Totally Mis-Led

Sunny Boy wrote:Unlike wood stoves, coal stoves are exempt from EPA emission standards. What's that tell you ?

And the irony is that many of those people who turn up their noses at coal have been taught that burning "wood is green" and better for the environment, because it's a renewable resource. Heck, it even has green leaves !

And, they truly believe that, . . . despite facts like, . . many years ago, the EPA has put emissions restrictions on wood stove construction, but not on coal stove construction. And many municipalities, like my own, have passed laws banning outdoor wood stoves.

Paul

And I guess if the government says so then that must be true huh?

Do you have test data that shows that coal stoves need to be modified to meet the latest clean air standards ?

Apparently the EPA doesn't think they need to be modified and certified as meeting some standards. I can live with that.

Paul

My furnace is in my basement, in a walled room of it's own, albeit rather large. Hot water heaters there too. Yes, that area gets dusty, because when I have to dump ashes into the galvanized trash bin I used to collect ashes, some dust escapes. But as for my whole house, meaning the upstairs area, the dust factor is no greater than when we didn't have the coal furnace. We also live out in the country, so furnace or no furnace dust is going to be an issue from winds blowing and picking up grit and particulate matter. So people who complain about the dust factor are totally oblivious of dust and grit in the atmosphere that is simple "there."

Berlin nailed it. If you are careless with the coal or the ashes then there will be a mess. I have a tiny amount of ash that get blown around, and no black coal dust because I oil the coal.

Sunny Boy wrote: Apparently the EPA doesn't think they need to be modified and certified as meeting some standards. I can live with that.
Paul

be careful with that thought process...living with their conclusion is ok at this point. But they can just as easily flip a coin tomorrow and say that residential coal stoves do need to be modified and certified to meet 'some standard' without any quantifiable scientific justification. The nebulous claim will be that it is for the health benefit of the flock.

Once they pound woodburning into the ground they will start looking around for other things to regulate to justify the existence of their agency.

Sunny Boy wrote:Do you have test data that shows that coal stoves need to be modified to meet the latest clean air standards ?

Apparently the EPA doesn't think they need to be modified and certified as meeting some standards. I can live with that.

Paul

I'm not trying to say coal stoves need to meet anything. It's the EPA standards I have a problem with. It's like the EPA making us use E10 gasoline because it produces less hydrocarbon emissions, but yet they fail to tell us the emissions produced in the production of ethanol fuels and the increased fuel usage. So I'm sorry if I have a hard believing everything the EPA spews out about how horrible wood stove emissions are. I wonder in what stage of a burn the EPA analyzes wood smoke emissions. The operator plays an important role in the efficiency of a stove, there are many types of stoves out there and there are varying stages of seasoned hardwood out there which are all factors the EPA conveniently fails to consider. The government hasn't been able to have a very big hand in wood burning for awhile so they need to find some way to &**# over those trying to be a little more independent.

dcrane wrote:anyone who has actually burned anthracite in a decent coal stove made for coal burning would NEVER say wood is better in any way shape or form (its simply not possible unless they lie).

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one as I can think of several areas where wood wins out. The biggest being the ash of course.

Well ,dcrane,wood smells better while handling it & while burning,think hickory ! can't think of anything else.

Ya know...I sure miss getting up in the middle of the night to reload the wood stoves...and hauling in a week's worth of firewood every time snow is predicted...and there was always that one piece of wood that had ants living in it...
My Fisher insert is nice to use on real cold days or when I want to sit around and watch the fire.

windyhill4.2 wrote:Well ,dcrane,wood smells better while handling it & while burning,think hickory ! can't think of anything else.

If you are burning wood for the ambiance that's one thing but, If you are burning wood to heat your house you have not discovered coal. Coal beats wood in every way no chimney fire hazard, one load can last 10 hours, more heat per pound than any native species of wood, and coal will not rot and is not effected by humidity so you can buy several years worth at a time with no fear of rot.

carlherrnstein wrote:

windyhill4.2 wrote:Well ,dcrane,wood smells better while handling it & while burning,think hickory ! can't think of anything else.

If you are burning wood for the ambiance that's one thing but, If you are burning wood to heat your house you have not discovered coal. Coal beats wood in every way no chimney fire hazard, one load can last 10 hours, more heat per pound than any native species of wood, and coal will not rot and is not effected by humidity so you can buy several years worth at a time with no fear of rot.

And it takes up half the space of the same amount of BTU's worth of wood.

It can be soaking wet and still burn fine.

And bugs hate it !

Paul

If you burn coal everything in your house will turn black, the air space around the outside of your house will stink, and you'll grow hair on your palms.
There. I said it.

Wood'nCoal wrote:Ya know...I sure miss getting up in the middle of the night to reload the wood stoves...and hauling in a week's worth of firewood every time snow is predicted...and there was always that one piece of wood that had ants living in it...

My friend with a Harman MK1 gets up at 3am every night to throw more coal on the fire. Our Jotul 600 kept us warm all night & still had a nice pile of hot coals in the morning. Only took a couple minutes to have a roaring fire again. A much faster recovery then I see with the Hitzer after the morning shakedown. No worries about coal gas explosions or blue flames roaring by the open baro either. Also didn't need to monitor a manometer or worry about getting gassed in our sleep with the woodstove.

Lots to like about burning coal but there's a number of reasons why I think my wife will have a much better chance of staying warm were something to happen to me if I put one of our woodstoves back in the house. That will definitely be one of next summers projects. It might only get used in the shoulder months or when I want to supplement the Hitzers output but I'll feel much better having a stove in the house that my wife is comfortable using.

titleist1 wrote:

Sunny Boy wrote: Apparently the EPA doesn't think they need to be modified and certified as meeting some standards. I can live with that. Paul

be careful with that thought process...living with their conclusion is ok at this point. But they can just as easily flip a coin tomorrow and say that residential coal stoves do need to be modified and certified to meet 'some standard' without any quantifiable scientific justification. The nebulous claim will be that it is for the health benefit of the flock.
Once they pound woodburning into the ground they will start looking around for other things to regulate to justify the existence of their agency.

My state mandates emissions testing on cars, (just as most others), and puts limits on the outputs. Years ago, I went to register a 79 Firebird, and put "true" dual exhaust on it. (No catalytic converter). But I tuned the carb and dist. to pass state regs, and it passed the emissions test. However DMV, wouldn't register it due to the lack of a converter. (even tho it met the standards).
So yeah, I believe they make up alot of this stuff, thru the flip of a coin.

Your state DMV failed the car, or was it the EPA ?

Only one has jurisdiction state wide dealing with mods you do to your car. The other has jurisdiction over OEM.

And I'm not defending either, but I've had more problems and spent more time actually tracking down accurate answers to questions concerning my customer's antique cars and what State regulations some State inspection station bozo's "think" antique autos are subject to, . . . none of which the EPA is interested in.

But my state was different. Within a few months of leaving the dealership, very little of the horse power robbing junk that came on my 72 AMX was left on it ! And yes, many years later, it still passed NY state 1980's emissions standards with flying colors, with an Edelbrock high-rise intake, Holly spread-bore 4 barrel, Vertex aircraft magneto, Sig Erskine cam, Hooker headers, Chrysler turbo mufflers, and only a PCV valve in the right valve cover as the only anti-pollution item left on it.

Paul