EPA new wood stove requirements!

[BKVP]

In regards to efficiency, look for the B415.1-10 test results. Not the earlier B415.1

These are two distinctly different test methods used in testing forced air wood furnaces.

A 250k BTU unit that tested 63% isn't nearly as good as a 200k unit that tested 82%. You get the idea.

 

[martae]

I understand completely. I've been looking at the Yukon Big Jack and Yukon Super Jack, and I know that my friend decided to go for the 'bigger unit' with his 2400sqft house that's 100 years old and has less insulation than a cardboard box. He's now having the issue that he has 'too much furnace' for his house, and is having to split his wood to kindling size to heat the place (lol)

The Big Jack heats up to 1500sqft, and the Super Jack heats up to 3000 or so, but is twice the money. Part of me thinks 1700sqft is pretty close to 1500sqft, but we can get some wicked -30dF nights here fairly regularly, and the last thing I want is a unit that's too small and is a waste of money because it can't keep up.

If I don't end up going with a Drolet Tundra and decide on a Yukon for the extra efficiency, I'll likely be calling them and discussing it before I place the order. I won't be getting another unit though until next tax season at the earliest though.

The super jack is just a big jack, with a secondary heat exchanger sitting on top of the firebox, like a hat. The big jack is rated at 90,000 BTUh, and the super jack at 125,000. Basically you are extracting an extra 35000 BTUh from the combustion products before you send them up the chimney, so you get a bit more than 1/3 more heat from the same wood burned.
I heat my mobile home, and a 200 square foot free standing greenhouse with a Super Jack. I also heat hot water with a thermosiphon system, drawing heat from outside the firebox.
I've managed to get the furnace to burn better at stand by, and at derated capacity by blocking the half of the secondary air ports near the door with cut off portions of common T cross section T post, held in position with 17 gage steel wire that is pulled tight, and joined in the ash pan compartment, over the ash pan. This does not decrease the secondary air, but heats it further, and causes more turbulence when it is discharged into the back of the firebox. I also try to keep the fire pushed back into the back of the firebox. I think the big problem with this design's secondary air system, is there is not enough turbulence to result in good secondary burning, unless the firebox is very hot

 

[adam6979]

It's like the diesel trucks... remove the catalytic and go back to having a great performing truck... or stove in this forum... wait did I just violate federal law??? Never mind I retract that statement and deny it's existence...

 

[begreen]

Pulling the catalyst on a catalytic stove would be like putting the stove back into a smoke dragon mode and turning it into a lousy performer.

 

[BrotherBart]

It's like the diesel trucks... remove the catalytic and go back to having a great performing truck... or stove in this forum... wait did I just violate federal law??? Never mind I retract that statement and deny it's existence...

Remove the cat in a new truck and see what happens with that engine control computer without a cat in closed loop mode. Good luck with that. And the wrecker service.

 

[BKVP]

If any one had it in mind to purchase one of our stoves that is catalyst equipped and then either remove it or not use the by pass correctly, I would ask them to buy another brand of stove.

We have not spent 30 years refining the technology so that the stove would be less efficient and potentially contribute to poor air quality.

And yes, it would be a violation of Federal and state laws to do so, but that aside, you would use vastly more wood and clean your chimney much more often.

 

[Light in the Dark]

It's like the diesel trucks... remove the catalytic and go back to having a great performing truck... or stove in this forum... wait did I just violate federal law??? Never mind I retract that statement and deny it's existence...

My '14 Powerstroke with 400/800 from the factory @ 21mpg would beg to differ.

 

[adam6979]

Sorry guys I was talking about the older trucks and stoves. Once the cats clog up they are worse, remove them and you get back superior performance... not talking about the newer junk. I should have clarified better for those not inside my mind.... damn voices.

 

[iamlucky13]

A stove is not a truck. In a truck, a cat slightly reduces efficiency by increasing back pressure, so it takes more work to drive the exhaust out (an accepted loss to reduce smog). The amount of fuel converted to work by the engine does not change. Improvements in engine design and management have more than made up for the loss, though.

In a stove, a cat increases the fuel burn up, so the amount of fuel converted to heat does change.

 

[bholler]

Full. I cut 12 this year total, and I've got about 2 left. I haven't used all 12 yet, but if the weather keeps it up this way, I will be. I installed my fresh air intake just last month, and noticed a slight difference. I've been burning since the beginning of October, maybe earlier.

You would be using a lot less wood if you were burning a more efficent stove and there fore it would be easier to get the wood dry ect ect. There are very good cat stoves out there. Many of the early ones were pretty bad and the addons never worked that does not mean cats are bad. Sorry i posted this before reading all of your posts you seem to have come around a bit. But honestly i heat most of my 100 yr old 1800 sq ft house with one stove in the basement i am looking to add another so i can heat completely with wood And many heat that much sq ft easily with one stove

 

[j7art2]

With -30dF or colder mornings, I'm starting to see where there are some MAJOR issues with air pollution in certain areas as Poindexter pointed out earlier.

