Clean-burning charcoal

[User Bp]

After a 14 year hiatus on solid fuel cooking I
restarted my charcoal barbecue, using the same
bag of briquetts.

At first lighting, the stench from the briquetts was
appalling. I'd completely forgotten how awful the odor
is. Once burned off they're ok, but I still don't like
it and the amount of ash suggests there's not much
charcoal in them. Who sells clean wood charcoal, in
lumps of about an inch? I'm in northern California,
not far from Sacramento. Something like almond or
walnut charcoal would be interesting to try.

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

[User Bp]

Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:
> charcoal year round. Lazrai is only a hundred or so miles from Sacto
> (in Brisbane, CA). They are a very good lump that still has quite a
> bit of flavor left in them - no need to use separate, slow burning
> smoking woods for flavor.

Lazzari is available at local retail and it
sounds worth a try.

Thanks for replying!

bob

[tutall]

Probably only their mesquite. You might try and ask the store manager
to order some of their hardwood lump.

[Nick Cramer]

tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 13, 7:13=A0pm, User Bp <b...@www.zefox.net> wrote:
> > Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:

> > > charcoal year round. =A0Lazrai is only a hundred or so miles from
> > > Sacto (in Brisbane, CA). =A0They are a very good lump that still has

> > > quite a bit of flavor left in them - no need to use separate, slow
> > > burning smoking woods for flavor.
> >
> > Lazzari is available at local retail and it
> > sounds worth a try.

> Probably only their mesquite. You might try and ask the store manager
> to order some of their hardwood lump.

So? Charcoal is carbon (not talking briquettes). For smoke flavor, I use
hardwoods from my garden or that I buy.

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://semperfifund.org https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/
http://www.specialops.org/ http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/ ~Semper Fi~
http://www.woundedwarriors.ca/ http://www.legacy.com.au/ ~Semper Fi~

[tutall]

On Oct 15, 11:37 pm, Nick Cramer <n_cramerS...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 13, 7:13=A0pm, User Bp <b...@www.zefox.net> wrote:
> > > Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:
> > > > charcoal year round. =A0Lazrai is only a hundred or so miles from
> > > > Sacto (in Brisbane, CA). =A0They are a very good lump that still has
> > > > quite a bit of flavor left in them - no need to use separate, slow
> > > > burning smoking woods for flavor.
>
> > > Lazzari is available at local retail and it
> > > sounds worth a try.
> > Probably only their mesquite. You might try and ask the store manager
> > to order some of their hardwood lump.
>
> So? Charcoal is carbon (not talking briquettes). For smoke flavor, I use
> hardwoods from my garden or that I buy.

For smoke flavor I use lump charcoal. No additives needed. For smoke
flavors when bbqing, I burn the wood I want, oak, fruit, whatever. If
available.

Are you claiming mesquite charcoal is no different from others? I a
lab somewhere, sure. In the real world, or in our backyard? Not so
much.

Pull the other one.

[Nick Cramer]

tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 15, 11:37=A0pm, Nick Cramer <n_cramerS...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > On Oct 13, 7:13=3DA0pm, User Bp <b...@www.zefox.net> wrote:
> > > > Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:

> > > > > charcoal year round. =3DA0Lazrai is only a hundred or so miles
> > > > > from Sacto (in Brisbane, CA). =3DA0They are a very good lump that
> > > > > still =

> has
> > > > > quite a bit of flavor left in them - no need to use separate,
> > > > > slow burning smoking woods for flavor.
> >
> > > > Lazzari is available at local retail and it
> > > > sounds worth a try.
> > > Probably only their mesquite. You might try and ask the store manager
> > > to order some of their hardwood lump.
> >
> > So? Charcoal is carbon (not talking briquettes). For smoke flavor, I
> > use hardwoods from my garden or that I buy.
>
> For smoke flavor I use lump charcoal. No additives needed. For smoke
> flavors when bbqing, I burn the wood I want, oak, fruit, whatever. If
> available.

Lump charcoal for smoke flavor?! Wow!

> Are you claiming mesquite charcoal is no different from others? I a
> lab somewhere, sure. In the real world, or in our backyard? Not so
> much.

When fully charred, yes!

> Pull the other one.

Pull this, pal!

