July 2004 Gasification Archive

From a31ford at INETLINK.CA Sat Jul 3 11:06:44 2004
From: a31ford at INETLINK.CA (a31ford)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: FW: Another way for turkey butts?
Message-ID: <SAT.3.JUL.2004.100644.0500.A31FORD@INETLINK.CA>

Good Day Matthew, and all.

The key statement in your words "Worrying about the total energy cost of
turning a waste into an energy product seems very unnecessary when it costs
more to dispose of it" is, in my eyes, 100% correct, (Except you still have
to verify that disposal IS more costly, in the first place)....

This is the exact reasoning I have used in going with the "woodchip powered"
CHP system we are now on (testing as we speak).

However there is more to implementing a system than just "profitability".
There are way too many people solely in anything, just for that only reason,
and that is the key factor of how to make something profitable in the first
place. (ya might need to re-read that last line a couple of times :)

If one simply "Dives in" and actually DOES the work, rather than only
speculation, or dreaming, then most people consider that person a fool
(guess that's me), if one dreams of it but does not get involved, then it's
"wishful thinking", but to DO, speculate, & dream, what person is that ? I
would say "totally committed" (again I would say that is me)...

Anyone else on this board "Totally Committed" ??

OBTW Matthew, did you ever get around to building a coffee can test unit ?

Greg Manning,

Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

-----Original Message-----
From: The Gasification Discussion List
[mailto:GASIFICATION@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG]On Behalf Of Matthew Pottinger
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 4:23 PM
To: GASIFICATION@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG
Subject: Another way for turkey butts?

Right on. That is exactly my point of view also. Worrying about the total
energy cost of turning a waste into an energy product seems very unnecessary
when it costs more to dispose of it. In my humble opinon, any form of
re-use, if done in an environmentally responsible manner, is better than
disposal

Whether or not it is profitable and the initial investment required to
implement it seem to be the main concerns to me. I don't see energy balance
as a concern when dealing with waste. Will it make or save money, is what
anyone actually doing this would be interested in.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "hlbrodie" <hlbrodie@BLUECRAB.ORG>
> To: <GASIFICATION@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 10:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [GASL] Another way for turkey butts?
>
>
> > There is no positive economic value of the residual or byproduct (waste)
> > of another process unless there is a buyer for that byproduct. There is
> > no energy or energy cost associated with the existence of that byproduct
> > because the cost of energy for the production from which it is derived
> > is entirely charged to the products that are sold. The byproduct
> > actually represents negative energy and energy cost when there is a need
> > for disposal.
> >
> > So the byproduct should be considered a new source of energy. Any cost
> > to retrieve energy from the byproduct is independent of the origin of
> > the byproduct. The cost of removing energy from the byproduct is
> > affected by the cost of the technology used as well as the economic
> > values of other opportunities to utilize the byproduct .
> >
> > An attempt at an energy balance to compare technologies for energy
> > retrieval from a feedstock has to be within the limits of the actual
> > processes being compared. If we attempt to define energy retrieval
> > efficiency beyond that then where do we stop? For example if we need to
> > build a facility component are we going to account for the incremental
> > energy required to obtain the materials used to manufacture the pipe
> > wrench that was used by a workman? And do we account for the energy
> > required to sustain the workman; get him to the job; or for that matter
> > the long account of energy required for the workman actually existing?
> >
> > We can't make this assessment with units of energy. We make the
> > assessment with units of economic value. Unfortunately, in the
> > development of economic value there is most often a failure to recognize
> > or give true value to direct or indirect impact on others.
> >
> > Herb Brodie
> >
> > Lewis L. Smith wrote:
> >
> > > to Gasifier list from Lewis L.
> Smith
> > >
> > > Oops !
> > >
> > > Full energy cost should also include incremental energy used to
> produce
> > > feedstock.
> > >
> > > Cordially.
> > >
> > > End.
> > >
>

From LINVENT at AOL.COM Wed Jul 7 17:33:47 2004
From: LINVENT at AOL.COM (LINVENT@AOL.COM)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: NY not recognize thermal conversion as renewable
Message-ID: <WED.7.JUL.2004.173347.EDT.>

I am not aware of any regulatory incentives any where to consider bio-diesel
or synthetically produced oils as part of the renewable energy portfolio
allowance. This gets into issues such as tax credits and tax treatment of converted
vegetable oil which is not currently taxed as I am aware of.
The issue of animal residues whether manures or other parts needs to be
addressed. There have been projects which could not get tax treatment from either
State or Federal standards using these materials.
CWT could get some technical crediblity in the marketplace if they published
the yields from their process and interim product analyses. Perhaps those are
available, but without them, the process has many technical skeptics. From
what I can tell, the financial world does not believe them outside of their own
resources.

Leland T. Taylor
President
Thermogenics Inc.
7100-F 2nd St. NW Albuquerque, New Mexico USA 87107 Phone: 505-761-5633, fax:
341-0424, website: thermogenics.com.
In order to read the compressed files forwarded under AOL, it is necessary to
download Aladdin's freeware Unstuffit at
http://www.stuffit.com/expander/index.html

From Mike.Mason at CO2.ORG Thu Jul 8 18:27:14 2004
From: Mike.Mason at CO2.ORG (Mike Mason)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Updraft Gasifiers for combustion - How big an issue is tar?
Message-ID: <THU.8.JUL.2004.232714.0100.MIKE.MASON@CO2.ORG>

Hi,

I am working with a new Stirling engine at the 250kW thermal scale, and
looking to gasify woody biomass. We will have good control of fuel size
specs, though moisture is less easy - some of the wood will be bone dry.
For a variety of reasons it seems to me a simple updraft gasifier is the
answer, with some filtering of fly ash.

