Sustainable Cooking Based on a 3 kW Air-Forced Multifuel Gasification Stove Using Alternative Fuels Obtained from Agricultural Wastes
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Case
2.2. Fuels
- (1st)
- Carbonization: carried out in a traditional furnace composed of a cylindrical metal barrel 80 cm in diameter and 120 cm high. The metal barrel has about 30 vent holes, 3 cm diameter each, at its lower base. The removable upper base has a 10 cm diameter and 100 cm high chimney. Char waste is introduced from the top with a quantity of 20 kg of solid waste (rice husks or peanuts). The fire is lit from the top of this furnace. The carbonization system is endothermic in oxygen, evolving at temperatures between 250–500 °C for 2–3 h. After this, holes in the lower base are covered and the lid is closed until cooled, which can last 3–4 h. The carbonization yield varies between 18–20%.
- (2nd)
- Grinding: the char waste is placed in a mortar with an artisanal pestle to convert the charred waste into a fine powder with a grain size of 1 mm.
- (3rd)
- Binding: the resulting powder, combined with a binder biomass (paper pulp and cassava fibers), is mixed properly to have a good homogenization.
- (4th)
- Densification: this mixture is manually densified to form the briquettes.
- (5th)
- Drying: the briquettes are dried in the sun for three days before their use.
2.3. Stoves
- Reactor: it is cylindrical, 12 cm internal diameter and 19 cm deep, and surrounded by a 1 cm layer of clay.
- Secondary Air Duct Tunnel: a second, 16 cm cylinder surrounds the reactor, so a 1 mm gap allows secondary air to rise, sweeping through the reactor body. This allows preheating of the secondary air.
- Thermal insulation: a 4 cm layer of rock wool
- Fan: a small 3 W-12 V DC motor provides the primary and secondary air supply.
- Power supply: a small 5 W solar panel that charges a 9 Ah-12 V lithium battery.
- Regulation: a potentiometric circuit allows varying the supply voltage of the small motor, to control the primary and secondary airflows.
- Outer shell: it is a 24 cm cube made of 1 mm thick sheet metal. The lower base is perforated to allow the motor to inject ambient air.
2.4. Instrumentation
- -
- Balance OHAUS V11 P6 with a 6 kg capacity and 0.1 g accuracy. Used to determine the amount of fuel used in the WBT and CCT test.
- -
- Balance OHAUS NVL 20,000/2 with a 20 kg capacity and 1 g accuracy. This scale was used to measure the amount of water to boil during the WBT test and the amount of dry and cooked meal during the CCT test.
- -
- Balance Mettler AB304-S/FACT with a 320 g capacity and 0.1 mg accuracy. It was used for the characterization of briquettes
- -
- Select Muffle Furnace SELECT-HORN, Capacity 9 L. Power 3000 W. Maximum temperature 1100 °C. This muffle was used for the thermo-physical characterization of briquettes
- -
- Combustion calorimeter CAL2 K/1. Resolution 0.001 MJ/kg and 0.000001 °C. To allow for the determination of the calorific value of the briquettes
2.5. Methods
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Performance Analysis Using the WBT Method
3.2. Results from the CCT Analysis
3.3. Environmental Analysis
3.4. Socioeconomic Analysis
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
BC | Black carbon |
BSW | solid fuel briquettes |
CCT | cooking controlled test |
ER-CO2 | Carbon dioxide emission reduction |
FCR | Fuel consumption rate |
HP | High power WBT phase |
ICS-G | improved gasification stove |
LP | low power WBT phase |
PM | particle matter |
PEMS | portable emissions measurement system |
DRC | Democratic Republic of Congo |
SA | Stequiometric air |
SFC | specific fuel consumption |
SEC | specific energy consumption |
SGR | specific gasification rate |
TCS | traditional stove |
WBT | water boiling test |
References
- Bhutto, A.W.; Bazmi, A.A.; Karim, S.; Abro, R.; Mazari, S.A.; Nizamuddin, S. Promoting sustainability of use of biomass as energy resource: Pakistan’s perspective. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 29606–29619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IEA. From Poverty to Prosperity. In World Energy Outlook Special Report; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2017; Available online: https://www.oecd.org/publications/energy-access-outlook-2017-9789264285569-en.htm (accessed on 19 February 2020).
