Paul:
1. I agree with your thoughts below. Thanks for persevering.
2. Can you help answer the questions below on Crispin's note to you.
>> The Quad 2 is one such stove - almost. It uses 1350 g (dry) and gets (got,
>> anyway) a rating of 636g.
>> RWL - Any other data? Amount of char? Any formulas or web sites to
>> visit?
>> The new spreadsheet with corrections does a better job. 4.2.1.
RWL: What are the 4.2.1 values?
>>
>> However if a stove were to make 25% char, it would be back in that category.
RWL: What category?
Thanks. Ron
On Apr 27, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Paul Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Stovers,
>
> I asked Crispin to name the stoves for which the reported results are not
> accurate. And he named one of mine, the Quad 2, which happens to be about
> the ONLY stove for which raw data sets have been made available on the
> Internet.
>
> (So, to the the GACC and EPA and others: My request for more disclosure of
> raw data set is STILL not satisfied, although we have received assurances of
> eventual compliance.)
>
> Unfortunately, Crispin sent his reply only to me. Perhaps he was trying to
> be nice. But I want the cards on the table for ALL stoves, and it does not
> matter if one of my stoves is presented in a bad light (TEMPORARILY). Much
> of this depends on how the data is presented, both in calculations and in
> discussions.
>
> So much talk and so little reality.
>
> I am NOT here to defend or condemn stoves that make charcoal (and they are
> mainly the TLUD stoves). The reality is that they exist, and are
> consistently shown to be among the lowest of biomass-fueled cookstoves in
> emissions of CO and PM .
>
> And they do not require wood as fuel. Those are facts.
>
> Let the discussions continue. But I am happy that others have been doing
> the discussion.
>
> Dr TLUD
>
> Paul S. Anderson, PhD aka "Dr TLUD"
> Email: [email protected] Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
> Website: www.drtlud.com
> On 4/27/2013 2:08 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
>> Sorry for not replying. I am on a job in Palo Alto, CA.
>>
>> The Quad 2 is one such stove - almost. It uses 1350 g (dry) and gets (got,
>> anyway) a rating of 636g.
>>
>> The new spreadsheet with corrections does a better job. 4.2.1.
>>
>> However if a stove were to make 25% char, it would be back in that category.
>> The UNFCCC uses the CCT 2.0 (names it specifically) and that uses the energy
>> efficiency, not the fuel efficiency as the metric to compare on the
>> assumption that stoves do not make char.
>>
>> Regards
>> Crispin travelling
>> From BB9900
>> From: Paul Anderson <[email protected]>
>> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:55:20 -0500
>> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves<[email protected]>
>> Cc: Crispin Pemberton-Pigott<[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [Stoves] FW: REQUEST for complete sets of raw data of cookstove
>> tests.
>>
>> Crispin,
>>
>> You wrote:
>>>
>>> stoves that actually take off 3 tons of biomass per year have been getting
>>> credit for taking only one ton and proclaimed to be ‘better’ and ‘more fuel
>>> efficient’ than a two-ton stove.
>> Please provide an example. If it is a specific stove, then name the names
>> and give the data.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Paul S. Anderson, PhD aka "Dr TLUD"
>> Email: [email protected] Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>> Website: www.drtlud.com
>> On 4/25/2013 10:06 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott wrote:
>>> Dear Paul
>>>
>>> Here is the problem restated slightly better without prejudice re other
>>> biomass:
>>>
>>> If someone is interested in the char, it can be reported – it is in the raw
>>> data set. What Ron is proposing, to reduce the energy in the fuel consumed
>>> by the heat energy available in the remaining char, is akin to considering
>>> the fuel efficiency to be the energy efficiency which is precisely what
>>> created for us a problem in the first place.
>>>
>>> The energy value of the char came from somewhere. Consider a stove that
>>> needs 2 tons of biomass per year to operate. If it produces ¼ of a ton of
>>> biomass energy equivalent in the form of char, fine. Say so. But saying so
>>> does not reduce the two tons of biomass it takes to feed the system. If you
>>> have (as you pointed out) a second stove that can utilise the charcoal,
>>> then that can be viewed as a ‘system’ by all and sundry, but is still does
>>> not change the fact that Stove 1 takes two tons of biomass each year which
>>> is what the reported fuel consumption should be. The impact of a system is
>>> not the same as the impact of a component of that system. The only debate
>>> left is how to report the fuel consumption and by-products.
>>>
>>> What has been happening that is wrong, in my view, is that stoves that
>>> actually take off 3 tons of biomass per year have been getting credit for
>>> taking only one ton and proclaimed to be ‘better’ and ‘more fuel efficient’
>>> than a two-ton stove. Plainly this is not the case and the test method has
>>> to report the fuel consumption correctly. It is a problem that the UNFCCC
>>> methodology (which measures energy efficiency) does not handle this well
>>> and it is being used for CDM trades. People are being cheated.
>>>
>>> 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://stoves.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://stoves.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://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
