Lloyd,
1. You should change the Subject line to reflect the topic.
2. I think Crispin is not subscribed to the Gasification Listserv, so I
am sending my reply plus your message to him.
3. What you describe (including making biochar) is most closely met by
the Chip Energy Biomass Furnace. See www.chipenergy.com The
realities are:
a. $50,000 for the full big system; To fit on a pallet-size
footprint, the $15,000 for the stripped system is without heat
exchanger/water pump, etc.
b. With 4 units commercially made, we know that it works. However, it
is a unit that should have support including some R&D for the specific
application/location; it is not a "plug and play" system.
c. Your expectations about using a wide variety of dry biomass fuels
would require R&D at the expense of the operator. Fuel from shipping
pallets sounds easy, but the metal nails and bolts prohibit "chipping"
and require a grinder with magnet to extract the metal (significant
effort/investment).
Chip Energy is interested in such a project, but it is a project, not
just a turn-key product. Contact me for further details.
[email protected]
Please let us know if there are other candidates for that project.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: [email protected]
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: www.drtlud.com
On 5/20/2014 2:14 PM, Lloyd Helferty wrote:
Crispin (and all), [CC; gasification list]
This is a very interesting conversation regarding ND TLUD power
(heat) variability and its implications, and (as you know) I do have a
keen interest in this topic since being introduced to the TLUD 'stove'
concept back several years ago (by Dr. Anderson, when he came to
Ontario to demonstrate his small "Champion" stove and similar devices
at the Laepple farm in June 2009), especially since the TLUD is one of
the few simple technologies that can produce biochar cleanly at a
small (or possibly at a medium) scale for local use ~ while producing
(hopefully) useful amounts of energy (heat).
What I am working on right now here in Toronto might interest you or
others on this list.
I have been approached by a business in Toronto that would like to be
able to implement a small-scale char-making technology at their
manufacturing site in the Toronto area (GTA) that would utilize the
(dry) 'residuals' from their food production process in order to make
heat energy that could lower their (fossil) energy use [natural gas
costs] while also turning their (dry) 'food waste' into a biochar
(and/or high-char ash) that could be re-integrated back into a (wet)
food composting system (vermicompost) that is already being
implemented onsite at their operations here in the city.
The primary use of the heat would be to heat up water, but it would
also be welcome if it could be used in the preparation of the 'raw'
food (drying, roasting certain products to a certain temperature --
i.e. an 'oven') that goes into their recipes, which includes
'fair-trade' sourced (temperate and tropical) foodstuffs that have
been either grown or imported into Canada in bulk, and which are
prepared on-site (including de-hulling etc. of several of the key
ingredients).
Essentially, this company would like to know if it might be possible
to come up with either a "customized" or an "off-the-shelf" system
that has a fairly small footprint (about the size of a shipping pallet
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallet#Dimensions>, or ~16 sq. ft = 40"
× 48", as commonly used in the food industry) that would be able to
meet the following requirements:
* Provides space heating and/or hot water heating (for their
kitchen), with the possibility also for using the heat for
"roasting" their ingredients (@ ~140 Celsius max. -- possibly
using a heat exchanger, if necessary).
* something flexible and rugged
* can accept multiple fuel inputs (different sized feedstocks,
different moisture/energy content -- not just woodchips)
* no smoky emissions (after-burner, if necessary) so that it can
meet local emissions regs
Of course they are interested also in custom of "commercial"
gasifiers [as well], but small systems (stoves) that could do the job
they are seeking might suffice, although they probably want the system
to be as automated (hands off) as possible to that the minimum amount
of human intervention is required... although it would need to be as
low-cost as possible (almost a "DIY" system -- they could actually
make it themselves since they do have some expertise, including a
machinist & a "master builder" who has built and operated a series of
gassifier stoves for several years and "who is more than capable of
manufacturing" something -- if they had the 'plans' for an open-source
system/design that could do the job).
Ideally this company would be interested in seeing 2 or 3 designs
that might work for them (a few devices that they could initially
assess)... so that they could work with the designers to get more
details. They would then choose a final design that they would then
incorporate into their head office (operations), but then possibly
also into a "franchise system" that they are designing (and that would
operate like a "food truck" would in /any/ city ~ except instead of
the truck being electricity or natural gas or propane-powered, the
'portable' food production/processing system would operate partially
off of its own 'waste'... and/or wood chips [or pellets] that could be
produced or supplied locally ~ possibly even from chipped shipping
pallets that have /only/ transported food products -- i.e. clean,
'food-grade' "green waste" like the type that can be found at the back
of nearly every supermarket in the country... including all the broken
ones.)
Regards,
Lloyd Helferty, Engineering Technologist
Principal, Biochar Consulting (Canada)
www.biochar-consulting.ca
48 Suncrest Blvd, Thornhill, ON, Canada
905-707-8754
CELL: 647-886-8754
Skype: lloyd.helferty
Steering Committee coordinator
Canadian Biochar Initiative (CBI)
CURRENTS, A working group of Science for Peace
http://www.scienceforpeace.ca/currents/
President, Co-founder & CBI Liaison, Biochar-Ontario
National Office, Canadian Carbon Farming Initiative (CCFI)
Organizing team member, 2013 N/A Biochar Symposium:
www.carbon-negative.us/symposium
Member of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council (DWRC)
Manager, Biochar Offsets Group:
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=2446475
Advisory Committee Member, IBI
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1404717
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42237506675
http://groups.google.com/group/biochar-ontario
http://www.meetup.com/biocharontario/
http://www.biocharontario.ca
www.biochar.ca
"Producing twice as much food with diminishing resources, without further loss of
natural habitats and biodiversity and in a changing climate may be the greatest challenge
facing humanity."
- Lloyd Helferty
On 2014-05-19 7:38 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
Dear Roberto
I agree with your analysis. There is a lot of merit in keeping the
secondary flame in close proximity to the top of the fuel bed. The
most important is that the secondary flame is harder to put out with
a slight breeze (because it relights). The second is that when the
primary air is turned down to control the power, the secondary flame
is able to remain hot enough to stay alight. Combined with external,
down-drafting secondary air preheating (not like the Peko Pe) one can
maintain the secondary air feed ration under different primary air
conditions.
Read and heed! TLUD's are not succeeding in meeting the turndown
ratios required by ordinary cooking. To burn clean at different burn
rates, whatever the fuel, you have to control both the primary and
secondary air flows.
While a 'double controller' can work, turning the secondary air down
at exactly the same time as the primary leads to a 2-3 minute period
of very high PM and or CO and VOC's because of the retained heat in
the fuel bed and stove body. This is worse if the combustion chamber
is ceramic or cast iron.
If the secondary air feed it an automatic, buoyancy-driven ?supply,
it will draw in additional air as required during the cooling-off
period. This explains the strange layout of the air supply in a Vesto
Stove which tried to address the problems inherent in David Hancock's
(very advanced at the time) 1984 Tsotso Stove (which is still in
production).
Regards
Crispin in Seoul enjoying spring
<snip>
_______________________________________________
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/
