Open Source TLUD Pyrolysis Stove Project
Inspired by the work of Paul S. Anderson [Dr. TLUD] , Hugh McLaughlin, and WorldStove, I offer the start of a small collection of photos of a Peacham natural draft TLUD made from recycled cans. I look forward to seeing how these pyrolysis units will be improved by the contributions of others to this Open Source project.
The goal, as is usually the case, is to provide designs for people to make their own clean burning stoves using the heat of pyrolysis at as close to zero cost as possible. This is not to take anything away from ‘manufactured’ stoves that are ‘sold’ and thus cost more. These very simple stoves, could in fact, be precursors to more sophisticated units.
1. Traditional three stove stoves, as used by about 2 billion people “at the bottom of the pyramid” are bad for the health of women and children — 5th largest killer of women and children — and tend to promote deforestation as women collect fire wood.
2. It will be a benefit to the people using three stone stoves if they can make for themselves nearly free stoves that burn much cleaner and thus reduce mortality from respiratory problems caused by three stone stove smoke [black soot].
3. Large particle black soot from three stone stoves also contributes to global climate disruption, even if it falls out of the atmosphere in a matter of weeks.
4. Stoves based on the complete combustion of their fuel produce no by-products with high utility or value to the family.
5. Very clean burning stoves, based upon pyrolysis:
- Substantially reduce deaths from inhalation of stove smoke
- Produce a by-product with high utility and value to the family [biochar];
- Reduce the pressure to burn “stick” wood and thus tend to reduce deforestation;
- Reduce the time required to acquire fuel for cooking;
- Give an immediate environmental benefit by substantially reducing the amount of large partical black carbon soot injected into the atmosphere.
The goal of this small Open Source Stove project is to remove as many barriers to the adoption of stoves based upon pyrolysis as possible.
Since the stoves have essentially cost zero, they may make good tools for educational purposes in schools. The younger people are when they learn about pyrolysis and biochar, the greater the over all benefit.
I like to ask this simple question:
What can I do with one can?
I can make a stove
I can cook a meal
I can make biochar
I can be carbon negative
I can start to change the world
That’s why I call my stoves iCans.
So welcome to the wonderful world of stoving. Just do it.
Resources
A Wood-Gas Stove for Developing Countries, 1996 paper by T. B. Reed & Ronal Larson. [Click on the link to download the PDF]
IBI: Biochar Misconceptions and the Science
The Peacham Volcano, a natural draft iCan TLUD stove project
Cans as they come from the store. Note: They are designed to inter-lock.
Two soup cans converted to a TLUD stove based on pyrolysis. The cat food can on top is a short draft enhancer. It is but one of many options. The bottom can is the fuel chamber. It works well with 1.5 cups of fuel. In the bottom of this can are some small primary air holes. I arrange them symmetrically. Often in triads. I start with holes that are about 7/64s of an inch. If there are too many holes I tape them over or fill them with small bolts. It is better to start with too few and too small holes.
The holes used for secondary air in the combustion chamber are interesting. The unit above is based on a 6 sets of holes. Seven sets may work better. The combustion chamber and the secondary air holes have to be tuned to work well with the fuel and with the nature of the primary air holes.
A Costco three pound coffee can has been added to act as both an insulator and a windshield.
An option is to also use a 6″ to 4″ “reducer” that will rest nicely on the coffee can. This can be used to support a grate. It will also capture some of the hot air trapped by the outer can.
2 comments Jock Gill | Agriculture, Climate Change, Community, Empowerment, Energy, Technology
Jock,
If you make three identical test-stoves, with just one small difference, and run them exactly the same way simultaneously. you see the best performer, and you can go into the right direction, from the aspect of the only difference.
If the test-stoves are made out of interchangable parts, there can be made a lot of experiments with re-used components, and so with less work.
An exact protocolling of all individuals of that “family” will be helpful, not to loss the thread.
I made this “three at once” proposal in the stoves list. the ony comment was that three stoves at the same time cannot be exactly measured; nobody saw the idea of “surviving of the fittest”
I wish you good progress.
P.S. 1.Mind to start with good fuel (I learned from Paul Anderson)
Martin,
Thanks for the note. I do use interchangeable parts and do multiple burns, but sequentially, to see what changes. You are right, this process tends to give you useful”direction” for your next round of tests. There is no end of learning.
As for fuels, I try to make my units robust enough to handle a wide range of feed stocks: wet wood chips, grass tablets, sun dried seed pods, wood pellets, etc. It is true that, if the fed stock is too far from what the unit was tuned for, you have to develop a unit tuned for the feed stock at hand.
Cheers,
Jock