EPA vs Non EPA

[sandie]

EPA and what does it matter really? Are they not allowed or something? IF they burn well and safe to burn, function to save oil or natural gas what is the importance of EPA?
How many people have the fire dept check the installation of the stove and pipe once installed?
What is importance of top loading or front loading vs side loading?
A few more questions I have from reading this forum.
Thanks

 

[lexybird]

i cant stand the epa but in this case they did a great thing by their strict demands ,they forced woodstove companies to produce stoves that burn cleaner and longer to pass the regulations and so this gives us consumers longer hotter burns and less creosote buildup than the low tech airtight versions of the 80's.

 

[madrone]

1. yes, much better stoves.
2. cannot sell or install older stoves here in OR
3. go ahead and waste wood and sweep more if it makes you happy
4. your insurance company likes inspections
5. whatev's

 

[joemeintzer]

Sandie yes, the EPA rating(or lack thereof) is going to mean a great deal to you for many reasons.
1. It's probably going to be a price point (you always have to shell out more for the good stuff)
2. Possible tax incentives, federal energy tax credit could be applicable to a qualifing stove and your own tax situation (read all fine print) or it may not
3. What are your perfomance expectations and amount of use of the stove going to be? In other words if your going to use the stove all winter night and day as primary heat for your home it might be worth your while to get the most efficient one you can afford.
4. Bear in mind that EPA ratings in this case (as opposed to typical engine equipment for cars and trucks) it is not performance hindering.
Good luck in your search! I would encourage you, if possible, to see a high efficient run in person before you buy a lesser variety.

 

[THEMAN]

i cant stand the epa but in this case they did a great thing by their strict demands ,they forced woodstove companies to produce stoves that burn cleaner and longer to pass the regulations and so this gives us consumers longer hotter burns and less creosote buildup than the low tech airtight versions of the 80's.

I agree. I too can not stand to even hear the initials EPA, but for once their demands and regulations did cause the creation of a better stove. Now if we can get them to allow us to burn EPA stoves daily since they put out much less particulates into the air that would be icing on the cake.

 

[Ratman]

Find the stove you like and buy it

If its an EPA design with less character and you like it buy that one.

If its a stove from the previous millennium and you love it and its solid and proven even better.
You will burn 26.5 more splits and you won't get to say you used the $1500 Energy Tax Credit.
(even though we all know you would have to spend $5k at 30% to realize that)
Oh ya and you will have to sweep up after those extra 26.5 splits, and you might have to deal with not having a blower.

 

[Pagey]

I think all of this EPA stuff started out in Oregon because in some towns so many people burned the old "smoke dragon" stoves (non-EPA) and choked them down that the towns were covered in a a thick haze of smoke, which had a significant impact on air quality. So the EPA certification is really targeted at reduced particulate matter/emissions. The added safety of burning off most of the emissions that condense into creosote is just a bonus. The EPA was concerned with pollution reduction, not pretty secondary combustion flames.

 

[savageactor7]

EPA certification= a new clearer burning stove = cleaner air.

In many communities stove are required to follow local code and be inspected afterw before you can burn.

top loading/ side loading/ front/loading can be a matter of personal preference or forced by space and stove locations.

 

[freeburn]

EPA doesn't matter if you are putting in a wood furnace, since there aren't any requirements for furnaces YET?

Anyone know why that is?

 

[Pagey]

EPA doesn't matter if you are putting in a wood furnace, since there aren't any requirements for furnaces YET?

Anyone know why that is?

I would guess it had/has to do more with the popularity of a stove vs. a furnace. If more furnaces had been in use at the time, we'd probably have regs on them.

 

[gerry100]

The EPA stoves burn cleaner and also much more efficiently.

The unspoken concern may be with ease of operation. These stoves are not like the cars of the mid seventies ( which ran like crap for those too young to know).

The EPA models run differently than the old designs but the deffernces are easily learned and after that they arer more convenient.

I ran a Jumbo Moe for 28 years and just switched to a Country Canyon.

New EPA is the right place to start.

 

[kenny chaos]

Why I like my EPA:
-30% less wood
-30% less work
-glass door
-easier to control
Did I mention 30% less wood?
That's very substantial for something
that requires so much work to begin with.

 

[polaris]

i cant stand the epa but in this case they did a great thing by their strict demands ,they forced woodstove companies to produce stoves that burn cleaner and longer to pass the regulations and so this gives us consumers longer hotter burns and less creosote buildup than the low tech airtight versions of the 80's.

I agree. I too can not stand to even hear the initials EPA, but for once their demands and regulations did cause the creation of a better stove. Now if we can get them to allow us to burn EPA stoves daily since they put out much less particulates into the air that would be icing on the cake.

