Dear Paul
You are looking at things through the wrong end of the telescope. :-)
Char from a TLUD is perhaps 90% Char and 10% ash, while char from a "Full
Combustion Stove might be 1% to 10% of the ash pit content.
One might easily pick out a few larger lumps of char from ash, but sifting
through the ash to get the smaller pieces is indeed a messy job. As you state
below..."I am not arguing a point. I am stating a fact." :-)
The issues here are:
1: Testing "Full Combustion Stoves"
2: Testing "Char making Stoves"
Before you close down the discussion, would you kindly address the following
questions that I have asked you twice previously?
What would you think about the following proposal for "stove testing rules"?
1: Stove Manufacturers shall state whether their stove is a "full burning
stove" or a "char producing stove.
2: "Full burning stoves" shall have a "Fuel Efficiency Test."
3: "Char producing stoves" shall have BOTH a "Fuel Efficiency Test", and an
"Energy Efficiency Test."
Does that sound practical, fair and reasonable to you?
Note that the "Energy Efficiency Test" required for Char Producing Stoves would
require a calorimetric determination of the char production, to confirm the
actual energy content lost to the char. I feel it would be unfair,
un-necessary, and wasteful to burden "Full Combustion Stoves" with the cost and
nuisance of such tests. However, such tests would indeed be meaningful and
helpful for Char making Stoves.
You bring up the point that "... The char can be burned immediately (that is,
not extinguished) in a charcoal stove, or can be extinguished for saving for
later burning or for placement into soil as biochar....". Note that the fuel
Efficiency of a "Char Making Stove" cannot properly be credited with the energy
in the char that was used to fuel a Charcoal Stove. The Charcoal Stove is a
"second stove" and it should be tested for its "Fuel Efficiency", and the
second stove should rise or fall on its own merits. Charcoal used as biochar
ceases to be a stove concern.
Paul Oliver has outlined a wonderful set of circumstances, where people can buy
rice hulls, do their cooking, and sell the char production for more than their
fuel cost. There is certainly a place for "Char Producing Stoves" Is Paul
Oliver's "Char Making Stove" design better than other Char Making Stoves"? A
good set of science based tests would enable the Stove Buyer to decide which
was the best "Char Making Stove" to buy.
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Anderson
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Shields E450c as a way totest char-making stoves(attn:
GACC testers)
Dear Kevin, and info to all Stovers
I am tired of the banter back and forth, but something you wrote really needs
to be pointed out to show that you do not really understand about charcoal
making in TLUD stoves and others that make a relatively high percentage of char.
Kevin wrote:
Recovery of char from ash is a dirty, unpleasant job, and only desperate
people would recover char from ash for re-burning.
Well, the truth is that char from TLUDs actually holds virtually all of the
ash in the char particles (as is done in the traditional making of charcoal
also). There is no need to separate char from ash, and it cannot be done
without burning the char. The char can be burned immediately (that is, not
extinguished) in a charcoal stove, or can be extinguished for saving for later
burning or for placement into soil as biochar.
And if the percentage of ash needs to be calculated (once ever 100 tests
maybe??), it can be easily and cleanly done be separately burning the char to
recover the ash that was in it.
I am not arguing a point. I am stating a fact.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: [email protected]
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: www.drtlud.comOn 10/25/2013 9:11 AM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
List: CC Kevin
I presume Kevin wanted this to go to the full list.
Ron
On Oct 25, 2013, at 7:47 AM, "Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Ron
----- Original Message -----
From: Ronal W. Larson
To: Kevin ; Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 12:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Shields E450c as a way totest char-making
stoves(attn: GACC testers)
Kevin and list
There are many reasons for one test procedure rather than two:
All stoves can produce char. It depends on when and how you stop
their operation.
# Where fuel economy is important, then stoves would be run in a manner
to minimize char production.
I have participated in a lot of stove testing - and users have
always saved their char.
