Research article

Performance and emission reduction potential of micro-gasifier improved through better design

  • Received: 04 November 2016 Accepted: 27 December 2016 Published: 05 January 2017
  • Biomass gasification is getting popular for household cooking application in most developing countries including Ethiopia. The preference for biomass gasification is due to the generation of less CO (Carbon Monoxide) and PM (Particulate Matter) in comparison with other biomass cookstoves. Our study showed the improvement in thermal efficiency and emission reduction potential of micro-gasifier. A prototype micro-gasifier was built and tested using the water boiling test protocol. The test results gave a thermal efficiency of 39.6% and a specific fuel consumption of 57 g of fuel/ liter of water. With regard to indoor air pollution, the maximum CO & PM registered were 12.5 ppm and 1.85 mg/m3, respectively. Using clean development mechanism (CDM) methodology, the estimated emission reduction potential of the micro-gasifier is 1.30 tCO2 per micro-gasifier per year. Generally, the micro-gasifier has better performance compared to the previous designs proposed by other researchers. Thus, disseminating our micro-gasifier at a larger scale in developing countries such as Ethiopia will be beneficial in reducing deforestation and emission that will be brought about by using open-fire stoves and thus, helps to obtain carbon credit.

    Citation: Kamil Dino Adem, Demiss Alemu Ambie. Performance and emission reduction potential of micro-gasifier improved through better design[J]. AIMS Energy, 2017, 5(1): 63-76. doi: 10.3934/energy.2017.1.63

    Related Papers:

    [1] Kamil Dino Adem, Demiss Alemu Ambie, Maria Puig Arnavat, Ulrik Birk Henriksen, Jesper Ahrenfeldt, Tobias Pape Thomsen . First injera baking biomass gasifier stove to reduce indoor air pollution, and fuel use. AIMS Energy, 2019, 7(2): 227-245. doi: 10.3934/energy.2019.2.227
    [2] Junaid Akhlas, Silvia Baesso, Alberto Bertucco, Fabio Ruggeri . Coal gasification by indirect heating in a single moving bed reactor: Process development & simulation. AIMS Energy, 2015, 3(4): 635-665. doi: 10.3934/energy.2015.4.635
    [3] Jonathan B. Norman, Marcelle McManus . The techno-economic viability of bio-synthetic natural gas production utilising willow grown on contaminated land. AIMS Energy, 2019, 7(3): 285-312. doi: 10.3934/energy.2019.3.285
    [4] Evrard Karol Ekouedjen, Latif Adéniyi Fagbemi, Stephen Junior Zannou-Tchoko, Jihane Bakounoure . Energy performance, safety and durability of charcoal cooking stoves commonly used in West Africa: Benin case study. AIMS Energy, 2021, 9(1): 68-95. doi: 10.3934/energy.2021005
    [5] Sonia Longo, Maurizio Cellura, Francesco Guarino, Vincenzo La Rocca, Giuseppe Maniscalco, Massimo Morale . Embodied energy and environmental impacts of a biomass boiler: a life cycle approach. AIMS Energy, 2015, 3(2): 214-226. doi: 10.3934/energy.2015.2.214
    [6] Araz Alizadeh, MohammadBehshad Shafii, Alireza hajiseyed Mirzahosseini, Abtin Ataei . Experimental and simulation investigation of pulsed heat pipes in gas compressors. AIMS Energy, 2020, 8(3): 438-454. doi: 10.3934/energy.2020.3.438
    [7] Bimal Acharya, Ranjan R. Pradhan, Animesh Dutta . Qualitative and kinetic analysis of torrefaction of lignocellulosic biomass using DSC-TGA-FTIR. AIMS Energy, 2015, 3(4): 760-773. doi: 10.3934/energy.2015.4.760
    [8] Mojgan Pouralizadeh . A DEA model to sustainability improvement of the electricity supply chain in presence dual-role factors and undesirable outputs: A case on the power industry. AIMS Energy, 2020, 8(4): 580-614. doi: 10.3934/energy.2020.4.580
    [9] Lihao Chen, Kunio Yoshikawa . Bio-oil upgrading by cracking in two-stage heated reactors. AIMS Energy, 2018, 6(1): 203-215. doi: 10.3934/energy.2018.1.203
    [10] Badr Ouhammou, Fatima Zohra Gargab, Samir El idrissi kaitouni, Slimane Smouh, Rachid El mrabet, Mohammed Aggour, Abdelmajid Jamil, Tarik Kousksou . Energy saving potential diagnosis for Moroccan university campuses. AIMS Energy, 2023, 11(3): 576-611. doi: 10.3934/energy.2023030
  • Biomass gasification is getting popular for household cooking application in most developing countries including Ethiopia. The preference for biomass gasification is due to the generation of less CO (Carbon Monoxide) and PM (Particulate Matter) in comparison with other biomass cookstoves. Our study showed the improvement in thermal efficiency and emission reduction potential of micro-gasifier. A prototype micro-gasifier was built and tested using the water boiling test protocol. The test results gave a thermal efficiency of 39.6% and a specific fuel consumption of 57 g of fuel/ liter of water. With regard to indoor air pollution, the maximum CO & PM registered were 12.5 ppm and 1.85 mg/m3, respectively. Using clean development mechanism (CDM) methodology, the estimated emission reduction potential of the micro-gasifier is 1.30 tCO2 per micro-gasifier per year. Generally, the micro-gasifier has better performance compared to the previous designs proposed by other researchers. Thus, disseminating our micro-gasifier at a larger scale in developing countries such as Ethiopia will be beneficial in reducing deforestation and emission that will be brought about by using open-fire stoves and thus, helps to obtain carbon credit.


