Boiler vs 2 stoves

[SolarAndWood]

My heat load is right on the edge of serviceable by a large stove. 3500 sq ft on a windy ridge in upstate NY with a lot of glass. We have heated with wood exclusively for 4 years now, much more comfortably since getting a bigger stove at the beginning of last season. I had always considered the stove a stop gap until I got the house done and put a boiler in. But now I'm reconsidering.

Seems the biggest disadvantages of wood appliances are the output curve of a burn cycle and being able to run in its efficient range in both mild and brutal conditions. The boiler with storage is an elegant solution to both problems. I am wondering if two large catalytic stoves side by side might be as well. I have no problem with 24 hour burn cycles until it gets cold and windy. Then, I move to 12 hour cycles and often push the stove most likely beyond its ideal efficiency range to keep the house comfortable. With the two stoves side by side, I could run one in mild temps as I do now. When it no longer can keep up over a 24 hour range in its ideal operating zone, add the second stove into the mix loading stoves opposite on 12 hour cycles. Then increase the output of both stove as necessary as conditions require.

Aesthetics and dhw aside, does this sound crazy?

 

[woodsmaster]

You must have a very open floor plan? That would cook me out of half of my house.

 

[SolarAndWood]

I removed almost all the interior walls as part of the rebuild. The room the stove is in is almost 1200 sq ft with nearly 10' ceilings. Then, decent openings to the few other rooms in the house.

The large catalytic stove burns low very well. We light in September and go until May and have never overheated the room the stove is in. I wouldn't have considered this strategy with the old stove as both had to open windows and run backup heat.

 

[Singed Eyebrows]

Stoves are quite simple as you have your burner & heat emitter all in one, you are comparing to a boiler here. It sounds like you will pipe both stoves into the same chimney & I'm not sure if that meets code where you are. Gasification boiler systems with storage get expensive fast, the advantage is that you can get the heat where you need it, no creosote & can buy units with greater capacity than is available in a stove. Your 2 stove idea although not crazy sounds like more work than I would want to go through, Randy

 

[SolarAndWood]

Gasification boiler systems with storage get expensive fast

Yep, that makes me think real hard about all my options. With the two stoves, I will do 2 8" pipes. To get them to burn right, they really need to be vented properly. This isn't a big deal as the house is largely an open shell. What got me thinking about this is it is about time to build the chimney chase. I think it will actually be a lot more work to put a stack in from the basement for the boiler, plumb the storage, install a distribution system, etc.

As far as wood, I think it is the same work either way as I need the same # of btus and I doubt in an open floor plan there is much difference in overall system efficiency. Processing is arguably less work with the stoves as they are less picky about size and shape. That is good as all my fuel is urban scrounged.

 

[pybyr]

Gasification boiler systems with storage get expensive fast

Yep, that makes me think real hard about all my options. With the two stoves, I will do 2 8" pipes. To get them to burn right, they really need to be vented properly. This isn't a big deal as the house is largely an open shell. What got me thinking about this is it is about time to build the chimney chase. I think it will actually be a lot more work to put a stack in from the basement for the boiler, plumb the storage, install a distribution system, etc.

As far as wood, I think it is the same work either way as I need the same # of btus and I doubt in an open floor plan there is much difference in overall system efficiency. Processing is arguably less work with the stoves as they are less picky about size and shape. That is good as all my fuel is urban scrounged.

Neither boiler nor stove. This sounds like a great situation (open floor plan) for a masonry heater. Simplicity of stove (no electrical or plumbing) with the efficiency of an unthrottled burn + thermal mass/ flywheel effect of a boiler & storage. Some friends of mine built one themselves in their new well-insulated house, and it makes their place fabulously comfortable. Should handle any reasonable sort of wood as long as it is dry.

 

[in hot water]

With two large stoves like that where do you get combustion air from? Is it vented directly to the stoves or do you have that much "leakage" in the building?

What about stratification with the stoves, Can you move all that warmed air down from the tall ceilings?

I like the KISS, and cost aspects of stoves, but the control-ability and dealing with the fuel mess inside the living space could be a hassle.

I think a parlor stove for a small cabin or square footage still sounds attractive. Keeping multiple units fueled, cleaned and running efficiently sounds like a lot of work. Sounds like you enjoy the ritual and rewards.

There are a lot of wild and unique stove products, a full halls worth, at the ISH show in Frankfurt every two years. It worth a trip just to spend a day in the fireplace and stove hall. I'd venture to guess that the stove and fireplace market is larger than the gasification boiler market in Europe.

hr

 

[flyingcow]

I think what your thinking is good. Quite frankly, if it doesn't work, what are you out? there is nothing like the direct heat from a wood stove. If i had to rebuild, I would lean towards an open floor plan w/wood stove.

Masonary heaters are cool. But, you need a big base of support, kinda heavy creatures aren't they? But, I would love to have one. How about a masonary heater with a wood fired pizza oven on the side? On other side of room, tasteful beer tap, with a poker table, and surround sound stereo.....whoops........gettin' off topic.

fire the 2 stoves up and don't look back.

 

[Chris Hoskin]

Is it correct that you have no central heat distribution already in place (baseboard, ductwork, etc.)? If there is nothing there, then I would say the woodstove(s) option makes sense. I would also encourage you to consider a masonry heater if you have the floor (heavy!) and budget.

If you already have hot water baseboards (or something) in place then I would look more seriously at a boiler. Two stoves and two chimney systems would cost no less than a boiler.