# I would suggest that the stove tests that you have participated in
were structured so that reported results were better when the char was
recovered and its energy content was deducted from the input fuel. Recovery of
char from ash is a dirty, unpleasant job, and only desperate people would
recover char from ash for re-burning. A "Full Combustion Stove" test could
include screening of ash for capture and weighing of char, to show how little
was produced, as a percentage of fuel input. A "low percentage of char
production" would be a great selling point for Stove Buyers wanting to maximize
fuel economy.
Char has value, no matter how little is made.
# That is true only if the char is put to a use where its value is
returned to the Fuel Buyer. A dollar bill has value only if it is exchanged for
goods or services... it has no value if it is torn up and tossed to the winds.
If there is zero char, then there is no extra cost.
# That is true also, but if, as you say above, "...all stoves can
produce char..." then all stoves could be burdened with the extra cost of
detrermination of the energy content of the char produced. A "Full Combustion
Stove" that produced say 1/2% of fuel input weight as char would be required to
do the "char energy content test", the same as a TLUD producing say 30% char.
That makes no sense.
You will not be able to compare between tests using the present
protocol unless you know the amount of char produced.
There are decades of tests with char production records. You
will lose the ability to compare progress if you stop measuring char.
# The Proposed Testing Protocols are based on science and clarity, and
are intended to remove the confusion, inaccuricies, and misdirection assocated
with past testing protocols. Comparing "accurate test results" with "inaccurate
test results" serves no useful purpose.
Some char-making stoves are more efficient (less annual input
material) than many that have no intended production.
# True.
You need the charcoal amount to show that.
# No, you don't. Just measure fuel input required to accomplish a given
"stove task." That alone will tell you what stove is more "Fuel Efficient."
Many experts have Ok'd the existing tests.
# The existing tests have served a purpose in the past. Now, however,
the short-comings and inaccuracies of previous tests are recognized, and are in
the process of being corrected.
Changing the procedures will cost time and money.
# True. However, clear and accurate test results will save the Funding
Agencies and Individual Stove Customers huge amounts of money in the future by
enabling the Purchaser to select stoves that are best suited for their intended
purposes.
Every stove manufacturer should want the charcoal included -
including char makes the efficiency numbers look better (not as good it
could/should, but better).
# This is perhaps a significant part of the problems with the present
stove testing procedures... they were configured by Stove Manufacturers, to
make their stoves look good. Testing protocols are dishonest, if they are
constructed "... to make the efficiency numbers look better..." The Proposed
test protocols are constructed around science, truth, and clarity.
Those arguing for a change have given no good reason for that
change other than saving a small dollar amount.
# One very good reason for changing the present stove testing protocols
is that the proposed stove testing procedures will enable Stove Customers to
purchase stoves that are best suited to accomplishing their targets or goals.
Others who know more about Stoves than I do can give many other good reasons
for improving the Stove Testing Protocol.
Much present stove testing is free to the manufacturer - and they
will/should learn a lot from knowing how much energy is in the char - if they
desire to get rid of it.
# If someone is attempting to build a Fuel Efficient Stove, and if they
see significant char in the ashpit, they don't need tests to tell them that
they are doing something significantly wrong.
"Char in Ash Pit = Back to Drawing Board."
On the other hand, the designer of a "Char Making Stove" will indeed
find tests on char production and energy content very important. However, it is
unfair to burden a Fuel Efficient Stove manufacturer with the requirement to
test the char, when he already knows that char production will cut into the
Fuel Efficiency Rating for his stove.
There are probably more; this list is not intended to be exhaustive.
# I find that:
1: your above points do not justify retaining present Stove Testing
Protocols
2: it is unfair and un-necessary to burden "Full Combustion Stove
Manufacturers" with the cost of testing charcoal for its energy content.
3: that the proposed Stove Testing Protocols will be much more helpful
to the Stove Buyer, and will greatly help the Stove Buyer select a stove that
best meets his wants and needs.
# If you have otrher reasons for wanting to stay with teh present Stove
Testing Protocols, please present them for consideration.
Kevin
Ron
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/