    Abbreviations and Acronyms

    AAiTAddis Ababa Institute of Technology
    AITAsian Institute of Technology
    ASTMAmerican Society of Testing and Materials
    CDMClean Development Mechanism
    COCarbon Monoxide
    EREmission Reduction
    FCRFuel Consumption Rate
    GHGGreenhouse Gas
    GTPGrowth and Transformation Plan
    PMParticulate Matter
    SFCSpecific Fuel Consumption
    SGRSpecific Gasification Rate
    UNFCCCUnited Nation Framework for Climate Change Convention
    WBTWater Boiling Test
    WHOWorld Health Organization
    Bold,capitaAverage baseline fuel wood consumption in tones per capita per year
    HCfuelwood,usage,yHost country national fuel wood consumption in tones per year y
    By,deviceAverage annual consumption of woody biomass per appliance in tones per year
    FWproportionProportion of household fuel wood consumed by micro-gasifier
    ERy,microgasifierEmission reductions by project device during year y in tCO2e (tones of CO2 equivalent)
    fNRB,y Fraction of woody biomass saved by the project activity in year y that can be established as non-renewable biomass using default country specific fraction of non-renewable woody biomass
    NCVbiomassNet calorific value of the non-renewable woody biomass that is substituted
    EFprojected_fossilfuel Emission factor for the substitution of non-renewable woody biomass by similar consumers
    Ny,microgasifierNumber of project devices of type i=1 operating in year y


    1. Introduction

    In developing countries, 50% of the population depends on traditional use of biomass. More specifically, in Sub-Saharan Africa, around 753 million people (i.e. 80 percent of the population) use biomass as energy source. And 95 percent of the population living in Ethiopia uses biomass energy for household activities as well [1]. This will likely to continue in the future [2]. In developing countries, traditional biomass stoves are inefficient and are causing indoor air pollution. In order to curb this problem, gasifier stoves are becoming popular. The only improved biomass cookstove selected for dissemination in Ethiopia is Tikikil which has a thermal efficiency of 28% [3]. This cookstove saved on average 1.07 tons of CO2 per stove where it is used in kaficho zone, Ethiopia [4].

