[Gasification] Mass vs Volumetric density

[mmbtupr at aol.com]

     from   Lewis L Smith

As an energy economist, I would conjecture that whether our emphasis 
should be on BTU's per unit of volume or BTU's per unit of weight would 
depend on the binding constraints of our harvesting, drying, 
transportation, feedstock-preparation and energy-conversion systems. 
For example, BTU per unit of volume is more of an issue for an enclosed 
container than it is for a flat-bed trailer.

Cordially. ###

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Ludlow <mark at ludlow.com>
To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification' 
<gasification at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Sat, Nov 10  3:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Mass vs Volumetric density

You wrote:

Dear Doctor Thomas B. Reed,

   Thank you for the comment. Is very important to clear concepts 
separating
hard from soft. Of course energy contents of dry matter is similar, we 
says
in spanish "cord" ;"stereo" but division is important to clasify uses of
firewood. Soft need less acid to make cellulose than hard then free 
energy
is better for burn with hard and soft is better not only for chemical
processes but using it for breed cattle. Remenber 14 Kilo of sugar cane
yields one kilo ethanol but 17 kilo is one kilo of meat ;what do you 
think
what is better? to drink alcohol or eat meat?



Dear Benjamin,

What do you think is better? Eating meat or drinking rum?

It's a tough call!

Mark


_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list
Gasification at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org



________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - 
http://mail.aol.com