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 17 Oct 2012 11:00:40 GMT, Nick Cramer <n_cram...@pacbell.net>
wrote:

>>
>> For smoke flavor I use lump charcoal. No additives needed. For smoke
>> flavors when bbqing, I burn the wood I want, oak, fruit, whatever. If
>> available.
>
>Lump charcoal for smoke flavor?! Wow!

Actually, yes. The dripping fat hits the hot coals and vaporizes,
sending "stuff" up to the meat. Same as the flavorizer bars on a gas
grill. Flavors, but not from wood smoke.

[Nunya Bidnits]

But Steve is correct that if you happen to have lump which has not been
fully carbonized then it will indeed have wood flavor. Not a lot, but it
will have it.

MartyB

[monroe, of course]

Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:

> "Thanks"? You're supposed to call us all inhospitable A-holes that
> scare away all the newbies with mean replies.
>
> Your troll failed!
>
> ;-)
>
> -sw

Dang,we really must be slipping!

monroe('hospitable A-holes'? hmm)

[User Bp]

Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:
>
> Your troll failed!
>
> ;-)
>
In a perverse way you're right. I live in Davis and the area is
abundantly provided with orchards: Almonds (dwindling), walnuts (lots)
plums and a few others. Every so often one of the orchards is
pulled up, like so many huge dandelions, and the wood retrieved
is set aside for some other use. I was hopeful that somebody would
know of a charcoal maker who uses it.

No such luck. Lazzari will certainly do, but I was hoping for
something more local.

bob prohaska

[TFM®]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 22:52:30 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> People have posted here about making their own charcoal in the distant
> past but I think the consensus is that the convenience factor of
> buying it far outweighs the hassle of making lump in small quantities.
>
> There's always the pre-burn method. Burn you cured or green wood down
> in a separate pit then transfer the coals to your meat-smoking pits.
> Again this is usually only reserved for larger operations (such as the
> legacy BBQ restaurants here in Central TX) or for very large offset
> smokers.
>
> -sw

What Steve is referring to is called "barbecue" except that in traditional
barbecue the live coals would be placed directly under the meat somewhere
between 16 and 24 inches. Barbecue cannot be made in an offset smoker but
the resultant smoke-roasted meat is delicious nonetheless.

TFM®

[Brick]

Glad 'Fats' finished with that last line 'cause I have a video clip of him
chowing down on mine. And here, I've been calling it BBQ because
I didn't know any better. I thought if you slow cooked meat with fire
and smoke, you could call it BBQ. Now I have to figure out what to
call the stuff I make because I cook it in an offset pit.

--
Brick(Youth is wasted on young people)

[tutall]

On Oct 17, 6:15 pm, "Nunya Bidnits" <nunyabidn...@eternal-

september.invalid> wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:

> > On 17 Oct 2012 11:00:40 GMT, Nick Cramer <n_cramerS...@pacbell.net>

> > wrote:
>
> >>> For smoke flavor I use lump charcoal. No additives needed. For smoke
> >>> flavors when bbqing, I burn the wood I want, oak, fruit, whatever.
> >>> If available.
>
> >> Lump charcoal for smoke flavor?! Wow!
>
> > Actually, yes.  The dripping fat hits the hot coals and vaporizes,
> > sending "stuff" up to the meat.  Same as the flavorizer bars on a gas
> > grill.  Flavors, but not from wood smoke.

I burn lump in my offset with good results. No fat is being vaporized
or any such gasser grill nonsense/subsitution.

>
> But Steve is correct that if you happen to have lump which has not been
> fully carbonized then it will indeed have wood flavor. Not a lot, but it
> will have it.
>

Wow, talk about YMMV. (And Nick, seriously, you need to take this more
personally, any disagreement should be taken as an affront to your
very being and worse, your manhood. )

Even when Royal Oak was available, never felt a need to add wood for
"more" smoke as lump does give off a fair amount of smoke when
lighting up. And ya know what that smoke smells like? Yes, the
original wood it was made from. Why does this suprise people here?

Now the Lazarri I've been using more than a decade has decidedly more
wood content than RO.

Nobody talks shit when stating that mesquite lump burns hot and had a
bitter bite, and oak lump has a sweeter smell.
But frame the discussion about carbon and all of sudden people lose
their memory? WTH?