    Biomass gasification is considered as the future concept for cookstoves which are mostly forced type [5]. Currently, the number of patents obtained by companies for small-scale gasifiers are relatively low [6]. Reed and Larson [7] initiated the concept of gasification of wood gas stoves for cooking applications and the test result showed better performance in indoor air pollution and efficiency. Later on, a natural draft cross-flow gasifier tested at AIT (Asian Institute of Technology) also showed a thermal efficiency of 27% [8]. Other authors also reported a thermal efficiency of 26.5% and 35% with CO (3-6 ppm) and CO2 (17-25 ppm) for gasifier stoves [9,10]. Dixit, et al. [11] has also reported a thermal efficiency of 37%.Mukunda, et al. [12] stated that forced draft gasifier stoves reached thermal efficiency of up to 50%. A number of efforts are underway to compare empirical result with computational models for gasifier stoves and generally, the results showed reasonable approximation between the two [13]. However, to increase the thermal efficiency and reduce the indoor air pollution remains to be researched. As a result, bringing a more efficient and less polluting gasifier stoves remain to be a challenge for researchers. In light of this, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a micro-gasifier using woody biomass and compare its advantage in terms of indoor air pollution and generation of carbon credit.


    2. Materials and Method


    2.1. Type of stove and materials for manufacturing

    A gasifier stove as is shown in Figure 1 has been developed at AAiT (Addis Ababa Institute of Technology- Ethiopia). its primary air inlet consists of four holes with a diameter of 30 mm at 900 apart on the outer casing and 12 holes with a diameter of 4 mm at the bottom of the inner cylinder. The secondary air is used for combusting the gases produced from pyrolysis of the biomass. For doing this, there are 6 holes with a diameter of 4 mm at the top of the central pipe.

    Figure 1. Micro-gasifier.

    Most parts of the micro-gasifier such as: reactor, outer casing, bottom cover and central pipe were made of mild steel with a thickness of 1.5 mm. The handle is the only part which is made of wood.


    2.2. Fuel used for testing

    The type of fuel used for conducting the laboratory test was Eucalyptus tree which is commonly used in most part of Ethiopia. Proximate analysis was conducted to analyze the feed stock characteristics. The feed stock characteristics were, moisture content (ASTM D3173-73), volatile matter (ASTM D3175-73) and ash content (ASTM D3174-73). Fixed carbon (FC) was also determined using material balance. Physical and thermal properties of the biomass are shown in Table 1.

    Table 1. Physical and thermal properties of eucalyptus tree as feed stock.
    Characteristics Biomass (Eucalyptus Tree)
    Size (mm) 15-20
    Length (mm) 30-50
    Dry density (kg m−3) 480
    Moisture content(% wb) 5.64
    Volatile matter (% db) 80.81
    Ash content (%db) 54
    Fixed carbon (%db) 13.02
    Calorific value (MJ kg−1) 18.64
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    2.3. Design of Micro-gasifier

    To manufacture the micro-gasifier, it requires mild steel sheet metal with a thickness of 1.5 mm. The micro-gasifier was manufactured to be aesthetically appealing to the users. User satisfaction is one of the parameters used to evaluate stove acceptability at community level.

    The design procedure outlined in [14] was used to come up with the major parameters required for drafting and manufacturing the gasifier stove. This includes Energy Input, Reactor Diameter, and Height of reactor.

    Energy required for cooking (Energy demand): This refers to the amount of energy need for cooking of a kg of rice [1]. It can be computed by knowing the type of food to be cooked, the specific energy (Es=331.8 kJ/kg) and the time required (T=15 min) for cooking.

    Qn=Mfx EsT=0.369 kW (1)

    Energy input for cooking (Energy input): This is the amount of energy required for cooking and to be supplied for the heating application. The calorific value of the fuel is 18.64 MJ/kg. Assuming a stove efficiency of 17%, the fuel consumption rate of the fuel can be computed as follows:

    FCR=Qn(HVf)(ξg)=0.419 kg/hr (2)

    Reactor Diameter: It is a major parameter of the micro-gasifier. It is the diameter of the reactor which is obtained by the ratio of FCR to SGR. Assuming FCR to be 2 kg/hr and SGR to be 120 kg/m2hr, the reactor diameter is calculated by the following formula.

