Pressure stove using vegetable oil

["A.D. Karve" <adkarve@pn2.vsnl.net.in>]

Dear Ron,
if one used vegetable oil as fuel, one would be depriving humans of a high
calory item of food, and the soap and paint industry of its oils. Therefore,
during my visit to Hohenheim, I mentioned to Mr. Stumpf that he may try
using glycerine instead of oil.
In India, we have at least 20 kinds of vegetable oils, with coconut, peanut,
several species of mustard, sunflower, safflower, sesame, niger, linseed,
cottonseed, castor, soybean and rice bran as oils from the agricultural
sector, and Pongamia pinnata, Jatropha curcas, Madhuka indica, Glycinia
indica, and about 10 other oils from uncultivated species. With a different
oil being available in the market every month, it became very difficult for
the soap and paints industry to produce a standard product. They had to buy
the necessary oil in huge quantities whenever it was available in the market
and store it for use during the rest of the year. In order to produce a
standard product throughout the year, the oil based industries buy just the
fatty acids needed to produce their product.  For instance a company would
produce  soap by titrating certain fatty acids of the required
characteristics with caustic soda, and have a standard product throughout
the year. The demand for fatty acids is so great, that In India there are
several factories producing just  fatty acids from vegetable oils of
whichever species that are available in the market.  These factories are
left with huge quantities of glycerine as a byproduct.  I am quite sure that
the glycerine is used as a feedstock of the chemical industry, but  I
therefore suggested that one may use glycerine as fuel, because the fatty
acid producers are producing it as a byproduct.  The cost of raw glycerine
might be comparable to that of kerosene, but I am not sure. In the case of
most products, the cost is determined to a great extent by government
policies.
    The thinking of the Government of India is of course quite topsy turvy.
In order to protect the cottage industry, soap made in open pans, which uses
vegetable oil as the raw material without recovering glycerine, is not
taxed, while soap made by the organised sector, which uses a more efficient
and rational process, and which leaves the glycerine behind as a by product,
is taxed.
A.D.Karve
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Larson <ronallarson@qwest.net>
To: Elmar Stumpf: stumpf@ats.uni-hohenheim.de
<Stumpf@495-simon.ats.uni-hohenheim.de>
Cc: stoves <stoves@crest.org>
Date: Saturday, September 28, 2002 11:01 PM
Subject: Re -Jatropha oil as household energy (forwarding Stumpf - #2)