Setting aside the issue of filtering for a moment, does anyone have any
experience of updrafts at this scale, and in particular of tar fouling
of the pipe work?

I have plenty of hot air at 750C or below which I can use to keep the
pipe work warm, and the entire unit will be reasonably close coupled so
there will be less than a metre of pipe work and vessels between the
gasifier outlet and the burner inlet. I also have plenty of heat to
inject steam, and can probably ensure the gas stream is relatively
hydrogen rich (I gather there is some suggestion that water/H2 reduces
the problems if they exist).

Many thanks,

Mike Mason

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________

From tombreed at COMCAST.NET Fri Jul 9 07:56:21 2004
From: tombreed at COMCAST.NET (tombreed@COMCAST.NET)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: [STOVES] A kettle that uses much less wood
Message-ID: <FRI.9.JUL.2004.115621.0000.>

Dear ALL:

The storm kettle, the samovar and my gas hot water heater combine unique principles for water heating/boiling that should be used by all of us.

The principles:

Water is the most heated material during cooking. (Hot oil next most...)

Solid fuels (and gas/liquids) requires a small amount of naturla or forced "draft" to burn intensely and efficiently

A chimney can supply this - but who wants to cook ontop of the chimney?

Water (and oil) can be "wrapped" around the chimney for very efficient heat transfer

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Charcoal is an excellent fuel for these devices.

However, either toplit or bottom lit biomass fires tend to produce incompleted pyrolysis gases which are likely to creosote the chimney and reduce heat transfer.

Need a source of secondary air above.

I'm ordering one to tryout in the real world.

TOM REED

> Jeunesse Park from the Small Farm Forestry Newsletter in South Africa
> forwarded this.
> - Crispin
>
> +++++++++++
>
> From: "Jeunesse Park" <jpark@trees.org.za>
>
> I have just been looking up about a kind of water boiler/kettle, something I
> looked it up for a friend of mine who works for the Nepal Forestry
> Commission. I came across your site a while ago and thought you might know
> someone who could use the info.. (eg as you work in the subsahara)
>
> The storm kettle/kelly kettle is a superefficient kettle designed to use
> outdoors, uses much less wood than conventional fires to boil water. The
> kettle has the fire (of paper twigs grass etc) in a chimney within the
> kettle. website: http://www.eydonkettle.co.uk/ a uk company has made them
> since the 1970s, (they were developed in ireland
> in 19th century by fishermen/outdoor hunters) maybe they would licence other
> companies to make them outside Britain. i believe there is a larger similar
> version made in india for household water heating. I've not found out who
> makes them.
>
> best wishes with everything
> alice quayle,
> isle of man, british isles.
>
> The famous Storm Kettle, ideal for picnics. Rapid, safe and sure. Boils
> water easily, in the wettest and windiest of weather. The traditional kettle
> of West Ireland Fishermen. The western part of Ireland is particularly
> remote and the winter nights must be particularly long. In order to while
> away the long evenings some of the Irish crofters used to manufacture a
> simple water boiler using hand tools.These were normally manufactured in
> copper and took them many hours to produce. These water boilers were used in
> the summer months to easily and satisfactorily boil tea for the enthusiastic
> fishermen who came regularly to Ireland to enjoy the splendid fishing. In
> the early 1970's John Grindlay and some colleagues decided that the time had
> come when these wonderful water boilers should be manufactured in quantity
> so that they could be made available to all fishermen and sportsmen.
> Email us here Eydon Kettle; Po Box 50; Daventry; Northants, England, United
> Kingdom; NN11 2ZA. © Copyright 1999 The Eydon Kettle Company. All rights
> reserved.

From dmarks at PERINI.COM Fri Jul 9 15:45:55 2004
From: dmarks at PERINI.COM (Dan Marks)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: [STOVES] A kettle that uses much less wood
Message-ID: <FRI.9.JUL.2004.154555.0400.DMARKS@PERINI.COM>

Please change my email address to dmarks@nycap.rr.com. Thank you
Dan

<<< <tombreed@COMCAST.NET> 7/ 9 8:36a >>>
Dear ALL:

The storm kettle, the samovar and my gas hot water heater combine unique principles for water heating/boiling that should be used by all of us.

The principles:

Water is the most heated material during cooking. (Hot oil next most...)

Solid fuels (and gas/liquids) requires a small amount of naturla or forced "draft" to burn intensely and efficiently

A chimney can supply this - but who wants to cook ontop of the chimney?

Water (and oil) can be "wrapped" around the chimney for very efficient heat transfer

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Charcoal is an excellent fuel for these devices.

However, either toplit or bottom lit biomass fires tend to produce incompleted pyrolysis gases which are likely to creosote the chimney and reduce heat transfer.

Need a source of secondary air above.

I'm ordering one to tryout in the real world.