    D=1.27 FCRSGR=145 mm (3)

    Hence, the diameter of the reactor is assumed to be 200 mm for this particular case in order to accommodate the variation of cooking habits throughout the country.

    Reactor Height: This is the overall height of the reaction chamber. This dimension indicates the loading capacity of the reactor. It is calculated based on ρa=100kg/m3.

    H=SGRxTρa=300 mm (4)

    For this particular test, the height is reduced to 260 mm to compensate the increase in diameter.


    2.4. Performance evaluation methods

    The laboratory test performed to evaluate the stove performance was based on a revised version of the Water Boiling Test Protocol [15].

    Thermal Efficiency: The amount of heat gained by the water inside the pot and evaporated compared to the energy of the fuel used for heating. The value for the efficiency can be computed based on the following equation:

    ηth=mwCp(TfTi)+mevhfg.wmfLHVf (5)

    Burning rate: The rate of fuel consumption during which the water gets boiled. It is calculated by dividing the equivalent dry fuel consumed by the time of the test.

    rcb=fcd Δ tc (6)

    Specific fuel consumption: The amount of fuel consumed per unit mass of boiled water. It is calculated based on the following formula

    SFC=fcdmw (7)

    Fire power: This is the fuel energy consumed to boil the water divided by the time to boil. It tells the average power output of the stove (in Watts) during the high-power test.


    2.5. Instrumentation for measurement

    Figure 2 shows the test set-up for conducting the water boiling test and the corresponding equipment required for conducting the test. The instruments used for measuring the temperature were K-Type thermocouple and an infrared thermometer for measuring flame temperature. In addition, sensitive balance was used for measuring the weight of water and fuel. A standard pot commonly used in Ethiopia was used to evaluate the performance of the micro-gasifier which is 7 liter capacity stainless steel pot with 5 liter of water.

    Figure 2. Test set-up of micro-gasifier and open-fire stove.

    Figure 3 below shows the feedstock, sensitive balance and thermometer which were used to evaluate the performance of the micro-gasifier. The standard water boiling test protocol was used to obtain the thermal efficiency of the micro-gasifier.

    Figure 3. Wood and sensitive balance used for the test.

    Carbon monoxide and particulate matter concentrations as well as room temperataure were logged every minute during sampling period of the laboratory test. The test room is selected in such a way that it simulates a typical rural household kitchen (2 m × 2 m area and 2.5 m-height). The instruments used for measurement were CO data logger with USB interface (EL-USB-CO with accuracy of ±6 ppm) for carbon monoxide; UCB Particulate Monitor (University of California, Berkeley) for particulate matter (PM2.5); and thermocouple data logger with USB interface (EL-USB-TC-LCD with accuracy of ±1 °C) for temperature. The procedure used to set the above cited instruments were based on the procedure outlined by the University of California-Berkeley. The standard procedure for installing the indoor air pollution (IAP) instruments is approximately 100 cm from the edge of the combustion zone and a height of 145 cm from the floor. Here, it is also recommended to place the instruments at least 150 cm away (horizontally) from openable doors and windows where possible [16].


    3. Results and Discussion


    3.1. Thermal efficiency and specific fuel consumption

    The final output of the micro-gasifier designed and manufactured at Addis Ababa Institute of Technology (AAiT) is shown in Fig.4 with the final paints to make it appealing to the end users.

    Figure 4. Designed and manufactured micro-gasifier.

    Thermal efficiency is calculated based on output over input heat energy. The output is related to the amount of heat supplied to the water in the pot and the input is the energy supplied to the water from the wood burned in the micro-gasifier. The average thermal efficiency obtained is 39.6 ± percent. The other performance indicator is the specific fuel consumption, which shows 70 percent improvement compared to the open fire stove (Table 2).

