RE: Pros and cons . . . Heating with wood and pelletstoves

[firefighterjake]

I'm doing a presentation next week and figure I might as well tap into the brain trust here.

Doing a presentation at a seminar on keeping warm in the winter sponsored by the local power company . . . and believe it or not they want me to do a presentation on the pros and cons of heating with woodstoves and pelletstoves.

I've got some ideas, but figured I would toss this one out to you guys to help me out a bit.

Basically, looking for the pros and cons- of woodstoves vs. pelletstoves . . . and heating with both woodstoves/pelletstoves vs. conventional heating sources (which around here tends to be heating oil with some natural gas heaters.)

 

[ControlFreak]

It's convenience vs cost.

If you want convenience but don't care about the cost of heat too much, go with a pellet stove.

If you want to keep your cost to the absolute minimum and don't mind the work involved, then go with a wood stove.

If you want to make sure that you have heat in the winter when the electricity goes out, then a wood stove is a nice thing to have around, unless your pellet stove runs OK on a generator. However, many gas inserts will also run without electricity, so that's another option for backup.

 

[Stevebass4]

Wood stoves are dirty - ie dust, ash and some soot.

lots of work, patience’s needed to ensure the wood is seasoned – need added room for storage of wood

pros – as CF mentioned – costs are a benefit if you process the wood yourself (and not purchased CSD as nat gas is cheaper now), satisfaction of being self sufficient carbon netrual as wood is a renewable Energy source

 

[Slow1]

Some of the factors that moved me toward wood stove along with a quick brainstorm for you...

In case of power failure
- Woodstove has no power requirements to run (yes, can use batteries/generator but that is one more thing)
- Woodstove can be used to heat water and cook on

Woodstoves generally have fewer moving parts / less likely to fail (I don't know if this is true, but that was my feeling/fear)

Fuel Supply
- Wood is more competitive in the marketplace (more suppliers)
- Wood generally is more local "Green" in the transportation sense
- Woodstoves CAN generally burn 'pellet like' compressed sawdust fuel if one has to - get some of the benefits of pellet stove fuel
- Pellets are easier to price compare (although the brands and options do confuse me, I think that can be sorted out)
- Pellets are easier to store if you have indoor or sheltered space (take up less space/BTU)
- Some Pellet stoves can burn multiple fuels giving flexibility

Pros of Wood/Pellet stoves vs Oil
- Renewable fuel source ('green' argument)
- Not supporting foreign countries ('hostile regime' politics argument)
- Clean burning (questionable argument really - so much depends on operation and what exact system you compare to and what pollutants you are measuring)
- Overall cost of heating bill
- Greater awareness of heating consumption - you can "See" the fuel going into the hopper or the stove. Sort of like paying cash vs credit card. When the family sees this they become more energy aware and perhaps are more likely to consider closing that door and keeping the heat in or put on a sweater. Larger picture - folks are more likely to actually 'see' the results of insulating homes and appreciate the difference and do more of it.
- Radiant heat has a very pleasant feel and brings family together

Pros of Oil/Gas over biofuel
- Easy 'set thermostat' control of environment

Other random thoughts -

Wood processing is fun for many folks
Wood processing is good exercise
Family activities can be built around wood processing
Lots of small chores around wood/pellet stoves that can be given to children to do (i.e. carry in wood etc as age appropriate)

 

[Bigg_Redd]

I'm doing a presentation next week and figure I might as well tap into the brain trust here.

Doing a presentation at a seminar on keeping warm in the winter sponsored by the local power company . . . and believe it or not they want me to do a presentation on the pros and cons of heating with woodstoves and pelletstoves.

I've got some ideas, but figured I would toss this one out to you guys to help me out a bit.

Basically, looking for the pros and cons- of woodstoves vs. pelletstoves . . . and heating with both woodstoves/pelletstoves vs. conventional heating sources (which around here tends to be heating oil with some natural gas heaters.)

WOOD PROS

- It's free, or it can/should be

- It doesn't require power to work

WOOD CONS

- It's messy

- It's a lot of work

- It can be unsafe for the inexperienced

PELLET PROS

- It offers no cleanness advantage over oil or natural gas or propane or electricity. I guess this isn't a "pro"

- easy to control and flat learning curve compared to wood

- Lots more parts to break


PELLET CONS

- No real savings over other forms of heat

- Need power to work properly (though as I understand the new stoves have battery back up so you're not immediately hosed in the event of a power outage)

 

[granpajohn]

... I might as well tap into the brain trust here...)

