2001-03-13 +0000, Jonathan Rouse wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am involved in a little work on improved stoves and health at the
>moment and an old question has cropped up. If a stove burns with
>less VISIBLE smoke does this necessarily mean that its
>emissions are less harmful? I realise that a poorly ventilated fire
>may produce lethal carbon monoxide, but other than that...
>
>I remember some discussions about grates and emissions about a
>year ago. I have a feeling someone said that the introduction of
>grates can create less smokey BUT MORE TOXIC emissions.
>Anyone know / remember more about this? Is it particulates or
>gaseous hydrocarbons which are really poisonous?

----------------------------------------
Norbert Senf---------- mheat@mha-net.org-nospam
Masonry Stove Builders (remove -nospam)
RR 5, Shawville------- www.heatkit.com
Quebec J0X 2Y0-------- fax:-----819.647.6082
---------------------- voice:---819.647.5092

From stoves at ecoharmony.com Wed Mar 14 11:58:13 2001
From: stoves at ecoharmony.com (Grant Ballard-Tremeer)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
In-Reply-To: <E14csHx-0007fe-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <LMBBLPFKOFEHFDOEMIGHKEBGDAAA.stoves@ecoharmony.com>

Hi Jon

I'm by no means an authority on this, but my understanding is that if
you manage to reduce both CO and (visible) smoke you can be reasonably
certain that you will have reduced other invisible pollutants (such as
methane and formaldahyde). The polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are
condensed at the temperatures present soon after leaving the fire -
they are big molecules.

On the other hand since coal contains traces of heavy metals one
couldn't say the same for coal and even the invisible emissions from
coal may contain elements such as florine, lead, and mercury, but
clean wood doesn't have these problems.

You mention ventilation, but I'm sure you know that ventilation isn't
the only variable involved in minimising CO and smoke; the three main
factors being oxygen (ventilation), heat, and time. There must be
sufficient oxygen, at a sufficiently high temperature, for a
sufficiently long time for the reaction to be completed. So CO (and
other products of incomplete combustion) could be produced not only
when there in insufficient oxygen, but also when it is not hot enough
(a smouldering match has sufficient oxygen), or when there isn't time
for the reaction to go to completion (for example if the flames are
quenched on the base of a pot).

All the best
Grant

-------------------
Grant Ballard-Tremeer, visit ECO Ltd on the web at
http://ecoharmony.com
eMail grant@ecoharmony.com
HEDON Household Energy Network http://www.ecoharmony.net/hedon/
-------------------

From ronallarson at qwest.net Wed Mar 14 18:29:00 2001
From: ronallarson at qwest.net (Ron Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Fw: [CSRT] Alert - Update available
Message-ID: <012d01c0acde$caa1ea60$9879e13f@computer>

Stovers:

This is a helpful suggestion from list member Marion Jackson, writing
from Germany (which I missed as coming only to myself)

Marion: Thanks for this helpful suggestion and sorry for the delay in
forwarding it. How is your project in Africa coming along?

Ron

----- Original Message -----
From: Marion Jackson <Marion.Jackson@t-online.de>
To: Ronal W. Larson <larcon@sni.net>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 4:16 AM
Subject: Fw: [CSRT] Alert - Update available

> Hello stovers,
>
> Norton did safe my PC from several fatal viruses. Yet it is costly.
>
> Here I send a link to a free Anti-virus programme.
>
> Please also consider to add attachements to mails in RTF (rich text file)
> format and not word. Then it is not as likely to contain viruses.
>
> Greetings, have a nice weekend
>
> Marion
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <eAladdin_Mailer@eAladdin.com>
> To: <csrt@webmailer.ealaddin.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:08 AM
> Subject: [CSRT] Alert - Update available
>
>
> .
> >
> > New Users
> > Download your free copy of eSafe Desktop 2.2 and get protected today.
Make
> > sure to update eSafe after you install and that you configured your
> product
> > to block all VBS attachments according to the instructions here:
> > http://www.esafe.com/home/csrt/protdesk.asp
> >
> > eSafe Users
> > Please make sure that your product is configured to block VBS
attachments.
> > The instructions are here:
http://www.esafe.com/home/csrt/Activescript.asp
> > A new update is available for download from here:
> > ftp://ftp.esafe.com/pub/updates/oxrupdinc.exe
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ******************************* IMPORTANT !
> **********************************
> > The content of this email and any attachments are confidential and
> intended
> > for the named recipient(s) only.
> >
> > If you have received this email in error please notify the sender
> immediately.
> > Do not disclose the content of this message or make copies.
> >
> > This email was scanned by eSafe Mail for viruses, vandals and other
> > malicious content.
> >
>
****************************************************************************
> **
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > For any eSafe related questions, please contact
esafe.support@ealaddin.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > This email is being sent by Aladdin Knowledge Systems Inc.
> (www.eAladdin.com)
> > You have received this message because our records indicate that you
have
> > requested this information. Our mailing list is for the exclusive use
of
> > Aladdin Knowledge Systems and is neither sold nor given to third
parties.
> > If you no longer wish to receive emails from Aladdin, or your email
> address
> > has been added to our list without your consent, please unsubscribe by
> visiting:
> > http://www.ealaddin.com/maillist/maillist_signin.asp
> >
> > Thank you.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
>
>

From crouchpa at ix.netcom.com Wed Mar 14 19:12:09 2001
From: crouchpa at ix.netcom.com (John Crouch)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Particulates and toxicity
In-Reply-To: <LMBBLPFKOFEHFDOEMIGHKEBGDAAA.stoves@ecoharmony.com>
Message-ID: <NABBIALBHLOANANOIKBHGEDLDFAA.crouchpa@ix.netcom.com>

To Jon, and Grant,

The North American woodstove industry usually doesn't have anything very
meaningful to offer the third world cooking discussion, but in this case we
do. As some are aware, every new woodheater offered for sale in the USA
must test to a protocol developed for particulate emissions. As one time,
the State of Colorado also required a test for CO. As a result, there is a
body of information which speaks to Jon's basic question.

Since app 90% by weight of woodsmoke are organic compounds, and these
organic compounds include virtually all of the PAH's, reducing the visible
emissions
is by far the most useful indicator of low emissions, including low toxic
emissions.