    Table 2. Performance Parameters for Micro-gasifier.
    No. Test parameters High Power Test (Cold Start)
    Micro-gasifier Three-stone
    Test-1 Test-2 Test-3 Avg. Standard Error Test-1
    1. Time to boil Pot #1 (min) 30 32 33 31.7 0.87 24
    2. Temp-corrected time to boil Pot #1 (min) 34 34 34 34.0 0.23 27
    3. Burning rate (g/min) 9 9 7 8.0 0.81 35
    4. Thermal efficiency (%) 37 35 47 39.6 3.76 14
    5. Specific fuel consumption (g/liter) 58 65 49 57.0 4.62 187
    6. Temp-corrected specific fuel consumption (g/liter) 66 68 50 61.0 5.83 213
    7. Temp-corrected specific energy cons. (kJ/liter) 1247 1285 940 1158.0 109.4 4013
    8. Firepower (watts) 2822 2954 2158 2644.7 246.2 10913
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Bhattacharya and Leon [8]and Belonio [14] obtained a thermal efficiency of a gasifier stove as 27% and 25.9%, respectively. Dixit, et al. [11] also reported thermal efficiency of a gasifier stove as 37%. Panwar and Rathore [9] and Panwar [10] obtained 26.5% and 35%, respectively. The thermal efficiency and specific fuel consumption of our micro-gasifier showed improvement compared to the existing gasifier stoves in the market (Table 2).

    As it is usually expected, the time required for boiling 5 liter of water in Addis Ababa using micro-gasifier is 70 percent higher than using the open-fire stove. The Firepower of the micro-gasifier is around 2.60 kW. In this study, the feedstock was limited to woody biomass in which case the inclusion of other feedstock may bring a different value in terms of thermal efficiency and indoor air pollution.


    3.2. Boiling point of water in Addis Ababa-Ethiopia - AAiT Workshop

    In order to ensure the precision of computing the performance of the micro-gasifier, the boiling point of water was experimentally determined rather than calculating using the altitude. The mean boiling point of water in Addis Ababa was 91 °C where the altitude is 2355 m (Figure 5). As shown in Figure 5, three tests were conducted to determine the average boiling temperature of water in a specific location.

    Figure 5. Boiling point of water in Addis Ababa.

    3.3. Indoor air pollution

    The major two emissions considered for this test in relation to indoor pollution were CO and PM. Figure 5 shows the variation of CO during the test period. The maximum CO exhibited during this test was 12.5 ppm which is below the WHO standard set as 30.6 ppm for 1 hour exposure [17]. As shown in Figure 5, the CO measurements exhibited the maximum value during the 40-50 minutes cooking time.

    Figure 6. CO concentrations during testing.

    Similarly, the amount of PM generated during the test period is plotted to see whether it is in the acceptable range or not. The maximum amount of PM recorded was 1.85 mg/m3 during the testing period (Figure 7). WHO guideline indicates that the annual mean & 24-hour mean for PM2.5 is 10 mg/m3 and 25 mg/m3, respectively [18]. Thus, the experimental result for PM2.5 is well below the recommended value. The reduction in PM of micro-gasifier showed 10-12 folds which is a huge advantage in terms of indoor air pollution, making the stove highly acceptable by the users.

    Figure 7. PM concentrations during testing.

    Indoor air pollution is responsible for the death of many people in developing countries during cooking. This can be substantially reduced by improving and introducing micro-gasifier. By using a better design of micro gasifier as shown in our case, it was possible to reduce the two emissions that are good indicator of indoor air pollution, CO and PM-where they were significantly reduced below WHO standard [16].

    The room used for conducting the test was a simulated typical Ethiopian rural household in which case the door was completely open to the outside. There were also some openings in the upper part of the room. Figure 8 shows the variation of the room temperature with time during the operation of the stove.

    Figure 8. Room temperature vs time.