[tutall]

On Oct 18, 6:34 am, "Brick" <hrbrickerNOS...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Brick(Youth is wasted on young people)- Hide quoted text -
>

Eh, always took him to be bragging how he's does it the original, more
difficult way.

And good on him for keeping traditions alive along with Bob from
Georgia and the rest of the gang.

If his red hick ass wants to get a little supercilious on us every
once in a while, what the hell. We know he doesn't take himself that
seriously anyway.

[TFM®]

On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:40:58 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:34:47 GMT, Brick wrote:
>
>> Glad 'Fats' finished with that last line 'cause I have a video clip of him
>> chowing down on mine. And here, I've been calling it BBQ because
>> I didn't know any better. I thought if you slow cooked meat with fire
>> and smoke, you could call it BBQ. Now I have to figure out what to
>> call the stuff I make because I cook it in an offset pit.
>

> Now I'm going to have to tell John Muller and Aaron Franklin, two of
> the most popular pit masters in America, that what they're cooking is
> not BBQ. And have them change the name of their restaurants, too.
>
> Basically, what TFM is saying now is that BBQ really *is* grilling,
> something that has been hotly debated here for way too many years.
>
> -sw

That's not at all what I'm saying and I'll thank you kindly to remove your
words from my mouth.
I'll stand by my purist definition of traditional barbecue along with a
good many other folks. Some of them I even have respect for.

TFM®

[TFM®]

On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:30:36 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:08:16 -0400, TFM® wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:40:58 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:34:47 GMT, Brick wrote:
>>>
>>>> Glad 'Fats' finished with that last line 'cause I have a video clip of him
>>>> chowing down on mine. And here, I've been calling it BBQ because
>>>> I didn't know any better. I thought if you slow cooked meat with fire
>>>> and smoke, you could call it BBQ. Now I have to figure out what to
>>>> call the stuff I make because I cook it in an offset pit.
>>>
>>> Now I'm going to have to tell John Muller and Aaron Franklin, two of
>>> the most popular pit masters in America, that what they're cooking is
>>> not BBQ. And have them change the name of their restaurants, too.
>>>
>>> Basically, what TFM is saying now is that BBQ really *is* grilling,
>>> something that has been hotly debated here for way too many years.
>>

>> That's not at all what I'm saying and I'll thank you kindly to remove your
>> words from my mouth.
>> I'll stand by my purist definition of traditional barbecue along with a
>> good many other folks. Some of them I even have respect for.
>

> How is putting coals under the meat any different from grilling? And
> how is cooking in a offset not barbecue? What DO you call smoking
> meat in a offset if it's not barbecue in the most purist form of the
> word?
>
> Sorry if you feel offended, but your definition is just way to anal
> for me. This is worse than the debates over grilling vs. BBQ, which I
> always avoided. But now you hit a sore spot.
>
> -sw

As I said earlier, if you'd been paying attention, an offset smoker
produces smoke roasted meat. By the same token, barbecue cannot be
produced in a Weber or a Brinkmann or any bullet smoker if the water pan is
in place, regardless of contents of said pan.

The difference in the flavor of the finished product cooked directly over
coals is so vastly different than that of smoke roasting as to constitute
another product entirely. Only one can be barbecue.

I don't mean to pick your scabs, but do try it yourself. You're duly
equipped with your ECB. Cook 2 nearly identical cuts of meat. One using
the water pan (with whatever you want in it) and the other with nothing but
air between the coals and the meat.
If you're diligent enough with the fire management you will have something
truly wonderful when you're done.

TFM®

[gregz]

The only difference I see is fat induced smoke. Temperature should be no
different, unless you want it to be different.

Greg

[bbq]

It is called barbecue, whether in an offset or bullet style smoker with
a heat/flame defuser between the heat and the meat. I think TFM is just
wanting to cause a debate on the definition of barbecue.

We used to think barbecue was something cooked low and slow. We have
learned, that is not necessarily so. Big Jim has mentioned he has cooked
brisket at temps of 300 or more. No one complained it was not barbecue
at his New Years Day bash that he cooked at for 25 years.

My definition is meats cooked at under 300 using lump and/or wood.
Others definition may differ a little. If it is tender and delicious,
who cares? It is all good...