- Maes, W.H.; Verbist, B. Increasing the sustainability of household cooking in developing countries: Policy implications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 4204–4221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.X.; Zhenfeng, S.; Yinghua, Z.; Hongyan, D.; Yuguang, Z.; Yixiang, Z.; Ahmad, R.; Pemberton-Pigott, C.; Renjie, D. Effects of biomass pellet composition on the thermal and emissions performances of a TLUD cooking stove. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2017, 10, 189–197. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Dong, R. The Influences of Various Testing Conditions on the Evaluation of Household Biomass Pellet Fuel Combustion. Energies 2018, 11, 1131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mwampamba, T.; Ghilardi, A.; Sander, K.; Chaix, K.J. Dispelling common misconceptions to improve attitudes and policy outlook on charcoal in developing countries. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2013, 17, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, D.; Ryan, C.; Fisher, J. Charcoal as a diversification strategy: The flexible role of charcoal production in the livelihoods of smallholders in central Mozambique. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2016, 32, 14–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chiteculo, V.; Lojka, B.; Surový, P.; Verner, V.; Panagiotidis, D.; Woitsch, J. Value Chain of Charcoal Production and Implications for Forest Degradation: Case Study of Bié Province, Angola. Environments 2018, 5, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lynch, M. Reducing Environmental Damage Caused by the Collection of Cooking Fuel by Refugees. Can. J. Refug. 2002, 21, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbieri, J.; Parigi, F.; Riva, F.; Colombo, E. Laboratory Testing of the Innovative Low-Cost Mewar Angithi Insert for Improving Energy Efficiency of Cooking Tasks on Three-Stone Fires in Critical Contexts. Energies 2018, 11, 3463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- IEA. World Energy Outlook 2018; IEA: Paris, France, 2018; Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2018 (accessed on 22 March 2020).
- Ramanathan, V.; Carmichael, G. Global and regional climate changes due to black carbon. Nat. Geosci. 2008, 1, 221–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ndindeng, S.A.; Wopereis, M.; Sanyang, S.; Futakuchi, K.; Atanga, N.S.; Marco, W.; Sidi, S.; Koichi, F. Evaluation of fan-assisted rice husk fuelled gasifier cookstoves for application in sub-Sahara Africa. Renew. Energy 2019, 139, 924–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jagger, P.; Das, I. Implementation and scale-up of a biomass pellet and improved cookstove enterprise in Rwanda. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2018, 46, 32–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gitau, J.K.; Sundberg, C.; Mendum, R.; Mutune, J.; Njenga, M. Use of Biochar-Producing Gasifier Cookstove Improves Energy Use Efficiency and Indoor Air Quality in Rural Households. Energies 2019, 12, 4285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kirch, T.; Medwell, P.R.; Birzer, C.H.; Van Eyk, P.J. Feedstock Dependence of Emissions from a Reverse-Downdraft Gasifier Cookstove. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2020, 56, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dresen, E.; Devries, B.; Herold, M.; Verchot, L.; Muller, R. Fuelwood Savings and Carbon Emission Reductions by the Use of Improved Cooking Stoves in an Afromontane Forest, Ethiopia. Land 2014, 3, 1137–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barbieri, J.; Riva, F.; Colombo, E. Cooking in refugee camps and informal settlements: A review of available technologies and impacts on the socio-economic and environmental perspective. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2017, 22, 194–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tucho, G.T.; Nonhebel, S. Bio-Wastes as an Alternative Household Cooking Energy Source in Ethiopia. Energies 2015, 8, 9565–9583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, K.R.; Uma, R.; Kishore, V.; Zhang, J.; Joshi, V.; Khalil, M. Greenhouse Implications of Household Stoves: An Analysis for India. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 2000, 25, 741–763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- FAO. State of the World’s Forest; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2020; Available online: http://www.fao.org/state-of-forests/2020/en/ (accessed on 10 September 2019).
- La Quema de Residuos Agrícolas: Fuente de Dioxinas; Comisión para la Cooperación Ambiental: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2014; Available online: http://www3.cec.org/islandora/es/item/11405-la-quema-de-residuos-agricolas-es-una-fuente-de-dioxinas-es.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- Producción y Consumo Sostenible y Residuos Agrarios. In M Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente; Spanish Ministery for Agriculture, Food and Environment: Madrid, Spain, 2012; Available online: https://www.miteco.gob.es/images/es/Residuos%20agrarios_tcm30-193059.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- Bhojvaid, V.; Jeuland, M.A.; Kar, A.; Lewis, J.J.; Pattanayak, S.K.; Ramanathan, N.; Ramanathan, V.; Rehman, I.H. How do People in Rural India Perceive Improved Stoves and Clean Fuel? Evidence from Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 1341–1358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loo, J.D.; Hyseni, L.; Ouda, R.; Koske, S.; Nyagol, R.; Sadumah, I.; Bashin, M.; Sage, M.; Bruce, N.; Pilishvili, T.; et al. User Perspectives of Characteristics of Improved Cookstoves from a Field Evaluation in Western Kenya. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- FAO-ONU. Perspective Monde 2020. Available online: https://perspective.usherbrooke.ca/bilan/servlet/BMTendanceStatPays?codeTheme=5&codeStat=RS.NUT.PROD.PP.MT&codePays=COD&optionsPeriodes=Aucune&codeTheme2=5&codeStat2=RSA.FAO.RicePaddy&codePays2=COD&optionsDetPeriodes=avecNomP&langue=fr (accessed on 7 August 2020).
