Woodgas Stove

[Brad]

Mike,

Its a good piece of kit and not too difficult to get the hsng off. Very fuel efficient aswell. I know you have already ordered one but have a look at the following-this one doesn't use batteries

http://www.bushbuddy.ca/index1.html

Brad

[woodburner]

I think the Woodgas stove could be run without batteries and would probably give similar performance as the Bushbuddy. There isn't quite enough draught available to give the best combustion unless a fan or an additional chimney is used with small stoves. This is a fact of life with combustion, it cannot be scaled down, so small fires are a problem.

[sam_uk]

I am also planning on getting a woodgas stove with a fan and then adding a thermo electric generator (TEG) to recharge the battery.

Basically make a stove similar to the Phillips one
http://money.cnn.com/popups/2006/fortun ... ing/5.html

I believe that a HT 6-12-40 from Melcor is a suitable TEG to use..

[woodburner]

I think a 9-3-25 would be adequate. The Woodgas stove uses 2 AA batteries and they last for hours.

[mikepepler]

Well, I have the stove and it works nicely! However, you have to light it properly - I had one attempt that made smoke for 10 minutes before it got going, and another that lit properly in under a minute. They suggest using a lighting gel to get it going, but I won't do that...

With the thermoelectric generator, where do you plan to fix it on to the stove? Wouldn't you still need a battery to get it going so there's some heat for the generator? Or could you pop a chimney on top to get it started?

[sam_uk]

In the Phillips stove above the fire is built on top of the well insulated TEG.

Here is some blurb from the guy who designed the Phillips stove

http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stov ... 05343.html

[kenneal - lagger]

I still think the basic rocket stove is the best. You get a

clean, complete burn,
it's easy to constant feed,
no technology to go wrong,
no expensive technology to pay for and
can be made from completely recycled materials.

OK, it's not such a Big Boy's Toy as a woodgas stove but it's much more sustainable and just as efficient.

[CountingDown]

I still think the basic rocket stove is the best. You get a

clean, complete burn,
it's easy to constant feed,
no technology to go wrong,
no expensive technology to pay for and
can be made from completely recycled materials.

OK, it's not such a Big Boy's Toy as a woodgas stove but it's much more sustainable and just as efficient.

Any recommendations on where to buy / how to make Ken?

[emordnilap]

I still think the basic rocket stove is the best. You get a

clean, complete burn,
it's easy to constant feed,
no technology to go wrong,
no expensive technology to pay for and
can be made from completely recycled materials.

OK, it's not such a Big Boy's Toy as a woodgas stove but it's much more sustainable and just as efficient.

Any recommendations on where to buy / how to make Ken?

There are some excellent videos on YouTube.

[CountingDown]

There are some excellent videos on YouTube.

Thanks, I'll go and have a look.

{note to self - remember to take picture of current shape of eyebrows before attempting to light stove}

[emordnilap]

There are some excellent videos on YouTube.

Thanks, I'll go and have a look.

{note to self - remember to take picture of current shape of eyebrows before attempting to light stove}

This is a particularly good one.

However, searching for 'building rocket stove' brings up tons of results.

[sam_uk]

I still think the basic rocket stove is the best. You get a
clean, complete burn,
it's easy to constant feed,
no technology to go wrong,
no expensive technology to pay for and
can be made from completely recycled materials.
OK, it's not such a Big Boy's Toy as a woodgas stove but it's much more sustainable and just as efficient.

Fair enough. I get the impression that the woodgas stove is more efficient than the rocket stove as it more completely combusts the wood. However I cannot find a direct comparison of the efficiency anywhere..

(edit - found some data on CO2 emissions which suggests that gasifiers are more efficient)



Computer fans are discarded in their thousands every day and are easy to come across, so apart from a TEG (which should last a very long time) then a woodgas stove can be built from recycled materials too.

I think rocket stoves are great, and plan to build one sometime, but it looks to me that a woodgas stove would make more efficent use of a limited wood resource.

[woodburner]

I get the impression that the woodgas stove is more efficient than the rocket stove as it more completely combusts the wood. However I cannot find a direct comparison of the efficiency anywhere.

I don't think the woodgas stove is more efficient than a rocket stove. The Woodgas stove was intended for camping and so needed to be light and portable. A rocket stove can be larger and made from insulating material that can run very hot. It can be continuously fed, and so suits another purpose.

A huge jump in efficiency is when a skirt is used round the pot to ensure the hot gases stay close to the pot, and this applies with any stove.

[sam_uk]

I don't think the woodgas stove is more efficient than a rocket stove.

OK I finally found some hard data, both types seem to have their advantages and disadvantages.
http://www.aprovecho.org/web-content/pu ... %20GWP.pdf

Rockets are most efficient in terms of using the smallest amount of fuel to cook. (boil then simmer)


Fan driven stoves are quicker and use less fuel to boil water, they also release less particulate matter.



They seem about equal in terms of global warming impact.

[/img]

So boil the kettle on a fan stove, but make soup on a rocket..

[DominicJ]

Shouldnt it be the other way round?
The more CO2 produced, the more carbon from the wood has reacted so the more completely its been burned, or is the particulate matter important?