Hi everyone,
I posted this in another sticky on underground piping, but wasn't sure if I was hijacking someone else's thread, so I thought I'd start a new one here.
I've been planning my wood boiler installation for next season and did some measuring yesterday and found that I can really save some underground distance depending on where I enter my basement to connect to the existing system and again where I enter the shed for the IWB. So I guess the question is...if I can save substantial length of buried pipe by entering a building at the closest point and then run the less expensive pex along the wall or ceiling to the boilers, is it a better option. I can always insulate the indoor pipe to reduce heat loss, and it will be in a heated space anyway. The difference in underground pipe length ( and cost) is significant. 115 feet vs. 170 feet. give or take a few feet either way.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Shawn
I posted this in another sticky on underground piping, but wasn't sure if I was hijacking someone else's thread, so I thought I'd start a new one here.
I've been planning my wood boiler installation for next season and did some measuring yesterday and found that I can really save some underground distance depending on where I enter my basement to connect to the existing system and again where I enter the shed for the IWB. So I guess the question is...if I can save substantial length of buried pipe by entering a building at the closest point and then run the less expensive pex along the wall or ceiling to the boilers, is it a better option. I can always insulate the indoor pipe to reduce heat loss, and it will be in a heated space anyway. The difference in underground pipe length ( and cost) is significant. 115 feet vs. 170 feet. give or take a few feet either way.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Shawn