Wood Stove Destroyers Organization

[yanksforever]

I'm all for offering incentives to retire smoke dragons, but I don't see the need to cut them up with a torch. It's inhumane. Same with destroying all the cars traded in as cash-for-clunkers. It takes a lot of money and energy to destroy things - things that took a lot of money and energy to create! Seems weird.

And a $2,500 rebate for an electric heating system vs. a $500 rebate for an EPA-certified woodstove? Seems weird.

If you don't destroy them they end up getting sold to others on the cheap. Then they are back in business again. If you want one for an end table maybe
they can just cut a nice gash through the top, the length of the stove and you can put a few planters on top! :cheese:

 

[yanksforever]

I hope you dont mind if I ask one question, non stove related?
Does the US government take a look at the Automobile pollution and encourage more economical transport or cars?

The US govt is a TOOL of the automotive and oil industry, among others. The short answer to your question is no.


Peace out :coolsmirk:

I like a straight answer, thanks Kathleen.

This is something that most Europeans, including myself, dont understand.
In the US, if you could have a car that does 60 miles / gallon, why do they still produce cars that do 20 miles / gallon?
Fuel economy is a major factor with most people in Europe when deciding on which car they want to buy.

It's because right wingers love oil! And they love to sell lots of it! It's good for their pocketbooks! Wow...I can hear the nasty grams coming already! Love it!

 

[btuser]

why are fossil and pellets more highly subsidized? If you count the amount of electricity used with a pellet stove, and the fact that a majority of our electricity comes from coal I don't think there's a smidgen of difference. I chose wood because its hard to monopolize. How about a 90% efficient gassifyer?

I think it is a matter of trying to expand the market for pellets. Some of the better designed newer stove, for instance one Thelin model, have incredibly low electricity use.......

In Europe where pellet use has gained some market share, they use very efficient central heaters - again, the electricity use is a very small percentage of the equation.

I think you have a lot of hydro and nuke in NH, don't you?

About 1/2 nuke, then NG, then Coal, and some local Hydro but mostly from Canada. http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/state-regs/graphs/NH.png Coal is 1/2 of America's electricity. PSNH is about $.18/KW, not cheap. Pellets are great, but when you're using NG to dry the wood, what's the carbon off-set compared to a 75-90% wood burning appliance? I spend about 3 gallons in gas to harvest 2 cord of wood/year. A diesel truck brings the wood to the shop, then wood is processed, then a diesel truck brings it to my house. How can pellets be considered any more efficient than a wood stove? Also a good pellet stove is about $1000 more than a good wood stove, with many more parts to break. What's the cost in energy of all that extra manufacturing?

 

[vvvv]

discretionary aspects of the economy are based on waste?

 

[Todd]

I talked with a stove dealer the other day and he told me that the laws on woodburning stoves in the USA and Europe are that they must burn to an efficiency standard, which means burning hotter, therefore all stoves now will not be able to shut down as much as before.

Except cat stoves! :coolgrin:

 

[Battenkiller]

They live in a valley that gets choked with smoke due to careless burning in old stoves.

"Careless" is the operative word here. There is no excuse for letting any stove belch out massive amounts of smoke like in that video. Many have nicknamed stoves like my old Vigilant "smoke dragons", but I don't let mine smoke. Seems to me the the notion of a "clean burning" EPA stove is giving folks the illusion that they aren't polluting, but intelligent burning practices are necessary with any stove.

I'm with Ratman on this. I'm kind of proud of the fact that I gave my stove a second life here. The last one got a second life for 18 years with few problems. A good stove should be forever as long as parts are available. What are you all going to do when the EPA Phase II stoves become outdated? Make smokers and chimineas out of them and cough up another $3K?

I agree, it's a shame that someone is going about destroying perfectly good stoves in a misguided attempt to save humanity.

For the record, here's a very short video of my chimney top (the flue on the left) about 45 minutes after a reload on a fair size bed of coals. Does it get any cleaner?

 

[vvvv]

duh, why is the top of the flue black?

 

[Battenkiller]

duh, why is the top of the flue black?

100 full cord of wood will do that over a twenty year period. :roll:

Point is... where's all the smoke from the smoke dragon?

 

[fossil]

If every woodburner out there was as informed, clever, concerned, and educated as we are here, maybe it wouldn't be a problem. But they're not. Air quality is a serious issue that affects us all. It becomes increasingly important in areas of dense population or frequent temperature inversion. Many of us woodburners realize all these things, and do whatever we can to mitigate the harmful effects on the environment of the way in which we choose to heat our homes. I'd venture to say that we who do realize all these things and do what we can to do it "right" represent a minority of all woodburners. Most woodburners aren't members of Hearth.com, nor are they looking for answers to questions they don't even know to ask. Yes, a very clever guy like Battenkiller can (and will...because he must, for himself) figure out a way to burn an old "Smoke Dragon" basically smoke-free. Totally cool. I love it. He's a rare individual. When it comes to mandating the removal and recycling of a pre-EPA stove upon the transfer of ownership of a home, I have no problem with that whatsoever. Here in Oregon, there are exceptions for particularly valuable antique pieces (which aren't likely to be used for primary heat sources anyway). We're not destroying irreplaceable works of art, we're trying to preserve/improve our air quality. Rick

ETA: And yes, the state has made/continues to make efforts to educate the woodburning public.