I've always admired your courage.

But seriously...best explaination is from Tom O. at chimneysweeponline.com; telling why they no longer carry pellet stoves. Take a look there. Mr. Tom is very helpful and smart (IMO).

Keep it simple for your audience: A pellet stove is an appliance, much like a modern washing machine; with Maytag, (well Quadrafire) repairman, maintenance, cleaning, and yes; breakdowns.

A woodstove is a steel box you build a fire in.

My local dealer has an open display unit for pellet, (like NASCAR on FOX), and it could turn one off fast.

Oh heck, I've rambled on. Sorry.

 

[d.n.f.]

Pellet stove con: pellet prices rarely go down
pro: load and leave for one to three days

Woodstove pro: potential for 'free' wood (costs of time, labour, wear and tear on equipment including truck).
con: realistic burn times of six to twelve hours means can't go away for the weekend and heat

cons of both, storage of pellets/wood can be problematic for some people.

 

[fredarm]

You can store wood outside, you really can't store pellets outside (at least it's not recommended).

 

[Got Wood]

All good input... I'll add:

Con Wood: space required to store and season properly
Very easy to get sucked into buying tools for processing.... new saw(s), safety gear, splitter, trailor, wood shed, etc....

Pro Wood: you can control the cost if your willing to do the work - independent
wood processing is healthy - both mentally and physically
educational: tree types, BTU's, seasoning
you tend to keep your house alot warmer using wood
feeling of satisfaction of supplying your home with heat through your own efforts

Con Pellets: you dont control the costs

Con Pellet & wood compared to gas/Oil - consistent temps through out the house/zone

 

[Slow1]

All good input... I'll add:

Con Pellet & wood compared to gas/Oil - consistent temps through out the house/zone

Good point to bring up but I think I'd like to note that in some cases it is nice to have warmer and cooler parts of the house. In fact we rather like that our sleeping area is significantly cooler than the area we sit around in and kids run and play away from the stove where it happens to be cooler too. If someone gets cold, they just move closer to the stove and reverse the process if they are too warm. So this may be a benefit too depending on how you look at it. It isn't always easy knowing what temp to keep the whole house at with a thermostat when you have 4-6 people living there.

 

[firefighterjake]

Thanks for the replies folks . . .

So any pros- and cons- for burning wood/wood pellets vs. using oil/natural gas . . . and on the flip side, any pros- or cons- to using oil and natural gas vs. wood/wood pellets?

 

[stejus]

Four con's for pellet stoves I didn't see.

1. Noise. I you have the stove in your family room or sitting area, they make clinking noises as well as air intake and blower noise.
2. Unrealistic flame - While the stove can be a nice looking stove, the flame is not a realistic flame like wood.
3. Convection heat only while wood stoves can offer both radiant and convection heat.
4. Pellet supply and price unstable - very supply/demand driven and sometimes limited supplies due to raw materials.

 

[Wet1]

I'm not a huge pellet fan these days, but I will say having the large capacity hoppers, bagged fuel, automated auto ignition, and thermostats, can make these stove easier to live with for those who just don't want to fuss with a wood stove. Automated pellet stove come closer to central heat convenience than wood stoves generally do.

With that said, pellets are almost as expensive (if not more so in some cases) than traditional NG ands oil these days. Add in the cost of the pellet stove, hearth pad, flue, and installation, and the ROI is about 20 years...

 

[stejus]

Con - Oil or NG Zone heat (i.e , forced hot water or hot air by oil or gas) require you to heat the entire zone. Most of the time you are not occupying the entire zone but you heat it anyway.

 

[fossil]

I've never owned a pellet stove, so all I know about them is what I've learned here: they require power, they're a good deal more complex than woodstoves, and the fuel must be purchased (no matter how many acres of woods you own). My experience is with woodstoves, and I'll point out that wood is by no means always "free". It depends to a great extent on where you live (wood available on your own property...or not? Opportunities for scrounging wood in your area...or not? You have the necessary equipment, time, desire, capability to collect up and process the wood...or not?). Heating with wood is a lot of work, no matter how you do it, and requires a good deal more space (and possibly equipment) than does the appliance itself. Even if you enjoy every minute of it right now in your life, you might want to gaze forward into the future and imagine that inevitably you simply won't be able to do all that's required to heat your home exclusively with wood...at least not without some help. Have a backup...electric, gas, oil, solar, whatever...that requires little effort on your part. You never know when you might be temporarily or permanently somehow prevented from doing the things required to heat with wood. That's how I see it from my 60 y/o perspective. Rick

 

[begreen]

Four con's for pellet stoves I didn't see.