Some papers which speak to your question are on this web site:
http://www.omni-test.com/Publications.htm
our trade association has funded some of Dr. Houck's work, as has USEPA.
Some of these papers are very specific to issues that only impact the North
American industry or are imbedded in our Clean Air Act (i.e. his comments on
specific USEPA program such as the "sec 112k" inventory), but even these
very targeted comments can be useful to readers of this list.

Unfortunately, some of this organizations best work, in-situ, was completed
prior to the creation of their web site and thus will always be difficult to
share on the web. The bulk of their work, reinforces the intuitive
assumption that; a clean burn in a clean burn.

The first paper on the site:
http://www.omni-test.com/Publications/rwctr.pdf
may be particularly interesting, since it address, a number of issues which
are often discussed on this list.
Again, many readers will need to distill the North American biases from this
information, the document was specifically prepared for the USEPA, and
responds to their request for an overview of the issues related to their
certification program, and woodsmoke in general.

John Crouch
Director of Government Relations
Hearth Products Association
7840 Madison Ave, suite 185
Fair Oaks, California 95628
916.536.2390 voice
888.206.7556 Pager (U.S. only)
916.536.2392 telefax
mailto:crouchpa@ix.netcom.com
www.hearthassoc.org

From elk at wananchi.com Fri Mar 16 07:17:49 2001
From: elk at wananchi.com (elk)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Chardust and TRAFFIC
Message-ID: <00d301c0ae13$0cadc3e0$9b40083e@default>

Stovers;

I'll soon be back up to speed again on my R&D
work!

Chardust has received funding from TRAFFIC- a joint
program of IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) and WWF
(the World Wildlife Fund) for a four-month study on the feasibility of
converting various locally available agro-industrial by products into charcoal
briquettes.

Working with TRAFFIC personnel, the study will
include a survey to assess the acceptability of the various 'charcoal
substitutes' that Chardust will produce.

We've a long list of possible wastes that
may prove suitable for conversion to charcoal briquettes, but top of
the list are coconut husk and shell, bagasse, sawdust, rice husk, sisal waste, and pineapple leaves.

I've included more information on this project at
www.chardust.com including a more
complete list of waste & agricultural by-products we have
identified as being worthy of investigation. If anyone on the stoves list
have suggestions on items to add or any experience
with carbonizing or briquetting what's on the list, I'd be very
pleased to hear from you.

elk

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

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Fri Mar 16 10:01:34 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: Chardust and TRAFFIC
Message-ID: <e0.11c54d93.27e3826f@cs.com>

