Trying to convince wife on inside boiler

I don't think the proximity to the oil boiler is a concern - 12' should be plenty, but the shared chimney definitely is. For most states (if not all) it is illegal to use one flue for two boilers. If you have an extra flue in your chimney you may be fine.

I agree with you on putting it inside. I am installing a Tarm with storage in my basement and I think it will be much easier to not have to go outside (especially if you can store a lot of wood inside)

Depending on length, you can buy a metal chimney for somewhere around $1k to $2K for the materials and they are pretty easy to install yourself, so that may be an option if you don't have 2 flues.

I note that Mr Free is not currently burning wood inside his house with a wood fired hydronic unit. With all due respect, he may not be too experienced with the smoke factor.

Make sure you get NoFo's opinion . . . I believe he is happy with his inside installation.

Some of us have put 'gassifiers' outside. Yup, increases installation costs. Yup, those trips outside can be a hassle sometimes. Yup, I'd do the install outside again if I had it to do all over.

As with EVERYTHING related to heating system choices, there are pros and cons of most.

Ask around on the 'indoor smoke' issue. Seems my hydronic - the GW - is notorious for smoke out the loading door issues. Some brands are better than others.

Smoke was a minor issue with my Tarm, but the biggest issue with an inside boiler was humping the wood downstairs a trash can load at a time, the bark, chips and sawdust in the boilerroom and worst of all, the very, very, very fine ash that the Tarm generated. That damn ash got airborne with every cleaning and settled in every room in the basement. That did not add to the Wife Acceptance Factor.

There are basically three options commonly used.

1. An outdoor wood burner installed as intended, sitting out in the yard unenclosed.

2. An indoor rated boiler installed inside the dwelling, usually the basement because that's where the mechanical room commonly is.

3. An indoor rated boiler installed in a detached building like a garage, shed or other outbuilding.

They all have advantages and disadvantages. If I was installing one for my own use it would be number 3 even if I had to budget a little more cash to construct a shed to house the boiler. It would be made large enough to store an ample amount of wood inside where it would be dry and warm. That alone would be worth it to me without even considering the safety factor, not hauling wood into the house, no smoke problems, no dust and ash, etc etc.

As to your question regarding the chimney, it is a code violation to vent any solid fuel appliance in the same chimney as an oil or gas fired unit. It is actually a real live safety issue and the code is correct in this case. Do not do it.

I've been planning to put a Tarm 40 in a new arctic entry attached to the house. The insulated metal stove pipe would be 10' from the house. How much ash does the Tarm put up the stack? Any issues with coating the house?

I don't recall who posted the picture of their boiler with an inexpensive kitchen range hood over the loading door but it is a great idea to get the smoke outside.

I don't think I want the smoke, ash, bugs, and sawdust in the house. Indoor air quality in a tight house is poor unless you have a mechanical ventilation system; adding a wood burner just makes it worse. I store a days worth of logs to feed the woodstove, but wouldn't want to move a quarter-cord in for storage.

muncybob said:

At first I thought an OWB would be the way to go...easier install, mess is outside and near wood pile and initial start up cost is less or maybe equal. Then I read up a bit and see in the long run an interior gassifier will save me money and labor...not to mention fewer trips outside for wood / loading the boiler and no underground lines to run saving me $$(but I guess a storage system will use up that $$ savings?). Ideally I would keep my oil boiler as a back up but now the Mrs. is very concerned about having a wood boiler with "flames" in the same proximity(apprx. 12' away) as the oil boiler and I have a concern about being able to use the same existing chimney for the wood boiler and the oil boiler. Are these 2 valid concerns? Maybe I should go OWB?

Click to expand...

Munchybob, check this out... http://www.mainewoodfurnaces.com/CC500_Installation.shtml
It can vent into a single chimney flu.

The fly ash from my gasifier ends up in the chimney cleanout. None of it ever gets out the stack. What Chris is talking about is the ash that gets into the air when you clean the ashes out. That's a potential problem with any indoor woodburner, but it's aggravated with a gasifier because the ash is so much finer.

