Pre-EPA Stove burning

  • 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
Not open for further replies.

BrowningBAR

Minister of Fire
Hearth Supporter
Jul 22, 2008
7,607
San Tan Valley, AZ
I have a question regarding emissions.

According to a report* a pre-EPA stove will emit 15.6 grams/hour. But the same report also states that an EPA stove emits 8.2 grams/hour. The vast majority of stoves I have seen and researched usually have a listed rating somewhere between 2-5 grams/hour. So this leads me to question the accuracy of a) the reports findings and b) the listed emission stats on stoves.

Lets say the report's findings are accurate for arguments sake. Are the numbers based of of optimum burning conditions? An average of all situations? If I am burning smoke-free with a pre-epa stove (in this case, the vigilant) does that mean I am emitting 15.6 grams/hour or are the findings an average of clean burning and dirty burning methods?

I find it hard to believe that a fireplace buring hard wood is only double the grams/hour that a pre-EPA stove is when burning smoke-free. (which is how the vigilant is 95% of the time)

*Report in references comes from these stats: http://burningissues.org/comp-emmis-part-sources.htm
 
I think the burning issues post is understating the pre-EPA results. When a lot of these stoves are banked down for an overnight burn, they are putting out >25gms/hr or more if the wood is poorly seasoned. Yes, EPA results are optimal, under controlled conditions. As we have seen here, many people burn sub-optimally. Conversely, your Vigilant is an exception and was far ahead of it's time with a modest secondary combustion system. If one keeps that stove in good working order, with clean passages and burns dry wood, it is decent burner compared to an old, baffleless Fisher for example. This winter I have fired up the Jotul again. Our dining area looks out at the greenhouse so I can watch the stack. Embarrassed to say it's a dirty burner. I have to work hard not to see smoke out of the stack. I may be switching to a VL17 if there's a good end of season sale.

http://www.chimneysweeponline.com/hoarticl.htm
 
BrowningBAR said:
If I am burning smoke-free with a pre-epa stove (in this case, the vigilant) does that mean I am emitting 15.6 grams/hour or are the findings an average of clean burning and dirty burning methods?

I find it hard to believe that a fireplace buring hard wood is only double the grams/hour that a pre-EPA stove is when burning smoke-free. (which is how the vigilant is 95% of the time)

BBAR, I own the same stove and I rarely see smoke, but that doesn't mean the stove is producing the same low levels of particulate matter as an EPA stove of good design. They use very sophisticated equipment to get those numbers, but 15.6 grams/hr of PM isn't going to look like a black cloud pouring out of your chimney. I have seen test results in the older stoves that show numbers up into the 200+ g/hr range during low burn rates on old air-tights. Yup, you'll definitely see it then.

Last week my son came out to help me replace my radiator, and I happened to look up at the chimney to see nothing but pure heat waves coming out. I bragged about it to my son, who informed me that from his perspective he could see a thin haze of smoke against the trees in the background. I moved my position, and sure enough, when the light caught it just right, I could make out wisps of smoke every now and then. Not bad, not bad at all, but I'll bet if they were running an EPA test on the stove at that moment, it would have failed miserably. So be it. I live out in the country at least a 1/4 mile from my nearest neighbors... who all burn wood, and make more smoke than I ever did.
 
BeGreen said:
This winter I have fired up the Jotul again. Our dining area looks out at the greenhouse so I can watch the stack. Embarrassed to say it's a dirty burner. I have to work hard not to see smoke out of the stack.

BG, I wasn't aware until recently that these stoves don't burn like a little 118, with the "S" shaped flame path and top baffle returning the flames back to the front. That is a pretty good design. How does the 602 differ? I tried to find line drawings of the construction details but struck out. Anywhere you know where I can get this info?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.