Congratulations on moving to the next stage of charcoal briquette production.
You could become the Rockefeller of charcoal (if you want).

~~~~~
I was talking to Ali Kaupp last Sunday (back in Denver from India) about
torrefied wood. Torrefie wood is wood (or biomass) roasted to about 250C
which retains 80% of volatiles, and so 80% of the original energy rather than
the 30% in charcoal. He said that he came across a group in Chile that was
making it and selling it as charcoal. I think they were not briquetted. He
said there was slightly more smoke than charcoal but the users were
satisfied and the sellers were ecstatic.

Give it a try.

Your booster, TOM REED BEF

In a message dated 3/16/01 5:17:17 AM Mountain Standard Time,
elk@wananchi.com writes:

Stovers;

I'll soon be back up to speed again on my R&D work!

Chardust has received funding from TRAFFIC- a joint program of IUCN
(International Union for the Conservation of Nature) and WWF (the World
Wildlife Fund) for a four-month study on the feasibility of converting
various locally available agro-industrial by products into charcoal
briquettes.

Working with TRAFFIC personnel, the study will include a survey to assess
the acceptability of the various 'charcoal substitutes' that Chardust will
produce.

We've a long list of possible wastes that may prove suitable for conversion
to charcoal briquettes, but top of the list are coconut husk and shell,
bagasse, sawdust, rice husk, sisal waste, and pineapple leaves.

I've included more information on this project at www.chardust.com
including a more complete list of waste & agricultural by-products we have
identified as being worthy of investigation. If anyone on the stoves list
have suggestions on items to add or any experience with carbonizing or
briquetting what's on the list, I'd be very pleased to hear from you.

elk

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

From andrew.heggie at dtn.ntl.com Fri Mar 16 17:16:23 2001
From: andrew.heggie at dtn.ntl.com (Andrew Heggie)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:49 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Air/Fuel ratio sensor measures HHV of fuels.....
In-Reply-To: <ea.12c6bf13.27e3827d@cs.com>
Message-ID: <qs35btkkl7qhf2oppdgq6jin8pjt2nt93g@4ax.com>

On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:51:41 EST
>The voltage change of the lambda meter is so sensitive to oxygen pressure
>change, that it changes by an order of magnitude as you pass from 1% rich to
>1% lean. Therefore the temperature of the sensor is not so important if you
>only want to find the switch point. However, if you want to operate rich or
>lean on purpose, you need to keep the sensor at a fixed temperature, say 777C
>(makes 727+273 = 1,000K, hot enough for the sensor and makes calculations
>easy from V = RT/NF ln (p2/p1).

I may have missed out on some of your earlier posts on Lambda sensors.
If you take a standard automobile sensor with three or four wires you
will see two wires are for a heater element. Though in a
stove/gasifier application there will be no need to make use of the
heater circuit (unless the Lambda sensor is placed after a heat
exchanger) but bear in mind you can overheat the sensor in a furnace.
You can measure the resistance of this element to give an indication
of temperature, either directly or by feeding a few volts and
measuring the current draw.

These heated sensors are about double the price of the simple ones.
They also appear to have an 18mm by 1.5mm pitch thread, this is an non
standard size here in UK so finding suitable nuts to weld to the stove
is a problem.

It also brings me back to one of my hang ups about wood combustion. In
general the simpler a chemical is to burn the less excess air needed
to give acceptable combustion. In an internal combustion engine this
is necessarily going to be about stoichiometric, so switching at
lambda=1 is O.K. as the fuel is easily burned to near completion and
their is limited time available for combustion. In a stove we may be
burning less ideal fuel and 200% excess air values may be required to
give a clean flue gas. The Lambda sensor is way outside it's range
here. Remember it is a comparator it uses the difference in oxygen
between the flue gas and the outside, this difference produces an
electron pump which switches over quite a narrow band. In a car the
closed loop control repeated richens and weakens the mixture about
this switching point, I doubt if large batch loaded devices can react
in this way.

It may be we need a cheap device to monitor the CO2:C0 ratio to be
more meaningful (though I do hope I am wrong on this or wide band EGO
sensors come down in price).

I think one of the attributes of gasification is that it produces a
good fuel gas, I would hope therefore that it should enable combustion
with much lower excess air values. My colleague has recently built a
gasifier for thermal use which I have on test at the moment, I shall
equip it with a lambda sensor for my own interest, though to all
intents and purposes it appears to self regulate on primary airflow
control and is clean burning.

AJH

From tmiles at teleport.com Sat Mar 17 16:27:28 2001
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Fwd: charcoal
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010317131713.00e31530@mail.teleport.com>

Stovers and Bioenergy List Members:

Please consider the following request from Namibia. Mssrs. R.Wagner and
E.Zamzow are now subscribed to both lists.

Tom Miles

>Reply-To: "R Wagner" <moselle@out.namib.com>
>From: "R Wagner" <moselle@out.namib.com>

>Subject: charcoal
>Organization: ERO (PTY) LTD
>
>Dear Sirs,
>we received your adress from david pennise.
>In the past, we here in Namibia have an big increase of charcoal
>production. No question, this created jobs and we need jobs.
>This production takes place in simple unfiltered steel kilns and we have
>an bi impact through air pollution.
>This steel kilns has a size from appr. 1.2o meters and a high from appr.
>1.5o meters. On the top is an opening from appr. 5o x 5o cm. Only charcoal
>from mopane trees is produced. On a limited area, more than 2oo kilns was
>in production and try to start again.
>We know about the greenhouse gases produced during the charcoal production
>from a report from
>Auke Koppmans, FAO.
>We know also about the health impact through this gases.
>We want to make an proposal to this charcoal producers for a cheap and
>simple solution :
>
>1. to build in a filtering system
>
>2. to build in a flaring off system for this dangerous greenhouse gases.
>
>
>We would be very glad if you can give some ideas to us to find a solution.
>
>best regards,
>R.Wagner/E.Zamzow

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

From jovick at island.net Sat Mar 17 17:13:46 2001
From: jovick at island.net (John Flottvik)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Test results
Message-ID: <000501c0af15$4d7410c0$6fb8fea9@computer>

March 17, 2001

Dear Stovers.

If it is of interest, we just got our stack emission tests back from the
Environmental Consultants A Lanfranco and Assoc.

The numbers look good to us, and I would like to share them with you. We
did manage to collect all the wood oil from the process, so I would call it a
success.
Letter.xif

The Stoves List is Sponsored by
Pyromid Inc. http://www.pyromid.net
Stoves Webpage, Charcoal, Activated Carbon
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
Other Sponsors, Archive and Information
http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bin00080.bin
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 104269 bytes
Desc: "For information about CHAMBERS STOVES"
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stoves/attachments/20010317/54dc9361/bin00080.bin
From adkarve at pn2.vsnl.net.in Sat Mar 17 20:53:36 2001
From: adkarve at pn2.vsnl.net.in (A.D. Karve)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Char sources
In-Reply-To: <e0.11c54d93.27e3826f@cs.com>
Message-ID: <000001c0af4d$058f64c0$4652c5cb@vsnl.net.in>

<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
Dear Mr. Karstad,
dry leaves of sugarcane, wheat stover, stalks
of safflower and mustard, as well dry leaves of trees are difficult to burn
directly in a wood burning stove and are therefore ideal candidates for
charring. After adding a binder to the char (cowdung or starch
paste), briquettes are made by using an extruder or by manually forming balls,
which are dried in the sun. Because this operation requires
sunlight for drying, it can be done only during the dry period of the year
(about 8 months). By using our process, a rural family can earn annual
net profit of about Rs. 100,000 (US$ 2000), or a monthly income of Rs. 8000,
which compares well with that of a white collar worker in a city. In
our cost calculation, the cost of the raw material is taken as zero, but there
is a component of collection charges, if the material lies scattered in
the field, as in the case of leaves of trees or leaves of
sugarcane.
Dr.A.D.Karve
President,
Appropriate Rural Technology
Institute
Survey No. 13,
Dhayarigaon
Pune 411 041, India

From jovick at island.net Sat Mar 17 23:50:32 2001
From: jovick at island.net (John Flottvik)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Retry Test results
Message-ID: <003a01c0af4c$b56a6d00$6fb8fea9@computer>

March 17, 2001

Dear Ron

Thanks for the note.

Please let me know if this attachment came
through

Regards John
Test Results.xif

The Stoves List is Sponsored by
Pyromid Inc. http://www.pyromid.net
Stoves Webpage, Charcoal, Activated Carbon
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
Other Sponsors, Archive and Information
http://www.nrel.gov/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/stoves-list-archive/
http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bin00081.bin
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 101173 bytes
Desc: "For information about CHAMBERS STOVES"
Url : http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stoves/attachments/20010317/6af20043/bin00081.bin
From english at adan.kingston.net Sun Mar 18 10:45:25 2001
From: english at adan.kingston.net (*.English)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Picture of a Pumice Rocket stove
Message-ID: <200103181544.KAA04834@adan.kingston.net>

Dear Stovers,
You can view an image of a Rocket stove carved from pumice stone by
going to
http://www.ikweb.com/enuff/public_html/Stoves.html
and clicking on the link under the 'New' section.

Sorry about the delay Dean.

Alex

From jovick at island.net Sun Mar 18 12:19:49 2001
From: jovick at island.net (John Flottvik)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Tests
Message-ID: <000a01c0afb5$850347e0$6fb8fea9@computer>

March 18, 2001

Dear Ron

I cant figure this out , so I'll just print it out.
Hope it is of intrest.

Summary

The following table presents the triplicate test
averages for the listed parameters for the emissions from the Charcoal
Production Pilot Plant on February 22, 2001.

Parameter
Charcoal
Unit
MELP Wood Residue

( Feb, 22,
2001)
Emission Standard

(@8%O2)
(8%O2 )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Particulate
(mg/dscm)
6.6
120
Opacity
(%)
0
15
Condensible
Organics(mg/dscm)
1.5
n/a
Sulphur
Oxides (mg/dscm

19
typical std.200 to 800
Nitrogen oxides
(mg/dscm)
69 typical
std, 100 to 300
Carbon Monoxide
(mg/dscm)
356
Not Regulated
VOC
(mg/dscm)
20
typical std. 55 to 120
Flowrate
(dscm/min) 7.1
n/a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The test results indicate that all parameters are
well below normaly permitted levels for the listed parameters.

 
Charcoal Unit Emission Results
Parameter
Test
1
Test
2
Test
3
Average
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test
Date
Feb. 22/01 Feb.
22/01 Feb. 22/01
Test
Time
10:09-11:14 11:57-12:59
13:24-14:27
Test duration in
minutes
60 60
60
60
Particulate (mg/m3
@8%o2)
7.5 5.7 6.5
6.6
Particulate (Kg/hr
) 0.004
0.003
0.003
0.003
Opacity
(%)
0
0 0
0
Condens.Organ. (mg/m3 @8%
O2) 1.0
2.9
1.6
1.5
Sulphur Oxides (mg/m3 @8%
O2)
18
19
20
19
Nitrogen Oxides (mg/m3
@8%O2)
69
68
70 69
Carbon Monoxide (mg/m3
@8%O2)
478
479 111
356
VOC (mg/m3 @8%
O2)
19
39
1
356
Flowrate
(m3/min)
7.5
6.9
6.8
7.1
Oxygen ( vol% dry
)
6.4
6.2
6.6 6.4
Carbon Dioxide ( vol % dry
)
13.9 13.8
12.6
13.8
Stack Temp ( C
)
388
421
420
410
Moisture ( vol %
) 12.7
13.0
12.7
12.8
Isokinetic Varation ( ave
% )
98.6
100
99.1
N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note; Our pilot
plant is 12 ft long, 6 ft wide and 6 ft high. There is two home heating style
burners in opposite corners for
heat.

Unfortunatly when I bought the burners, I did not realize there was no control
of the heat. So we have to turn one of to

regulate the reactor temperature. You will notice on test # 3, the carbon
monoxide and the VOC,(volatile organic
 compound) dropped signifently. We left the burner that
is directly below our stack on for this test. This will be the way we

will
operate during the next few weeks while doing all tests. Charcoal burners will
be used in the future.

Note 2;
MELP, stands for ( British Columbia ) Ministry of Environment lands and
Parks. They were in attendance during the
tests

The testing was done by the Environmental Consulting Co, A.Lanfranco and
Assoc.


Best Regards John
Flottvik

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Mon Mar 19 18:16:10 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Lung Abuse - and hoods
Message-ID: <7c.132dbf94.27e7ecbc@cs.com>

As a healthy human, planning for me and my lungs to reach 100, I occasionally
concern myself with smoke and smog inhalation. Living in Colorado and the
EPA-protected US, I get much less exposure to potential lung irritants than
most of us.

As one doing research in stoves and gasifiers I occasionally may need to take
steps to protect my lungs. Half of the human race should definitely take
major steps now, since smoke inhalation is a major cause of death to women
and children in developing countries.

We here at "STOVES" are dedicated to improving cooking and heating stoves to
increase efficiency and reduce smoke. But stove improvement is slow.

However, We have been ignoring the single, simplest improvement to protect
lungs: HOODS! Every teepee has a smoke hole, but most other primitive homes
don't. Hoods also carry away cooking emissions which are probably harmful
(particularly frying) and smells that are annoying.

Removing kitchen smells has always been a cooking priority when people can
afford it. Most American homes have cooking hoods even though they don't
have smokey fires.

We need to develop a simple "HOOD" modification for each type of yurt, hut,
shack, lodge, .... that exists. I suggest that the general model however
would be a 45 degree sheet of local material (thatch etc.) over the cooking
area, a hole or slot at its apex, and a rain shield outside (continuing the
inside slope?) to prevent wind-rain from entering the house. In cold
climates there might have to be a closeable slot/hole.

I hope Elizabeth Bates at BOILING POINT will weigh in with some of the
results and pictures she has published and let us know if there is any
general attempt being made to help various countries to help their people to
be aware and to make hoods. I hope Kirk Smith will summarize his
measurements of smoke and other kitchen emissions. And I'm sure we'll get
lots of great comments from those on the front lines.
~~~~~
Fortunately heat rises, so a hood need not involve a fan. A passive
collector over the cooking area with a hole to the outside (and external rain
drain) may solve the problem in many homes. Properly designed, the hood may
help cool the home too.

For my lab, I am looking in the Grainger industrial catalogue and finding
dozens of kitchen wall fans in the $30-$100, 100-200 W range. . I am going
to install one in my lab in the next few days even though we are working
toward zero emission stoves and I don't usually cook there.

At CPC we are installing a wall fan over our "cook area".

Breathe clean... Yours truly, TOM REED BEF

From carbex at rdsor.ro Mon Mar 19 23:27:54 2001
From: carbex at rdsor.ro (Cornel Ticarat)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Web page address needed.
Message-ID: <200103200425.XAA28575@crest.solarhost.com>

Dear Mr. Miguel Trossero,

My computer has recently had some problems and I had to format the hard
disk. Unfortunatelly I have lost your message containing the two web page
addresses regarding charcoal.
Please be so kind and send them again to me.
My e-mail address:
carbex@rdsor.ro
Thanks a lot in advance.

Best regards,

Cornel Ticarat

From stoves-help at crest.org Wed Mar 21 13:37:35 2001
From: stoves-help at crest.org (stoves-help@crest.org)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: ezmlm warning
Message-ID: <985192726.11048.ezmlm-warn@crest.org>

Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
stoves@crest.org mailing list.

I'm working for my owner, who can be reached
at stoves-owner@crest.org.

Messages to you from the stoves mailing list seem to
have been bouncing. I've attached a copy of the first bounce
message I received.

If this message bounces too, I will send you a probe. If the probe bounces,
I will remove your address from the stoves mailing list,
without further notice.

I've kept a list of which messages from the stoves mailing list have
bounced from your address.

Copies of these messages may be in the archive.

To retrieve a set of messages 123-145 (a maximum of 100 per request),
send an empty message to:
<stoves-get.123_145@crest.org>

To receive a subject and author list for the last 100 or so messages,
send an empty message to:
<stoves-index@crest.org>

Here are the message numbers:

3586

--- Enclosed is a copy of the bounce message I received.

Return-Path: <>
Received: (qmail 1421 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2001 10:58:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO crest.solarhost.com) (root@206.112.76.2)
by 206.112.78.16 with SMTP; 9 Mar 2001 10:58:17 -0000
Received: from shl2.solarhost.com (IDENT:root@[206.112.78.13])
by crest.solarhost.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA26786
for <stoves-return-3586-list-archive=shl2.solarhost.com@crest.org>; Fri, 9 Mar 2001 07:52:11 -0500
Received: from localhost (localhost)
by shl2.solarhost.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with internal id EAA25771;
Fri, 9 Mar 2001 04:55:52 -0800
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 04:55:52 -0800
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@shl2.solarhost.com>
Message-Id: <200103091255.EAA25771@shl2.solarhost.com>
To: <stoves-return-3586-list-archive=shl2.solarhost.com@crest.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
boundary="EAA25771.984142552/shl2.solarhost.com"
Subject: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure)

This is a MIME-encapsulated message

--EAA25771.984142552/shl2.solarhost.com

The original message was received at Fri, 9 Mar 2001 04:55:52 -0800
from IDENT:qmailr@[206.112.78.16]

----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
"|/usr/local/bin/run-archive"
(expanded from: <list-archive@shl2.solarhost.com>)

----- Transcript of session follows -----
554 "|/usr/local/bin/run-archive"... unknown mailer error 1

--EAA25771.984142552/shl2.solarhost.com
Content-Type: message/delivery-status

Reporting-MTA: dns; shl2.solarhost.com
Received-From-MTA: DNS; [206.112.78.16]
Arrival-Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 04:55:52 -0800

Final-Recipient: RFC822; <list-archive@shl2.solarhost.com>
X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; |/usr/local/bin/run-archive@shl2.solarhost.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 04:55:52 -0800

--EAA25771.984142552/shl2.solarhost.com
Content-Type: text/rfc822-headers

Return-Path: <stoves-return-3586-list-archive=shl2.solarhost.com@crest.org>
Received: from mail.solarhost.com (IDENT:qmailr@[206.112.78.16])
by shl2.solarhost.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id EAA25770
for <list-archive@shl2.solarhost.com>; Fri, 9 Mar 2001 04:55:52 -0800
Received: (qmail 1365 invoked by uid 509); 9 Mar 2001 10:58:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact stoves-help@crest.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list stoves@crest.org
Received: (qmail 1359 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2001 10:58:12 -0000
Message-Id: <200103091252.HAA26778@crest.solarhost.com>
From: "Cornel Ticarat" <carbex@rdsor.ro>
To: "Stoves Crest Org." <stoves@crest.org>
Subject: Web page addresses demand.
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:52:33 +0200
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

--EAA25771.984142552/shl2.solarhost.com--

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Fri Mar 23 09:23:00 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Torrefying trash...
Message-ID: <8b.416fcd3.27ecb2c8@cs.com>

Glad to hear of the success of converting "biomass trash" to charcoal.

Charcoal is a wonderful fuel, but you lose 60-70% of the biomass energy on
conversion.

Torrefied biomass is made by heating biomass to about 250C, at which point it
loses mostly water and CO2 and a little energy forms. The energy content
goes from 18 MJ/kg to about 22 MJ/kg and the smoky volatiles convert to a
char like material, but you still have 80-90% of the original energy. A
group in Columbia burned it instead of charcoal and found it slightly more
smokey than charcoal, but much better than biomass. The biomass also loses
most of its strength, so is much easier to make into charcoal-like
briquettes.

You might try experimenting with torrefaction to make fuel briquettes.....

Please report back....

Yours truly, TOM REED

PS By the way, where are the Pune papers, publicationwise?

Dear Mr. Karstad,
dry leaves of sugarcane, wheat stover, stalks of safflower and mustard, as
well dry leaves of trees are difficult to burn directly in a wood burning
stove and are therefore ideal candidates for charring. After adding a
binder to the char (cowdung or starch paste), briquettes are made by using
an extruder or by manually forming balls, which are dried in the sun.
Because this operation requires sunlight for drying, it can be done only
during the dry period of the year (about 8 months). By using our process,
a rural family can earn annual net profit of about Rs. 100,000 (US$ 2000),
or a monthly income of Rs. 8000, which compares well with that of a white
collar worker in a city. In our cost calculation, the cost of the raw
material is taken as zero, but there is a component of collection charges,
if the material lies scattered in the field, as in the case of leaves of
trees or leaves of sugarcane.
Dr.A.D.Karve
President,
Appropriate Rural Technology Institute
Survey No. 13, Dhayarigaon
Pune 411 041, India

From mheat at mha-net.org Fri Mar 23 18:36:14 2001
From: mheat at mha-net.org (Norbert Senf)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: grass biofuel pellets
In-Reply-To: <8b.416fcd3.27ecb2c8@cs.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010323183254.00df2ba0@mha-net.org>

The following article came through today on the Energy Probe Research
Foundation list. Thought it might be of interest to members of this list
....... Norbert
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grass Biofuel Pellets: Assessing the potential to respond to North
America's energy concerns
March 23, 2001
by R.Samson, R. Jannascha and T. Adams

Introduction
Unprecedented opportunities for biofuel development are occurring as a
result of a combination of factors including: rising oil, natural gas and
electricity costs, energy security concerns in the US, and the need to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 1.1 billion acres of farmland in North
America could help mitigate these concerns if currently viable biofuel
production systems were expanded.

In most agricultural regions, warm season grasses such as switchgrass can
be successfully grown at a cost of USD $2-$3/GJ. Much of this farmland can
collect 100-250 GJ of energy per hectare with existing production
technology and plant materials. Efforts have been made to produce power and
liquid fuels from this material, but the development strategies
demonstrated so far appear to be sustainable only with subsidies.
Converting this feedstock into a viable energy option suitable for
widespread application requires an energetically efficient, economical, and
convenient energy transformation pathway to meet consumer energy needs.