TOM REED

> Jeunesse Park from the Small Farm Forestry Newsletter in South Africa
> forwarded this.
> - Crispin
>
> +++++++++++
>
> From: "Jeunesse Park" <jpark@trees.org.za>
>
> I have just been looking up about a kind of water boiler/kettle, something I
> looked it up for a friend of mine who works for the Nepal Forestry
> Commission. I came across your site a while ago and thought you might know
> someone who could use the info.. (eg as you work in the subsahara)
>
> The storm kettle/kelly kettle is a superefficient kettle designed to use
> outdoors, uses much less wood than conventional fires to boil water. The
> kettle has the fire (of paper twigs grass etc) in a chimney within the
> kettle. website: http://www.eydonkettle.co.uk/ a uk company has made them
> since the 1970s, (they were developed in ireland
> in 19th century by fishermen/outdoor hunters) maybe they would licence other
> companies to make them outside Britain. i believe there is a larger similar
> version made in india for household water heating. I've not found out who
> makes them.
>
> best wishes with everything
> alice quayle,
> isle of man, british isles.
>
> The famous Storm Kettle, ideal for picnics. Rapid, safe and sure. Boils
> water easily, in the wettest and windiest of weather. The traditional kettle
> of West Ireland Fishermen. The western part of Ireland is particularly
> remote and the winter nights must be particularly long. In order to while
> away the long evenings some of the Irish crofters used to manufacture a
> simple water boiler using hand tools.These were normally manufactured in
> copper and took them many hours to produce. These water boilers were used in
> the summer months to easily and satisfactorily boil tea for the enthusiastic
> fishermen who came regularly to Ireland to enjoy the splendid fishing. In
> the early 1970's John Grindlay and some colleagues decided that the time had
> come when these wonderful water boilers should be manufactured in quantity
> so that they could be made available to all fishermen and sportsmen.
> Email us here Eydon Kettle; Po Box 50; Daventry; Northants, England, United
> Kingdom; NN11 2ZA. ? Copyright 1999 The Eydon Kettle Company. All rights
> reserved.

From mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA Sat Jul 17 17:39:11 2004
From: mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA (Matthew Pottinger)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Ceramicrete
Message-ID: <SAT.17.JUL.2004.173911.0400.MPOTTINGER@RENEWABLEPLANET.CA>

Hello everyone!

Seems like this list is pretty slow during the summer months! I haven't
kept up to date myself, but it looks like I haven't been missing much as
you all may be doing the same thing I am: taking a break for the summer!

Well, for those who know what I'm into, I've far from given up on it.
Still only researching, as I will be until I am finished school.
I found something interesting however, for the treatment of toxic ash
that can sometimes result from gasification of certain materials, it's
called ceramicrete. It was originally developed for trapping low-level
radioactive wastes. It is also useful for many other applications and
can bind to just about anything except plastics.
Haha, wishful thinking? hehehe, yes, maybe for now, but everyone has to
start somewhere. I am off to a good start. I have some good information,
and possibly some potential investors for the future for when I want to
go further with this.

Mixing up a concrete solution

Chicago Sun-Times
January 28, 2002

BY DAVID ROEDER BUSINESS REPORTER

Physicist Arun Wagh's research into industrial waste has led him to a
better way to fill potholes and cavities, drill for oil and, perhaps,
build affordable homes in developing countries.

Wagh, who works at Argonne National Laboratory, is the inventor of a
binding compound called Ceramicrete. It's been gaining acceptance among
highway departments as the preferred way to repair roads. The dark gray
matter with the consistency of porridge pours easily, sets quickly and
lasts . . . well, nobody knows how long, but it could be until the next
millennium.

The stuff has twice the strength of cement, yet it's lighter and
impervious to water, and its applications are just now dawning on
American business.

CERAMICRETE BASICS

* What it is: Magnesium oxide powder mixed with soluble phosphate
powder and industrial wastes, such as coal ash
* Attributes: Has twice the strength of cement, hardens quickly,
mixes at room temperature, resists corrosion, bonds with most
materials and does not absorb water
* Uses: Pothole patch, dental fillings, construction material and
insulation, encasement for radioactive waste

Source: Argonne National Laboratory

As the name implies, Ceramicrete combines properties of ceramics and
concrete, but there's more to it. Wagh hit on the idea of mixing the
material with industrial wastes that make it stronger and adaptable to
many uses. Through licensing deals with manufacturers, Ceramicrete also
has found its way into dental and insulation material.

The pothole patch makes use of coal ash, a waste material that's a
headache for utilities. Three years ago, Wagh and his assistant,
Seung-Young Jeong, tried it on a crumbling road within Argonne's DuPage
County campus. They picked a stretch often used by trucks to ensure it
would get an intense beating.

It has withstood all the freeze-thaw cycles since, still with a smooth
surface that's attached to the pavement, even though the asphalt itself
has suffered more wear and tear over the years. The product is being
used on the Illinois tollways and Chicago Skyway and has been approved
in about 15 other states, with good reviews all around, said Tom Lally,
president of Oak Brook-based Bindan Corp., a Ceramicrete licensee.

"It sets in 90 minutes or less and they can open up the traffic right
away,'' Lally said. But as good as Ceramicrete is as a patch, it's
agreed that it'll never be suitable for the whole road. As a
construction material, it's three to four times more expensive than
portland cement, the type used in roads, Lally said.

Wagh, who began studying industrial waste in the 1980s, said he sees
Ceramicrete as a niche product. "It fills the gap between ceramics and
cement, with the advantages of both,'' he said. "And it binds almost
anything except plastics.'' Argonne owns six patents based on
Ceramicrete and has applied for several more.

Originally, the material was conceived to encase radioactive wastes.
Wagh, 61, started working on the problem for the U.S. government in 1993
and had to confront the issue of heat treatment. Other encasement
materials needed intense heat to be produced, yet they could crack when
cool, letting the wastes escape.

