A Study on the Performance and CO 2 Mitigation Potential …
127
Fig. 2 Performance of the AMGCS [19] and TCS [32]
Table 1 The input parameters for estimating CO 2 emissions mitigation potential
Parameter
Character
Unit
Value
Thermal energy required for cooking
E th
MJ/day
15
Capital cost of TCS stove
–
400
Capital cost of ICS stove
–
1000
Capital cost of AMGCS stove
–
4500
Useful lifespan of AMGCS stove [29]
–
Years
5
Fraction of carbon in different biomass fuels
–
Fraction
45–55
Calorific value of fuels
CV fuel
MJ/kg
15–20
Efficiency of TCS stove
η TCS
Fraction
0.1
Efficiency of ICS stove
η ICS
Fraction
0.16
Efficiency of AMGCS [19, 21, 22]
η AMGCS
Fraction
0.36–0.38
below formula is taken to compute the payback period [31]:
SPP =
(C ACS − C TCS )
S t
(2)
Cost analysis of the AMGCS developed in the laboratory was determined and
comparison was made on the cost of energy generated by the conventional TCS.
The payback period for different fuels used in AMGCS was found to be from 2 to
5 months for four-member family. Also, higher the annual working hours will results
in lower the payback period.