Finding Energy Farming's Comparative Advantage
The recent development of a "close coupled" gasifier pellet stove capable
of burning moderately high ash pelleted agricultural fuels provides a
completely new fuel cycle for energy farming development [1]. When burned
in the gasifier stove, pelleted switchgrass provides fuel conversion
efficiencies and particulate emissions in the same range as modern oil
furnaces. Each GJ of grass pellet energy delivered to consumers thus
directly substitutes for one GJ of delivered oil and can be utilized on a
large scale without significant air pollution. The pelletized grass biofuel
systems builds on, and is likely to overtake, the existing wood pellet
heating industry, which is rapidly developing without any significant level
of government intervention.

Pelletized grass biofuel is poised to become a major fuel source because
this fuel pathway is capable of meeting some heating requirements at less
cost than all available alternatives. The cost-effectiveness of pelletized
grass as a fuel results from:
* efficient use of low cost marginal farmland for solar energy collection

* minimal fossil fuel input use in field production and energy conversion

* minimal biomass quality upgrading which limits energy loss from the feedstock

* efficient combustion in advanced yet modestly priced and simple to use
devices

* replacement of expensive high-grade energy forms in space and water heating
Contrary to the prevailing wisdom that reducing greenhouse gas emissions
will raise societal energy costs, pelletized biofuels can provide consumers
with lower and more stable heating costs while dramatically cutting
greenhouse gas emissions. Given that agricultural commodity prices are
declining in real dollars, pellet fuels are likely to become cheaper over
time. By contrast, wood-based pellets have been rising in cost due to
ongoing improvement in industrial wood utilization which is reducing the
waste fraction of delivered roundwood. Furthermore, the development of a
grass pellet biofuel industry has great potential to revitalize the rural
economy of North America by absorbing the surplus production capacity of
the agricultural sector and cutting on-farm fuel costs in heating intensive
sectors like green houses.

The Potential for Energy Farming with Grasses
Of the farmland in North America (932 million acres in the US and 168
million acres in Canada), we estimate that 150 million acres could be
dedicated to energy farming without appreciably affecting North America's
food production capacity. Assuming biomass energy crop yields are 50%
higher than the current harvested hay yields, harvested perennial grass
yields of 5.9 and 8.1 tonnes/ha in Canada and the US respectively can be
expected.

By energy farming 130 million acres in the US and 23.4 million acres in
Canada, a total production capacity of 424 and 55 million tonnes could be
achieved in the two respective countries. Assuming grass fuel pellets
contain 18.5 GJ of energy/tonne, 8.9 billion GJ (an energy equivalent of
1.5 billion barrels of oil) could be produced each year from energy crop
production on 14% of North American farmland. With U.S. crude oil imports
of approximately 3.4 billion barrels per year, the U.S. could displace the
equivalent of 39% of its oil imports by growing biofuels on 14% of its
farmland.

The Economics of Pelleted Biofuels
The most promising regions to develop a grass pellet fuel industry are
those where hay production costs are low (generally indicated by low land
rent) and heating costs are high due to a long winter heating period and
high fossil fuel costs. Based on hay prices, land costs and switchgrass
performance data in North America, and the relative winter heat costs of
the various regions of North America, the best regions are the states of
North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the
provinces of Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec.

An ideal location for a biofuel pellet industry is the province of
Manitoba. This largely agricultural region has amongst the lowest hay
prices in North America and no indigenous fossil energy reserves. The
spread between delivered heat costs of conventional energy sources and hay
costs is rapidly growing. In real dollars, long-term hay prices remain flat
at USD$2/GJ (USD35$/tonne) while delivered heat costs for natural gas, oil
and electricity are rising and are now in the USD$10-$13/GJ range.

With current pellet production costs estimated to be $2/GJ (USD$35/tonne)
and a conversion efficiency of 80%, delivered heat costs for on-farm and
residential grass pellet fuels are projected to be in the USD$5-$7.50/GJ
range. There are major opportunities for Manitoba households to switch from
electrical heating (used by 32% of households) to biofuel heating systems.
Widespread implementation of this energy substitution strategy would enable
hydro-rich regions such as Manitoba and Quebec to expand electricity
exports into the US market.

Summary
This paper makes the case that the easiest way to move biomass energy ahead
in North America in the future is to focus on the development of pelletized
grass biofuels as a substitute for high-grade energy forms such as oil,
natural gas and electricity in heat related energy applications. North
American energy markets could be profoundly transformed by the development
of a large scale, pelletized grass biofuel industry. As prices continue to
rise for high grade energy forms, low priced farm derived biofuel pellets
will increasingly become the heating fuel of choice for many North American
energy consumers.

References
[1]Samson R, Drisdelle M, Mulkins L, Lapointe C, Duxbury P. The use of
Switchgrass Biofuel Pellets as a Greenhouse Gas Offset Strategy. Bioenergy
2000 Conference, Buffalo, New York, October 15-19, 2000.

Authors
Roger Samson

R. Jannascha Resource Efficient Agricultural Production-Canada, Box 125,
Ste Anne de Bellevue, Quebec, Canada J7V 7P2,
<http://www.reap.ca/>www<http://www.reap.ca/>.reap.ca , Tel (514) 398-7743
Fax (514) 398-7972;

T. Adams Energy Probe, 225 Brunswick Ave. Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 2M6,
<http://www.energyprobe.org/>www.energyprobe.<http://www.energyprobe.org/>org,
tel: 416-964-9223 Fax: 416-964-8239

From woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru Mon Mar 26 01:29:29 2001
From: woodcoal at mailbox.alkor.ru (Yudkevich Yury)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: grass biofuel pellets
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010323183254.00df2ba0@mha-net.org>
Message-ID: <003d01c0b5be$0fd365e0$7d3fefc3@a1g0h5>

Dear Norbert,
I applaud the paper of doctor R.Samson. I think it important not only
for Northern America. This direction can become main. The people will count
time from this paper through 100 years. There is one problem. The grass
contains many fibers. It is a lot of oxides of nitrogen can be formed at
burning. I think it is possible to solve, but it needs to be solved.
Yury Yudkevich, Dr., Assoc. prof.
Sanct-Petersburg State Forest Technical Academy,
Department of Forest Chemical Products
and Biological activity Substunces (Russia)
fone 7+812+5520430 fax 7+812+5500815
5, Institutsky per. St.-Petersburg, 194021, Russia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Norbert Senf" <mheat@mha-net.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 2:35 AM
Subject: grass biofuel pellets

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Mon Mar 26 08:46:42 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: GAS-L: International Holistic Cooking
Message-ID: <92.123874b5.27f0a1cf@cs.com>

I recently mentioned that there were at least 40 countries (probably many
more) represented at the GASIFICATION forum of CREST and probably there are a
like number at STOVES. This represents a unique opportunity to produce a
joint book on HOLISTIC WORLD FOOD AND COOKING PRACTICES.
~~~~~~~~~
Cooking is a cultural as much as a technical activity. I have spoken before
about the fact that a solution to cooking problems in any given country will
depend on a holistic approach to all the aspects of food cooking
simultaneously. You can't solve the stove problem in a country independently
of the kinds of food available, the foods actually cooked, the kinds of fuel
used, the kind of cooking done etc.

We are all motivated in part to improve world cooking and gasification. Each
of us has unique experience in cooking in our own country. I submit that it
would be productive (and fun) to assemble this knowledge through the magic of
Email and Crest into a WORLD COOKING book covering the majority of countries
in the world. If you need more motivation, we will list all the contributors
as authors, making it the most authored book ever.

It is my intention to ask generic questions about the cooking practices and
problems of the world - and my hope that each of you will wish to contribute
answers unique to your own country. These will be assembled to give a
HOLISTIC VIEW of WORLD COOKING. (We could even solicit recipes to dishes
particularly characteristic of each country to appear in an appendix).

I plan to accumulate the Email answers and arrange them in a massive database
table which would give a first crack at understanding - and someday solving
in part - the cooking problems of the world.
~~~~~~
MAJOR FACETS:

Before thinking about filling in a detailed questionnaire, I would like to
solicit comments about the questions. I'll take a first crack at writing the
questionnaire, but I invite all of you to interpolate other questions.

The questions break down into major facets, each of which will have a number
of questions. Please look over just the facets now and see if you can add
some more. These could be chapter headings in the book.

FOODSTUFFS AVAILABLE
Different countries have different foods available for cooking, so we need to
list the broad categories available. Grains, vegetables, pulses (beans,
peas), fruits, nuts, and ???? Many countries are now importing other
foodstuffs or producing new ones that are changing the cooking habits (ie
wheat in India).

TYPICAL COOKED FOODS
Each country has a particular "typical menu" of foods they cook, "meat
potatoes and vegetables" in the 1920s in the U.S.; salads for the underweight
ladies; Mediterranian diets; Vegetarian diets; Pastas (Italy); corn and beans
in Central America; and???

TYPE OF COOKING
I am amazed at the number of types of cooking practiced in different
countries and presumably adapted to the foods formerly available. Boiling
(in water); steaming (heating in a rising column of steam); frying (oil on a
skillet); deep frying, (in oils); baking (in oven); crock potting (long
cooking in a crock-pot, haybox etc.); barbecuing (diffuse radiant heat
source for large pieces of meat); and??? Can we adapt our new stove designs
to the old cooking habits?

RELIGIOUS RESTRAINTS
(Kosher, Fish on Friday, "unclean" foods, ....) And ???

AVAILABLE FUELS
Wood, (sticks, chunks, pellets, ....); dung (cow, ??); electricity; LPG
(propane, butane); natural gas.
and ???

STOVES
Three stone, mud, top down, Rocket, Turbo, ...