 

[SolarAndWood]

Neither boiler nor stove. This sounds like a great situation (open floor plan) for a masonry heater. Simplicity of stove (no electrical or plumbing) with the efficiency of an unthrottled burn + thermal mass/ flywheel effect of a boiler & storage. Some friends of mine built one themselves in their new well-insulated house, and it makes their place fabulously comfortable. Should handle any reasonable sort of wood as long as it is dry.

How would a masonry heater work for circulation? Part of my design plan is to pull the cold air from the furthest reaches of the house through a duct and direct over the top of the stoves. My concern with the masonry heater is that any space that doesn't see it is going to have big temperature swings?

 

[SolarAndWood]

With two large stoves like that where do you get combustion air from? Is it vented directly to the stoves or do you have that much "leakage" in the building?

What about stratification with the stoves, Can you move all that warmed air down from the tall ceilings?

I like the KISS, and cost aspects of stoves, but the control-ability and dealing with the fuel mess inside the living space could be a hassle.

I think a parlor stove for a small cabin or square footage still sounds attractive. Keeping multiple units fueled, cleaned and running efficiently sounds like a lot of work. Sounds like you enjoy the ritual and rewards.

There are a lot of wild and unique stove products, a full halls worth, at the ISH show in Frankfurt every two years. It worth a trip just to spend a day in the fireplace and stove hall. I'd venture to guess that the stove and fireplace market is larger than the gasification boiler market in Europe.

hr

My rebuild includes 2x6 walls filled with foam, felt, 1" of XPS outside the sheathing, wrap and wood siding. Also new metal clad wood windows properly flashed and sealed with foam. That said, there are still going to be 50 opening doors and windows in the house, so I am not sure I will ever need outside combustion air no matter how much I do to seal it. We'll see.

The stove room has a series of ceiling fans to move the warm air down.

Part of the reason for the side by side stove layout is to contain the mess. There is an exterior door directly adjacent. I am thinking I can build this out in such a way to contain the mess to that area.

Now the whole multiple units fueled, cleaned and running efficiently is the big question. I understand what this means for the stove as I do it now. In fact, what I am proposing will not be very different from what I do now other than alternating fuel chambers every 12 hours instead of feeding the same one. The stove runs efficiently on its own as long as you feed it dry wood and has a thermostat to control the burn rate throughout the burn cycle. So, my thinking is that this is probably not that different than what I would have with a boiler? From what I've read, most of you guys visit your boilers at least twice a day and have to start a fire every day?

 

[SolarAndWood]

I think what your thinking is good. Quite frankly, if it doesn't work, what are you out? there is nothing like the direct heat from a wood stove. If i had to rebuild, I would lean towards an open floor plan w/wood stove.

Masonary heaters are cool. But, you need a big base of support, kinda heavy creatures aren't they? But, I would love to have one. How about a masonary heater with a wood fired pizza oven on the side? On other side of room, tasteful beer tap, with a poker table, and surround sound stereo.....whoops........gettin' off topic.

fire the 2 stoves up and don't look back.

That's a pretty good argument for a masonry heater ;-) I guess the worse thing that happens is I spend a lot of time building a hearth for two stoves and then it looks stupid with one? I really like the simplicity of stoves too. I am thinking if I replace the noisy blowers and the wal-mart fan in the hallway with an inline duct blower, I will be that much happier. Two stoves seems to solve the biggest problems of stoves: the output curve of heat through the burn cycle and the range of overall output.

 

[SolarAndWood]

Is it correct that you have no central heat distribution already in place (baseboard, ductwork, etc.)? If there is nothing there, then I would say the woodstove(s) option makes sense. I would also encourage you to consider a masonry heater if you have the floor (heavy!) and budget.

If you already have hot water baseboards (or something) in place then I would look more seriously at a boiler. Two stoves and two chimney systems would cost no less than a boiler.

The house had a 60s era Honeywell electric baseboard system and a 80s era LP forced air system. I completely removed the forced air system along with the LP tank when I gutted the house. I carefully uninstalled the electric system when I replaced the load bearing walls. But, it could be reinstalled as the backup central heat and may very well be required for a C of O if I go the stove route.

So, that makes the boiler a lot more expensive. I figure I am looking at 20-25K by the time I'm done vs maybe 5K with the additional stove and duct work. The way I am looking at it now is that all I really lose with 2 stoves is dhw and the option of heating a pool, hot tub, etc. I have a lot of time to think about it though, I will probably spend the rest of the winter reinstalling windows and siding. Then, in the spring, I have another set of trusses to put up.

 

[ihookem]

If I had a 1200 sq. ft area with 2 stoves I would put them on opposite corners of the room. Two stoves in one spot might get one area of the house awfull hot.

 

[SolarAndWood]

That is where my hair brained idea comes into play. Right now I heat the house with one stove. To heat the house when its cold, I have to run it hot. So, I get a relative hot phase and a relatively cool phase over the burn cycle. With two stoves loaded opposite each other, they roughly cancel each other out and produce more even heat. In general, they will not produce any more heat on average over a 24 hour period than I am doing now. Just more even heat and well within the optimal operating range of the stoves.

 

[ihookem]

Not the first to do this. When my dad was a kid they had 2 wood stoves. They also cooked on one.

 

[flyingcow]

Just jogged my memory. The old farmhouse I grew up in had 2 woodstoves on the first floor. One on each end of the house, plus a third in the basement.