Hi Kevin and All,
I would like to suggest even another way of looking at things. As an example of how the toolbox might work I will use a simple example. We have ten pellet STOVES and we want to determine in order of best to worst. Our means of 'measuring success' is the WBT. So we have the variable and the measurement. To make this work all the other variables in front of the LINE needs be controlled. The LINE is in order as below: Fuel > Fuel Manipulation > STOVE > Utensils > Work Manipulation > Work Done (food, water, WPT, stack emissions etc) So to test a group of Pellet Stoves we need all variables before STOVES to be controlled. Fuel and Fuel Manipulation need be controlled. Then we have our variable- the STOVES. Then we determine success using the WBT so the Utensil and Work Manipulation need to be controlled and that is easy as it is part of the WBT. Not as easy if cooking rice is measure of success. How the Tool Box Works: Fuel: The Pellet Fuel Institute has a rating system for pellet fuel. We test moisture, ash, density, energy, hardness, length & diameter, fines, chloride. Based on these results pellets are rated as Super Premium, Premium, Standard, and Utility. So we find the pellet fuel used in a part of India (where we are distributing the stoves) rates as Standard so we use in our labs pellets that are Standard Rating. Fuel Manipulation: This is how the person operating the stove handles the fuel. For pellets it could be part of the stove having a hopper or worm drive feed. It could be filling a TLUD and tapping on ground twice or simply 'following manufacturer instructions'. STOVES - our variable Utensil - copper bottom, cast iron, thin, size etc. For the WBT these are stated. Work manipulation: How a person does the work. Moving pots, adding water, checking doneness etc. For the WBT this is already Controlled. Work Done - WBT is our measure of success. Could have been stack emissions or a good tasty meal or fuel efficiency. But for this example we are using WBT. When we are done testing the stoves and basing the results on the WBT we can rate the stoves as best to worst using this scheme. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Rating fuels is a big one. I think coal is already rated(?) and it should be easy to design a rating system for rice hull fuel, wood chips, and Richards briquettes. For biomass it becomes tricky as there are so many variables but to have this Tool Box work it must be done or that variable 'noise' will mask over any measure of success. So we can work on all parts at the same or different times but we cannot use the system until we have completed all the parts on the LINE *before* the Variable and the Measurement. Therefore a classification for Fuel is most important because nothing gets done until this is completed. Then how the fuel is handled should follow a specific protocol that simulates what's done in the field (as Paul pointed out). Regards Frank From: Stoves [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2013 10:41 PM To: [email protected]; Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Hugh McLaughlin; Bob Fairchild Subject: Re: [Stoves] [biochar] Understanding FUEL EFFICIENCY vs Energy efficiency Dear Paul I would like to suggest a different way of looking at things.... look at a stove through the eyes of the customer. (The "Customer" is the person or Organization that pays the Manufacturer for the Stove.) The fundamental question should be: "What does the Customer want?" Does the Customer want the stove to produce biochar? Does the Customer want the stove to have the least fuel input to accomplish a stated task? Does the Customer want to minimize products of combustion vented into the living space? Does the Customer want the stove to provide a space heating benefit for the stove user? Does the Customer want a stove that requires extended burn times between refuelling, and a minimum of attendance? Does the Customer want a single firing rate throughout the burn, OR, a "Two Level Firing Rate capability, OR a large range of firing capabilities? etc.... "Efficiency" is basically a measure of "Resource Input to accomplish a desired task" It is not the purpose of "testing" to promote a particular technology or philosophy, but rather, to measure the effectiveness of accomplishing a given task of importance to the Customer.. "The Customer is the King." Proper Testing Protocols should allow a Customer to test a range of stoves, under a variety of circumstances, so that he will be able to select the stove that best meets his requirements. Best wishes, Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Anderson <mailto:[email protected]> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <mailto:[email protected]> ; Hugh McLaughlin <mailto:[email protected]> ; Bob Fairchild <mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 1:50 AM Subject: [biochar] Understanding FUEL EFFICIENCY vs Energy efficiency Dear Stovers and Biochar