crimson63 said:
I've burned wood for years but I'm still really dumb when it comes to different stove types. On this site, I saw cat stoves, non-cat stoves & EPA stoves mentioned. What are some examples of each & what are the advantages/disadvantages of each?
Nah, not dumb . . . it's just all new and there is a process of learning, re-education if you would . . . we've all had to go through the re-learning, but trust me, this is the place to get the right answers!
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency . . . in the context of woodstoves this refers to the types of stoves that burn cleanly and efficiently . . . which is good for the environment and good for you since it means more heat with less wood burned. Examples: Most any new stove . . . can achieve this EPA "rating" through the use of catalytic converters or secondary burning technology.
Cat = Stove that uses a catalytic converter to achieve the EPA standards for a clean burning stove. The cat does need to be replaced (con) over time and it seems as though it is a little less forgiving than secondary burning tech if you're using less than ideal seasoned wood, but if you have good, dry wood you can get some fantastically long burn times and long, low burn temps which are nice in the shoulder seasons (pro.) Examples: Woodstock and BlazeKing.
Non-cat = Dog . . . or any other commonly found animal found as a pet in an American home.
Non-cat (definition 2) = Secondary burning technology . . . uses a baffle and secondary air supply to effectively re-burn the smoke before it exits the flue achieving clean burning standards as defined by the EPA. While this type of tech definitely does better with seasoned wood, some folks can muscle by with less than ideal wood . . . nice visual displays . . . not as long burns or long, low-temp burns like cats. Examples: Jotul, Englader, Napoleon, Lopi.
Needless to say there are many cat vs. non-cat debates . . . my own take . . . both technologies work and work well . . . there are some differences and at one time I would have only wanted to go with one of those types . . . but now, after hearing actual users of both types, I would not hesitate to go with either type as both offer clean and efficient burning.