>Stovers (cc Elmar Stumpf):
>
> This is to follow up on the earlier September 18 dialog on oil cookers -
>which began with a mention from A.D. Karve.
>
> I just realized that this message four days ago from Elmar had only come
to
>myself.  Elmar - my apologies for the delay.
>
> I have added brief notes on Q3, Q5a, Q5b and Q9
>
> Elmar has asked for our help on Q7.
>
>Elmar:
>
> Thanks.  This is one of the most complete inputs we have ever had on
>"stoves".  The big surprise to me is the conclusion that you can cook a
meal
>with oils at half the price of urban-purchased fuel wood on open fires
>(Response to Q6).  This says that improved wood stoves have to do at least
>this well (efficiency doubling) also.  I look forward to hearing of the
>other work that is on-going;  please consider this a request to let us know
>more as your results come in.
>
>Ron
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Elmar Stumpf: stumpf@ats.uni-hohenheim.de
>[mailto:Stumpf@495-simon.ats.uni-hohenheim.de]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 2:21 AM
>To: Ron Larson
>Subject: Re: FW: Jatropha oil as household energy (forwarding Stumpf)
>
>
><color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>Dear Ron, dear all,
>
>
>thank you very much for your interest in our stove. I was - again - out of
>office
>some days, therefore I couldn't get back to you earlier.
>
>
>Now - let me answer your questions:
>
>
>1.) Costs
>
>We did not yet do a detailed costs analysis of the actual stove costs -
>nevertheless, we put a lot of emphasis of designing a stove which is
>affordable to the people.
>
>
>We need a tank including an air pump with a pot support just like the
>kerosene stoves (we can also used those parts from existing kerosene
>stoves, which answers your question number 3.). Moreover, we need the
>plant oil burner, which functions like the kerosene stoves, but is
>completely
>re-designed. Maybe, this burner might be slightly more expensive than the
>kerosene burners, however, producing the stove in a tropical or subtropical
>country we expect the production costs within the same range as the costs
>for producing a kerosene pressure stove. Those ones - as you know - are
>sold in India for example for around 12 US-$ (if I remember the personal
>comment of Dr. Karve right). We bought some kerosene pressure stoves in
>the Philippines for 10 - 12 US-$. So - we are talking of a retail price
(for
>sure)
>of less than 20 $ for a basic stove modell if it is produced in mass
>production.
>
>
>2.) principal things that changes the stove design
>
>Well - this is quite a challenge to give you a short description of 5 years
>basic
>research studies. Our burner is - as written before - completely new. The
>basic problem is the temperature of the vaporizer which has to be
sufficient
>for a complete vaporization as well as combustion of the plant oil in the
>burner. This required a new design of the vaporizer which has to maintain
>this temperature not only at high but also at low power outputs of the
>burner
>while high power outputs leads to high flame temperatures and low power
>outputs to lower temperatures within the burner.
>
>
>3.) see above  [RWL insert - this was on doing c conversion oneself]
>
>
>4.) Gravity feed mechanism
>
>Our cooking stoves runs with a pressure of more than 2.5 bars. Therefore
>using gravity does not seem to be a good alternative.
>
>
>5.) Pollution emissions and efficiency.
>
>Yes, we already did emission and efficiency testing. Starting with the
>
>
>Efficiency: we did the testing according to the Water Boiling Test and got
>an
>efficiency range between 40 - 45 % (depending on the power output);
>nevertheless this is still subject to further optimization and some 50 of
52
>%
>seem to be quite feasible (it would be great if I could get any information
>of
>anyone who knows about enhancing efficiencies of liquid fuel cooking
>stoves).
>
>[RWL insert  -  I believe the ideas of Dr. Karve (mentioned by Sam Baldwin
>as the first time I saw it) of putting a "convection-enhancing" cylindrical
>ring around the cookpot will add a good bit of efficiency.]
>
>
>Emissions: regarding CO-emissions we stay within the range of gas cooking
>stoves for Europe (DIN EN 3O) which allow no more than 1000 mg/m^3 in
>the exhaust gas with 0 % oxygene. We did this testing for one open fire and
>got a value of more than 20000 mg/^m3. The Hydrocarbon emissions are
>likewise some 200 - 400 times lower than the emissions of open fires. The
>NOx and SO2 emissions are negligible. Comparing our stove to the existing
>kerosene stoves: our stove emissions are within the same range or
>somewhat lower than the kerosene pressure stove emissions (depending on
>the stove, of course) and very much lower than the kerosene wick stove
>emissions.
>
>[RWL insert:  Could you expand on you meaning of "0% oxygen(e)"?  With some
>nice recent messages on testing, I think we all would like to know more
>details (or a reference) on the details of your measurement set up.]
>
>6.) Costs of typical meal
>
>We did not yet do this analysis. For the Philippines, we did some
>preliminary
>work on the cost analysis for utilizing crude coconut oil as cooking fuel.
>It
>turned out that the running costs (taking the energy in the cooking pot as
>the
>basis for comparison) for coconut oil is within the same range as the
>(slightly
