On 9 October 2011 06:42, Paul S. Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The issue about the TLUD is that its "steady state" can be as a nice stable > cooking fire, but it can also be steady as providing a raging flame. This > can be easily done with simple forced air (FA) methods such as fans and > blowers into the primary and secondary air inlets. And the discussion is > currently focused on heaters for > developed/affluent/with-**reliable-electricity > societies. > > Steady does not mean small nor large. If the high mass stoves need high > heat, the TLUDs can provide it. And with the evident sizes of these high > mass stoves/heaters, there is sufficient room for TLUD fuel chambers > (pyrolytic reactors to create the gases) to have both intensity and duration > (such as for 45 minutes to 2+ hours) with a single batch. > > I would also add that the TYPE of fuel you can use in a TLUD is considerably more flexible in my view than the rocket techniques. The main disadvantage is the difficulty of continuously charging - but a high mass stove obviates the need. Steve
_______________________________________________ Stoves 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/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site: http://www.bioenergylists.org/