Driving to and from work on these mornings, there is a quarter mile section or less of road that has 5 outdoor wood boilers, and it is literally like driving through fog. I have never once seen this in my 31 years of life, but now I am starting to understand why people are starting to heavily lean this way.

One of them seriously puts out so much smoke I wonder if he is cutting and burning the same day. I kid you not, it looks on par with Dow Chemical, simply on a smaller scale. It's ridiculous, and it infuriates me because it's idiots like him that are punishing people like me, who at least make a damn good effort to season their wood and be responsible burners.

I don't know for sure if government regulation is for sure the answer, but I can say for certain, that good burning practices are something that people simply aren't educated on I guess. More information on this needs to be shared and addressed at the bare minimum. When I took apart my wood furnace to clean it from the previous owner of my house, there was an 80% blockage. When I took it apart last month for inspection after burning some less than optimal stuff, I had absolutely zero build up other than soot, obviously leading me to believe that the previous owner of my house had no knowledge of wood burning.

 

[saskwoodburner]

You make a good point about the smoke. The neighbor has an old wood furnace, and he lives 400-500 yards away. It's easier to smell his smoke when the wind blows in my direction, than to smell smoke from my stack once it's warmed up, even up top near the chimney.

 

[j7art2]

You make a good point about the smoke. The neighbor has an old wood furnace, and he lives 400-500 yards away. It's easier to smell his smoke when the wind blows in my direction, than to smell smoke from my stack once it's warmed up, even up top near the chimney.

Is it his old wood furnace, or is it his poor burning practices? I have a 40 year old wood furnace, and I can't even smell my own smoke (let alone see it) if I'm burning at optimal temperatures. The only time I see or smell either, is when I'm just lighting a fire, or struggling to keep the stove hot because I'm burning sh#tty wood, or found a random piece of wood in the stack that seems to have made a vacation to the local swamp for the last few years and snuck back into the pile unnoticed.

 

[saskwoodburner]

Is it his old wood furnace, or is it his poor burning practices? I have a 40 year old wood furnace, and I can't even smell my own smoke (let alone see it) if I'm burning at optimal temperatures. The only time I see or smell either, is when I'm just lighting a fire, or struggling to keep the stove hot because I'm burning sh#tty wood, or found a random piece of wood in the stack that seems to have made a vacation to the local swamp for the last few years and snuck back into the pile unnoticed.

Hard to say, maybe a bit of both. I'm not saying his place is always rolling smoke, but anytime there's wind from the east, I usually smell smoke. We went for some wood together, standing dead pine, and he said it's good to drop in the stove right now (him an older wood furnace, me an Englander 17). Well, it burns in his, but most of any I tested reads about 26-28 % moisture. If I cut it small enough, it'll eventually have the moisture chased out and burn, but I think it's best to leave until next year.

 

[iamlucky13]

I don't know for sure if government regulation is for sure the answer, but I can say for certain, that good burning practices are something that people simply aren't educated on I guess.

And that right there is the issue. The result of the proposed regulation is those of us who season our wood and run the burners properly will pay extra the next time we need to buy a burner, and probably have fewer options, which will only be a tiny bit cleaner than the models we already have. The same applies to anyone thinking about making the jump to wood, or who just wants to upgrade an old burner for something more efficient. Increasing the cost creates more incentive to keep older burners or stay on fossil fuels.

So those folks you pass on your drive to work will be less likely to upgrade, and even if they do, the will still burn their wood the same way, and still create huge amounts of smoke, which will continue to fuel complaints, and we'll get regulated even more.

 

[begreen]

Inflation seems rampant in stove pricing in spite of whatever the CPI says. Our stove price has gone up an average about $100/yr for the past 7 yrs.. So have many other stove prices. It's going to happen the next time one has to buy a stove regardless. Interesting to note that the Englander 30 price has been remarkably stable. I suspect it will continue to be a reasonably priced stove after the new regs take effect.

 

[j7art2]

And that right there is the issue. The result of the proposed regulation is those of us who season our wood and run the burners properly will pay extra the next time we need to buy a burner, and probably have fewer options, which will only be a tiny bit cleaner than the models we already have. The same applies to anyone thinking about making the jump to wood, or who just wants to upgrade an old burner for something more efficient. Increasing the cost creates more incentive to keep older burners or stay on fossil fuels.

So those folks you pass on your drive to work will be less likely to upgrade, and even if they do, the will still burn their wood the same way, and still create huge amounts of smoke, which will continue to fuel complaints, and we'll get regulated even more.

Instead of putting more regulations on companies, how about we start holding people accountable for their actions? Don't punish all of us, including corporations, for the handful of idiots that don't know what they're doing. Spend the resources educating, not regulating.

But then again, if the government doesn't have complete control over every single person's lives, they're clearly not powerful enough for some.

 

[bholler]

Instead of putting more regulations on companies, how about we start holding people accountable for their actions? Don't punish all of us, including corporations, for the handful of idiots that don't know what they're doing.

