Separate names with a comma.
Posted By gzecc,
Feb 14, 2013 at 2:13 PM
Jags u were right I should have just waited. Dennis you nailed it, Alex I have learned much from these guys. These guys love to help everyone who ventures through here. I hope you stick around and learn and contribute your experiences.
Very good post Dennis. I have also burnt green wood and more specifically green locust. Yes you can get it to burn and the heavy bark will get it going but nothing like good dry locust. I have been burning locust for overnights a good bit this year and it is stuff that was down for several years. No bark and not one bit of sizzle. If somebody opened the stove in the morning that didn't know what I put in there they would think I was burning coal.
Dennis is one of a kind. You have a great gift of being able to tell a man something
without belittleing him. Believe me I've learned plenty from the whole lot of forum guys
Good morning, I will keep this super short, you Are interesting? Green Wood, specifically locust. Have you ever heard of lava rocks being used in a wood stove? I bought a stove from a guy that uses lava rocks in the design above the combustion chamber. all the heat rises up as with the smoke, through the lava rocks hence heating them up, catching, absorbing the creosote. What i have found is that this lava area above the fire keeps a tremendous amount of the heat in the stove and does not let it out the flue. This guy can put toliet paper over the flue, without it catching fire. So i guess that this kinda sandwiches the heat between the upper lava rock area, and the coal bed. this requires less air to fuel ratio and a more efficient burn. I have placed seasoned wood in, and it burns up faster. do to the sandwich effect. Water, has the second highest heat carrying capacity, other than amonia. it will smoke for the first fifteen minutes, until the out side of the log is scorched then no smoke the lava rocks help, tremendously. After the outside of the log is burnt, the interior of the log still has moisture, gives me the longer burn. If there is no smoke, then there should be no creosote correct? I pulled my flue apart acouple of weeks ago, the only thing I found in there was fluffy carbon, scraped some off and took it to the incubator that I have been working with. I can tap on the pipe and it falls off. Hmmmm. I'm ready, no fear, with no disrespect. Lava rocks capture the particulates. and hold the heat in the stove. Alex
For starters I'm not sure how you think that waters latent heat capacity would benefit the system you describe. Water can only absorb heat reducing the transfer to the lava rock you believe is capturing heat and volatiles. Seems someone told you this fact but it has no relevance here except that it would be reduce efficiency of the burn.
If the system you describe has any real benefits it would function better with less water (dry wood). The fact that wet wood burns slower (and at a lower temp) is no mystery, it's wet. Better to burn dry wood and control your air.
Yeah, the fluffy stuff is creosote and my furnace is set up the same way. There is a plate on top of the firebox that traps the heat in the firebox with an opening just to the left of the firebox for the smoke to exit up into the smoke pipe. The firebox in the furnace gets so hot sometimes that I cannot even get close to it when it is open and I have to literally throw the logs into it from outside the furnace. The manufacturer still suggests that all wood be seasoned to 20% or less moisture content. There is even a warning sticker on the side of the furnace stating this.
Not only do you have to deal with the creosote factor, but you have to deal with the loss of energy factor. Energy is used to transform the water into heat. That is energy that could have been used to heat the firebox instead. The question is, how much energy is lost in this process and does the hot steam make up for the energy lost. So far, I greatly prefer burning seasoned wood that lights right up and burns hot. Anything that is above 20% MC sucks in my book. I am burning some 24% red oak right now that is alright, but not great.
Well, we may have to see if we can talk some stove manufacturers into putting lava rocks in the stoves. Still, they, like soapstone or cast, can store only so much heat. As for the lava rocks soaking up the creosote, something just does not sound right there. How much can it soak up? Can the rock really soak it up at all? Would you have to remove this rock every so often to clean it, much as you would clean a chimney? Would it not be better to not have any creosote to "soak up?"
"After the outside of the log is burnt, the interior of the log still has moisture, gives me the longer burn." You are correct in that the moisture is throughout the whole log. It gives you a longer burn simply because it can't burn very fast at all. Where most folks seem to go wrong on the theory of burning green wood vs burning dry wood is that they claim the dry wood burns too fast. Well for sure if they attempt to burn the wood in the same way, the dry will burn faster. But that is one of the beauties of burning dry wood in that you do not have to burn it fast; you do not have to give it as much air as you do to keep wet wood burning. Therefore, you keep more of that energy (heat) in the house rather than sending it up the chimney.
