Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: The testing of gel fuels, and their comparison to alternative cooking fuels
Authors: Lloyd, Philip JD 
Visagie, E.F 
Keywords: gel fuels;unburned hydrocarbons;paraffin-fuelled appliances
Issue Date: 2007
Publisher: Energy Research Centre, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
Source: 10-13 April 2007
Conference: Paper No D5-1, IntConf Domestic Use Energy 
Abstract: A range of gel fuels was tested in a range of appliances designed for the fuels. The tests comprised the determination of the efficiency of the fuel/appliance combination when boiling water at full and, where possible, minimum power; and the measurement of CO, CO2 and unburned hydrocarbons collected in a hood at the burner level in normal operation. The tests were repeated with paraffin-fuelled appliances, LP gas appliances and an electric stove. In the majority of cases it was found that the gel fuels did not meet an emission standard of a CO:CO2 ratio of <0.02, and that they gave off excessive unburned hydrocarbons. It was suspected that this had to do with the mixing of the fuel vapour with air, because tests with pure ethanol in various appliances gave similar results. Tests in which appliances were modified to improve the air/fuel mixing showed that the hypothesis was valid. A subsidiary finding of the tests was that some gel fuels had excessive water, and that in these cases the condensation of the water vapour on the base of a cooking pot was so extensive that it could extinguish the flame. This leads to a recommendation that a standard for gel fuels be established. A comparison of the cost of cooking a standard meal suggests that gel fuels are unlikely to meet users needs even if improved appliances can be developed.
Description: Conference Proceeding
Appears in Collections:Eng - Conference Proceedings

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Lloyd_PJD_Visagie_EF_Eng_2007.pdfConference Proceeding183.79 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s)

checked on May 22, 2019


checked on May 22, 2019

Google ScholarTM


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons