Dear Bill

You area breath of fresh air in these confused archives.

Humans guess, chemists know!

Tom 

Dr Thomas B Reed
President, The Biomass Energy Foundation
www.Woodgas.com

On Jan 28, 2011, at 4:48 PM, "Bill Klein" <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> Well put, Doug
>  
> I would like to stick my oar into this ever muddier pond.
>  
> Diesel, kerosene, gasoline, petrol, producer gas, syngas, woodgas and a rose .
>  
> We know what these are, but, it seems, some who are not too familiar with the 
> words would do well to learn what each is rather than trying to change 
> something of which they have limited knowledge.
>  
> Get over it and deal with reality!
>  
> East is east and west is west. Producer gas is well known by those of us who 
> spend their lives smelling it. I've made syngas. Like most things, it doesn't 
> smell like producer gas.
>  
> Still not convinced?
>  
> A rose, by any other name is still a rose!
>  
>  
> Respectfully,
>  
> Bill Klein
> 3i  
>    
>  
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: doug.williams
> To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 6:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Syngas, why not just fix it?
> 
> Hi Pete and Colleagues,
>  
> Seeing as you ask, this is what can be offered:
>  
> > This topic sure has taken up a lot of time. 
>  
> We can talk about multiple subjects at the same time on this forum, and you 
> select that which interests you the most. However, there are not many who 
> contribute enough to keep minds interested in the mundane issues like correct 
> use of terminology.
>  
> >Why not just fix it if y'all don't like it the way it is?
>  
> This forum is an interest group and has no mandate from any authorizing body 
> to set standards or definitions. We are also very International in our 
> location, and therefore subject to working within certain set standards, set 
> by our administrations.
> 
> >   Earlier I suggested that the analysis of this mystery gas might fit 
> > into some numbering system, as is done with steel.
>  
> We make gas that already has set boundaries as to it's correct 
> identification, but to create a system based on numbers would require 
> accurate gas analysis for everyone involved. Many factors can affect the gas 
> volumes,etc, depending on the scales of gas production, and fuels used, plus 
> seasonal variations that play havoc with the same process.
>  
> > It seems to me that this group is the right one to do it.
> >  One could at least deal with the top half dozen components, couldn't one?
>  
> Well, we certainly have plenty of  knowledge, but we see only a fraction of 
> those belonging to this Forum contributing informed comment. 
> > 
> > Again, back to the steel analogy--- we don't have any problems talking 
> > about A36, 1018, W1, etc..
>  
> Having been defined by the steel industry, makes it easy for the steel 
> fabricators to use numbers. Shock horror if you aren't aware as an amateur 
> fabricator, and only think of iron,steel, tool steel, stainless steel, so not 
> everyone who talks about the subject, is on the same wave length.  Like any 
> technology, you have to make the effort to learn about the differences, then 
> be more constructive in how you participate, 
>  
> > Maybe, a letter for the top component?
> > Maybe a 2 tier system,; one for those gases with N2 and one for those 
> > without?
>  
> Producer gas, and Syngas identify these two gases, how complicated is that to 
> understand?
>  
> > Maybe someone could at least tell me why this shouldn't be done now?
>  
> Quite simply, it has been done, but clearly some would rather ignore correct 
> definitions for reasoning of their own. The market place remains very 
> confused by how gasification is presented, and the EU took the initiative in 
> 2008-9, to set guidelines that can be used by all involved, and be more 
> informed with gasification projects. It's was a huge job, involved many 
> institutions, and is only a beginning to bring some order into the 
> implementation of gasification. The work has to be seen as on-going, and 
> maybe we can ask Harrie Knoef of BTG to explain their progress, as I have 
> current no on-line reference.
>  
> Doug Williams,
> Fluidyne.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Gasification mailing list
> 
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> [email protected]
> 
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Gasification mailing list
> 
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> [email protected]
> 
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org
> 
> for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
> http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
[email protected]

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

Reply via email to