Our site is dedicated to helping people develop better stoves for cooking with biomass fuels in developing regions.

For additional detail and information, join the Cooking Stoves Mailing List, browse the archives, read about current projects and ask other cooking stove builders, designers, and organizations disseminating improved stoves around the world.

Bolivia Inti-Sud Soleil Retained Heat Stove and Efficient Cookers Rozenn Paris, Bolivia Inti-Sud Soleil, February 2009

Le cuiseur à bois économeLe cuiseur à bois économe

In attached French documents you will find the information relative to the cookers: the retained cooker and the efficient stove we use in Chile and Africa. Bolivia Intl Sud-Soleil

ETHOS 2009 Developing World Cooking Stove Conference
Charlie Sellers, February 11,2009

Charlie Sellers and GEKCharlie Sellers and GEK

This was my third ETHOS (Engineers in Technical and Humanitarian Opportunities of Service – a long name for people who often just call themselves “stovers”), and the Seattle suburbs are as cold as usual at this time of year. ~100 researchers came from around the world to compare notes on stove projects, stove designs, standards and testing procedures, health impacts, other associated appropriate technologies, and so on. More apparent this year was interest in carbon credit funding and biochar (terra preta) applications, and all year long there has been an increased emphasis on refugee camp stoves (and more testing of stoves in the field, versus in the laboratory) so this was more apparent at the conference.

Nat MulcahyNat Mulcahy

There was a raft of new stoves introduced this year, including the new BioLight thermoelectric-powered-fan one for camping and more, the likewise fan powered Lucia Stove from www.worldstove.com (shown with developer Nate Mulcahy),

Crispin Pemberton-PiggottCrispin Pemberton-Piggott

and the souped up Peko Pe natural draft gasifier presented by Paul Anderson (pictured with Crispin Pemberton-Pigott, wielding his ever present combustion analyzer).

Rocketeers Larry Winiarski and Dean StillRocketeers Larry Winiarski and Dean Still

The venerable Dr. Larry Winiarski and Dean Still are also shown here with the upcoming finned pot atop StoveTec’s (www.stovetec.net) rocket stove - now 36,000 strong in the field just since last year.

The trend toward stove models like all these, designed for mass manufacturing, continues, and this trend was recently discussed here: coming-of-corporate-biomass-stoves-mass.html). And yours truly demonstrated in light snow the new biomass gasifier (the red one) from All Power Labs here in Berkeley (www.allpowerlabs.org). Look soon for Peter Scott’s new rocket stove design and application website at rocketstove.org.




Resources for the interested include past conference proceedings () and reviews

(http://improvedstoves.blogspot.com/2007/02/ethos-2007-conference-report-and.html

http://improvedstoves.blogspot.com/2008/02/ethos-2008-conference.html)
and the master site for all things related to biomass stoves is here: www.bioenergylists.org.

Notes from the ETHOS Conference of 2009,
by Paul S. Anderson, 4 February 2009

I enjoyed (and benefited from) the 2009 ETHOS Conference more than in most previous years. ETHOS is growing and evolving, and so are our stoves.

This year we seemed to have had more discussions of issues than in the past. There were topical “panels” of usually three or four qualified people. The topics of these plenary sessions were: Carbon Credits; Stove Testing Issues (not results of specific stoves); Safety; and Stove Standards. Those sessions still tended to be presentations, but there was somewhat more interaction and some effort to get to the underlying difficulties that need more discussion. Attendees still need to read-between-the-lines and/or have some more private discussions to see some of the differences of position.

The session Crispin and I led about controversial issues that need to be discussed was only moderately successful (in my opinion) because we spent our time identifying the issues and did not have time for discussions of those issues. Next year, we hope to have some of those topics PRE-identified and to have discussion time about those issues. I have volunteered to work on that, and Mark B. has accepted my offer. (More about this in some future messages.)

There were still about 30 somewhat standard (academic style) presentations, usually with PowerPoint slides. But they were in three concurrent sessions with 30 minutes (too much in my opinion) allocated to each presenter (who usually did make sure to fill all of the minutes, often with background info that could have been omitted, in my opinion). So each attendee could only hear about 10 of them. I will comment on four of the nine that I was able to attend. There were certainly other excellent presentations, but I am not trying to summarize the entire conference.

1. Alan Berick did a masterful job of calling attention to simmering by the use of only charcoal, available from the fire that was used to bring the pot to boil. There were questions about the heat retained in a ceramic stove body, etc., and certainly he will do more work on this. But really he called attention to the need to have “different” heat sources for boiling and simmering. This is akin to the advocacy of retained heat cookers (RHC or “hayboxes”) for integrated cooking. We should all think more about having two or more modes or devices for different cooking (as in bringing-to-boiling vs. simmering vs. tea-for-two in the morning).