    3.4. Time vs temperature variation for various tests

    The variation of temperature as heating was continued until the water reached its boiling point was shown in Figure 9. In the four testes conducted, the temperature exhibited a similar trend

    Figure 9. Temperature of water during heating process.

    showing the consistency of the boiling of the water at the given altitude and pressure. Similarly, the result indicates the precision level of our test result.


    3.5. Conservative estimate for GHG reduction potential

    As we have mentioned above, the majority of the population in Ethiopia uses biomass energy for cooking. In order to estimate the GHG saving from introducing micro-gasifiers, the reference dissemination potential of households could be considered based on GTP 2 of Ethiopian Government Plan. In this plan, 11.25 million improved cookstoves are expected to be distributed in the coming five years. The discussion under section 3.5. focuses on estimation of the amount of CO2 reduced per unit of micro-gasifier, where the total amount of CO2 reduction can be computed based on baseline survey for a specific location.

    The approach followed to calculate the amount of emission reduced per unit of micro-gasifier was based on the clean development mechanism (CDM) methodology outlined by UNFCCC [19].

    Bold,capita=HCfuelwood,usage,yHCpopulation,y (8)
    HCfuelwood,usage,y=Fuel wood consumption in cubic meters  x  Wood density (10)

    Fuel wood consumption in cubic meters =80,185,000 m3 [20]

    Wood density = 0.725 t/m3 [21]

    HCfuelwood,usage,y = 80,185,000 m3 x 0.725 t/m3 = 58,134,125 t/year

    HCpopulation,y = 84,320,987 [22]

    Bold,capita=0.689 t/year

    Nresidents,household= 6

    By,device=Bold,capita x Nresidents,household x FWproportion (11)

    FWproportion = 41.50% for cooking application

    By,device= 1.72 t/device/year

    ηold=10 [The default value of 10% was applied as the systems to be replaced are three stone fires].

    ηnew,microgasifier=39.6Bold,microgasifier=By,deivce,microgasifier x Ly (12)

    The default net to gross adjustment factor of 0.95 has been applied to account for leakages:

    Bold,microgasifier=1.63  t/device

    By,savings,microgasifier=Bold,microgasifier x (1ηoldηnew,microgasifier) (13)
    By,savings,microgasifier=1.21tdevice/year

    The emission reductions created by the micro-gasifier are calculated as follows:

    ERy,microgasifier=       By,savings,microgafier x fNRB,y  x NCVbiomass x EFprojectedfossilfuel x Ny,microgasifier (14)

    fNRB,y =88 [23]

    NCVbiomass= 0.015 TJ/tone (IPCC default for wood fuel on wet basis)

    EFprojected_fossilfuel=  81.6 tCO2/TJ

    ERy,microgasifier= 1.30 tCO2/device/year

    The emission reduction potential of the micro-gasifier, in terms of carbon credit saving which was calculated as 1.30 tCO2/device/year is better than other biomass cookstove promoted in the country by various institutions. For instance, World Vision Ethiopia claimed 1.14 tCO2/device/year [24].

    Our result showed better emission reduction which implies that the micro-gasifier tested in our study has a bigger contribution towards CO2 emission to the environment, thereby reducing global warming and climate change.


    3.6. Manufacturing cost of micro-gasifier

    The micro-gasifier was made of mild steel sheet metal with 1.5mm thickness and assumed that it will be used at least for five years without maintenance. The unit production cost of the micro-gasifier is 10.85 USD (Table 3). This cost could be partially covered from the carbon saving of the micro-gasifier which is 1.3 tCO2/device/year. For wider dissemination of the micro-gasifier, awareness creation about the benefit and its implication for alleviating the health problems need to be carried out through joint efforts of governmental and non-governmental and organizations.

