[Stoves] Safety of stoves and conflicts of interests

[Philip Lloyd]

Dear Paul /all

I think a measure of relative safety is needed, and based on my experience,
I think it should be the rate at which fuel is burned after an incident.
Candles don't easily give rise to large quantities of fuel being burned
immediately; LP gas leaks are not very impressive; but when liquid fuels hit
the open air in pint-sized quantities, then you can have a real problem on
your hands, because the rate of energy release can reach nasty levels.  That
is true for all the liquid fuels (and I include LPG) and for atomized solids
(ever seen what a bag of flour can do?). 

So the hazard of the Lily, on this measure, is the risk of spilling a few
hundred ml of hot alcohol.  The energy release will be fast, the power
significant, and the risk of significant  fire starting rapidly will be
high.  If one can design it so the alcohol can't spill, then the risk drops
significantly.

Hope that helps.

Philip


-----Original Message-----
From: stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Paul S. Anderson
Sent: 03 September 2007 04:24
To: crispin at newdawn.sz; Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Crispin
Pemberton-Pigott
Cc: Harry Stokes - alcohol - Pennsylvania; 'Discussion of biomass cooking
stoves'
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Safety of stoves and conflicts of interests

Quoting Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at gmail.com>:

> Dear Dean and Paul
>
> The issue of being legal is important.  In some places you sell 
> anything that is not illegal (the 'American' model), in some only what 
> is legal (the 'Soviet' model).

And I guess we have seen how successful the "Soviet" model was for getting
innovations to the market.   Not!!!!
...
>
> Paul can sell his Lily stove anywhere that is it not illegal to do so.  
> That doesn't make it 'safe. Were there to be even the most basic set 
> of safety standards in force, it would include a requirement not to 
> leak if tipped over while burning, because that is how nearly all 
> stove-initiated fires start.

I am interested in safety, but there are limits.  If an operating Vesto
stove is tipped over, flaming fuel could fall out of the top and it could
start a fire. If an ignited matchstick is dropped, it could start a fire.  A
child could get to matches, but matches are not banned.  The Onil stove
cannot be tipped over, but a child could pull a burning stick out of the
Rocket hole.  If ANY of the self-pressurizing alcohol stoves (beverage-can,
Trangia, Lily, are there any others?), there will be spillage of the
alcohol.  No explosions, but real fire.
It is not a toy.  A three-stove fire is not a toy.  Is a Lily stove more
dangerous than a three-stove fire?  I say it is not even as dangerous.

I do not like the scare-tactic about LPG associated with the photo at that
http://www.paraffinsafety.org/   website that you mentioned.  Maybe the LPG
advocates have an opposing website with scarry info about paraffin stoves.
>
> There are very expensive paraffin stoves for use in sailboats that 
> have very low emissions and are really safe even in violent seas. 
> So...why haven't they been brought to the mass market?  They cost is 
> now related to the tiny sales volumes so it looks like an opportunity
going begging.

Correction:  I believe those are alcohol stoves, not paraffin/kerosene
stoves (unless you can cite specific stoves).  The company Dometic AB has an
established business for marine-stoves, and part of the reason for burning
alcohol on boats is that mere water can extinguish the flames, instead of
water spreading the flames as occurs with kerosene or petrol-based fuels.  
One of the
great plus factors of the Dometic CleanCook stove (with alcohol) is its
impressive insistance on safety (Dometic is a Swedish company.).  But the
stove price has been high.  They are working on getting it lower.  Project
Gaia people can give full info.  (I paid about US$140 for a single burner
Itago unit in the USA a couple of years ago;  The Cleancook two-burner in
Ethiopia is now about $80;  A single burner version of the Cleancook is to
be perhaps $50, or maybe go as low as US$30.)  I believe that the Lily
burners plus associated stove structure would be one-fifth or one-tenth.
But, AT PRESENT the Lily stove is not as pretty nor as safe as the
CleanCook.  I did not say it was unsafe.

Paul


----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Illinois State University Webmail.



_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
Stoves at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org