[Stoves] energy lost in charcoal makinag and briquetting

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Paul and AD

As far as I can see from the descriptions..
1: Both stoves are lit on the top
2:The draft us up in both cases
3: They both make charcoal

It sure looks like me that the basic technology of the stoves is identical.

They could be made from tincanium or pottery. They could have fan assisted 
draft or natural draft. All successful stoves need a secondary air system. 
They could be continuously fed or batch fed.

In a precious discussion, you mentioned that you could burn the charcoal as 
it was generated, but that the charcoal combustion zone became excessively 
hot. With a re-design, you could have a top lit up draft stove that burned 
the fuel to completion, and did not produce charcoal. You could operate the 
top lit up draft stove in either the charcoal producing mode, or in the 
charcoal burning mode, depending on local circumstances

In previous discussions, you were promoting the stove as a "gasifier stove, 
where it was really a gasifier, close coupled to a stove." It seems now that 
you wish to distance the combustion from the gasifier, rather than having it 
close coupled..

The essence of a "Top Lit Up Draft" stove would seem to be that it is lit 
from the top and the draft is up.

Isn't that what a T-LUD is? Wouldn't the technology that you and AD employ 
be such that  both stoves can properly be named "T-LUD Charcoal Making 
Stoves?"

Kevin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "adkarve" <adkarve at pn2.vsnl.net.in>
To: "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" <stoves at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] energy lost in charcoal makinag and briquetting


> Dear Paul,
> the fuel in our charcoal making stove is ignited from the top, but the 
> stove
> is so designed, that one can also feed additional pieces of wood, while it
> is in use. The present model does not allow any control over the fire
> intensity, but it is possible to do so with certain additions and
> alterations to the stove. We are working on it. We are aware of the fact
> that we have to ensure a steady supply of fuel before we launch this 
> stove.
> The entire concept is new, and we shall have to orgtanise the complete 
> chain
> involving fuel production, supply of fuel to users, collection of charcoal
> from the users and selling of charcoal.
> Yours
> A.D.Karve
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul S. Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu>
> To: <stoves at listserv.repp.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] energy lost in charcoal makinag and briquetting
>
>
>> Dear A.D. and all,
>>
>> Congratulations with your charcoal making stove!!!  I prefer that name
>> for your
>> stove instead of the T-LUD designation which is applied to devices that
> have
>> the more separated combustion of the gases in addition to being lit at
>> the top.
>> As Dean's and your own comments have helped us understand, your stove is
> akin
>> to the charcoal making stove that Ron Larson showed to Dean and to you
> (and
>> probably elsewhere) which is without the distinctive upper can/cylinder
> and
>> secondary-air management for gases-combustion that is found in the
> Reed-Larson
>> 1996 documented device.  I am glad that we are clearly distinguishing the
>> different technologies, noting their similarities and differences.
>>
>> Dean commented on the "lazy, red flame" in his experiments with
> Larson-style
>> charcoal making stoves.  Words like lazy and weak are relative and
> somewhat
>> unjustly biased.  Such flames can be highly appropriate for some cooking.
> So
>> maybe "flaccid" or "non-vigous" might be better terms.
>>
>> Anyway, can you describe and comment upon the "vigor" or strength of
>> your flame,
>> and if it is uniform for the duration of the burn?  And can the stove
> produce
>> stronger flames and even less-vigorous flames (that is, does it have much
> of a
>> turn-down ratio)?
>>
>> When I was at ARTI in Phaltan for 5 weeks one year ago, we did not
> identify a
>> reliable supply of acceptable fuels similar to those you described, nor
>> encounter the willingness of many local people to be gathering the
>> fuels as you
>> mentioned.  When you have those fuel supply issues well under control,
>> that will
>> be a great benefit for any and all of the stoves that can utilize those
> fuels
>> well.
>>
>> Paul
>> --
>> Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Geography professor - Emeritus
>> Telephone:  USA-309-452-7072 (residence and office)
>> Internet site:  www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
>> For my gasifier stoves info, go to:
>> http://bioenergylists.org/contributors#Paul_Anderson
>>
>>
>> Quoting adkarve <adkarve at pn2.vsnl.net.in>:
>>
>> > Dear stovers,
>> > the charcoal making stove has solved the problem of energy lost during
>> > pyrolysis of biomass in the process of charcoal making and also of the
>> > energy lost during briquetting of the char. We use small pieces of wood
> in
>> > the charcoal making stove. The pyrolysis gas is used as cooking fuel 
>> > and
> the
>> > charred pieces of wood that are left behind, are used as fuel in the
> Sarai
>> > cooker. Sarai cooker is a steam cooker, but it does not generate
> pressurised
>> > steam. It requires only 100 g charcoal to cook beans, rice, meat or
>> > vegetables for a family of five. It has become quite popular, and we
> have
>> > already sold about 30,000 of them. The charcoal making stove is not yet
>> > under mass production, but it would cost about US$12 when mass 
>> > produced.
>> > Sarai cooker also costs about the same. If a family has these two
> devices,
>> > it would only require a couple of kg of wood pieces every day. This 
>> > type
> of
>> > fuel is free of cost in the villages, because the villagers can use
> pieces
>> > of cotton stalks or pigeonpea stalks. In areas where they do not grow
> cotton
>> > or pigeonpea, they can cut brushwood growing on public lands or
> undergrowth
>> > in forest lands. A shrub called Lantana camara has assumed weedlike
>> > proportions in forests and the foresters are willing to allow people to
> cut
>> > it and take it away.
>> > I had already mentioned the fact that at current prices of wood and
>> > charcoal, by burning about Rs.2 worth of wood in the charcoal making
> stove,
>> > one gets Rs.3 worth of charcoal. So the more wood you consume, the more
>> > money you make.
>> > Yours
>> > A.D.Karve