Coal Vs Pellet Heat

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: driz On: Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:17 pm

Oh I think many of you guys don't give pellets their due. I heard all the horror stories of both corn and pellets and for the life of me don't see what the problem is is you use your head. Corn causes dust coal causes dust and corn causes dust there is no escaping it. Storing pellets on their pallets doesn't take up hardly any space at all even if you have to move them and restack. Enough to heat my 1400sf house here in the North only takes up about a 10 by 10 area and they keep just fine in spite of what everyone says. Corn is the same thing. I have let it sit all Summer with the cellar door wide open and living in a hay field. Only a couple mice holes in the bag spilled a couple pounds, thats it no big deal. One other observation with corn is that most of what you buy if its bulk is pretty damp so I wouldn't go quoting chapter and verse with how much more btu value it has. I never saw so much difference and it is nice cleaning my stove once a month rather than every week. With any of these appliances a thermostat really makes a difference. My corn or pellet consumption seemed to go down by about a quarter when I hooked up the stat. Thats something for everyone to keep in mind whatever you use. Must be the stat keeps things on a much more even keel than regulating it by hand or setting. I sure wouldn't be without mine.
Anyways I wouldn't be too quick to berate the humble pellet stove till you have seen one run properly. Mine keeps the place decently down at minus 30 and I know several others who do as well. None of these heaters are perfect, coal included. If you want perfect get electric and a bigger wallet.
driz
 

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: jpen1 On: Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:43 pm

I have burned all three and coal is the least maintanence and gives of the most btu for the buck. Plus pellets and corn carry mold and they can make people sick like my wife. Plus the pellets take up much more space to store. In the same space I stored 3 to 3.5 tons of pellets I now have 8 tons of coal sitting which is enough to last 3 years instead of not quite a year for the 3 tons of pellets. I willa gree pellets are an effective form of heat but anyone wanting to burn pellets better get there entire family tested for mold allergies and that of raw wood rosin before taking the leap. The corn I tried was dry but the sugars in the corn really gummed up the grate in the stove and was a PITA to clean every week plus it stunk to high heaven when you have to open the door to remove the clinker 2 times a day. If I had my coice of the biomass fuels I would burn cherry pits but they are hard to come by where I live or compressed cardboard pellets which burned great in my harman pellet stove. Both of those burned hotter and cleaner than corn or the wood pellets.
jpen1
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Leisure Line
Stove/Furnace Model: 110 Boiler

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: coalkirk On: Sun Mar 30, 2008 9:16 am

The only perfect heat is the sun. but coal has twice the BTU's of pellets and is signifncalty cheaper. Corn is too expensive now that all the ethonal crap is in high gear. Might as well burn gas or oil.
coalkirk
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Harman VF3000
Coal Size/Type: antrhcite/rice coal


Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Sting On: Sun Mar 30, 2008 9:57 am

I keep seeing post stating coal has twice the heat of corn or pellets - then others that is only 1.7 times - and I read on that says its 1.5 times the heat

Thats a very wide mass of claims

some pellets heat better than others because some are junk and some are not - apparently coal has similar issues.

As for coal being less expensive - In Wisconsin??? maybe - if I could prove to myself that there really were twice as many BTU per ton.

I am turning off Baby Boiler today after it eats the last bag of pellets from in the house - I have 14 ton sitting for next year in the shed. NOT quite enough This year with the degree day load 7.5% greater than last same day period I burnt 16 ton of corn and good wood pellets at about $150.00 a ton. If I were sure a new Harmon would only eat 8 ton of coal - I could make a choice - but
Sting
 
Other Heating: BurnHAM=NG-gas

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: rberq On: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:58 am

You will get no argument from me, Sting. Wood should have about 8,000 BTU per pound, anthracite 12,000 or 13,000 depending whose numbers you accept, and I don't know about bituminous. If I could buy good wood pellets at $150 like you can, I would not be burning coal at $300. It seems to depend SO much on where you live. I am in Maine, which has a lot of trees, and yet wood pellets are about $240, way more than your area of Wisconsin. And pellets here are sometimes plentiful, sometimes scarce. But if I were in Pennsylvania and could buy coal for $130 at the breakers, there is no way wood pellets could compete.