2. Jonathan Cedar and Alex Drummond discussed (and later showed) their “BioLight” cookstove that includes an attractive device attached to the side of the stove to use the heat of the fire to create the electricity (via a TEG = thermoelectric generator) to drive the blower to make the fire burn well. The theory and practice have been known for a long time, but they impressively accomplished it in their attractive prototype, a variation of a Reed-style Woodgas Campstove. Neither the stove body nor the TEG power units are available for purchase, but they should be encouraged to continue their work. [Side note: The TEG in the bottom of the innovative Philips cookstove (seen in previous years) has been removed and that stove is moving to the marketplace with battery or plug-in for the required electric power.]

3. I liked my own presentation about the low emissions of TLUD gasifiers, especially if the charcoal is NOT burned in the TLUD. This favorably relates both to Alan Berick’s findings (above) and to the carbon credit and biochar sequestration topics. (Enough said. My paper is at the Stoves Internet site: http://www.bioenergylists.org/andersontludcopm I think that in future years we should have many papers placed there in advance of the conference.)

4. Nathaniel “Nat” Mulcahy attended ETHOS for the first time and (in my opinion) presented the most dramatic stove innovation I have seen since the day I met Tom Reed and his TLUD prototype. Nat presented about the Lucia Stove (and some info about the larger WorldStove). True science and engineering in action. His website is underdeveloped, but he has 13 YouTube items that will partially bring you up to speed. Visit: www.youtube.com/worldstove I will be writing more in another message about his “coaxial gasification” (vs. stratified gasification in TLUDs and most other small gasifiers). I spent some extra time with Nat and can say that he has deep understanding of the issues, and he has solutions already in place.

The “Lighting of the Stoves” was Sunday afternoon, with a light snowfall!! Five stoves were fired up.

1. The Rocket stove produced in China. Reliable, economical, and this one had a very nice pot-skirt that attached to the pot and let the emissions/draft out through (20 mm??) holes near the top of the skirt. Many people (including me) purchased one of those stoves (and would like to get the skirt). Contact Aprovecho to get your stove (under US$30, plus shipping).

2. The “PP-Plus” natural draft TLUD from Servals in Chennai, India. It uses the natural draft techniques combined by Paul Anderson and Paal Wendelbo. I will be posting within a few days a document on how to make a PP-Plus gasifier. (Wendelbo’s extremely interesting life as a TLUD pioneer was highlighted at the Friday night slide-show and is at the Stoves Website: http://www.bioenergylists.org/wendelbopekope ).

3. The GEK downdraft gasifier. This is not a cookstove. It is a gasifier intended as a start-up kit for aspiring gasifier enthusiasts, including cleaning and cooling of the gases. This is for sale as a kit or as a set of plans for construction. About forty units are around the world.

4. The Lucia Stove by Nat Mulcahy. Mentioned previously. The live-fire demo was impressive. The turbulence of the gases/flame and the air control provided a very clean combustion, measured by Crispin and his furnace-emissions analyzer.

5. The BioLight by Drummond and Cedar. Discussed previously. It performed very well, and was measured by Crispin to have very clean combustion slightly better than the other four stoves shown this year.

As someone mentioned, in previous years usually only one gasifier was among the stoves ignited. But this year four of the five were gasifiers, each distinctly different from the others.

The “Crispin Awards” were inaugurated this year. Crispin gave out three little bottles of “Gold Medal” Canadian pure maple syrup to stoves 3, 4, and 5 in the above list. The criteria were the emissions readings from his furnace emissions analysis equipment. The three winners did share one thing in common. All three were with force air, and even used true blowers, not just small fans.

In summary, it was a beneficial conference. Another report on the meeting has been posted by Kelpie Wilson, with insights especially for the issues of biochar:
http://www.biochar-international.org/projectsandprograms/memberprojects....

Hello stoves community,

At ETHOS 2009 we held a panel on stove safety, bringing in viewpoints from corporate standards development, national standards certification, and small to medium scale developers. The team led by Nathan Johnson (Iowa State University) included Crispin Pemberton-Pigott (New Dawn Engineering), Casper Thijssen (Philips), and Karabi Dutta.

The panel gave a comparative analysis of how different stove industries (multinational corporations, medium-scale companies, NGOs, small developers, etc.) addressed fundamental stove safety questions. These topics included:

a) applicability of standards and regulation;
b) incentives and benefits
c) facilities and equipment availability
d) cost vs. benefit
e) resulting action

We determined that each type of industry has a different perspective that influences their path or actions towards a safer stove. And that all sub-industries may not produce safer stoves given the same incentive mechanisms or policies. As such more than one path to safety may be needed to reach the greatest amount of end-users (and producers). The panel ended the discussion with an overview present work in stove safety with recommendations for next steps.

