On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:21 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott < [email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Max**** > > ** ** > > Note the first thing they say on the side refers to the cost of > transportation. I see that the product of their process is a ‘charcoal-like > residue’! Because it is …perhaps…charcoal? Do you think? > Well... I try, sometimes. fine charcoal powder has been considered for engines and tested for uses in such... but I was assuming here that the idea would be to direct part of the pyrolysis gasses into sustaining the pyrolysis reaction and other part of those gasses into condensing into tar like fluids... and then further process those fluids into combustible liquid fuels for engines to use without modifications... and to have that process small and portable, low tech and sturdy... still resulting in same amount of charcoal for soil amendment uses, and some amount of heat from process for the heating and cooking uses. Assuming such possibility... it would not be nasty to see companies and research teams competing on who gets the process completed better for their brand name franchise advantages... as long as it leaves room for all sort of small scale local adaptations and competitors, or just local fuel and soil amendment heat making community mills, open source technology (whether the competing companies or their funders planned it so or not). Smaller the fluid particles, more surface area, rapider the tank's local microbe cultures can habitate it and start to do their metabolizing things faster ? MaxT > **** > > ** ** > > *>*... or are we witnessing a biochar + fuels race starting ? **** > > Exactly that, then will come the biomass digesters that want to turn waste > into butanol and so on. It is a wasted resource so people will compete for > it.**** > > Fortunately the poorest people are stuck in the middle of nowhere and are > hard to get to so They will have first dibs on the resource. Good.**** > > Note that they intend for the gases from pyrolysis to be put into a liquid > fuels process, not for process heat or cooking. They are really in the > liquid fuel business not using the gas for heat. And they got $5m to work > on it!**** > > If only stoves research (instead of implementation) could get resources > like that.**** > > Regards**** > > Crispin **** > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > > >
_______________________________________________ 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/