Ceramicrete mixes at room temperature and its chemical recipe can be
altered so it will expand into molds. Once, Wagh and Jeong pushed the
mixture through a paste maker, creating long strands of potential
insulation. They're working with oil companies that think the product
could quickly and cheaply harden for wells.

Still in the early stages of testing are other applications for home
construction. Wagh has combined the material with wood dust to form a
compound that could replace particle board, but with an important
difference. Wagh said particle board can produce toxic fumes if it
burns, while his compound won't.

Using "red mud,'' a leftover from the manufacture of aluminum,
Ceramicrete can become bricks or tile. It also has potential as a
replacement for decorative terra cotta, known for falling from
downtown's Art Deco-era skyscrapers.

Through a contract with an undisclosed company, Wagh also is examining
whether a home itself can be made from Ceramicrete. He said that in
developing countries where cheaper materials aren't easily obtained,
Ceramicrete-based homes might cost about $10,000 to $20,000 each.

But he said there's no such potential for the product in the United
States because of its higher cost. "This product will never replace
cement,'' he said. "But there are many things that cement can't be used
for, and this is a very durable alternative.''

From mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA Sat Jul 17 17:54:14 2004
From: mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA (Matthew Pottinger)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: More on Ceramicrete
Message-ID: <SAT.17.JUL.2004.175414.0400.MPOTTINGER@RENEWABLEPLANET.CA>

*Successful 'Ceramicrete' goes international*

"Ceramicrete," a new material developed at Argonne to solidify
radioactive and hazardous waste for safe disposal, has been licensed to
Wangtec, Inc. of Woodridge, Ill. The firm is expected to use the new
product overseas to package hazardous waste for disposal.

Ceramicrete sets harder than concrete and binds quickly to almost
anything. Ceramicrete is made by combining metal oxides and soluble
phosphate powders, like those used in detergents and fertilizers, with
water.

These ingredients are abundant in nature and react quickly at room
temperature to form a ceramic that is similar in composition to dental
cement.

No toxic emissions are generated in the process.

Solid wastes may be mixed with the binder powders and water, while
liquid wastes such as sludge may be used to provide the water needed for
the reaction. When the reaction occurs, the ingredients form a thick
slurry that can be poured into storage drums, where it sets to form a
hard, dense and nonleachable ceramic waste form.

"Ceramicrete is effective in solidifying various waste streams,
including ash from municipal solid waste incinerators, fossil-fueled
power plants, hazardous waste incinerators and steel mills, as well as
nuclear power plant waste," said Arun Wagh (ET), one of the Argonne
researchers who developed Ceramicrete. "Ash improves Ceramicrete's
structural properties and reduces its production costs."

Wangtec will market Ceramicrete in Taiwan. The company is part of a
consortium that has been awarded a contract to build a hazardous waste
incinerator and to treat the ash produced there if it cannot pass local
regulations.

Wangtec demonstrated the use of Ceramicrete on ash from a municipal
solid waste incinerator in Taiwan. Tests showed that Ceramicrete greatly
exceeded regulatory requirements for leaching and that its strength was
also well above structural requirements.

Since Cerami-crete is commercially available for treating low-level
nuclear waste in the U.S., Wangtec is negotiating with utilities in
Taiwan to treat such waste there.

For information on Wangtec, see the company's Web site at
http://www.wangtec.com.

From mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA Sat Jul 17 19:32:28 2004
From: mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA (Matthew Pottinger)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Ceramicrete PDF
Message-ID: <SAT.17.JUL.2004.193228.0400.MPOTTINGER@RENEWABLEPLANET.CA>

http://www.techtransfer.anl.gov/working/pdfs/ceramicrete4-7-03.pdf

From psanders at ILSTU.EDU Thu Jul 22 13:32:51 2004
From: psanders at ILSTU.EDU (Paul S. Anderson)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Ceramicrete
In-Reply-To: <40F99C7F.6040007@renewableplanet.ca>
Message-ID: <THU.22.JUL.2004.123251.0500.PSANDERS@ILSTU.EDU>

At 05:39 PM 7/17/04 -0400, Matthew Pottinger wrote about Ceramicrete.

I looked at the items sent and did not find much about its properties under
heat. can this stuff be used to cast critical parts in
furnaces/gasifiers? 300 C 600 C 1000 C, or even higher?

Anyone have any info on that?

Paul
Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D.
Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
NOTE: Retired from teaching. Active in Stoves development.
For fastest contact, please call home phone: 309-452-7072

From mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA Fri Jul 23 04:55:28 2004
From: mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA (Matthew Pottinger)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Ceramicrete
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20040722122828.0257dcb0@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.23.JUL.2004.045528.0400.MPOTTINGER@RENEWABLEPLANET.CA>

Paul S. Anderson wrote:

Interesting, I never thought of using it for that purpose, I was more
interested in it's potential for encapsulating wastes & possibly for
carbon sequestration!
I looked for any info on ceramicrete in high temperature environments.
No specific info about the maximum temperature range it is able to
withstand. The only info I found said that it can be used as a fireproof
material for buildings and makes a good insulator against extreme heat.
The properties sheet merely states that the binder is a refractory
substance and can withstand "very high temperatures". What "very high"
means, I am not sure of.

So the binder itself should withstand the heat, but then it depends on
what fillers/aggregates are used. Coal ash or wood ash should withstand
high temps also correct?

