Tom,

 

Thanks for the observations.

 

Burning forest slash is CO2 neutral at the very least. The benefits when the 
charcoal is used in the forest are in soil health and water quality. No doubt 
there are models that show the net improvement in the carbon cycle from 
carbonizing slash. 

 

Blanket strips could be used just as you have suggested for the turf. Unlike 
the turf the blankets could be reused on several piles. The total cost of 
treatment should be less than using a portable kiln like a modified air curtain 
incinerator ( www.airburners.com ) or a mobile pyrolyzer to make oil 
(http://www.advbiorefineryinc.ca/technology/). 

 

The benefit of using the TLUD approach is to have a cleaner burn than a typical 
earth kiln approach. 

 

You're welcome to come out and stimulate our pyromania. 

 

Happy Holidays

 

Tom     

 

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Reed
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 8:45 AM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification; Paul Anderson; Hugh 
McLaughlin; Kathy Nafie
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [Gasification] TLUD BEST

 

Tom Miles and all

 

First let me reiterate the warning that TLUD charcoal making is not CO2 
negative unless you have also a use for the heat GENERATED in the pyrolysis gas 
fire.  Wood is 50% carbon, and if you get a 20% yield of charcoal, you have put 
30% back in the air as CO2 sooner than if the wood rotted.  So 1 ton of wood 
gave 400 lb of charcoal and (1600x44/12) 5.87 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

 

Unless you cook or generate electricity with the heat, in which case you are 
doubly CO2 negative by replacing propane or other fossil fuel for cooking!

<><><> 

 

I like the idea of the blanket, but not the $1500 it would cost and the time it 
would take to develop.    How about TURF.

 

Classic charcoal at the time of Napoleon ( he burned down the forests to make 
cannons) involved stacking many cords of wood around a central chimney made of 
poles and covering it with turf, leaving a smoke hole at the top.  Small air 
entries were made at the base and fires lit.  For quite a while the smoke was 
white as water vapor was expelled amd the wood dried.  Then the smoke turned 
yellow, as pyrolysis began, and finally blue when the charcoal was burning.  
Then seal the bottom up tight and wait another few days for it to cool.  Strip 
off the turf and you have a beautiful pile of charcoal.  

 

I have been tempted to replicate the above method on a small scale in my back 
yard next  April when we are allowed to burn.  But I would substitute TOP 
LIGHTING with burning off of the pyrolysis gases as they are formed and 
regulation of the burn rate by adjusting the air inlet holes.  Make a TURFTLUD.

 

I hope you will discuss this with your friends at UW.  I would even be willing 
to fly out for a meeting and maybe small tests if you have a secret burn spot.  

 

Onward to more charcoal with cleaner air.

 

Tom Reed,   Dr. PGas

Dr Thomas B Reed 

The Biomass Energy Foundation

www.Woodgas.com


On Dec 17, 2011, at 11:00 AM, "Tom Miles" <[email protected]> wrote:

Tom,

 

The pyromid looks like a good  in-woods approach to converting slash to biochar.

 

Do you think that the pyrolysis blanket that is being developed by Carbon 
Cultures (Jenny Knoth U Washington) can be used to improve the performance of 
the pyromid? 

 

See video and story at: 

http://www.slideshare.net/sblank/carbon-cultures-corps-final

http://www.igert.org/stories/90

http://depts.washington.edu/bioenrgy/

http://www.myscience.us/wire/turning_slash_piles_into_soil_benefit-2011-washington

 

Thanks

 

Tom Miles

 

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Reed
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 6:43 AM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification; STOVES
Subject: Re: [Gasification] gasifier type updarft use rice husk

 

Dear gassers and Stovers

 

Using any size TLUD device including an open PYROMID, and any junk biomass, we 
all have easy access to as much charcoal as we could ever need, for the first 
time in history.

 

Furthermore, Hugh McLaughlin tells me that, while it's not true activated 
charcoal, made with steam or CO2 at 800C, it has significant absorption 
capacity (iodine no 400?) since it is made at 500-800 C.  I hope Hugh or Frank 
will comment.  

 

So we really have no excuse for cleaning up TLUD gas if we wish to.  

 

I'm waiting for a good analysis of TLUD gas.  I suspect after cleaning it will 
have significantly more energy than the typical 5.5 MJ/m3 or 150 Btu/ scf of 
downdraft Woodgas, since the air fuel ratio for pyrolysis is only 1-1.5, rather 
than the 3.5 for complete gasification of the cellulose lignin package that is 
wood.   So, as a first guess, with 1/3 the A/F ratio, I'm guessing 3x the 
energy content, of 4.5 MJ/m3 or 450 Btu/scf.  Compare to natural gas at 1000 
Btu/ scf. 

 

I'd sure like to see some comments from all you practical guys (and dolls?) out 
there.  

 

Onward 

 

Tom Reed.   Dr WoodGas

 

 



Dr Thomas B Reed 

The Biomass Energy Foundation

www.Woodgas.com





_______________________________________________
Gasification 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/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

_______________________________________________
Gasification 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/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/

Reply via email to