Please view the attached file for more details. I will be leading a group in 2009 to work on the following: assemble database of injury data, b) analyze incentive mechanisms, cost/ benefit, c) development of lab testing procedures for different stove categories, d) publication of findings/ results, and e) look for partnerships with international agencies to support safer stove design and production.

Please contact me if you have any questions. There will be more updates to follow. Best,
Nathan Johnson
atlas@iastate.edu
PhD Candidate, Mechanical Engineering, International Development
Iowa State University

Searching for an insertable insert stove
Ronald Hongsermeier, July 24, 2008

Tom Reed,

CO and PM Emissions from TLUD Cookstoves Presentation to 2009 ETHOS Conference, Kirkland, WA 23-25 January 2009 Paul Anderson, Biomass Energy Foundation, January 22, 2009

CO and PM in TLUDCO and PM in TLUD

Introduction Since 2005, high quality quantitative data on emissions from cookstoves have been accumulating. For data to be properly comparative, both a standardized cooking task and reliable emissions measurements are required. The principal test continues to be the standard five-liter Water Boiling Test (WBT), about which much has been written and debated. Equipment for reliable emissions measurements has been gathered, installed, tested, and accepted for operation at the Aprovecho Research Center (ARC) in Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA. No known equivalent site exists anywhere else in the world. Sincere thanks are given to the Shell Foundation, other financial donors, the ARC organization, and the numerous scientists who assisted in the establishment and operation of those emissions hoods. While the ARC facilitated the gathering of data presented here, the author is responsible for interpretations and any errors or omissions. Dozens of different stoves have been tested to various degrees with the ARC equipment and methodologies. Hundreds of separate test results have been collected. The two measured emissions are carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM). This report is focused upon those emissions from four categories of cookstoves: 1. The traditional “three-stone fire,” which provides baseline data. 2. “Simple improved cookstoves” that utilize basic combustion that is confined in various stove structures made of ceramics, mud, or metal. 3. “Rocket stoves” that utilize clear principles and designs that provide significant control over the amount of wood in the area of combustion, with some restriction on the flow of air to the combustion area. 4. “TLUD (top-lit updraft) gasifier stoves” that essentially separate in time and location three processes of biomass burning (pyrolysis, char-gasification, and combustion). They also emphasize separate control of primary and secondary air supplies. Robert Flanagan, a TLUD stove developer in China, has coined the term “third-generation cookstoves” for these stoves that have the capability to easily create and save charcoal for use as a “biochar” additive to improve soil fertility (as in “terra preta”) and to remove permanently carbon from the atmosphere. See attached presentation

ETHOS 2009 PROGRAM
Mark Bryden, January 21, 2009
ETHOS 2009 – Changing the World… one household at a time
NGOs, academics, students, technical trainers, and global programs.

Paal Wendelbo and His “Peko Pe” Top-Lit UpDraft (TLUD) Gasifier Cookstoves
Paul Anderson, January 19, 2009

Paal WendlboPaal Wendlbo

This report is in three parts: pioneer experiences; selection of photographs; and technical specifications of the PP stove. The report is based on e-mail interviews and materials provided by Paal Wendelbo in July 2008 and December to Paul S. Anderson, who has added interpretive content. Mr. Wendelbo has approved the basic content about himself, but Dr. Anderson is responsible for any errors, omissions, and editing.

--

This is an experiment using biomass in the KEROSENE WICK STOVE. http://e-kerbiostoveexp.blogspot.com/ (for more photographs) The stove was lit at the top using a little amount of biomass soaked in kerosene. The fine holes of 1 to 2 mm located all along the inner and outer frame are useful in achieving very good bluish flames. The flames continued for 30 to 45 minutes duration. Only at the end the performance was bad, the option was that, a lid was used to shut down safely. The fire was very high (Reasons I am not sure). If one does not have enough kerosene, and in emergency one can use the kerosene stoves too with fine wood shavings as fuel. The end product is very good biochar. I am thankful to TOM REED for explaining the functioning of a Kerosene stove, which was the motivation for doing this experiment. http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stoves_listserv.repp.org/2009-January...
Also see http://e-woodgasstovemodified.blogspot.com/

Competing for Development: A Case Study of Fuel Efficient Stoves for Darfur
Samer Abdelnour, Richard Ivey School of Business, University of Western Ontario,. June 20-21, 2008

A Teaching Tool

Pages

Subscribe to Improved Biomass Cooking Stoves RSS