Maybe you are onto something here that would be useful for you also. It
seems there could be more applications for this material than even the
inventors know about yet. Definitely ranking high on my personal list of
"hot" technologies! hehehe.

> At 05:39 PM 7/17/04 -0400, Matthew Pottinger wrote about Ceramicrete.
>
> I looked at the items sent and did not find much about its properties
> under heat. can this stuff be used to cast critical parts in
> furnaces/gasifiers? 300 C 600 C 1000 C, or even higher?
>
> Anyone have any info on that?
>
> Paul
> Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D.
> Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
> NOTE: Retired from teaching. Active in Stoves development.
> For fastest contact, please call home phone: 309-452-7072
>
>

From mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA Fri Jul 23 18:04:43 2004
From: mpottinger at RENEWABLEPLANET.CA (Matthew Pottinger)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Ceramicrete
In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20040722122828.0257dcb0@mail.ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <FRI.23.JUL.2004.180443.0400.MPOTTINGER@RENEWABLEPLANET.CA>

So the binder itself should withstand the heat, but then it depends on
what fillers/aggregates are used. Coal ash or wood ash should withstand
high temps also correct?

Paul S. Anderson wrote:

From tmiles at TRMILES.COM Tue Jul 27 01:31:49 2004
From: tmiles at TRMILES.COM (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Pellet Burning Boilers for Commercial and Insitutional Use
Message-ID: <MON.26.JUL.2004.223149.0700.TMILES@TRMILES.COM>

The US needs biomass pellet burners and boilers for commercial and educational institutions.

Several pellet burning appliances for light industrial and commercial use have emerged in Europe in recent years. Several European home heating units are featured in the May 2004 issue (No 9) of Bioenergy International (http://www.bioenergyinternational.com/) There are pellet burners to retrofit oil and coal boilers, direct fired pellet burning boilers or pellet gasifier burners for boilers. Some like Tarm US (http://woodboilers.com ) and Talbott's (http://www.talbottsna.com/) are represented in North America. Most appliances are too expensive for our markets. Others do not enter because of the prohibitive costs of meeting ASTM or ASME standards.

US pellet producers have increased production capacity in recent years. New England wood pellet production dwarfs chip deliveries to schools and institutions. Bulk delivered costs of pellets at $130/ton ($8/MMBtu or $10.20/MMBtu @ 80% efficiency) are competitive with propane, fuel oil, and even cordwood in the same area. In a recent assessment for a 150,000 ft2 school in New Hampshire the pellet boiler system was 25% the capital cost of an equivalent wood chip system.

Pellet producers are looking to gasifier and boiler suppliers for efficient devices that can be used in schools and businesses. Conventional US boiler suppliers are generally not interested. How do we move the US pellet appliance technology forward?

Tom Miles

From tombreed at COMCAST.NET Tue Jul 27 09:41:31 2004
From: tombreed at COMCAST.NET (TBReed)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: [STOVES] compact biogas system
Message-ID: <TUE.27.JUL.2004.074131.0600.TOMBREED@COMCAST.NET>

Dear ADK and All:

You are to be congratulated on a breakthrough in making biogas

2CH2O + Smart little bacteria ===> CH4 + CO2 (A disproportionation reaction
that looks easy on paper, but chemists can't do it)

I have never been enthusiastic about digester gas because it required lots
of manure/sewage, very large reactors and lots of time to produce small
amounts of gas. Not surprising, since the digestive tracks that produced the
manure/sewage had already extracted most of the useful energy.

With your new process you are feeding foodlike materials to the digester, so
it isn't surprising that you get much higher yields.

It would be useful if you could convert your figures into m3 of gas/m3 of
reactor/day and compare to manure/sewage digestion figures. I believe you
are 2 to 20 times more efficient/smaller/quicker, but I'd like to see some
figures.

~~~~~~`
Since the name "Biogas" has been used to describe the digestion of
sewage/manure, I suggest you find a new name for your gas and process to
differentiate the two.

~~~~~~~
In 1978 we also compared modern digesters sto the champion of all digesters,
the cow. (Holy Cow!) How many m3 of cow stomach does it take to digest X kg
of grass, and how does that compare to your process.

Your pal and admirer,

TOM REED
----- Original Message -----
From: "adkarve" <adkarve@PN2.VSNL.NET.IN>
To: <STOVES@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 10:37 AM
Subject: [STOVES] compact biogas system