MANUFACTURING AVAILABLE
(Ceramics, metal working, mud, ...) and ???
~~~~~~~~

So please look this list over and see if you can think of...

OTHER MAJOR FACETS OF COOKING???

Next step will be to make out a questionairre that can be sent to all our
members to have them tell us about local variences.

Your pal and admirer... TOM REED BEF PRESS

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Mon Mar 26 08:51:26 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Must Read...
Message-ID: <78.1269d839.27f0a1d1@cs.com>

Did you ever wonder why Civilization originated in the Fertile Crescent,
rather than say, California or New Guinea (similar climates, similar wild
crops)?

Jared Diamond addresses this vital question in 400 pages in "Guns, Germs and
Steel" (Norton Press, papaerback, $16).

Since we here are vitally interested in the various kinds of domesticated
foods, we read...

.. reflect that the vast majorityof wild plants are unsuitable for
cultivation for obvious reasons: the are woody, they produce no edible fruit
and their leaves and roots are inedible. Of the 200,000 wild plant species,
only a few thoousand are eaten by humans, and jus a few hunded of these have
been more or less domesticated. Even of these several hundred crops, most
provide minor supplements tour diet and would not by themselves have sufficed
to support the rise of civilizations. A mere dozen species account for over
80 percent of the modern world's annual tonnage of allcrops.

Those dozen blockbusters are the cereals wheat, corn, rice, barley and
sorghum; the pulse soybean; the roots or tubers potato, manioc and sweet
potato; the sugar sources sugarcane and sugar beet; and the fruit banana.
... Our failure to domesticate even asingle major new food plant in modern
times suggewts that ancient peoples really may have explored virtualoly all
useful wild plants and domesticated all the ones worth domesticating.

The book is a history of the rise of (so called) civilizations and why they
occur where they do (and implicitly how they can occur elsewhere).
Fascinating!

(Thanks, Paul Kilburn and I'll get my own copy as soon as I wear out
yours....)

Onward.... TOM REED BEF

From karve at wmi.co.in Wed Mar 28 08:08:33 2001
From: karve at wmi.co.in (karve)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: holistic cooking
Message-ID: <3AC1E1DC.98D6A5D7@wmi.co.in>

Tom,
How about cooking vessels - shapes, sizes, materials and uses?
Regards,
Priya

begin:vcard
n:Karve;Priyadarshini
tel;fax:-
tel;home:91 020 5423258
tel;work:91 020 5442217/4390348/4392284
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://members.tripod.com/ARTI_India/index.html
org:Appropriate Rural Technology Institue (ARTI)
version:2.1
email;internet:karve@wmi.co.in
title:Member
note:ARTI is an NGO undertaking research projects to study, develop, standardise, implement, commercialise and popularise innovative appropriate rural technologies with special emphasis on making traditional rural enterprises more profitable and generating new employment opportunities through introduction of novel business possibilities in rural areas.
adr;quoted-printable:;;2nd Floor, Maninee Apartments,=0D=0AOpposite Pure Foods Co., Dhayarigaon,;Pune,;Maharashtra;411 041;India
fn:Dr. Priyadarshini Karve
end:vcard

From ovencrft at nbn.com Wed Mar 28 13:05:41 2001
From: ovencrft at nbn.com (Alan Scott)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Tom Reeds definitions
Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010328101045.008b3420@mail.nbn.com>

Just a minor point that in Australia during the WW11 the popular name for
the solid fuel (charcoal I think) auto truck and tractor gasifiers was "gas
producers". They were on every car on the runing board or mounted on the
rear luggage rack. They took 1/2 hour to get going and took a car 50 miles
before refuelling was necessary. This was always a good time to boil up a
"billy" of water for a hot cuppa tea and a smoke before continuing on the
way (not easy to find your way as all the road signs were removed to hinder
the Japanese invaders).

Check out the web site for OVENCRAFTERS at http://www.nbn.com/~ovncraft

From J.R.Rouse at lboro.ac.uk Fri Mar 30 04:38:09 2001
From: J.R.Rouse at lboro.ac.uk (Jonathan Rouse)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Smokey photo?
Message-ID: <E14ivKY-0005bB-00@mailer1.lut.ac.uk>

Hi,

I am looking for a photograph for the front cover of a publication on
indoor air pollution (mostly relating to poor stoves, fuels and house
design). Does anyone have any striking images which may be
suitable and which they would be willing to share? I have lots of
photos of stoves but none are very smokey (I have obviously
imporved them all too much) ....

Cheers

Jon
---------
Jonathan Rouse
Research Assistant
Water, Engineering and Development Centre
www.lboro.ac.uk/wedc/

From karve at wmi.co.in Fri Mar 30 23:10:59 2001
From: karve at wmi.co.in (karve)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: new work at ARTI
Message-ID: <3AC559B5.A1409556@wmi.co.in>

Stovers,
I am writting to report on some new work at ARTI.
Soon after the Pune conference, there was a lot of discussion on the
list regarding the Bachat cooker, a cooking device that some of you saw
at Pune. I was a bit surprised that it was considered as a novel concept
by everyone. In India, It is not a new concept. This type of cookers
were common in Indian urban households in my grandmother's generation.
These devices had to take a back seat with the advent of pressure
cookers. A similar design has traditionally been used in the
north-eastern parts of India. In those parts it is called the 'icmic'
cooker.
The icmic is actually a portable metallic stove. There is a fuel
chamber at the bottom, in which one can burn any solid fuel.
Traditionally it is operated on coal or charcoal. On top of the fuel
chamber, there is a cylindrical vessel. One has to pour a small quantity
of water at the bottom of the vessel, and then load it with cooking
pots, stacked one on top of the other. The cylindrical vessel is double
walled, and the heat from the fuel chamber passes through the gap
between the two walls. There are holes in the outer wall near the top of
the cylinder for the hot air to escape. There is a close fitting lid on
the top. The cooking chamber gets heated by the heat flowing all around
it, as well as by the steam generated inside. There is a handle that
allows the stove to be moved even during operation.
We have modified the icmic design a bit, to increase its utility. In
the improved version, the fuel chamber at the bottom can be detached
from the cylindrical 'cooker'. The design of the fuel chamber too has
been modified, so that it can now be used efficiently with charcoal,
pellets, briquettes, wood, etc., either as an attachment of the
cylindrical cooker or as a stand-alone cookstove. One can use the
cylindrical cooker without the fuel chamber on an electic coil or a gas
or kerosene stove. This is basically the bachat cooker.
Our modified icmic works well with the char briquettes that we make
from dried leaves of sugarcane. We have cooked rice, pulses, vegetables,
as well as meat in this stove. One can easily cook for 4-5 people using
just 100 gm of char briquettes.
Regards,
Priyadarshini Karve

From Reedtb2 at cs.com Sat Mar 31 09:17:48 2001
From: Reedtb2 at cs.com (Reedtb2@cs.com)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: new work at ARTI
Message-ID: <6f.13549c0f.27f74076@cs.com>

Good writeup on the Bachat cooker and the ICMIC (is this the old name for
it?)

You said it was displaced by the pressure cooker - certainly an elegant
application of physics to get faster cooking with little excess energy.
Reaction rates double with each 10 C increase in temperature, while cooking
power is primarily proportional to the time for cooking. So ...

I presume one could also make a PRESSURE BACHAT COOKER, a combination of two
ellegant ideas. (But I doubt if anyone will try it...)

Your admirer, TOM REED

In a message dated 3/30/01 9:09:55 PM Mountain Standard Time, karve@wmi.co.in
writes:

From tmiles at teleport.com Sat Mar 31 22:13:30 2001
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:36:50 2004
Subject: Bioenergy Lists Update
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010331190912.020658a0@mail.teleport.com>

Members of CREST Bioenergy Discussion Lists (stoves, bioenergy,
bioconversion, gasification, anaerobic digestion):

Archives:
Solarhost.com, our ISP, has been working on getting the list archives in
working order. Following that they'll implement some of the suggestions
that you have made since we changed list serve software in February.

Reference pages:
You'll find that the bioenergy reference pages are mostly updated with dead
links removed and others added. Let us know if there are links that you
think would be useful to other list members.

Bioenergy: http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/
Charcoal: http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/carbon.shtml
Gasification: http://www.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml

New Lists:
Several lists have been requested. The next lists we intend to create will
be for renewable carbons (charcoal@crest.org) and greenhouse gases
(biomass-ghg@crest.org). The latter will be hosted by the International
Energy Agency Task 38.

New Services:
We would like to create the ability for list members to post electronic
pre-publication papers "preprints" or other original papers to be
downloaded from the web and for comment by other list members. But to do
that we need Sponsors.

Sponsors:
To sponsor a list or contribute to their maintenance contact:
Tayleah L. Jones, Internet and Publications Manager
Renewable Energy Policy Project (REPP)
Center for Renewable Energy and Sustainable Technology (CREST)
1612 K St, NW #202, Washington, DC 20006
202.293.2898; Fax: 202.293.5857
www.repp.org and www.crest.org
Email: tjones@repp.org

Thank you for your patience and for your lively discussions.

Kind 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

BioEnergy Lists: Improved Biomass Cooking Stoves

March 2001 Biomass Cooking Stoves Archive