BBQ
--
“We are going to be gifted with a health care plan that we are forced to
purchase, and fined if we don’t, signed by a president who smokes, with
funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, by a
government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare,
all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a
country that’s broke.

Author Unknown

[TFM®]

There you have it, it all boils down to temperature. NOT. It's just like
boiling and steaming are both cooking with hot water so temp is the only
consideration, right?
Hint: It's not all about temperature. There's magic in them there coals.

TFM®

[TFM®]

On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:10:46 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:38:51 -0500, bbq wrote:
>
>> It is called barbecue, whether in an offset or bullet style smoker with
>> a heat/flame defuser between the heat and the meat. I think TFM is just
>> wanting to cause a debate on the definition of barbecue.
>

> I just think he's out of KGB.
>
> -sw

Not out but certainly not partaking enough. Thanks for the reminder. I
now leave you to your previously scheduled programming.

TFM®

[Big Jim]

"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
news:1r7lh12jamj8y$.dlg@sqwertz.com...

> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:34:47 GMT, Brick wrote:
>

> Basically, what TFM is saying now is that BBQ really *is* grilling,
> something that has been hotly debated here for way too many years.
>

> -sw

OK little Buddy that Squirts off at the mouth<g>
"Barbecue" is not grilling.
Barbecue "IS" done over coals from burnt down logs at a greater distance,
say 16" to 24" in most cases. In some case it may be a bit closer because of
ash build-up.
"Grilling" is also done over coals, BUTT, the coals are very close to the
meat. Somewhere in the 6" or less range.
Also with a very hot fire.
When you are cooking barbecue the coals are not only much farther from the
meat, BUTT are spread very thin or even around the outside edges of whatever
you be cooking.
That is where the art comes in. Knowing where and when and how many coals
to use.
Originally to me Barbecue was never meant to have a heavy smoke flavor.
Grilling = hot and fast with coals close under the meat.
Barbecue = slow, cooler fire at a distance from the fire.
This is Southern Barbecue.
What in Texas is called Barbecue is a whole different animal.
For instance, the pits at Kuretz are offset pits with the fire in a pit on
one end of the pit.
There use to be a place in Dripping Springs (Riley's) that cooked on
Southern Pride Pits.
While Kuretz was good, especially the sausage and pork chop, I preferred
Riley's.
I don't get too testicle about it. If is pleasant to eat I am happy.
When I had my place I cooked on a Southern Pride, it wasn't TRUE Barbecue,
BUTT don't try to tell my customers that.
BeeJay

[Nick Cramer]

tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 17, 6:15=A0pm, "Nunya Bidnits" <nunyabidn...@eternal-

> september.invalid> wrote:
> > Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
> > > On 17 Oct 2012 11:00:40 GMT, Nick Cramer <n_cramerS...@pacbell.net>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >>> For smoke flavor I use lump charcoal. No additives needed. For
> > >>> smoke flavors when bbqing, I burn the wood I want, oak, fruit,
> > >>> whatever. If available.
> >
> > >> Lump charcoal for smoke flavor?! Wow!
> >

> > > Actually, yes. =A0The dripping fat hits the hot coals and vaporizes,
> > > sending "stuff" up to the meat. =A0Same as the flavorizer bars on a
> > > gas grill. =A0Flavors, but not from wood smoke.

>
> I burn lump in my offset with good results. No fat is being vaporized
> or any such gasser grill nonsense/subsitution.
>
> >
> > But Steve is correct that if you happen to have lump which has not been
> > fully carbonized then it will indeed have wood flavor. Not a lot, but
> > it will have it.
> >
>
> Wow, talk about YMMV. (And Nick, seriously, you need to take this more
> personally, any disagreement should be taken as an affront to your
> very being and worse, your manhood. )

I'm 77 Tut tut. Advanced maturity is the affront to my dignity, but I don't
take it personally.

>
> Even when Royal Oak was available, never felt a need to add wood for
> "more" smoke as lump does give off a fair amount of smoke when
> lighting up. And ya know what that smoke smells like? Yes, the
> original wood it was made from. Why does this suprise people here?
>
> Now the Lazarri I've been using more than a decade has decidedly more
> wood content than RO.
>
> Nobody talks shit when stating that mesquite lump burns hot and had a
> bitter bite, and oak lump has a sweeter smell.
> But frame the discussion about carbon and all of sudden people lose
> their memory? WTH?

OK. I use mesquite from Smart n' Final. For smoke, I use Kaffir lime from
our garden, corn cob, baby coconut or hickory chips.

[tutall]

On Oct 19, 12:47 am, Nick Cramer <n_cramerS...@pacbell.net> wrote:

> tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Nobody talks shit when stating that mesquite lump burns hot and had a
> > bitter bite, and oak lump has a sweeter smell.
> > But frame the discussion about carbon and all of sudden people lose
> > their memory? WTH?
>
> OK. I use mesquite from Smart n' Final. For smoke, I use Kaffir lime from
> our garden, corn cob, baby coconut or hickory chips.
>

Corn cob, coconut? Those are new to most of us I think. Can you expand
a bit on those two?

How dry are the cobs and what sort of aroma do they have, am trying to
imagine this.

[Nunya Bidnits]

You can call it BBQ but not barbecue.

Just sayin'.

[Nunya Bidnits]

The primary difference here from my perspective is radiant heat vs. indirect
heat. Actually I had expected you to make a correction, but about the fact
that IIRC you do indeed use a burn down pit.

I learned some things about big offsets when I cooked on a Horizon at the
Lenexa contest (won 15th pork and 7th brisket, around 150 teams). Not my
usual team but cooking with a buddy who just bought the Horizon and had no
idea how to use it. But I had a great coach come help me out. Her being nice
to look at with a liquor store sponsored pit party was a nice bonus. ;-)

Anyway... the big offsets, except for the reverse flows, can create some
amount of radiant heat exposure, depending on meat placement in the pit. So
I can start some pork or brisket near the fire box and they will develop a
certain amount of char (this is a very good thing). But to control that and
slow down the later stages of cooking, I would move the meat back away from
the firebox, and eventually wrap. Not a lot different from letting a direct
fire gradually reduce. I could get anywhere from 275F or so near the
firebox, lower on the lower level, to a nice cycling 210-225F on the cool
end of the pit. (bragging that I had that temp stable and predictable all
night after a couple hours of learning curve, but had to get up every two
hours to feed that hog) My old NBBD was just too small to offer all these
coooking zones so it was an education for me.

So what is it that I was doing? BBQ, barbecue, smoking, or grilling? I used
radiant heat and indirect heat.

I could also reference some ancient tribal cooking methods which effectively
utilized offset heat and smoke for cookiing. No steel pit, more like piles
of molded clay. What were they doing?

Not sure it behooves us to split hairs, but by the same token, it does
behoove all of us to uphold our own folk cooking traditions centered around
low and slow wood fired methods, to preserve and pass on to the next
generation. And it also behooves us to support others in their efforts to
preserve their own traditions, even when they differ from our own.

MartyB

[Nunya Bidnits]

TFMŽ <horn...@tampabong.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:30:36 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>

Char. It's about the char. The hottest cooks in KCBS in recent years do hot
starts in UDS cookers, then to a smoker, in effect an oven, for long slow
tenderizing and finishing. One guy who has been very successful cooks on
large size WSMs and goes hot until his brisket or pork hits 155F or so. He
places all the charcoal to one side in the bottom, then every 30-45 minutes
depening on heat, he rotates the cooking rack, flipping the meat every other
pass. I knew that we got a lot better smoke and wood flavor when we started
hot on the UDS, but specifically his comment reveals what it's really
about.... and I quote... "You can't buy char."

Since we went to UDS hot starts, our brisket and pork scores have been
consistently higher.

I guess I can ask again... is this barbecue or smoke roasting? Does it
matter?

> I don't mean to pick your scabs, but do try it yourself. You're duly
> equipped with your ECB. Cook 2 nearly identical cuts of meat. One
> using the water pan (with whatever you want in it) and the other with
> nothing but air between the coals and the meat.
> If you're diligent enough with the fire management you will have
> something truly wonderful when you're done.
>

The only thing is I'm not sure about is if an ECB has enough fire to rack
clearance for that. If the cook is done with a low fire the entire time I
can see it. But if I tried hot start in the ECB I'd expect burn rather than
char and some bitter smoke flavor.

MartyB

[Nunya Bidnits]

Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 23:18:34 +0000 (UTC), gregz wrote:
>

>> The only difference I see is fat induced smoke. Temperature should
>> be no different, unless you want it to be different.
>

> That's one thing I don't like is the fat smoke - especially from
> chicken. Gas grills they call that "flavorizer", I call it nasty.
> I'd rather have wood smoke.
>
> -sw

Amen on burned chicken fat smoke.

[Nunya Bidnits]

TFMŽ <horn...@tampabong.com> wrote:
> There's magic in them there
> coals.

Indeed.

[Nunya Bidnits]

Amen to that too. If it was called barbecue and you find yourself reaching
for another piece, it's all good.

[monroe, of course]

tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Corn cob, coconut? Those are new to most of us I think. Can you expand
> a bit on those two?
>
> How dry are the cobs and what sort of aroma do they have, am trying to
> imagine this.

Cobs ain't just for wiping! Folks in Cornistan,esp. places where trees
are rare have been smoking hams and bacons with cobs for decades.
Coconut shells make charcoal with practically ZERO odor. It's really
nice and mild when used as smoke wood.

monroe(no hickory in samoa)

[tutall]

On Oct 19, 7:09 am, "Nunya Bidnits" <nunyabidn...@eternal-

september.invalid> wrote:

> Not sure it behooves us to split hairs, but by the same token, it does
> behoove all of us to uphold our own folk cooking traditions centered around
> low and slow wood fired methods, to preserve and pass on to the next
> generation. And it also behooves us to support others in their efforts to
> preserve their own traditions, even when they differ from our own.
>

Good sentiments here. Well stated.

[TFM®]

On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:09:00 -0500, Nunya Bidnits wrote:

>
> Not sure it behooves us to split hairs, but by the same token, it does
> behoove all of us to uphold our own folk cooking traditions centered around
> low and slow wood fired methods, to preserve and pass on to the next
> generation. And it also behooves us to support others in their efforts to
> preserve their own traditions, even when they differ from our own.
>
> MartyB

Aye! Well said.

TFM®

[Nick Cramer]

tutall <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote:

They're completely dried out. Both are sweet. Coconut is also smokier.

[tutall]

On Oct 19, 8:27 pm, Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:

>
> Ahh, Behoove THIS!
>
> -sw <unzipping...>


Texarkanians just can't hep themselves.

<shaking head sadly, scuff toes...>

<beg>

Heh

[Shawn Martin]

On 10/17/2012 10:29 PM, User Bp wrote:
> Sqwertz<swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote:
>>
>> Your troll failed!
>>
>> ;-)
>>
> In a perverse way you're right. I live in Davis and the area is
> abundantly provided with orchards: Almonds (dwindling), walnuts (lots)
> plums and a few others. Every so often one of the orchards is
> pulled up, like so many huge dandelions, and the wood retrieved
> is set aside for some other use. I was hopeful that somebody would
> know of a charcoal maker who uses it.
>
> No such luck. Lazzari will certainly do, but I was hoping for
> something more local.
>

> bob prohaska
>
check this out:
http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/charcoal-making/Charcoal%20Retort.htm

[User Bp]

Shawn Martin <pain...@starband.net> wrote:
> check this out:
> http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/charcoal-making/Charcoal%20Retort.htm

Good article! Where I live that would bring out the local FD in a
minute, the air pollution police in two. Out in the country it'd work.

bob prohaska

[Malcom "Mal" Reynolds]

In article <k5aqb5$2a0$1...@news.albasani.net>, User Bp <b...@www.zefox.net> wrote:

> After a 14 year hiatus on solid fuel cooking I
> restarted my charcoal barbecue, using the same
> bag of briquetts.
>
> At first lighting, the stench from the briquetts was
> appalling. I'd completely forgotten how awful the odor
> is. Once burned off they're ok, but I still don't like
> it and the amount of ash suggests there's not much
> charcoal in them. Who sells clean wood charcoal, in
> lumps of about an inch? I'm in northern California,
> not far from Sacramento. Something like almond or
> walnut charcoal would be interesting to try.
>
> Thanks for reading,
>
> bob prohaska

Have you tried the Natural Foods Co-op on X street?

[User Bp]

"Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds" <atlas-...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> Have you tried the Natural Foods Co-op on X street?

Not yet, but the next time I'm over that way I'll look.

Thank you!

bob