> Dear Stovers,
> We are now collaborating with a voluntary organisation formed by a group
of
> engineers.A school hostel in the town of Jawhar, Dist. Thane, Maharashtra,
> has a biogas plant having a capacity of producing daily 16cubic meters of
> biogas. Following my advice, they shifted to using oilcake of locally
> available non-edible oilseed cake as the feedstock. They get daily 16
cubic
> meters of biogas, using just 16 kg of the oilcake, which costs them only
> Rs.32 or USCents 70. The cake comes from three species, namely, Pongamia
> pinnata, Madhuka indica and Jatropha curcas.A colleague from the
engineers'
> voluntary organisation tested a petrol driven electricity generator on
this
> biogas. They could generate electricity by running the generator entirely
on
> biogas. A fortnight ago, I tested our biogas on a diesel-driven
electricity
> generator. This generator could however replace only about 70% of the
total
> diesel.
> Yours
> A.D.Karve
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom Miles <tmiles@TRMILES.COM>
> To: <STOVES@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG>
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 12:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [STOVES] ARTI videos in compressed avi format
>
>
> > Grant, Andrew and Dr. Karve,
> >
> > Thank you for your tireless efforts. I downloaded the files from HEDON
> > with no problems on a standrd DSL connection. I have placed a link to
your
> > downbload site on Biomass Cooking Stoves and will in time also put the
> > files on the stoves site.
> > http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:22:00 +0100, Grant Ballard-Tremeer
> > <stoves@ECOHARMONY.COM> wrote:
> >
> > >Dear Stovers
> > >
> > >As Andrew Heggie reported some weeks ago, he transferred the two video
> > >files to me via FTP (taking many hours of high-speed transfer - thanks
> > >Andrew!). I have since converted and compressed them so that the files
> > >are now more than 10 times smaller and picture quality and size
> > >reasonable (although certainly not as good as the original). These,
> > >with Dr Karve's permission, are available to download at:
> > >
> > >www.hedon.info/goto.php/ARTI
> > >
> > >Click on the 'Videos' link in the table of contents to jump directly
> > >to the download links. At about 15MB for the sugar-cane charcoal
> > >briquette video and 23MB for the bamboo video, the downloads are still
> > >not easily accessible unless you have high-speed broadband access (at
> > >normal dial-up access speeds you will take over an hour to download
> > >each video, but less than 5 minutes on a reasonable ADSL line).
> > >
> > >Tom - maybe these two files could also be placed on the 'stoves'
> > >website?
> > >
> > >Regards
> > >Grant
> > >
> > >PS. The format is DIV-X (.avi) which most of you should be able to
> > >play without any extra codecs, but on older systems some may need to
> > >download some extra drivers. file://G
> > >
> > >--
> > >Grant Ballard-Tremeer PhD, CEng MIMechE, MEI
> > >Visit Eco on the web at http://ecoharmony.com
> > >HEDON Household Energy Network http://hedon.info
> > >SPARKNET Knowledge Network http://sparknet.info
> > >Partners for Africa http://partners4africa.org
> > >Breathe Easy Network India http://india.shellfoundation.net
> > >About me: http://hedon.info/goto.php/User:GrantBallard-Tremeer
> > >-------------------

From snkm at BTL.NET Tue Jul 27 11:19:28 2004
From: snkm at BTL.NET (Peter Singfield)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: [STOVES] compact biogas system - designer bacteria
Message-ID: <TUE.27.JUL.2004.091928.0600.SNKM@BTL.NET>

Re: Custom bred bacteria

You all might want to follow this thread through. I have just ordered
designer bacteria for recycling 20 liter jugs that once contained cooking
oil -- which I buy from local restaurants here. These are required for
racking the cane wine I make -- and any residual oils/fats/grease will kill
my wine!

No amount of cleaning will get it all out -- so did some searching and came
across this system -- these "bugs":

http://www.spillaway.com/

Have ordered samples to try here.

But now -- after reading this posting -- you don't suppose these bugs do
their magic by breaking down the grease/oil/fats/crude to other substances
water soluble and:

CH4 + CO2

Never thought to ask! But these designer bugs are promised to do their work
to 100% completion -- and very fast at that!

I'll ask and report back.

Oops -- it's on their FAQ page:

WHAT IS BIO-REMEDIATION?

Bio-Remediation is the process of using naturally occurring, safe and
beneficial micro-organisms to degrade environmentally harmful contaminants
and turn them into non-toxic compounds. In particular, these organisms will
break down most petroleum hydrocarbons and transform them into carbon
dioxide (CO2) & water. Further, this natural process will produce valuable
bio-nutrients that can be utilized by both plant and aquatic life. The
process of Bio-Remediation is listed as one of the United States
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) innovative technologies.

*********************************

Still -- will contact and ask if "possible" -- as in converting old
oils/fats -- to methane.

I am finding almost unlimited amounts of used oils -- veggie and mineral --
here. Would be nice to have gas for cooking -- etc.

Course -- they do burn directly as fuel in "some" diesel engines now.

I am increasing my collection status with a further 1500 gallon capacity
cistern.

Waste oils is just about the most energy rich product available -- and for
minus cost!

Would be interesting to know just how much energy is disposed of in the
most environmently unfriendly manner each year -- by simply "dumping" -- as
they do here!

I suspect this is a huge figure --

Mr Karve -- pray tell -- what do they do with waste oils in India??

I suspect this is a huge figure --

Peter -- in Belize -- preparing for a self sufficient post apocalypse life
in 3rd world and making sure that has some good wine in it.

(Last years trial batches came out fantastic!!)