1. Noise. I you have the stove in your family room or sitting area, they make clinking noises as well as air intake and blower noise.
2. Unrealistic flame - While the stove can be a nice looking stove, the flame is not a realistic flame like wood.
3. Convection heat only while wood stoves can offer both radiant and convection heat.
4. Pellet supply and price unstable - very supply/demand driven and sometimes limited supplies due to raw materials.

Very good points! Having owned a pellet stove in the living room I would add:

1 - yes, a real issue with some pellet stoves and some woodstoves, though much better with modern stoves using dc motors like the Quad Mt. Vernon.
2 - yes, it ain't a wood fire lizzie.
3 - we got a fair amount of radiant heat with the pellet stove burning. But most pellet stoves are primarily convection (fan assisted) heaters. I like to think of them as wood pellet mini-furnaces.
4 - this can be regional. the pacnw seems a bit more stable in this regard.

 

[BJN644]

3. Convection heat only while wood stoves can offer both radiant and convection heat
This is what I used to think until I bought a P43 Harman. I was told you can boil water on the top of it, and when I fired it up after installation I shot the top and sides with my infared thermometer and it quickly got up to 300 deg. I turned it down soon after because it was 80 deg outside at the time. I suspect any of the Harman P series will throw plenty of radiant heat.

 

[Wet1]

I have a P38, I'm not sure it will boil water unless it's running at full tilt, but it does throw some radiant heat. The sides and top get pretty hot... Hot enough to cause a burn at medium+ settings, although not as hot as the wood stoves. I don't think I'd want to run the pellet stove w/o the blower going unless I had no choice. The wood stoves throw plenty of heat w/o the blowers on.

 

[ControlFreak]

Kind of off-topic, but I couldn't help it...

"I think I’d like to note that in some cases it is nice to have warmer and cooler parts of the house. "

YES! I enjoy having the living room at 78-83 degrees all winter, and the kitchen at about 68-73. If you get cold, you go sit over by the fire and enjoy the flames. If you get hot, you go into the kitchen (or another part of the house) and you go cool off. Having the temperature the same everywhere is just plain boring.

The oil furnace thermostat is in the kitchen and it's set to about 63. It only goes off if it's super super cold outside at night.

 

[Jags]

Pro- while I am working with firewood, I am not sitting at the bar.
Con- I like sitting at the bar.

Its hard to convince your significant other to curl up in front of the oil burner or furnace in the basement.

Wood working will give you wood.
Burning propane will give you gas.

And finally.....you would be embarrassed to show the saw needed to cut pellets, but proud of the one for firewood.

 

[begreen]

don't tell yur friends that they are wood pellets. Tell them they're hamster feed to keep those magic hamsters cranking out the heat.

 

[Wet1]

And finally.....you would be embarrassed to show the saw needed to cut pellets, but proud of the one for firewood.

:cheese:

 

[Slow1]

You know... reading these messages one might think that there is a bias here or something eh?

 

[Wet1]

You think it's bad here, ask the same question over in the pellet forum!

I've been burning wood since I was a kid and pellets for the last 9 years now, so I can appreciate both. Each has it's pros and cons. With that said, I just have a difficult time recommending pellets to people given the supply and pricing issues the pellet market has seen over the past several years. With the cheap price of traditional fuels right now, burning pellets makes little sense.

 

[Slow1]

You think it's bad here, ask the same question over in the pellet forum!
With the cheap price of traditional fuels right now, burning pellets makes little sense.

Financially I'm sure you are right. However some of the other benefits still apply -

- If the alternative is oil I could see folks not wanting to support the trade deficit by buying more oil (of course same folks are likely burning 10x more driving their cars, but that is another discussion).
- Preference to use a space heater to heat one part of the house (if alternative is central heat with insufficient zones designed into it)
- Preference for ambiance - although I would think this would move folks to a wood stove rather quickly, perhaps the pellet flame is enjoyable enough for many.

Then of course there is the illusion of greater control that we all desire. If I'm the one feeding the hopper or putting the wood in then I control the cost, right? So I fool myself into thinking this is somehow better than not knowing/controlling the oil/gas/electric flow of the central heat system that is "set and forget" the thermostat even though in truth one can have just as much (if not more) control with the thermostat.

Perhaps at least with the wood or pellet pile sitting there in the fall I get a sense of security knowing that "at least I'll be warm this winter"