Problems with Burning Old Non-Certified Wood Stoves - Tip of the Iceberg

[Martin Strand III]

Tell you what.

Give me an old smoker and some well seasoned Oak
Give some other schmuck with the cash for a brand new stove some wood that isnt all that well seasoned.

Take the readings from each chimney for a full season of burning.

I GUARANTEE that I will have put less "bad things" into the air than the schmuck with the new stove.
Good wood and good burning habits will beat better technology every time. I see it every day on my way home, I can tell who has seasoned wood and who doesnt....... no matter what the stove.

Blabla:

I agree with you anybody (read: idiot) can burn wood in less than the optimal fashion.

This thread (maybe not obvious to some), for clarity, implies with similar wood burning styles (dry wood, proper air control, etc), an older pre-Phase II stove burns more wood, has more harmful particle emmissions in its 'smoke' and is unhealthier for everybody than burning same in a newer stove.

Aye,
Marty

 

[jabush]

Tell you what.

Give me an old smoker and some well seasoned Oak
Give some other schmuck with the cash for a brand new stove some wood that isnt all that well seasoned.

Take the readings from each chimney for a full season of burning.

I GUARANTEE that I will have put less "bad things" into the air than the schmuck with the new stove.
Good wood and good burning habits will beat better technology every time. I see it every day on my way home, I can tell who has seasoned wood and who doesnt....... no matter what the stove.

Thank You!

 

[jjbaer]

Your "real" costs to heat with oil are even higher because it takes about $20-$40 per month to run the blower on the furnace so add in another $150 for 6 mo or so that you use the blower so now the cost to use oil is about $1,852 and that makes wood look even better. Plus, oil costs are even higher because when it comes time to replace the stove and the furnace, the furnace costs twice what the stove does, thus making oil even more expensive.........

Hmmm, though it's correct to include the electrical costs, that seems a pretty high estimate. First of all, the blower is going to run a whole lot less in fall and spring and on many winter days lately. And the math doesn't seem to back up the monthly price either. Let's say the running blower draws 500 watts and the furnace runs 5 hrs per day. That equals 2.5kw.hrs. / day. 2.5 x 30 = 75kw.hrs. At .10/kw it would cost $7.50 a month to run the blower. At .20/kw it would cost $14.50/mo. for the blower. Even if the fan ran 10 hrs per day with electricity costing .15/kw.hr. it would only cost $22.50 - for that month. (And if the blower is running 10 hrs/day, get those leaks fixed and the house insulated! It's a better investment.)

There are hidden costs for wood as well including the fuel and equipment used for cutting, transport and splitting., And there are the cleaning and health costs, especially when there is a lot of wood burning in non-rural environments. No heat comes for free except the sun and perhaps geo-thermal if you live on top of a hot spring.

Hi BeGreen,

I think you'd be amazed at just how much electricity a conventional furnace blower consumes and it's a lot more than the 500 W you stated. There was a Canadian study done with two types of blowers...conventional (PSC type motor) and high efficiency (ECPM motor) and the results in energy consumption are startling for two reasons: 1) the fact that the efficient motor uses only 20% of the electricity that the conventional motor does and 2) the fact that the conventional motor uses over 2,000 KW Hrs per year in a house with NO A/C but only heat. At 10 cents per KW-hr that's $200 per year that it costs just to run the blower so I was actually on the low side when I said $150 for 6 mo...the actual cost is $200 for the year based on $0.1 per KW-HR. NOW, take you poor folks out there in what I call "captive electricity markets" like the East and your costs are closer to $0.18 per KW hr and now your cost to operate JUST the blower goes to about $360 per year.....now that's REAL $ in the bank if you don't have to run that beast.....!

NOTE: actual savings are less than this because the heat rejected from an inefficient motor actually heats your house....when you go to higher efficiency motors you actually have to burn slightly MORE oil to compensate for the heat you're no longer getting from the motor...BUT, since gas is cheaper than electricity, you still save real $. In the study your real savings are about 45% of what you calculate...so, at $0.18 per KW-hr you're not saving $360/year but $180 which is still real $ in the bank by burning wood and not having to run the blower.....

The study can be found here (see the chart on pg 2 of the study):

https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/b2c/b2c/mimes/pdf/63818.pdf

look at the "CCHT without A/C" and using the "PSC motor" and you'll see that about 2,000 KW-HR per year are required to run JUST the motor....... That's why, 7 years ago when I bought my furnace, I paid the extra $ to get the ECPM (more efficient) type motor.

 

[jjbaer]

Tell you what.

Give me an old smoker and some well seasoned Oak
Give some other schmuck with the cash for a brand new stove some wood that isnt all that well seasoned.

Take the readings from each chimney for a full season of burning.

I GUARANTEE that I will have put less "bad things" into the air than the schmuck with the new stove.
Good wood and good burning habits will beat better technology every time. I see it every day on my way home, I can tell who has seasoned wood and who doesnt....... no matter what the stove.

Babalu,

You're using a "faulty analogy".....you compare the particulate belching old stove using DRY wood to the new EPA approved stove using WET wood.....BAD comparison...... The valid comparison to make is to have both stoves use the SAME DRY WOOD.......... In that case, the EPA stove stomps the particulate belcher every time.......

I think what you meant to say was that you minimize particulates in your older stove by using the best dry firewood you can find and that IS a correct statement but to say you run your stove on the highest quality wood while assuming those with newer stoves all use wet wood is not an accurate comparision or assumption.....

I noticed this thread seems "closed" but doesn't say so yet I can't seem to respond to anyones comments so I had to edit my post to add something new.....why was the thread closed when it was just getting lively?

Also, for Marty...you opened the thread giving good reasons why one should replace their old stoves and when one individual asked "what kind of car do you drive" you refused to answer.....Let me help you here with the point he was trying to make: some won't replace their stoves for the same reason you might not replace your car, if, for example, someone (hypothetically) pointed out that you might be driving a gas guzzler....because regardless of the emissions, you like what you have.....to drive home his point as to why he won't give up his stove he asked you a similar question about your car..........