I have no problem with folks who want to burn green wood so long as they aren't affecting their neighbors and it really can have some bad effects. For one, what about those with breathing problems? Is it right to send dirty smoke into the air and have those folks breath it? Isn't this one of the things folks have fought and are still fighting about smoking tobacco? Would it not be better to burn fuel that is more efficient and less polluting?
I'm still not convinced so I'll continue to burn good dry wood. I make every attempt to burn good fuel in all the engines we have and will also make that attempt in the heating department. Dry wood rocks!
Yes, young man, but you said it all. Water holds, the heat, correct? which is creosote, creosote sticks to stuff. as in the lava rocks, the heat transfers to the basalt lava rocks, and then they heat up and burn the creosote. I took a video yesterday of this. Yes, dry wood fires up faster, but like i was saying the fact that I have a solid layer of lava rocks above the fire, it trapping the heat inside the combustion chamber, burning the dryer wood up faster. I also burn tires, trash in my stove with no smoke, the lava rocks. I am going over to my mothers house to post this video that i took yesterday, you may find it interesting, or not. The choice is yours. I will post the video on youtube with the title being this thread. "Ahh you gotta love the locust" If there is no smoke then there can't be CREOSOTE.
Yes correct but it's not benefitting you. Waters high latent heat capacity (which you cited) means it absorbs heat (energy) without a concurrent rise in temperature. That means it is sapping energy from the system without providing anything useful. The water eventually boils once the latent heat capacity is overcome (after sucking up enough energy) which occurs at a very low temp relative to the type of heat you should achieve in a wood stove (500+) and then floats off up the stack. If you are equating creosote with water or believe that the lava rock is also retaining the water then you would have to run at very low temps but I doubt that that is the case even with wet wood.
To take advantage of waters high latent heat capacity water is heated in a closed system (like a boiler with baseboard heat). In your setup the water vapor goes out the stack at a low temp before you can get that heat back.
You may have a viable system but the point is if you could control the air better it necessarily must work better without excess water. Water after all is used to put out fires because it cools the fire and displaces O2.
All I know is that this morning my wife was complaining that the house was at 67 degrees (because the logs I put in last night before getting to bed extinguished themselves over night. She found two charred logs in the furnace this morning) and that the wood currently in the house SUCKS for starting a fire. Looks like I am going to have to split this 24% MC oak down a little smaller to help get fires started and to help them continue burning.
Yeah, wet wood is for the birds, ants, and termites. By the end of the spring, I am going to have wood stacked all over the place. Enough of this wet wood burning for this guy here.
Alex your getting way to complicated for something very simple. All this you are going through and not getting the heat you could be. Lava rocks may be helping you with creosote and retain the water. But the reason people are saying different is not to argue. They are simply trying to help because all here have burned wet wood and know the difference in heat output once you learn how to burn dry wood. As far as burning tires, that's a whole different conversation.
I has suspected it before but that post by our new friend Alex Johnson sort of spelled it out free and clear. Alex is a troll and only trying to stir up the clan. This thread does not deserve even one more post.
So go ahead Alex and burn your tires in your stove. Just tell it somewhere else.
The byproducts of complete combustion, there are only two. Co2 and h2o. I find that kind of odd, that a fire that is burning at optimum efficiency, it puts out water and carbon dioxide. Yes, Your right, I'm not going to throw a cup of water in everytime, that i throw in a hunk of wood. But, when you have a tree as in only locust, that is freshly cut down. water is just not oozin out of it. Locust starts to dry check itself within the first two days. I wood like for you toi watch the video that I made just for this, I want for you to see it. its on youtube, ibought this stove from a guy. under you gotta love the locust. With your fire, fire is put out by water, lets say there is a 100 year old two story house, ya know the one that is made out of true 2 by 4' and its on fire. I have a water hose from the next door neighbor house tryin to put it out, in reality I am just fueling it. Ok, then the fire department comes they more than likely will have 3 to four 3 inch lines and they will get it out, but it takes a whole hell of alot of water to make that happen. Its funny that you talked about, water putting out fire. When alex looks at water i see a fuel, oxygen combo. Hydrogen fuel cell cars, to put it bluntly, there will come a day that we put water in are cars to create in essesnce a fire to make them go. What 2 molecules make up water, 2 hydrogen atoms and a single oxygen atom. Hydrogen is a fuel and oxygen is a oxidizer, which reacts with hydrogen, or methane, butane, acetelyne and on and on..........