At 07:41 AM 7/27/2004 -0600, TBReed wrote:
>Dear ADK and All:
>
>You are to be congratulated on a breakthrough in making biogas
>
>2CH2O + Smart little bacteria ===> CH4 + CO2 (A disproportionation reaction
>that looks easy on paper, but chemists can't do it)
>
>I have never been enthusiastic about digester gas because it required lots
>of manure/sewage, very large reactors and lots of time to produce small
>amounts of gas. Not surprising, since the digestive tracks that produced the
>manure/sewage had already extracted most of the useful energy.
>
>With your new process you are feeding foodlike materials to the digester, so
>it isn't surprising that you get much higher yields.
>
>It would be useful if you could convert your figures into m3 of gas/m3 of
>reactor/day and compare to manure/sewage digestion figures. I believe you
>are 2 to 20 times more efficient/smaller/quicker, but I'd like to see some
>figures.
>
>~~~~~~`
>Since the name "Biogas" has been used to describe the digestion of
>sewage/manure, I suggest you find a new name for your gas and process to
>differentiate the two.
>
>
>~~~~~~~
>In 1978 we also compared modern digesters sto the champion of all digesters,
>the cow. (Holy Cow!) How many m3 of cow stomach does it take to digest X kg
>of grass, and how does that compare to your process.
>
>Your pal and admirer,
>
>TOM REED
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "adkarve" <adkarve@PN2.VSNL.NET.IN>
>To: <STOVES@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG>
>Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 10:37 AM
>Subject: [STOVES] compact biogas system
>
>
>> Dear Stovers,
>> We are now collaborating with a voluntary organisation formed by a group
>of
>> engineers.A school hostel in the town of Jawhar, Dist. Thane, Maharashtra,
>> has a biogas plant having a capacity of producing daily 16cubic meters of
>> biogas. Following my advice, they shifted to using oilcake of locally
>> available non-edible oilseed cake as the feedstock. They get daily 16
>cubic
>> meters of biogas, using just 16 kg of the oilcake, which costs them only
>> Rs.32 or USCents 70. The cake comes from three species, namely, Pongamia
>> pinnata, Madhuka indica and Jatropha curcas.A colleague from the
>engineers'
>> voluntary organisation tested a petrol driven electricity generator on
>this
>> biogas. They could generate electricity by running the generator entirely
>on
>> biogas. A fortnight ago, I tested our biogas on a diesel-driven
>electricity
>> generator. This generator could however replace only about 70% of the
>total
>> diesel.
>> Yours
>> A.D.Karve

From tombreed at COMCAST.NET Fri Jul 30 07:05:47 2004
From: tombreed at COMCAST.NET (TBReed)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Need for Power in heat and cooking?
Message-ID: <FRI.30.JUL.2004.050547.0600.TOMBREED@COMCAST.NET>

Dear John:

We operate our fireplace on your logs even though we have very reliable
power. I have lusted over the pellet stoves to replace gas, but they do
require some power.

The home heat pellet stoves use ~ 450 W (see
http://www.harmanstoves.com/surefire.htm for backup power) for the forced
convection combustion and forced air heating aspects of the pellet stove.
This requirement is certainly a limitation on their ability to operate in
remote locations. The pellet stove is a major advance in home heat - as
long as you have power.

1900 houses were typically built vertically and a coal furnace in the
basement could burn and distribute the air by natural convection. With the
advent of universal electricity in the US most houses are built horizontally
and rely on modest power to distribute the heat. Do we need to prepare for
a future without electric power?

Our WoodGas camp stoves use ~ 1 W from a single AA battery, lasting ~3 hours
on high and 6 hrs on low. (www.woodgas.com; www.woodgasllc.com) Much less
of a restriction, but still a dependence on power. Our natural draft stoves
can also burn pellets without any power, somewhat less intensely. I spent
15 years trying to perfect woodgas stoves without any power and gave up.

There isn't much heat generated in advanced countries that doesn't rely on
at least a small amount of power. Our 5 and 15 kW Biomax systems provide
"turnkey-tarfree" local power from pellets, chips, etc. (See
www.gocpc.com)

Are we resisting the advance of "electric civilization"? Should we try to
help the rest of the world by providing reliable electricity or trying to
figure out how to live without it? There was a big move in the nuclear days
to use "too cheap to meter" nuclear power for home heat. We've backed down
from that wasteful approach, but it is hard to dispense with electricity
entirely.

Puzzled...

TOM REED
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Olsen" <cree@DOWCO.COM>
To: <BIOENERGY@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 11:12 PM
Subject: [BIOENERGY] sawdust Pellets / densified sawdust logs

> I read with interest the continuing fascination with pellets, but, is
there
> a pellet stove which operates without electricity.?
> (I am biased, as I am in the densified logs from biomass, business)
> John Olsen
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/2004
>

From tmiles at TRMILES.COM Fri Jul 30 17:16:06 2004
From: tmiles at TRMILES.COM (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: Fw: STCBC Conference Reminder
Message-ID: <FRI.30.JUL.2004.141606.0700.TMILES@TRMILES.COM>

All,

I'm sure that many of you will be attending the Science in Thermal and
Chemical Biomass Conversion Conference in Victoria, BC, Aug 30-Sept 2, 2004.
Have a look at the current list of abstracts on the conference website at
www.stcbc.com
See Emma's reminder below.

Regards,

Tom Miles

----- Original Message -----
From: "E.Wylde" <e.wylde@aston.ac.uk>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 3:13 AM
Subject: STCBC Conference Reminder

> Dear all
>
> Please find attached a flyer for the Science in Thermal and Chemical
> Biomass Conversion Conference (STCBC) which will be held in Victoria,
> Vancouver Island, BC, Canada from August 30 to September 2 2004.
>
> Full programme details, including a list of oral and poster presentations
> and a detailed programme are available on the conference website at
> www.STCBC.com Downloadable registration forms can be found on the
> registration page of the website.
>
> If you have already registered, you should have received a message
> confirming your registration, so please ignore this message.
>
> For any other queries or information, please do not hesitate to contact me
>
> Kind regards
> Emma Wylde
> Conference Secretariat
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

> Miss Emma Wylde
> Research Projects Manager
> Bio-Energy Research Group
> Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry
> School of Engineering and Applied Science
> Aston University
> Birmingham
> B4 7ET
> UK
> Tel: +44 (0)121 359 3611 Ext 4633
> Fax: +44 (0)121 359 6814
> Email: e.wylde@aston.ac.uk
>
> www.stcbc.com
> www.pyne.co.uk
> www.supergen-bioenergy.net
> www.bioenergy-noe.org
> www.aston-berg.co.uk
>
>
>
>

