Creosote products.....
- Thread starter Byrond
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
Swedishchef
Minister of Fire
CenterTree
Minister of Fire
I bet it was WARM inside that building.
-------------------------
Just to note: That article was from 1981. (pre EPA standards)
-------------------------
Just to note: That article was from 1981. (pre EPA standards)
Knew it was old but I was interesting to see the results. No matter what kind of stove, it's still important I burn good wood and run em warm. I will say that I bought some red devil creosote destroyer for my pa in laws smoke dragon and I have noticed a big diff in his clay flueI bet it was WARM inside that building.
-------------------------
Just to note: That article was from 1981. (pre EPA standards)
CenterTree
Minister of Fire
Yeah, I for one, believe the stuff has it's merits. It mainly causes gooey creo to turn to more brush-able flakes.
I used it when I first started burning last year. I don't use it as much now, but still have a tub of the Rutland product around here.
Dry wood, proper burning and a good brush is always best. (not always a reality though)
I used it when I first started burning last year. I don't use it as much now, but still have a tub of the Rutland product around here.
Dry wood, proper burning and a good brush is always best. (not always a reality though)
It wouldn't surprise me if the modern products are still somewhat ineffective, but as pointed out, the article was from 1981 and I suspect the test happened a year before. Surely the products on the market today must have improved a bit in the last 35 years. I'm not sure any useful information can be gleaned from an article that old.
Oldman47
Minister of Fire
To me the information to be gleaned from such "old" research is to treat snake oil claims as they should be treated. When everyone changes their formulation after the research is ready to publish it strikes me as a way for the manufacturers to claim that now their stuff does just what they told you it did last year because now it is new and improved. When it doesn't work, it doesn't work. New packaging makes no difference and large print that says "New and Improved" also makes no difference. Your flue needs to be cleaned and inspected just as often as it ever did. If you have money to burn, pun intended, buy and use the stuff but don't skip any cleanings.
Creosote products can be useful but generally they are fixing problems that would be better fixed by changing burning practices. But we do recommend them for people who cannot of will not change but no they are not a substitute for cleaning they just make cleaning easier.
Even if the creosote products do work, you still have to inspect your chimney regularly to ensure it's remaining clean, or clean it if it's not. Otherwise you're betting that something is different between your use case and the test case of the report above.
If you've got several seasons of burning under your belt and know how things buildup in your case, either with or without a cleaning product, then maybe you can increase your inspection and/or cleaning interval, but I've seen no credible evidence that you can simply burn a chimney sweep log once a season and stop paying attention to your chimney.
In other words, if you want to use the products, approach it basically like CenterTree seems to do with his chimney:
If you've got several seasons of burning under your belt and know how things buildup in your case, either with or without a cleaning product, then maybe you can increase your inspection and/or cleaning interval, but I've seen no credible evidence that you can simply burn a chimney sweep log once a season and stop paying attention to your chimney.
In other words, if you want to use the products, approach it basically like CenterTree seems to do with his chimney:
Yeah, I for one, believe the stuff has it's merits. It mainly causes gooey creo to turn to more brush-able flakes.
I used it when I first started burning last year. I don't use it as much now, but still have a tub of the Rutland product around here.
Dry wood, proper burning and a good brush is always best. (not always a reality though)
Lumber-Jack
Minister of Fire
I'm sure if they bothered to do the same test with all the new products on the market they would come up with the same results.
All I can say is, if you feel it overwhelmingly necessary to regularly burn something in your stove to prevent creosote formation and obtain that feel good placebo effect, at least use one of the free ones like potato skins or aluminum cans, so you aren't wasting your money.
In the end though, there is only one chimney cleaning product that really does work.
All I can say is, if you feel it overwhelmingly necessary to regularly burn something in your stove to prevent creosote formation and obtain that feel good placebo effect, at least use one of the free ones like potato skins or aluminum cans, so you aren't wasting your money.
In the end though, there is only one chimney cleaning product that really does work.
- Status
Similar threads