I don't get it. Are you saying you can only burn like every other day, every third day? I would hope not. If that's really the case I think I'd move.
Joe

 

[freeburn]

Nevermind, misread last post.

 

[CrappieKeith]

EPA doesn't matter if you are putting in a wood furnace, since there aren't any requirements for furnaces YET?

Anyone know why that is?

Look back 20 years ago...stoves ran about 10% efficient.The EPA wanted to force stove manufacures to produce more efficient stove.
Ergo the EPA 40cfr60 Subpart AAA rule which some states have grabed to add into their local code like Wa.
Furnaces known to be more efficient were exempted from that standard.
(broken link removed to http://www.epa.gov/Compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/caa/woodstoverule.pdf)
Environmental Protection Agency
time, a continuous program of component
replacement.
Subpart AAA—Standards of Performance
for New Residential Wood Heaters
SOURCE: 53 FR 5873, Feb. 26, 1988, unless otherwise noted.
§ 60.530 Applicability and designation of affected facility.
(a) The affected facility to which the provisions of this subpart apply is each wood heater manufactured on or after July 1, 1988, or sold at retail on or after July 1, 1990. The provisions of this sub-part do not apply to wood heaters constructed
prior to July 1, 1988, that are or have been owned by a noncommercial
owner for his personal use.
(b) Each affected facility shall comply
with the applicable emission limits in § 60.532 unless exempted under para-graph (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) or (h) of this section.
(c)–(d) [Reserved]
(e) Affected facilities manufactured in the U.S. for export are exempt from the applicable emission limits of § 60.532 and the requirements of § 60.533.
(f) A wood heater used for research and development purposes that is never offered for sale or sold is exempt from the applicable emission limits of § 60.532 and the requirements of § 60.533. No more than 50 wood heaters manufactured
per model line may be exempted
for this purpose.
(g) A coal-only heater is exempt from the applicable emission limits of § 60.532 and the requirements of § 60.533.
(h) The following are not affected facilities
and are not subject to this sub-part:
(1) Open masonry fireplaces constructed
on site,
(2) Boilers,
(3) Furnaces, and
(4) Cookstoves.
(i) Modification or reconstruction, as defined in §§ 60.14 and 60.15 of subpart A, shall not, by itself, make a wood heater an affected facility under this subpart.
[53 FR 5873, Feb. 26, 1988, as amended at 60 FR 33925, June 29, 1995]
§ 60.531
§ 60.531 Definitions.
As used in this subpart, all terms not defined herein shall have the meaning given them in the Act and subpart A of this part.
At retail means the sale by a commercial
owner of a wood heater to the ultimate
purchaser.
Boiler means a solid fuel burning appliance
used primarily for heating spaces, other than the space where the appliance is located, by the distribution
through pipes of a gas or fluid heated in the appliance. The appliance must be tested and listed as a boiler under accepted American or Canadian safety testing codes. A manufacturer may request an exemption in writing from the Administrator by stating why the testing and listing requirement is not practicable and by demonstrating that his appliance is otherwise a boiler.
Coal-only heater means an enclosed, coal-burning appliance capable of space heating, or domestic water heating, which has all of the following characteristics:
(1) An opening for emptying ash that is located near the bottom or the side of the appliance,
(2) A system that admits air primarily
up and through the fuel bed,
(3) A grate or other similar device for shaking or disturbing the fuel bed or power-driven mechanical stoker,
(4) Installation instructions that state that the use of wood in the stove, except for coal ignition purposes, is prohibited by law, and
(5) The model is listed by a nation-ally recognized safety-testing laboratory
for use of coal only, except for coal ignition purposes.
Commercial owner means any person who owns or controls a wood heater in the course of the manufacture, importation,
distribution, or sale of the wood heater.
Cookstove means a wood-fired appliance
that is designed primarily for cooking food and that has the following
characteristics:
(1) An oven, with a volume of 0.028 cubic meters (1 cubic foot) or greater, and an oven rack,
(2) A device for measuring oven temperatures,
(3) A flame path that is routed around the oven,
399

 

[madrone]

Find the stove you like and buy it

If its an EPA design with less character and you like it buy that one.

If its a stove from the previous millennium and you love it and its solid and proven even better.
You will burn 26.5 more splits and you won't get to say you used the $1500 Energy Tax Credit.
(even though we all know you would have to spend $5k at 30% to realize that)
Oh ya and you will have to sweep up after those extra 26.5 splits, and you might have to deal with not having a blower.

26.5% more splits, and [strike]50%[/strike] 100% more pollution. If you don't have any neighbors, go for it.