>subsidized) kerosene (while the price of kerosene will rise in the future
>for
>sure), lower than gas or charcoal and about half of the price of fuel wood
>(bought at the market) on open fires. Still more detailed costs analysis
>have
>to be made. However, if we utilize used oil (from McDonalds, ....) in our
>stove, the running costs will be even lower.
>
>
>7.) Costs for seed oils in different locations
>
>I would appreciate more information from the stove list members to get more
>information about this issue.
>
>
>8.) Gel alcohols as stove approach
>
>We think, utilizing plant oils as cooking fuel might have the potential to
>play
>an important role in different parts of the world within the nearest
future.
>However, the future cooking energy will be covered with a mix of different
>energy </color>forms <color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>including energy
>saving wood stoves, charcoal stoves, plant oil
>stove and so on. The alcohol gel fuel may also play a role in this list.
>
>
>9.) Economics etc.
>
>[Larson insert of full question: How does the economics of other attributes
>of the native species fit in   >(use for soil preservation, nitrogenation,
>firewood benefits, left over >economic value of the seed cake, etc)?
>
>
></color>Well - this is really a broad area: utilizing plant oils as cooking
>fueld does
>have numerous ecological as well as economical and social advantages. Let
>me get a short list for you
>
>
>socio-economic benefits (among others)
>
>
>a) local production of plant oil as fuel provides income opportunities for
>local
>population
>
>
>b) sustainable energy system due to local production of the fuel
>
>
>c) press-cake as a by-product of the oil pressing process can be sold as
>animal food or fertilizer
>
>
>d) plant oils substitute fossil fuels such as petroleum -  import and
>subsidization of those fossil fuels burdens ofteh the national budget of
>some
>countries
>
>
>e) plant oils are bio-degradable and handling is simple and free of danger
>
>
>f) utilization of plant oils as fuel prevents users from severe operating
>risks
>related to the easy inflammation of kerosene
>
>
>g) the plant oil stove runs not only on plant oils, but also on plant oil
>esters,
>kerosene, diesel fuel, and gasoline if necessary
>
>
>h) local fabrication and maintenance of the plant oil cooker and its
>equipment
>provides employment opportunities
>
>
><flushboth>ecological advantages (among others):</flushboth>
>
>
>i) using plant oils instead of wood as fuel reduces tree felling which has
>negative ecological consequences including soil erosion and desertification
>
>
>j) many oil-bearing plants grow on marginal land - utilization of their
oils
>as
>fuel provide economic incentives to enhance their cultivation on unused
>tracts and prevent further erosion
>
>
>k) plant oils burn CO2-neutral
>
>
>
>10.) Test results
>
>We are right now running a more detailed test in Guatemala - unfortunately,
>the test results are not yet available.
>
>
>11.) Solar cookers
>
>Well - I think, the big advantage of solar cookers it the low running costs
>of
>the energy - nevertheless, their utilization is connected with some
>problems,
>especially regarding cooking in the morning, in the evening, during rainy
>season and so on.
>
>
>This for today - I am looking forward to any comments, information,
>questions etc.
>
>
>Take care,
>
>Elmar
>
>
>Ron - I am already a stove list member for some years now and it has been
>very interesting following the discussions!
>
>
>
><color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>Datum:   Wed, 18 Sep 2002
>12:38:14 -0600
>
>Von:            "Ron Larson" <<ronallarson@qwest.net>
>
>An:             stoves@crest.org
>
>Durchschläge an: stumpf@ats.uni-hohenheim.de,
>Stumpf@495-simon.ats.uni-hohenheim.de
>
>Betreff:        FW: Jatropha oil as household energy (forwarding Stumpf)
>
>
><color><param>7F00,0000,0000</param>>Stovers -  the following just in from
>Elmar Stumpf on his stove for oils.
>
>>
>
>>Elmar -  Thank you for this additional information you have supplied
below.
>
> <snip a lot of earlier material>
>
>
><nofill>
>von:
>Dipl.-Ing. Elmar Stumpf, M.Sc./Univ. of Wisc.-Madison
>Institute for Agricultural Engineering in the Tropics and Subtropics
>Hohenheim University (495)
>Garbenstr. 9, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
>Tel.: +49 (0)711 - 459 - 2840
>Fax:  +49 (0)711 - 459 - 3298
>e-mail: stumpf@ats.uni-hohenheim.de
>
>
>
>
>-
>Stoves List Archives and Website:
>http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/200209/
>http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
>>
>Stoves List Moderators:
>Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
>Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com
>
>Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
>http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon
>
>List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
>>
>For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>>http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/Chambers/Chambers.ht
m
>
>


-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/200209/
http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
>
Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com

Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
>
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/Chambers/Chambers.htm