[Stoves] Reducing smoke with steam

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

Dear Philip

Weather-wise being here in Waterloo again is not much better! It will be -23
tonight and that is without the wind chill...

>As I said in my earlier note, I think the
>excess air you have is plenty, and should dominate the smoke removal
>process, so I shouldn't worry too much about the moisture level. 

Then I can try to remove it.  At the moment there are plants going up to
remove the volatiles which is a serious issue because think it will raise
the combustion temperature and the CO.  There is something remarkable about
the coal in the area.

What is happening now is people are paying for 5 tons of 'Coal' but getting
2 tons of water which they have to buy and trot home in small bags.  Then
they pay for cola to remove it.  Unless it is doing something magical, I
would rather not have poor people pay for water as if it was heat.

>getting water out of coal bears a certain resemblance to getting blood from
>stone

In what form is it? I asked that the moisture content of coal in use be
checked as it enters the stoves to see if it has dried out at all between
the mine and the home. No feedback yet.

Burning a small amount of coal at the mine to reduce the moisture content
will pay everyone except the mine owners who now sell water.  They should be
paid for the amount of heat they provide, not tonnage. That is how the
formal sector works.

I just saw a paper from the 15th European Biomass conference where the CO is
measured 'per MJoule energy provided'.

What do people think of that for the testing/rating of a stove?  I liked the
idea then tilted towards 'per kg of dry coal' because it is easy. Coal would
have to be rated for heat content before doing a test.  On the other hand we
want a 'real' answer with respect to efficiency and emissions.

Ideas anyone?

Regards
Crispin

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.12/1203 - Release Date: 30/12/2007
11:27 AM