Crispin and list: 

Thanks for today's additional information on testing, including the nice 8 page 
report. I read your 8 pager moderately closely, but not real closely because it 
was all on paraffin and ethanol stoves - and I am only interested in stoves 
that might make charcoal. 

One surprise is that there are commercial stoves where you think you are 
turning up or down and the reverse happens. I don't think that could possibly 
happen with a TLUD or BLDD with primary air control. Any explanation? 

I am surprised that they are not cleaner, and are so variable on where they 
operate best - apparently nothing can be predicted? 

I think a summary sheet on the 100 or more stoves tested so far would be very 
helpful . Am looking forward to those that burn or (better) pyrolyze wood. 


Still a few questions below (with truncations). 

<snip> 






>Late last year we trained 20 people from 7 universities in Africa how to 
>conduct basic tests and how to use the spreadsheet. They are being provided 
>some test equipment including a hood. 



[RWL2: Fantastic. Who is paying for this really important addition?] 



That was funded by PRoBEC. 




[RWL2B: Not surprised. The Germans are really doing great things on all aspects 
of renewables and climate. 




>…It looked like a good burn but the CO level was quite high and the designer 
>could not go further without emissions testing. Using only the controllers 
>provided for primary and secondary air, it was possible to reduce the CO/CO to 
>0.5%. 



[RWL3: Sounds like either TLUD or BLDD?] 



Side draft. 



>…We then constructed a slightly modified combustion area which produced a best 
>figure of an additional order of magnitude reduction to 0.02%. 



[RWL: I would have no idea how to make this big a difference with only 
"slightly modified". Can you say a bit more? 



Actually that was discussed in detail – the messages about the depth of the 
fuel bed. The depth was increased by 10mm from 75 to 85. The air supply was 
more than cut in half and the secondary air nearly eliminated. That should 
confuse the biomass burners! J 



>In other cases we have located good potential in stoves that looked average or 
>‘bad’ using this approach. 



[RWL: Same question - what sort of changes? ] 



I was referring to locating performance issues that are detected by running the 
stove at various powers and with various pots and operating procedures. 



Regards 

Crispin 

_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org
http://info.bioenergylists.org

Reply via email to