- Strategie Nationale De Developpement De La Riziculture (SNDR). 2013. Available online: https://riceforafrica.net/images/pdf/NRDS_drc_fr-min.pdf (accessed on 7 August 2020).
- Panwar, N.; Rathore, N.S.; Panwar, N.L. Design and performance evaluation of a 5kW producer gas stove. Biomass Bioenergy 2008, 32, 1349–1352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panwar, N.L.; Kurchania, A.K.; Rathore, N.S. Mitigation of greenhouse gases by adoption of improved biomass cookstoves. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Chang. 2009, 14, 569–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Normas UNE-AENOR (Spain). Available online: https://www.aenor.com/normas-y-libros/buscador-de-normas?k=(i:7516040) (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- Hurtado, E.J.; Mulumba-Ilunga, Ó.; Moros Gómez, M.C.; Vargas Salgado, C.A. Analyse des impacts économico-environnementaux du changement d’usage d’un foyer de cuisson traditionnel par un foyer de cuisson amélioré optimisé à charbon de bois dans les ménages de la ville de Kinshasa. Déchets Sciences et Techniques 2017, 75, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kumar, S.S.; Pitchandi, K.; Natarajan, E. Modeling and Simulation of Down Draft Wood Gasifier. J. Appl. Sci. 2008, 8, 271–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Belonio, A.T. Rice Husk Gas stove Handbook; Appropriate Technology Center; Central Philippine University, 2005; Available online: https://www.bioenergylists.org/stovesdoc/Belonio/Belonio_gasifier.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- Abolarin, S.M.; Ojolo, S.J.; Adegbenro, O. Development of a Laboratory Scale Updraft Gasifier. Int. J. Manuf. Syst. 2012, 2, 21–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panwar, N.L. Design and performance evaluation of energy efficient biomass gasifier based cookstove on multi fuels. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Chang. 2009, 14, 627–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukunda, H.S. Understanding Combustion; Universities Press (India) Private Limited Publication: Hyderabad, India, 1989; ISBN 978-8173716850. [Google Scholar]
- Water Boiling Test, Version 4.2.3; Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; Available online: https://www.cleancookingalliance.org/binary-data/DOCUMENT/file/000/000/399-1.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- Bailis, R. Performance Testing Protocols Controlled Cooking Test (CCT) Version 2.0; Shell Foundation; University of California Berkeley: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2004; Available online: https://www.cleancookingalliance.org/binary-data/DOCUMENT/file/000/000/80-1.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- ISO/TMBG Technical Management Board. Guidelines for Evaluating Cookstove Performance; International Organization for Standardization ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012; Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/61975.html (accessed on 21 March 2020).
- Jetter, J.J.; Kariher, P. Solid-fuel household cook stoves: Characterization of performance and emissions. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33, 294–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berrueta, V.M.; Edwards, R.; Masera, O. Energy performance of wood-burning cookstoves in Michoacan, Mexico. Renew. Energy 2008, 33, 859–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, K.R.; Dutta, K.; Chengappa, C.; Gusain, P.; Berrueta, O.M.A.V.; Edwards, R.; Bailis, R.; Shields, K.N.; Bailis, R. Monitoring and evaluation of improved biomass cookstove programs for indoor air quality and stove performance: Conclusions from the Household Energy and Health Project. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2007, 11, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bailis, R.; Berrueta, V.; Chengappa, C.; Dutta, K.; Edwards, R.; Masera, O.; Still, D.; Smith, K.R. Performance testing for monitoring improved biomass stove interventions: Experiences of the Household Energy and Health Project. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2007, 11, 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldwin, S.F. Biomass Stoves: Engineering Design, Development, and Dissemination; 287, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies; Princeton University: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1986; Available online: http://blog.newdawnengineering.com/website/library/Papers+Articles/Biomass%20Stoves,%20Engineering%20Design,%20Development%20and%20Dissemination,%20Samuel%20Baldwin%201987.pdf (accessed on 18 March 2020).