My friend i can burn tires in my stoves, with the lava rock filter. Its on youtube. One day you will see, that this so called troll. Look up mcguire stoves on youtube, and you will feel like a schmuck, my friend. I have patience for people, who speak, what they know.... I am hear to spread the word about lava rocks, Just think and let yourr mind swell, with knowledge. do you realize that 600 years ago, we thought the world was SQUARE. Good day my friend!
I like to know how long it takes locust to dry so you can burn it with out worrying about creosote?
Alex, I had not planned on posting to this thread any more but just wanted to warn you about one thing. You are posting that you burn tires in your stove. I can not tell you about where you live but will tell you that in most places, someone could turn you in and you would be facing a huge fine for burning those tires. How much? Last one I know of who was fined had to pay the State $10,000.00. So you might be well advised to stop with these posts lest you get yourself into some big time trouble.
Good replies Dennis, don't waste anymore time on this guy. I'm getting dumber just by reading his posts...
Yeah, I think he really lost me when he stated that using a garden hose on a house fire would be fueling the fire. How can putting water on a fire fuel it whatsoever, unless the garden hose is hooked up to a tank of gasoline.
If it is a green tree 2 or 3 yrs, But a dead one well thats a different story, deepends.
I saw the video of your inefficient and dangerous setup.
Be careful you don't hurt yourself and BTW did you say... "choochin' "?
Well, there is some debate as to whether I have locust in my pile of wood. 90% say it is locust, 8% say it isn't, and 2% say it is Siberian Elm. All I know is that the wood has been split and stacked since August/September 2011 and it burns like crap and two MC measurements from fresh splits last month returned 37% water. Plenty of people have said on here that even when it is dry, it still burns really slow and long. Me, I am going to take a couple more MC readings sometime soon, but am pretty sure they are still way too wet. They are just so much heaver than the same sized red oak splits I stacked at the same time.
So, for me it is going to be 2 to 3 summers worth of seasoning before the locust is worth burning. Others swear that it only takes 6 months. You are going to have to experiment on your own to see what works for you.
We got some cotton wood the first year we got our stove that was cut and stacked for 6 months then we split it. 3 weeks later it was good to go. So each wood is different.
No doubt about that. Every different species is different. This season I burned a lot of poplar, sweet gum, and cherry that was split and stacked the fall of 2011. The stuff burned great. It was super dry, lit right up, and put out a ton of quick heat. Did not last very long and the sweet gum stank/stunk and left a ton of ash. The oak and locust stacked around the same time frame lights up under protest and the locust will not stay lit if it is the only thing in the furnace and there isn't a deep coal bed underneath it. Going to get through this season and then things should be much better for next year. Really need to get 3 years ahead though so I don't have to worry about all this stuff.
Dennis, With much respect, I will leave and not come back. I am a open minded more than most, I know this. I live in the state of missouri, In Saint Joe, I have been working with the local university, actually Missouri Western State University. They have been taking Infrared Spectroscopy Samples. we have been capturing, flue gas samples. In the state of missouri, it is in violation to "The open burning of tires" but it states that you can burn tires in a apparatus that has a stack. I can guarantee you this there are people that do it, regularly. Im not one of them because they create way to much heat, specially when there is no smoke. I have had the lava rocks up to 2400F. What i found, while doing research for my project, there are few states that allow for one tire to be burnt in a stack configuration. I have found a away for this to be done smoke free, I achieved the complete combustion, with the aid of a 4inch thick lava rock filter to pass the particulates through. I truly apologize to all of you, if i have ruffled feathers. That was not my intentions, my intentions were wanting to talk to some people kinda like me. Black locust is my favorite wood, its a weed tree. I had a meeting with a local coal fired electrical producer, about my concepts. Did you know that every full load of coal in a single train car, over half will be wasted. sub critical power plant, 38% efficient, Super Critical 45%, Ultra Super critical 45.6% efficient, that's ridiculous gentleman. I still love Black Locust for heat, and hickory for smokin Respectfully Alex, peace be with you gentleman.