 

[firefighterjake]

Me . . . I'm with Kenny Chaos.

In answer to some of your questions.

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency . . . this is the federal group which came along and basically set a policy in place to clean up all of the particulates that were belching out of the chimneys . . . for you and I that would be the thick brown smoke that you might see coming out of many of the chimneys in your neighborhood early in the morning. Now, this was a good thing for the EPA to do in terms of clean air. Me, I think that's great . . . but what I like even better is the fact that the folks at the EPA most likely did not envision that a side effect of forcing the manufacturers to make this change would be woodstoves that now not only burn cleaner, but also burn more efficiently. What this means for us is that most folks burn 30% less wood than they would if they were using a pre-EPA woodstove.

As mentioned, some places in this country (i.e. Oregon) specifically mandate EPA stoves.

In addition, this year and next year, most of the EPA stoves qualify for a tax credit.

Now I didn't buy my stove this year so no tax credit for me . . . and while clean air is good, the fact is I never even considered buying a stove that was not EPA approved. Why? It's simple. I'm lazy. Well, maybe not lazy, but I just don't want to spend more time than I need to cutting, splitting and stacking wood . . . and even though I have access to "free" wood at the family homestead the one thing I don't have a lot of is free time which is infinitely more important to me. Therefore, less wood being consumed in a woodstove for me equals more time to spend with my wife.

Now don't get me wrong . . . I also like the fact that EPA stoves burn so clean that inspecting and cleaning my chimney every month is a non-event . . . heck, many folks get by with a yearly cleaning . . . and I like the fact that I can go outside and see a plume of smoke rising from neighbor's chimneys, but all you can see coming from my chimney are heat waves . . . and I love being able to get a great view of the fire through the large "glass" window . . . but again, it all comes down to the fact that I burn less wood.

Fire department checks: Some communities require an inspection for new installations . . . and some insurance companies will require an inspection. A lot depends on the community and the insurance company. Basically, it's a simple check to make sure the basic codes are followed.

Top, side, front loading: A non-issue for most folks . . . some of this boils down to user preference based in part I believe in what we get used to using . . . the plain simple fact is that as long as you can somehow get the wood into the firebox without any hang ups . . . it's all good.

 

[zuegnu]

i cant stand the epa but in this case they did a great thing by their strict demands ,they forced woodstove companies to produce stoves that burn cleaner and longer to pass the regulations and so this gives us consumers longer hotter burns and less creosote buildup than the low tech airtight versions of the 80's.

I agree. I too can not stand to even hear the initials EPA, but for once their demands and regulations did cause the creation of a better stove. Now if we can get them to allow us to burn EPA stoves daily since they put out much less particulates into the air that would be icing on the cake.

I don't get it. Are you saying you can only burn like every other day, every third day? I would hope not. If that's really the case I think I'd move.
Joe

Joe, I too live in Central CA as the other poster and we do live under an "air board". So to answer your question...basically they have burn and no burn days based on air quality index. Wood burning in the valley has really had an almost criminal face put on it through campaigning and politics. Believe it or not it is on a "watchdog" system and comes down to neighbors reporting neighbors. There are fines that can be imposed and some believe there are chimney police driving around looking for smoke. The only way around the burning is to not have natural gas service to your property, be on propane only, or have no other source of heat. Wanna know a great one? They take funding from Duraflame and encourage the burning of those if you "have to burn" on an allowed day. I think we had something like 33 no burns last winter? Maybe more, I dont remember? Working on moving? YES.

 

[THEMAN]

i cant stand the epa but in this case they did a great thing by their strict demands ,they forced woodstove companies to produce stoves that burn cleaner and longer to pass the regulations and so this gives us consumers longer hotter burns and less creosote buildup than the low tech airtight versions of the 80's.

I agree. I too can not stand to even hear the initials EPA, but for once their demands and regulations did cause the creation of a better stove. Now if we can get them to allow us to burn EPA stoves daily since they put out much less particulates into the air that would be icing on the cake.

I don't get it. Are you saying you can only burn like every other day, every third day? I would hope not. If that's really the case I think I'd move.
Joe

Joe, I too live in Central CA as the other poster and we do live under an "air board". So to answer your question...basically they have burn and no burn days based on air quality index. Wood burning in the valley has really had an almost criminal face put on it through campaigning and politics. Believe it or not it is on a "watchdog" system and comes down to neighbors reporting neighbors. There are fines that can be imposed and some believe there are chimney police driving around looking for smoke. The only way around the burning is to not have natural gas service to your property, be on propane only, or have no other source of heat. Wanna know a great one? They take funding from Duraflame and encourage the burning of those if you "have to burn" on an allowed day. I think we had something like 33 no burns last winter? Maybe more, I dont remember? Working on moving? YES.