I will agree with others, though, that when cost per BTU is fairly close, coal has an edge in easy storage, much lower stove cost and stove/chimney maintenance if you go with hand-fed which is not an option with pellets, and probably lower air emissions.
rberq
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: DS Machine 1300
Coal Size/Type: Nut -- Kimmel/Blaschak/Reading
Other Heating: Oil hot water radiators, propane

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: europachris On: Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:31 am

Sting wrote:I am turning off Baby Boiler today after it eats the last bag of pellets from in the house - I have 14 ton sitting for next year in the shed. NOT quite enough This year with the degree day load 7.5% greater than last same day period I burnt 16 ton of corn and good wood pellets at about $150.00 a ton. If I were sure a new Harmon would only eat 8 ton of coal - I could make a choice - but


Where are you getting pellets for $150/ton? Cheapest I've seen in N. Illinois is $200/ton on sale ($4/bag). I recall seeing Farm & Fleet having the Marth pellets a few years ago for $2.49/bag on sale, which is a good deal. I did the math and came out with my Keystoker burning coal at $300/ton, although it's gone up $.50/bag due to shipping costs just lately. I also got a great deal on the stove, so that helped sway my decision.

Chris
europachris
 
Stove/Furnace Make: EFM 350/Iron Fireman
Stove/Furnace Model: Custom bituminous burner

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Sting On: Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:45 am

I buy truck loads :)

Want one?
Sting
 
Other Heating: BurnHAM=NG-gas

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: europachris On: Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:56 am

That's the way to it! I like the philosophy of pellets - using waste products. I remember years ago looking at an Austroflamm Integra stove at a shop out in Watertown, WI (I think) and they were burning pellets made from the Kimberly-Clark paper mill waste. It was residue from diapers, etc. and you could see the pink and blue colors in the pellets. Price was cheap and they burned well.

If the price of diesel goes back down, I'm considering figuring out a way to get 8 or 10 tons of rice in bulk shipped out here from NEPA. My local supplier of Blaschak sells for a very fair price considering the distance it has to travel.
europachris
 
Stove/Furnace Make: EFM 350/Iron Fireman
Stove/Furnace Model: Custom bituminous burner

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: efo141 On: Sun Aug 17, 2008 9:54 pm

Sting wrote:I buy truck loads :)

Want one?
My Father in law lives in Green Bay and has burned corn for years. This year he is looking for pellets because of high corn prices. He cant find pellets. he is on a waiting list for paper pellets at 150 a ton i think. If you have any info on pellets in his area please let me know. Thanks ED
efo141
 
Stove/Furnace Make: New Yorker/Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: WC90-----/Kaa-2

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Sting On: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:56 pm

I just bought 12 ton of corn because of the rise in the cost of the NG that I thought I would use to make up for the short fall on my supply of pellets. Corn at Green Bay prices is still less than NG in the area.

But paper pellets at 150 a ton???? Is this a rumor started by the pellet Nazi :mad: just to the South East of title town?
Sting
 
Other Heating: BurnHAM=NG-gas

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Freddy On: Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:54 pm

Pellets here are now $268 a ton. I just ran it through my fuel comparison program & coal would have to be $445 a ton to be the same price as pellets.
Freddy
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 130 (pea)
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Reading piece o' junk in the barn (rice)
Coal Size/Type: Pea size, Superior, deep mined

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Sting On: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:10 pm

but pellets are not 268 a ton! :? here
Sting
 
Other Heating: BurnHAM=NG-gas

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Freddy On: Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:52 pm

Sting wrote:but pellets are not 268 a ton!


More? Less?
Freddy
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 130 (pea)
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Reading piece o' junk in the barn (rice)
Coal Size/Type: Pea size, Superior, deep mined

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: Uglysquirrel On: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:11 am

read an article last where the lumber industry slow down is causing less sawdust to be made,so cost goes up. Oh well, I though of that before I bought a pellet stove.
Uglysquirrel
 
Stove/Furnace Model: Pocono

Re: Coal Vs Pellet Heat

PostBy: efo141 On: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:15 pm

Sting wrote:I just bought 12 ton of corn because of the rise in the cost of the NG that I thought I would use to make up for the short fall on my supply of pellets. Corn at Green Bay prices is still less than NG in the area.

But paper pellets at 150 a ton???? Is this a rumor started by the pellet Nazi :mad: just to the South East of title town?


I will talk to him again, but iam pretty sure he said 150. They gave him a bag to try first . He said some have trouble with the pellets not sliding in the hopper.
efo141
 
Stove/Furnace Make: New Yorker/Keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: WC90-----/Kaa-2