I wouldn't sweat having a separate oil boiler in the same space as a gasifier or other wood-fired boiler. It's not a safety issue if both are installed correctly and to code.

Any boiler is going to let some smoke out the loading door on occasion. Most people figure out how to avoid that and succeed pretty well. I don't think my gasifier is any worse than my old conventional wood-fired boilers, but since I have it in the barn, I don't pay that much attention since it's not an issue. Again, it depends on when and how you open the loading door.

I've owned a combination wood/oil conventional wood-fired boiler and I'm not a big fan of the concept--which seems to make a lot of sense at first glance. Here you've got two appliances for basically the price of one, and they both vent into the same flue. And that's the problem. If your wood boiler is also your oil-fired backup, then a leak or other serious problem with the boiler leaves you with no backup--usually in the dead of winter. And while venting two different fuel exhausts into the same chimney is technically legal with a combination boiler, that doesn't mean it's smart. Consider what happens when your chimney is clogged with creosote and you can't get a decent fire going. You switch over to oil and try to vent it out a clogged chimney. That's a good way to kill everybody in the house.

Separate boilers burning separate fuels is the way to go, IMO.

Eric Johnson said:

The fly ash from my gasifier ends up in the chimney cleanout. None of it ever gets out the stack. What Chris is talking about is the ash that gets into the air when you clean the ashes out. That's a potential problem with any indoor woodburner, but it's aggravated with a gasifier because the ash is so much finer.

I wouldn't sweat having a separate oil boiler in the same space as a gasifier or other wood-fired boiler. It's not a safety issue if both are installed correctly and to code.

Any boiler is going to let some smoke out the loading door on occasion. Most people figure out how to avoid that and succeed pretty well. I don't think my gasifier is any worse than my old conventional wood-fired boilers, but since I have it in the barn, I don't pay that much attention since it's not an issue. Again, it depends on when and how you open the loading door.

I've owned a combination wood/oil conventional wood-fired boiler and I'm not a big fan of the concept--which seems to make a lot of sense at first glance. Here you've got two appliances for basically the price of one, and they both vent into the same flue. And that's the problem. If your wood boiler is also your oil-fired backup, then a leak or other serious problem with the boiler leaves you with no backup--usually in the dead of winter. And while venting two different fuel exhausts into the same chimney is technically legal with a combination boiler, that doesn't mean it's smart. Consider what happens when your chimney is clogged with creosote and you can't get a decent fire going. You switch over to oil and try to vent it out a clogged chimney. That's a good way to kill everybody in the house.
Separate boilers burning separate fuels is the way to go, IMO.

Click to expand...

Eric, I understand where you are coming from and I appreciate your preference not to use combos. There are hundreds
of Benjamin CC-500s operating in Canada and the US. There are close to 50 in Maine. Your comments are purely conjecture. The water vessel is made of 3/16" steel, similar to the old Tarm. My father is still operating a tarm wood boiler that he purchased in 1979. There is simply no history or evidence that the water vessel of the CC-500 will pre-maturly fail. Operating one of these boilers correctly will not "clog" the chimney with creosote and "kill" evrybody in the house. Eric, the combination boiler that you owned, fired the oil burner into the same fire chamber as the wood.

I would not hesitate to put a gasifier inside, based on my Tarm experience. Occasional smoke out the loading door is less that we get from our wood stove. And there is some of that fine ash dust, which we also get with the wood stove. My wife complained at first, but after years of saving $1,000's with the wood, and not having to give a second thought about the cost of a little extra heat, she now would never go back to LP gas (the best local option). She is the wood heat champion, and she still does the dusting.

The great plus is all of the otherwise "wasted" heat is in the building you want to heat, so net efficiency can rise significantly.

One thing that is important is easy access to bring in wood. I have ground level access to my gasifier and bringing in a wheel barrow load of wood is easy and clean.