- McCarty, N.; Ogle, D.; Still, D.; Bond, T.; Roden, C. A laboratory comparison of the global warming impact of five major types of biomass cooking stoves. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2008, 12, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lombardi, F.; Riva, F.; Bonamini, G.; Barbieri, J.; Colombo, E. Laboratory protocols for testing of Improved Cooking Stoves (ICSs): A review of state-of-the-art and further developments. Biomass Bioenergy 2017, 98, 321–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lombardi, F.; Riva, F.; Colombo, E. Dealing with small sets of laboratory test replicates for Improved Cooking Stoves (ICSs): Insights for a robust statistical analysis of results. Biomass Bioenergy 2018, 115, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Small-Scale Methodology: Energy Efficiency Measures in Thermal Applications of Non-Renewable Biomass; United Nations Framework on Climate Change: Bonn, Germany, 2019; Available online: https://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/DB/ZI2M2X5P7ZLRGFO37YBVDYOW62UHQP (accessed on 9 December 2019).
Bulk Density [kg·m−3] | Moisture Content | Volatile Matter | Ash Content | Fixed Carbon | HHV [MJ·kg−1] | LHV [MJ·kg−1] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
365 | 7% | 13% | 2% | 85% | 30.2 | 29.8 |
Type | E1 | E2 | E3 | E4 | E5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSW 1 | 50% | - | 20% | 15% | 15% |
BSW 2 | - | 50% | 30% | 10% | 10% |
BSW 3 | - | 20% | 50% | 15% | 15% |
Type | C | H | N | O | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSW 1 | 51.70% | 2.40% | 0.70% | 45.20% | 0.00% |
BSW 2 | 52.50% | 3.20% | 0.70% | 43.60% | 0.00% |
BSW 3 | 50.70% | 2.70% | 0.60% | 46.00% | 0.00% |
Bulk Density | Moisture Content | Volatile Matter | Ash Content | Fixed Carbon | HHV | LHV | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[kg·m−3] | [MJ·kg−1] | [MJ·kg−1] | |||||
BSW 1 | 520 | 7.50% | 34.30% | 24.50% | 33.70% | 18.2 | 17.7 |
BSW 2 | 550 | 10.20% | 36.00% | 25.80% | 28.00% | 18.4 | 17.7 |
BSW 3 | 560 | 10.30% | 38.80% | 19.00% | 32.90% | 19 | 18.3 |
Parameter | Symbol | Value |
---|---|---|
Power | P | 3 kW |
Stoichiometric air | SA | 6 kg air/kg biomass |
Equivalence ratio | ε | 0.33 |
Air density | ρa | 1.25 kg·m−3 |
Thermal efficiency | ηth | 60% |
Cooking time | Δt | 1 h |
Specific biomass weight | ρf | 560 kg.m−3 |
Air holes diameter | de | 2 mm |
Specific gasification rate | SGR | 110 kg·m−2·h−1 |
D [cm] | H [cm] | FCR [kg·h−1] | QPA [m3·h−1] | QAT [m3·h−1] |
---|---|---|---|---|
12 | 19 | 0.906 | 1.304 | 4.34 |
Quantity [g] | |
---|---|
Fish (6) | 1.370 |
Flour (corn + cassava) | 2.010 |
Peanut paste | 180 |
Vegetables | 1.150 |
Other ingredients (tomatoes, salt, onion, garlic) | 390 |
Olive oil | 350 |
Water | 7.000 |
IWA PERFORMANCE METRICS | UNITS | TCS | ICS-G | ICS-G. vs. TCS (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
High Power Thermal efficiency | % | 22 ± 1.0 | 51.6 ± 1.5 | 134 ± 13 |
Low Power Specific Fuel Consumption | kJ/(s.l) | 0.64 ± 0.05 | 0.32 ± 0.07 | −50.0 ± 11.6 |
High Power CO emissions | g/MJ | 16.3 ± 3.8 | 5.1 ± 0.2 | −68.7 ± 7.4 |
Low Power CO emissions | g/(s.l)*1 × 10−3 | 5.00 ± 0.67 | 1.33 ± 0.08 | −73.3 ± 3.9 |
