Ron, Thank you for your comments. In reply to your questions:
3. For the example on Slide #46, I think we can say the "lost" energy is 50%, but we must also say that the potential energy in the unburned char is 20%. If the char is discarded or used for some purpose other than for fuel, such as for biochar, then the "lost" energy is 70%. 4. I believe that we cannot add the "apples" and the "oranges." 5. The best thermal efficiency we have found for a char-producing TLUD stove with low-moisture wood pellet fuel and with a pot skirt was 53% (average of cold-start and hot-start) with the WBT credit for remaining char. Results were published and are available at this link: http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/krsmith/?p=1387 The ratio of energy in remaining char to energy in fuel was approximately 40%. If the char is "excluded" (discarded or used for a purpose other than for fuel), then thermal efficiency is 32%. We can say the "lost" energy is 28% if the remaining char is used for fuel, or the "lost" energy is 68% if the remaining char is not used for fuel. Hope this is helpful. Regards, Jim From: Ronal W. Larson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 5:27 PM To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Jetter, James Subject: Re: [Stoves] Recorded EPA webinar and files posted Jim and "stoves": 1. Thanks for the link (below) to the PPt. Very complete added notes - I guess transcribed. 2. My first question relates to the "apples and oranges" discussion on slide #46, where you give the helpful example of energy into the pot (apples) of 30% and in char (oranges) of 20%, showing a calculated efficiency of .3/(1-.2) = .375 (37.5%). Then warnings about not being legitimate to add the 30 and 20%. I am in support of what you have written. 3. I want to ask on the reverse side of this: What is the inefficiency (lost, useless energy) number? The obvious choices are the reciprocals of the above: 62.5%, 70%, and 50%. I can only justify 50% in my mind. Your choice? I ask to see if char-making stove salespersons would be justified in talking of this (lowest) 50%. 4. A corollary question is - if we don't believe that 62.5% or 70% are justified inefficiency numbers, then what do we call the sum of "apples" and "oranges"? 5. Some char-making stoves are seeing more than 20% char by weight - so maybe "oranges" could be 40%. If 30% still made it to the pot, this would lead to the "main" reported stove efficiency of .3/(1-.4)=.5 (50%) and the choices for inefficiency become 50% (100 minus number to left), 70% (no change, by assumption on apples), and (100-30-40)=30%. This done only to show that the "sales pitch" differences can be larger than in your example. The question is what is the smallest inefficiency numbers you have measured yet for char-making stoves (along with the number of "apples" and "oranges" to come up with that number) Again - thanks for all you are doing. Ron On Sep 21, 2013, at 3:35 PM, "Jetter, James" <[email protected]> wrote: To All, Thanks to those who joined us for the webinar on August 29, and thanks to the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves for hosting. The recorded webinar, presentation slides with notes, and draft spreadsheet have been posted for your information, review, and comments: http://community.cleancookstoves.org/communities/forums/viewtopic/22/33/207?post_id=357#p357 The purpose of the webinar was to: Provide an update on the EPA cookstove testing project Present a format (EPA spreadsheet) for sharing data Discuss test methods Focus on example testing results for a batch-fueled pyrolytic TLUD (top-lit up-draft) stove Solicit further comments on methods, spreadsheet, and data sharing Please let me know if you have any further comments by Oct. 11. My email address is: [email protected] Regards, Jim Jetter _______________________________________________ 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/