    Table 3. Manufacturing cost of micro-gasifier.
    No. Description Total cost (USD)
    1 Mild steel sheet metal 1.85m x 0.50m x 1.5mm 4.50
    2 Pipe 3/4'' and 260mm 0.35
    3 Mild steel sheet metal 0.131m x 0.045m x 4.0mm 0.35
    4 Rectangular Hollow Section(RHS) 20mm x 30mm x 1.5mm and length 180mm 0.35
    5 Wood(for handle) Dia. 20mm and 110mm 0.05
    6 Machining cost (cutting, grinding, drilling, etc…) 3.75
    7 Labour cost 1.50
    Total 10.85
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    4. Conclusion

    Based on our study, a gasifier stove is worth promoting rather than biomass cookstoves and open-fire stoves. This is due to its thermal efficiency and less indoor air pollution and emission reduction. Disseminating this micro-gasifier will result in a reduced fuel wood use in the rural parts of Ethiopia where local people widely use open-fire stove for household cooking. It also reduces indoor air pollution which is the cause of death incidents; and reduction of CO2 emission which has tremendous implications for the environment in terms of global warming and climate change. The cost of micro-gasifier is relatively small and even that could be subsidized by having a partial carbon credit by selling the emission reduced. Such experience is already available within the country with some non-governmental organization like World Vision Ethiopia. Hence, this micro-gasifier is a better choice for the users.


    Acknowledgments

    This research was funded by Addis Ababa University (AAU) and Ethiopian Climate Innovation Center (ECIC). We would like to thank the Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Electricity and Ethio Resource Group (ERG) PLC for lending us the instruments which we used for various measurements during the test period.


    Conflict of Interest

    All authors declare no conflict of interest in this paper.