High Power PM emissions | g/MJ*1 × 10−3 | 116 ± 10.7 | 38.1 ± 2.4 | −67.2 ± 9.5 |
Low Power PM emissions | g/(s∙l)*1 × 10−6 | 35.0 ± 0.33 | 20.0 ± 0.4 | −42.9 ± 1.1 |
IWA PERFORMANCE METRICS | UNITS | TCS | ICS-G | ICS-G. vs. TCS (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
High Power Thermal efficiency | % | 21.8 ± 1.2 | 55.1 ± 0.03 | 153 ± 14 |
Low Power Specific Fuel Consumption | kJ/(s∙l) | 0.57 ± 0.05 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | −66.7 ± 4.4 |
High Power CO | g/MJ | 16.3 ± 3,8 | 6.9 ± 0.4 | −41.0 ± 3.4 |
Low Power CO | g/(s∙l)*1 × 10−3 | 4.83 ± 0.17 | 1.50 ± 0.17 | −66.9 ± 3.7 |
High Power PM | g/MJ*1 × 10−3 | 83.3 ± 6.4 | 13.5 ± 3.1 | −83.8 ± 3.9 |
Low Power PM | g/(s.l)*1 × 10−6 | 20.7 ± 2.3 | 1.5 ± 0.4 | −92.8 ± 1.8 |
IWA PERFORMANCE METRICS | UNITS | TCS | ICS-G | ICS-G. vs. TCS (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
High Power Thermal efficiency | % | 22 ± 1.0 | 55.1 ± 0.03 | 150 ± 11 |
Low Power Specific Fuel Consumption | kJ/(s∙l) | 0.64 ± 0.05 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | −70.3 ± 3.9 |
High Power CO | g/MJ | 11.7 ± 0.07 | 6.9 ± 0.4 | −41.0 ± 3,4 |
Low Power CO | g/(s∙l)*1 × 10−3 | 5.00 ± 0.67 | 1.50 ± 0.17 | −70.0 ± 5.3 |
High Power PM | g/MJ*1 × 10−3 | 116 ± 10.7 | 13.5 ± 3.1 | −88.4 ± 3.9 |
Low Power PM | g/(s.l)*1 × 10−6 | 35.0 ± 0.33 | 1.5 ± 0.4 | −95.7 ± 1.1 |
TCS | ICS-G | ICS-G. vs. TCS (%) | |
---|---|---|---|
Fuel (g) | 2063 ± 119 | 805 ± 80 | −61.0 ± 4.5 |
Cooking Time (s) | 15,120 ± 960 | 12,160 ± 612 | −20.2 ± 6.5 |
SFC (g charcoal /kg cooked meal) | 313 ± 16.5 | 123 ± 11.2 | −60.7 ± 4.1 |
SEC (MJ /kg cooked meal) | 9.3 ± 0.5 | 3.7 ± 0.3 | −60.2 ± 3.9 |
TCS | ICS-G | ICS-G/TCS [%] | |
---|---|---|---|
Fuel (g) | 3327 ± 210 | 1270 ± 95 | −61.8 ± 3.7 |
Cooking Time (s) | 15,960 ± 432 | 13,080 ± 654 | −18.0 ± 4.7 |
SFC (g charcoal /kg cooked meal) | 506 ± 27 | 194 ± 13.0 | −61.7 ± 3.3 |
SEC (MJ /kg cooked meal) | 9.3 ± 0.5 | 3.5 ± 0.2 | −62.4 ± 2.9 |
Fuel | Bsaving (t/Year) Household | Bsaving (t/Year) Bandundu City | ER-CO2 (t/Year) Household | ER-CO2 (t/Year) Bandundu City |
---|---|---|---|---|
Charcoal | 2.288 | 1248.194 | 1.97 | 1,073,384 |
BWS3 | 3.766 | 2,054,480 | 3.24 | 1,766,751 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hurtado Pérez, E.; Mulumba Ilunga, O.; Alfonso Solar, D.; Moros Gómez, M.C.; Bastida-Molina, P. Sustainable Cooking Based on a 3 kW Air-Forced Multifuel Gasification Stove Using Alternative Fuels Obtained from Agricultural Wastes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187723
Hurtado Pérez E, Mulumba Ilunga O, Alfonso Solar D, Moros Gómez MC, Bastida-Molina P. Sustainable Cooking Based on a 3 kW Air-Forced Multifuel Gasification Stove Using Alternative Fuels Obtained from Agricultural Wastes. Sustainability. 2020; 12(18):7723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187723
Chicago/Turabian StyleHurtado Pérez, Elías, Oscar Mulumba Ilunga, David Alfonso Solar, María Cristina Moros Gómez, and Paula Bastida-Molina. 2020. "Sustainable Cooking Based on a 3 kW Air-Forced Multifuel Gasification Stove Using Alternative Fuels Obtained from Agricultural Wastes" Sustainability 12, no. 18: 7723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187723