makers, We are NOT sufficiently emphasizing that TLUDs/char-maker stoves can use fuel other than stick wood. When burning briquettes and pellets and cobs and shells (which most other stoves cannot burn very well), we are NOT burning tree-sourced fuel. Crispin correctly says that a kg of wood in and pyrolyzed is no longer wood, and therefore is FUEL used, and that relates to FUEL Efficiency. TLUDs can consume more wood because they are converting some of that wood into charcoal. That is different from ENERGY efficiency, which can allow calculations for the energy in the charcoal that is not used. Especially in char-making stoves, energy efficiency is better than the fuel efficiency IF USING WOOD. But if the fuel is not wood, then the WOOD-FUEL efficiency is 100% (none was burned in the cooking of the meal), and the ENERGY efficiency might be very good, while the FUEL efficiency (burning ag residues, dung, etc) might be low in comparison with other stoves, but no trees were cut or burned. About the above, there will need to be some education given to the stove community (including GACC and manufacturers and governments). WHAT fuel is burned does make a difference if FUEL efficiency is an important criteria when evaluating stoves. Just because wood is the traditional fuel used in stove testing does not mean that stoves that can also burn OTHER biomass should be judged on the WOOD-FUEL efficiency calculations. For places like Haiti, Rwanda, and many large zones of numerous large countries, to be able to cook WITHOUT FOREST DEGRADATION should be a major reason for choosing TLUD stoves. Having written about this here does not mean that the message has reached the decision makers and those who report test results on cookstoves. And the makers of "stick-wood-burning stoves" are unlikely to want to tell this message to others. Because the GACC is about stoves AND FUELS, I hope that proper recognition can be given in the discussions and decisions about the stoves that can have 100% avoidance of cutting wood, if that is important. Paul -- Paul S. Anderson, PhD aka "Dr TLUD" Email: [email protected] <mailto:psanders%40ilstu.edu> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072 Website: www.drtlud.com __._,_.___ <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJybjg1a290BF9TAzk3MzU 5NzE0BGdycElkAzIyNDM4MDUyBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNzQxODYxMgRtc2dJZAMxNDg3NQRzZWMDZnR yBHNsawNycGx5BHN0aW1lAzEzNjUzOTY2NDk-?act=reply&messageNum=14875> Reply via web post <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Re%3A%20Understanding%20FUEL%20EFFICIENCY %20vs%20Energy%20efficiency> Reply to sender <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Re%3A%20Understanding%20FUEL%20EFFIC IENCY%20vs%20Energy%20efficiency> Reply to group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmbm80dmxzBF9TAzk3MzU 5NzE0BGdycElkAzIyNDM4MDUyBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNzQxODYxMgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN 0aW1lAzEzNjUzOTY2NDk-> Start a New Topic <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/message/14875;_ylc=X3oDMTM3ZHM0bW9yBF 9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIyNDM4MDUyBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNzQxODYxMgRtc2dJZAMxNDg3NQ RzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzEzNjUzOTY2NDkEdHBjSWQDMTQ4NzU-> Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: . <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJnMGxtbnFuBF9TAzk3 MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIyNDM4MDUyBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNzQxODYxMgRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJy cwRzdGltZQMxMzY1Mzk2NjQ5?o=6> New Members 3 <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdmhwNnUxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0 BGdycElkAzIyNDM4MDUyBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNzQxODYxMgRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1l AzEzNjUzOTY2NDk-> Visit Your Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbGQ0amJwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIyN DM4MDUyBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNzQxODYxMgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM2NTM5NjY0O Q--> Yahoo! Groups Switch to: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Form at:%20Traditional> Text-Only, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Digest> Daily Digest . <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe . <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use . <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20r edesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback . <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=22438052/grpspId=1707418612/msgI d=14875/stime=1365396649> __,_._,___
_______________________________________________ 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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