Good explanation zuegnu. This is the reason that I got an EPA stove. I found out that they do not release much smoke from the chimney so no smoke for the "smoke police" to see. After more investigation I found that the new stoves are actually better and more efficient so it was a win win for me. I luckily have very cool neighbors that do not call on this crap. They too burn on non burn days and so will I. I can't wait to install my stove this weekend. As for moving well. I am looking at Idaho. It's a red state with plenty of hunting and fishing, and no california laws and provisions, like not being able to burn to keep warm or buy ammunition through the mail, can't buy high capacity magazines, and the latest one, no more Big Screen TV's(they use too much electricity) the list goes on, ughh! I can't take it anymore.

 

[laynes69]

I'm proud to say my wood furnace is EPA Certified for phase 1 standards. If im correct here, its an emission test. The Caddy is currently the only EPA certified indoor forced air furnace. There is at least 1 other company that is currently in the works to get their furnace EPA Certified also. If they can do it, others can too. The problem is they others know their furnace won't comply with the EPA Certification standards. Furnaces need to go the same direction woodstoves go. I will say going from a basic furnace to a EPA Certified model is night and day. Far less wood, more heat and a cleaner chimney are the benefits I am seeing. Plus I no longer need 10" rounds of locusts to carry me through the night. A few large maple splits and I'm golden. As far as furnaces being tested, yes they can be tested and certified if they fall within the requirements.

 

[CrappieKeith]

I'm proud to say my wood furnace is EPA Certified for phase 1 standards. If im correct here, its an emission test. The Caddy is currently the only EPA certified indoor forced air furnace. There is at least 1 other company that is currently in the works to get their furnace EPA Certified also. If they can do it, others can too. The problem is they others know their furnace won't comply with the EPA Certification standards. Furnaces need to go the same direction woodstoves go. I will say going from a basic furnace to a EPA Certified model is night and day. Far less wood, more heat and a cleaner chimney are the benefits I am seeing. Plus I no longer need 10" rounds of locusts to carry me through the night. A few large maple splits and I'm golden. As far as furnaces being tested, yes they can be tested and certified if they fall within the requirements.

Here again you are wrong. There is no particulate testing for wood furnaces.
Check with the 4 EPA approved testing facilities to verify.I have...would you like their phone numbers.
There is a test the Canadians are looking at ,but to this date none have been accepted. As soon as the Canadians except this new method of testing it sounds like the EPA will then accept it for the U.S.
I will also point out that to assume a wood furnace that does not have an EPA tag is not efficient which no warm air furnace does...it ridiculous.
There are a few that have an afterburn either via cat style or gasser style.
Once you have burned off the smoke from a fire there are no more btus that can be made.You can not do any better than that well you could ,but now we are getting to heat exchange surface area.
You can make all of the btu's available ,but if you can't exchange them they will vent out the flue which brings me to another point.
Higher stack temps mean less heat in the home as to what a piece of wood can make.There are only so many btus.

For example Layne your Caddy runs at a flue draft speed of about .04" of water column ,maybe faster up to .06 if I recall from the manual.
Sure it has an after burn ,but your blowing more heat up the chimney because the way that the Caddy is designed it needs those faster draft speeds to get the gasser technology to function properly.
So really it's not as efficient as some other furnaces out there.
Your Caddy is also a light small furnace so there's not much for heat exchange surface area and thermal mass built into it.
I know your proud of the buying decision you have made,but your knowledge of what it and what isn't lacks.
I just thought you should know while you try to help out others.

 

[laynes69]

The unit was certified by a testing facility or it wouldn't carry the tag. I've contacted various manufacturers and they have told me furnaces can be certified, but due to the market for furnaces being smaller compared to stoves its not worth the cost, or their products won't meet the emission requirements. Which is where manufacturers need to step up and improve their designs. The title was EPA vs Non and in my case as well as others they have seen a big difference in performance. Especially from the pictures I have seen both here and on other sites. I can't find it at the moment, but firebox volumes and burn rates are an important when it comes to testing. There are furnaces with a 6+ cubic foot firebox producing around 120,000 btus, where a EPA model with a 3.5 cubic foot firebox producing more btus, and longer cleaner burns. I've witnessed both and its quite different. I've seen pictures of furnaces with their heat exchangers plugged after 30 days. Creasote running out the baro onto the floor and also running down the furnace. If you call that efficient, wow. That was with 3 year seasoned wood. There are many dirty burners out there and what the EPA did improved things alot.