Dear RB OK.... as discouraging as the facts may be, the facts are reality, and they must be dealt with to avoid future problems. 1: Can different species be grown, that have higher Mean Annual Increments of growth? 2: Can the woodlots be managed better? 3: Can cooking practises be changed? 4: Would more efficient stoves help significantly? 5: Can other forms of fuel, or other sources of energy, be used to take some of the pressure off the woodlots? 6: Would some form of "Agroforestry" be possible, to put the land to a higher use, with multi-cropping? ...etc...
Most people like to do things the way they have always been done. They can't expect different results if they do things the same way they have always done things in the past. The cruel facts are that if they want different results, then they will have to find changes that are acceptable to them, OR choose to live with the consequences of their present practises. Those seem to be the cruel realities. Best wishes, Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] ; [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 7:38 AM Subject: planting trees I think the maximum you can grow, if the land is totally dedicated to tree growth and fire wood production is about 20 tons per hectare per year. Our Maasai women use about two tons of wood a year each, and that is with a pretty good stove. before our stove they were using 5 tons per year for each house. so on a hectare of dedicated wood growing land, we could grow the wood for 10 houses. this may seem discouraging. not many rural areas can afford to set aside tree growing space like this. I know the Maasai can't. -----Original Message----- From: Kevin <[email protected]> To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 2:29 pm Subject: Re: [Stoves] Making smoke in 2013? Dear Teddy ----- Original Message ----- From: Cookswell Jikos To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:14 AM Subject: Re: [Stoves] Making smoke in 2013? Hi All, Would anybody be able to clarify from an emissions standpoint, (and honestly I am not sure I understand it completely) is wood smoke is 'food' for tree's? # The first thing to do is define "smoke". :-) While "pyrolysis products" may be beneficial for seed treatment or insect control, I am guessing that the quantity, distribution and lack of permanence of "pyrolysis products distributed as a result of poor combustion" would likely have a minimil beneficial or detrimental effect on plant growth. # The "products of complete combustion" of biomass are basically CO2 and water vapour. Additional CO2 in the atmosphere will be beneficial to plant growth only if existing CO2 levels were the constraint to plant growth. I am guessing that this is seldom the case... the limiting factors are probably more likely to be Sunlight, Moisture, and Nutrients. If so, take my small stove business - if I sell 100 stoves in a month that in total will use say - 1 ton of biomass (charcoal so perhaps 7 tons of wood). How many tree's would myself and my customers need to plant every month to not only achieve a positive feedback loop of increased biomass but be able to 100% reduce the emissions produced? # The number of trees you need to support a stove depends on the "Mean Annual Increment of Growth" for the trees being used for fuel. For example, if heating my home requires 5 cords of wood per year, and the "Mean annual increment" for spruce trees is 1 cord per acre per year, then I would need an area of 5 acres to grow the trees required to heat my home with no net increase or decrease of the wood on my woodlot. If the woodlot is managed in a sustainable manner, then it is unlikely that "re-planting" will be required, in that the trees will naturally "re-seed" the harvested areas, or, depending on the species, the trees will send up clones from their roots. Note that if one is not using "Sustainable Management Practises, there will never be a gain in wood availability, no matter how many trees are planted. Is this even possible? I feel very strongly that woodfuel stove manufacturers and users should be responsible for replanting, growing and advocating tree planting as a future source of renewable energy, if only for our own job security. I am also very interested in finding out how one can actually measure the number of tree's needed to be grown compared to the number of stoves in use? (especially if the woodlot is managed under a pruning/coppicing regime). # It is not that difficult. You need to know the amount of wood consumed per year per stove, and the "Mean Annual Increment" of growth for the tree species being grown in the particular area, and the percentage of the "Mean Annual Increment" (MAI) that actually gets used as fuel. For example, if the MAI is 1 cord per acre per year, and if half the wood is sold off as logs, then 2 acres would be required to yield 1 cord of fuel wood. many thanks for any thoughts, # I hope this is helpful. Best wishes, Kevin Teddy Cookswell Jikos www.cookswell.co.ke www.facebook.com/CookswellJikos www.kenyacharcoal.blogspot.com Mobile: +254 700 380 009 Mobile: +254 700 905 913 P.O. Box 1433, Nairobi 00606, Kenya On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <[email protected]> wrote: Dear Paul I find this sentence odd so perhaps you can explain it a little further: >And TLUDs are not intended to be charcoal burners. I am not sure this is true. The TLUD's used in the Ulaanbaatar clean air programme are definitely intended to burn char and they do it very well. More than 100,000 of them have been sold just in that city. I am drawing a distinction between the devices that burn high and low carbon fuels, basically. I hear you saying that biomass burning TLUD's aren't designed to burn char but that is the choice of the designer, not a 'feature' of TLUD's. If you change the superficial velocity of the air supply it changes from one to the other. Is it possible that here are more TLUD's burning char (high carbon) than there are TLUD's making it? It would be interesting if that was the case, right? I know there are reasons provided for making and saving the char and a whole enthusiast sector devoted to the matter, however it would be unfortunate if the acronym TLUD was tied to only one form of combustion, while the world merrily went ahead with two. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks 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/
_______________________________________________ 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/