From tombreed at COMCAST.NET Sat Jul 31 09:43:28 2004
From: tombreed at COMCAST.NET (TBReed)
Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:59 2004
Subject: [STOVES] Manually powered forced air: The "Ejector effect"
and the "Coanda effect"; FIREPIPES
Message-ID: <SAT.31.JUL.2004.074328.0600.TOMBREED@COMCAST.NET>

Dear All:

Ain't Physics grand, especially the ejector effect and the Coanda effect! It's amazing how a simple demonstration of an effect plus understanding the physics can lead to new inventions.
~~~~~~~~~~
Here's a simple test for the ejector effect, ie
"a jet of air from a nozzle entrains its own weight of air approximately every 5 diameters. Momentum is conserved, so that a jet of a small amount (m1) of high velocity (V1) air can move a large quantity (m1+m2) of low velocity (V2) air.

m1V1 = (m1+m2) V2

Pucker up like to whistle (~1/8" nozzle)and blow a strong jet of air at your hand. You can feel/see the force at an inch or two; you can feel the cooling at 4-6 inches. At 1 ft you feel nothing because more and more air is moving slower and slower.

Now roll up a piece of 8 1/2 X 11 paper into an 8 1/2" "pipe", 1 1/2" in diameter, secure with rubber band or scotch tape. Keeping the pipe against your mouth and your hand 2 inches from the end of the pipe, blow a strong jet of air into the pipe. Your hand feels nothing! (The quantity of air is very small and the velocity has been attenuated by entrainment of air inside the pipe). Now gradually move hand and pipe away from mouth. When the pipe is ~1" from your mouth you will feel a cooling effect comparable to that at 3" without the pipe. As you increase mouth to pipe distance the cooling diminishes.

All firemakers should use a piece of PVC pipe as a "firepipe" for fanning the fire and avoid smoke inhalation. I wonder if cavemen knew about this and used hollow bones. I wonder if distributing firepipes to village cookers could decrease lung disease. I once damaged my lungs and coughed for a year by trying to light a fire with wet wood plus blowing on it close. Wish I had known about the firemaker pipe.
~~~~~~~~~`
For the Coanda effect (a flowing fluid follows a curved and preferably bumpy surface), see

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/coanda.htm
http://www.aardvark.co.nz/pjet/coanda.shtml
and many more.

You can amaze your friends at dinner parties by blowing out a candle behind a glass or by blowing at right angles to the flame around a glass.

Thanks to Pete, Paul and all for bringing this up. Incidentally, when you increase the volume of air by tenfold in blowing on a fire, the small (<50%?) depletion of the oxygen by your lungs in your jet is insignificant.
Your wondering friend,

TOM REED

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Heggie" <list@SYLVA.ICUKLIVE.CO.UK>
To: <STOVES@LISTSERV.REPP.ORG>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 6:05 AM
Subject: Re: [STOVES] Manually powered forced air Was Re: [STOVES] Jmla Stove

> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 22:50:42 -0500, Paul S. Anderson wrote:
>
> >At 09:55 PM 6/4/04 +1000, Peter Verhaart wrote:
> >>>snip
> >>
> >>Blowing IN a pipe. You leave some distance between your mouth and the pipe
> >>so that the relatively high velocity jet from your mouth entrains more air
> >>into the pipe, resulting in less expenditure of breath and more wind into
> >>the fire. This can be kept up for much longer than straight blowing.
> >
> >So, those interested in forced air should position the source of the force
> >slightly away from the opening. Therefore, an otherwise weak force of air
> >might just be enough.
>
> This is not necessarily so, there are two things to take into account
> when using your lungs to aspirate a fire, firstly the air must be less
> well endowed with oxygen, because this is what you breathed it in to
> extract from it. Secondly as peter Verharrt has implied it is to do
> with sustaining the effort, so a smaller high velocity jet can be
> sustained longer and entrain further air.
>
> >
> >This also raises the question of how to make a forced air unit entrain the
> >surrounding air and suck that air in through side holes of some
> >nozzle. Propane burners come in shapes/models that do that, and other
> >shapes that do not (with resultant differences in the fire).
>
> We discussed this some while back, at the time I was investigating a
> steam powered aspirator. The propane burner uses a venturi to entrain
> 15 times it's volume of air. The power for this comes from the
> pressure inherent in the storage vessel (though this is reduced by a
> regulator). A similar effect is had with the paraffin stoves when the
> pressure is derived from the liquid vapourising in the heat.
>
> Other effects I looked at were simple ejectors and coanda effect
> nozzles. A conclusion I came to was that these devices conserved
> momentum but did not necessarily transfer much of the kinetic energy
> into the combined airflow. I would still like to learn more of this,
> at the time I concluded that an efficient fan was a better means of
> converting mechanical power into air movement.
>
> AJH
> >
> >Paul
> >Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D.
> >Dept of Geography - Geology (Box 4400), Illinois State University
> >Normal, IL 61790-4400 Voice: 309-438-7360; FAX: 309-438-5310
> >E-mail: psanders@ilstu.edu - Internet items: www.ilstu.edu/~psanders
> >NOTE: Retired from teaching. Active in Stoves development.
> >For fastest contact, please call home phone: 309-452-7072
>

BioEnergy Lists: Gasifiers & Gasification

July 2004 Gasification Archive