 

[BrotherBart]

I talked with a stove dealer the other day and he told me that the laws on woodburning stoves in the USA and Europe are that they must burn to an efficiency standard, which means burning hotter, therefore all stoves now will not be able to shut down as much as before.

Except cat stoves! :coolgrin:

Or after my first season with it. :coolgrin:

 

[BrotherBart]

Loved my old stove. But after heating the place for 21 years it didn't owe me or the planet anything. With a stove top temp over five hundred it went smoke free. With almost half more wood and less heat than with the new one.

I could give a 1985 Ford new life too. But it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Battenkiller]

Yes, a very clever guy like Battenkiller can (and will...because he must, for himself) figure out a way to burn an old "Smoke Dragon" basically smoke-free. Totally cool. I love it. He's a rare individual.

Well, Fossil, I really ain't all that clever, but if you want to say so... gosh, I'll accept it. %-P

Fact is, way back in the beginning, I was as clueless as all the newbies here, and I would have gunked up the works even with the best EPA stove if it was available back then. I don't do anything particularly special at all, just mostly pay careful attention to what's going on. My wood isn't even as dry as some folks wood is. I don't choke the dang thing down and I burn it pretty hot. Not in the overfire range, but in the "burn out a few parts every now and then" range. I have learned over the years how to start a fire and pack the stove in a way that it will burn with plenty of air going through it, at least in the beginning "smoke generating" stages. That's the only time the new stoves have an advantage. And I get some creosote just like everybody else, but a lot less than some folks I read here struggling with their new "clean and efficient" stoves.

Personally, I don't think there is a shortcut. It takes time to learn to burn clean in any stove, and some folks just aren't cut out for it. Lifestyle can make a huge difference, and for those folks, gas or even electric may be a better option. I applaud the steps Oregon is taking to keep the air clean. I wish my beautiful state was as concerned. But I just don't see these new stoves as a magic bullet. Pack 'em full of bone dry splits or pallet wood and shut them down too soon, they're gonna smoke as bad as anything else. People should realize this is all I'm saying. Just like the brain is the best safety tool, it's the best "clean burn" tool as well.

 

[branchburner]

I could give a 1985 Ford new life too. But it ain't gonna happen.

You could smuggle it to Cuba so they'll have something stylish to drive in 2040.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/automobiles/27MILL.html

 

[fossil]

...Personally, I don't think there is a shortcut. It takes time to learn to burn clean in any stove, and some folks just aren't cut out for it. Lifestyle can make a huge difference, and for those folks, gas or even electric may be a better option. I applaud the steps Oregon is taking to keep the air clean. I wish my beautiful state was as concerned. But I just don't see these new stoves as a magic bullet. Pack 'em full of bone dry splits or pallet wood and shut them down too soon, they're gonna smoke as bad as anything else. People should realize this is all I'm saying. Just like the brain is the best safety tool, it's the best "clean burn" tool as well.

Agreed. 100%.

 

[soupy1957]

All we are doing in our wood stoves (aside for benefiting from the residuals) is what happens in nature, naturally. We simply care enough about keeping our systems clean to burn clean (or as "clean" as possible), which really means we burn as "a-natural" as possible.

If the graph posted about New Hampshire's heat source usage is accurate, New Hampshire is certainly one of the states that is more prone to having resident wood-burning public than some others. Although perhaps every state in the Union would have wood burning citizens in them, certainly New Hampshire is one of those that would have a higher number, due to climate, if nothing else. Given the low numbers stated in that graph, it would be apparent to me at least, that the level of polution brought about by burning wood is rather small; at least in that state, according to those numbers.

I will happy join both sides of the issue, as a lover of burning wood, even before I bought my first wood stove for my home, and as a concerned consumer, wanting to ensure that we do what we can to minimize our footprint on the planet.

-Soupy1957

 

[branchburner]

The NH chart above is for electricity sources, but I would be curious to see a state by state chart for residential heating.

The main issue with pollution from wood smoke is how prone a particular area is to stagnant air. Keene, NH, is especially prone to poor air quality so they participated in a wood-stove buyout program with the EPA. I think those programs are only pursued in such trouble areas. Many of those seem to be on the west coast.

I know a few guys with smokeless smoke dragons, and some guys with EPA stoves that smoke like they're burning tires, so as it has already been stated here: stoves don't pollute, people do. I think the biggest problem in NH is some of the guys with OWBs - they ARE burning tires! And who knows what else.