Says the guy burning 12 cords of wet wood a year lol. I dont mean to pick on you but i found that statement pretty amusing. I do agree with you though it would be more effective if they could help people change their burning practices. But i know i have some customers who absolutely will not change no matter how many times we tell them. And honestly can you really say that modern stoves are not way better than the old ones? Yes the prices will be high to start but they will come down like they did with the last set of regulations.

 

[midwestcoast]

Whether by design or not, modern stoves are Very hard to use with wet or marginal wood. It's what drives a lot of members to this forum asking about issues with dirty glass, low temps, short burn times... So many folks who buy new stoves end up cleaning up their burning practices out of necessity to be able to run them. Without the gov't reg's they'd never reach the burner's nirvana that comes with truly seasoned wood and an EPA stove burning clean & pulling more btu's out of the smoke that'd otherwise be mucking up their chimney & their neighbor's lungs. Worth a few extra bucks on purchase price IMO.

I trust industry spokespeople to reliably exaggerate the impact of new reg's without mentioning the benefits. It's just their job.
I see the EPA tightening emissions standards on many types of equipment & usually at a reasonable pace that industry can satisfy by applying existing tech & with modest impact on cost... If many stoves already meet the standards, what is the big deal if they all have to meet them 5 years down the road? (& it's not like this is a huge surprise to the industry either).
I say close the loopholes that allow dirtier devices (uber-leaky stoves, OWB's, furnaces...) & push the industry to improve at a reasonable pace. The alternative is more burn-bans. No thanks.
Worrying aboutSmoke Police coming to confiscate anyone's older wood stove is silly IMO. EPA does't have anywhere near the needed the resources & they aren't dumb enough to think people would accept that, even if they wanted to try.

 

[j7art2]

Says the guy burning 12 cords of wet wood a year lol. I dont mean to pick on you but i found that statement pretty amusing. I do agree with you though it would be more effective if they could help people change their burning practices. But i know i have some customers who absolutely will not change no matter how many times we tell them. And honestly can you really say that modern stoves are not way better than the old ones? Yes the prices will be high to start but they will come down like they did with the last set of regulations.

My wood is not wet; at least not in the green sense. Some surface moisture maybe, but that's it. I did go through approximately 12 cords, but I can count on one hand the amount of green pieces of wood I used this year. All of my wood I burned this year was dead and down for at least 3 years, some significantly longer.

Part of the reason I went through so much wood is because I did not have a fresh air intake in my basement, and thus was completely unable to use my key damper and lost a significant amount of heat through my chimney. I was trying to speed up this 'global warming' thing to get spring here quicker, but it just didn't work. I did a complete inspection of my chimney 3 weeks ago, and if you'd like a picture of how clean it was, I'll gladly send it along to prove my wood was in fact not green. Two handfuls of black creosote, and powdery soot is all she wrote for a 30' chimney and 5 foot of pipe.

 

[semipro]

All of my wood I burned this year was dead and down for at least 3 years, some significantly longer.

I had some oak "dead and down" for three years. I went to split it and it was still visibly wet inside.
The only practical way to test is to make a fresh split use a moisture meter.

 

[buddha65281]

I don't think this will be such a big issue, I never even looked at the EPA rating on the new wood burning United States Stove Company "Country Hearth" model 2000 that I bought late last summer but because of this post I did, it is EPA 2 rated and burns 4.4 on smoke emissions... The stove was very reasonable for $549 at TSC, it is rated at 89,000 BTU and 2000 sqf BUT my garage is 30x40(1200 sqf) with 11.5 high ceiling and it does NOT keep it warm enough so I don't see this model heating 2000... According to a website I found it says for colder climates you need around 50-60 BTU per Square Foot. I will say it does make it relatively comfy..(30x40, 6" walls w/R19, ceiling R19, argon etc windows(2), (3) 2" garage doors(insulated) and concrete floor, also 2 std doors).

 

[bholler]

30x40(1200 sqf) with 11.5 high ceiling

11.5' ceilings is the problem that makes it much harder to heat also that stove is a pretty low end stove not a good example of modern epa compliant stoves at all. But for the price it is not that bad of a stove. But it will not pass the next set of regs at 4.4

 

[j7art2]

I had some oak "dead and down" for three years. I went to split it and it was still visibly wet inside.
The only practical way to test is to make a fresh split use a moisture meter.

I have one and use it regularly. I've got a full cord cut that has gone back in the shed because it isn't ready yet. If it's not below 30% MC, it doesn't go in the fire. 30% is high, but it's by no means "green" imo. My average is about 18% on my test splits. Some of my ash is lighter than my pine which has been bucked to length and seasoned for 2+ years. It's like carrying around a piece of styrofoam. lol.

 

[semipro]

I have one and use it regularly. I've got a full cord cut that has gone back in the shed because it isn't ready yet. If it's not below 30% MC, it doesn't go in the fire. 30% is high, but it's by no means "green" imo. My average is about 18% on my test splits. Some of my ash is lighter than my pine which has been bucked to length and seasoned for 2+ years. It's like carrying around a piece of styrofoam. lol.

Strangely enough, some species "green" moisture content is about 30%. This includes pine, fir, eastern red cedar.
http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr190/chapter_04.pdf