    [1] IEA (2015) World Energy Outlook. Population relying on traditonal use of biomass for cooking in 2013.
    [2] Beyene AD, Koch SF (2013) Clean fuel-saving technology adoption in urban Ethiopia. Energy Economics 36: 605-613. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.11.003
    [3] GIZ-ECO, D.G.f.I.Z.-E.C.O. (2009) Water Boiling Test Results of Various Types of Household Wood Stoves for Non-Injera Cooking.
    [4] Dresen E, DeVries B, Herold M, et al. (2014) Fuelwood Savings and Carbon Emission Reductions by the Use of Improved Cooking Stoves in an Afromontane Forest, Ethiopia. Land 3: 1137. doi: 10.3390/land3031137
    [5] Sutar KB, Kohli S, Ravi MR, et al. (2015) Biomass cookstoves: A review of technical aspects. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41: 1128-1166. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.003
    [6] Kirkels AF, Verbong GPJ (2011) Biomass gasification: Still promising? A 30-year global overview. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15: 471-481.
    [7] Reed TB, Larson R (1996) A wood-gas stove for developing countries. Energ Sust Develop 3: 34-37. doi: 10.1016/S0973-0826(08)60589-X
    [8] Bhattacharya SC, Leon MA (2003) A Biomass-Fired Gasifier Stove (IGS-2) For Institutional Cooking. Available from: http://www.faculty.ait.asia/kumar/rets/Publications/Glow_ Indonesia.pdf. [accessed 29.09.2016]
    [9] Panwar NL, Rathore NS (2008) Design and performance evaluation of a 5 kW producer gas stove. Biomass Bioenerg 32: 1349-1352. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.04.007
    [10] Panwar NL (2009) Design and performance evaluation of energy efficient biomass gasifier based cookstove on multi fuels. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 14: 627-633. doi: 10.1007/s11027-009-9187-4
    [11] Dixit CSB, Paul PJ, Mukunda HS (2006) Part I: Experimental studies on a pulverised fuel stove. Biomass Bioenerg 30: 673-683. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2006.01.011
    [12] Mukunda H, Dasappa S, Paul PJ, et al. (2010) Gasifier stoves - science, technology and field outreach. Curr Sci 98: 627-638.
    [13] Varunkumar S, Rajan NKS, Mukunda HS (2012) Experimental and computational studies on a gasifier based stove. Energ Convers Manage 53: 135-141. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2011.08.022
    [14] Belonio AT (2005) Rice Husk Gas Stove Handbook.
    [15] WBT, v., Water boiling test v.4.2.3. Cookstove Emissions and Efficiency in a Controlled Laboratory Setting, 2013.
    [16] University of California, B. Installing Indoor Air Pollution Instruments in a Home, Version 5.1. 2005 Available from: http://berkeleyair.com/wp-content/publications/guidelines-for-instrument- placement.pdf. [accessed 10.08.2016]
    [17] WHO, R.O.f.E. (2010) WHO guidelines for indoor air quality: selected pollutants. Available from: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/128169/e94535.pdf. [accessed 03.09.2016]
    [18] WHO (2014) WHO indoor air quality guidelines: household fuel combustion. Available from: www.who.int/indoorair/guidelines/hhfc/HHFC_guidelines.pdf. [accessed 03 September 2016]
    [19] UNFCCC (2012) CDM, Small-Scale Methodology: Energy Efficiency Measures in Thermal Applications (AMS-II.G). Available from: https://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/DB/DCO8WRR QVTGLH1GHQBCL035F5M13R8. [accessed 19.09.2016]
    [20] UN, U.N.S.D. (2013) Energy Statistics Database. Available from: http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=EDATA&f=cmID%3aFW%3btrID%3a06. [accessed 28.09.2016]
    [21] FAO (2004) Unified Bioenergy Terminology. Available from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/j8227e/j8227e11.htm#P1131_70563. [accessed 19.09.2016]
    [22] Ethiopia, C.S.A.-. (2012) Population Statistics Abstract. Available from: http://www.csa.gov.et/images/documents/pdf_files/nationalstatisticsabstract/2011/2011%20population.pdf. [accessed 28.09.2016]
    [23] UNFCCC. (2012) Default values of fraction of non-renewable biomass. Available from: http://cdm.unfccc.int/DNA/fNRB/index.html. [accessed 28.09.2016]
    [24] World Vison Ethiopia, W. (2013) Energy Efficient Stoves Program, CDM Program of Activities Design Document. Available from: https://cdm.unfccc.int/ProgrammeOfActivities/poa_db/5TE6 HLP1Z4KOABSDI873YQCFGXW2RM/view. [accessed 24.09.2016
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Bassazin Ayalew Mekonnen, Thermal efficiency improvement and emission reduction potential by adopting improved biomass cookstoves for sauce-cooking process in rural Ethiopia, 2022, 38, 2214157X, 102315, 10.1016/j.csite.2022.102315
    2. U. Omsakthivel, T. Lakshmanan, S. Sekar, B. Stalin, Performance and emission characteristics of a micro-gasifier-based cook stove using solid biomass, Melia dubia and Casuarina, 2021, 45, 0315-8977, 573, 10.1139/tcsme-2020-0164
    3. Jasper Okino, Allan John Komakech, Joshua Wanyama, Herbert Ssegane, Elly Olomo, Timothy Omara, Pallav Purohit, Performance Characteristics of a Cooking Stove Improved with Sawdust as an Insulation Material, 2021, 2021, 2314-4394, 1, 10.1155/2021/9969806
    4. Assefa Tesfaye Hailu, Tayachew Nega, Nasim Hasan, Etsegenet Worku, Design and performance evaluation of low-emission injera baking biomass gasifier stove, 2023, 2190-6815, 10.1007/s13399-023-04441-0
    5. S.U. Yunusa, E. Mensah, K. Preko, S. Narra, A. Saleh, Safietou Sanfo, M. Isiaka, I.B. Dalha, M. Abdulsalam, Biomass cookstoves: A review of technical aspects and recent advances, 2023, 11, 27724271, 100225, 10.1016/j.nexus.2023.100225
    6. Tigist Elias Haile, Kamil Dino Adem, Experimental evaluation of low-cost thermoelectric integrated rocket stove, 2024, 7, 27727831, 100112, 10.1016/j.cles.2024.100112
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(6584) PDF downloads(1286) Cited by(6)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(9)  /  Tables(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog