Paul wants help coming up with a different name for rocket mass heaters

Don Ritter wrote:This is what someone who knows the history shared with me --

"Rocket stoves are not actually all that clean.

It already has a name, it is called the Walker Stove. If you want a better version just get plans from Matt Walker at Walker Stoves.

So leave the Rocket Mass heater where it is, an older technology that was a stage on the way to clean burning.

Dr TLUD has on his site about Rockets Stoves in regard to cooking. He is the one saying they are not really clean." [/b]
[/i]
Perhaps this may be helpful or not....

If one is making claims like this, show me the numbers, or I'm going to ignore you. Peter has consistently shown the numbers. I installed thermocouples in my stove so I could see the numbers.

This is the age of science.  Show the numbers. No excuses.

Solomon Parker wrote:

Don Ritter wrote:This is what someone who knows the history shared with me --

Dr TLUD has on his site about Rockets Stoves in regard to cooking. He is the one saying they are not really clean." [/b][/i]
[/i]
Perhaps this may be helpful or not....

If one is making claims like this, show me the numbers, or I'm going to ignore you. Peter has consistently shown the numbers. I installed thermocouples in my stove so I could see the numbers.

This is the age of science.  Show the numbers. No excuses.

So, yes, there are the numbers but they are on the quoted site. https://www.drtlud.com/introduction/  For my money Don Ritter is comparing apples with oranges.  The Top-loading Updraft (TLUD) cooker is just that.  It is a fairly complicated (to my mind) cooking system with a carboniferous residue. The RMH is primarily a space heater with adapted smart functions such as cooking and has a residue of some carbon but mainly minerals left from the plant metabolism. the TLUD is metal and has to be manufactured by someone who has the skill/ tools.  The RMH can be made by anyone out of anything ground/ earth based with the addition or otherwise of a metal flue system.

Don Ritter has shared a third person narrative which is "a story" and therefore not necessarily fact.  Solomon has chosen because there are no numbers (which there never usually are in a narrative) to ignore the post unless the numbers are produced. I went to the site and my take is that apples and oranges cannot be compared and both have their place in our world.

Jay Angler wrote:paul wheaton wrote:

So even if you burn the twigs that fall from the trees in your yard or amazon boxes, you could, from a certain perspective, call it a zero carbon heater.

I don't know about "zero", but it is "short cycle" carbon use. Fossil fuels are long cycle taking many lifetimes to go from plant life to fuel. Burning twigs take a blink of a lifetime because they will regrow in a season. Grow the right plants, and they have the ability to take over in a season! Ever seen Himalayan Blackberry grow on the Pacific Wet Coast? It's too prickly for me to want to use it in a RMH, but my Kiwi vine would be a pretty good contender - firewood and fruit on one vine.

Fossil fuels are no longer being produced. At some point fungi figured out how to eat wood and other plant matter, and it stopped accumulating into fossil fuel. And that accumulated plant matter took eons to become fossil fuels.  They truly are non-renewable.