Gasifiers tend to smoke out the loading door during filling. This can be substantially decreased to near zero with honed loading practices. As the technology improves my guess is that we will see no smoke at loading time. I personally favor placing the gasifier in the heated structure(in a boiler room in the basement or an attached structure). Methodical boiler room cleaning methods and maintenance will reduce the fine ash problem. This being said, there is usually a substantial learning curve for new owners so don't lie to your wife. Good luck. Here, here for Gasifiers!

Mainewood said:

Eric, I understand where you are coming from and I appreciate your preference not to use combos. There are hundreds
of Benjamin CC-500s operating in Canada and the US. There are close to 50 in Maine. Your comments are purely conjecture. The water vessel is made of 3/16" steel, similar to the old Tarm. My father is still operating a tarm wood boiler that he purchased in 1979. There is simply no history or evidence that the water vessel of the CC-500 will pre-maturly fail. Operating one of these boilers correctly will not "clog" the chimney with creosote and "kill" evrybody in the house. Eric, the combination boiler that you owned, fired the oil burner into the same fire chamber as the wood.

Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about premature failure. What I said was that when it does fail, which all boilers eventually do, then you're stuck with no backup. You or whoever owns the house when it goes.

And if you're saying that the Benjamin produces no creosote, then it's the first conventional boiler I've heard of that accomplishes that feat. My objection to venting two different appliances into the same flue is that not everyone operates their boilers "correctly." My point is that it's dangerous to vent an oil or gas appliance into a chimney that might contain creosote.

I'm not knocking the Benjamin, but I think that anyone considering a combination wood/oil boiler that vents into the same flue should be aware of the dangers and potential problems, including the responsibility inherent in selling somebody a house that may contain a hidden or unanticipated danger.

speaking of 'hidden and unanticipated danger' . . . incognito salesman :sick: would fall in that category. Seems like newbies that come here could benefit from some disclosure on the part of some of the lurkers

ISeeDeadBTUs said:

speaking of 'hidden and unanticipated danger' . . . incognito salesman :sick: would fall in that category. Seems like newbies that come here could benefit from some disclosure on the part of some of the lurkers

Click to expand...

haha.

i say get a Tarm then tell me your name so I can put it on the referral card they gave me so I can get 50 bucks.

hi everyone just a suggestion the heating buuby said to me that my oil burn is 50yrs old and i want to put in a wood boiler and i only have one flue that i should consider replacing the oil furance to with a direct vent and using the existing flue for the wood boiler it would be almost the same price to add a chimney as to replace the oil boiler with a newer high effincey just tring to decide which boiler to go with

Yes, a direct vent for the oil boiler and using your existing chimney for the wood side is the best approach. That depends, of course, on the condition of the existing chimney. If it's inadequate for the wood boiler (unlined or deteriorated clay liner), then a new prefab chimney might be a cheaper solution, if it's still adequate for the new oil boiler. If not, then direct vent the oil and put a ss liner into the old chimney for the wood.

yes chimney is in great shape

Hearing the continual warnings about creosote build-up and the danger of chimney fires led me to dismantle my breech pipe to check the chimney. After 1 heating season this is what I found. Am I in any trouble?

I've got no experience with wood boilers, but compared to creosote buildup in a wood stove, yours looks great to me...I'll be watching for others opinions.

Chuck

Your build up is very light...

Check out this thread to see a major creosote problem

https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/11830/P30/

Yeah, Steve I have seen that post before. The Seton hydronic furnace is a good unit, but can be abused like others I have seen on this forum.

Hi Folks -

after a winter with a boiler outside and in a shed, I have come to the conclusion that when it comes to smoke and ash it is just like having it indoors - at least as far a smoke into your lungs is concerned.

I am switching to an EPA approved OWB to reduce this impact on my lungs.

I would always vote for the unit to be outside or at least in a detached structure from your house. I can't imagine the impact to my house if my boiler was inside.

Something to think about.

Pete