# Investing in a new furnace(s) - Advice and input needed



## gitmo234 (Jun 26, 2011)

Hello all!

After making it through a cold winter in a 2700 or so square foot house, 25 foot cathedral ceilings, poor insulation and only a fireplace insert until january, I'm ready to take the plunge and buy a furnace. First, this is my first home and I was unprepared for the cost of propane in my area, at over $3 a gallon, I have a 1000 gallon tank, and I filled it in january and started using it. It was gone, keeping my house at 68 degrees, in right about two months. I'm sitting on 300 gallons now.

In August I will commission as a 2LT in the Army guard, and will also get a chunk of change from my bank, which I intend to use part of it for home improvement. 

I'm going to insulate my whole house (double insulating it), which will bring it basically to code. This winter I threw 4 rolls of insulation in my attic in areas that were uninsulated alone, above my living room. It cut my propane furnace run time to 12 hours a day from 14, almost immediately. 

Second, I'm going to buy a new propane furnace. Mine is 10 years old at 90% efficient. I'm considering a modulating 98% efficient module. I'm also going to buy either a wood furnace or a pellet furnace. I'm set on two things for now. I want them to be indoors, and I want them to be "forced air" models. id they work right into my existing forced air easily.

Lastly, my HVAC guy basically told me that the duct work coming off my furnace is set up about as inefficient as possible and explains why i can barely feel air out of some of my vents upstairs.

Does anyone have any general advice or tips on any of the above?

Does anyone have recommendations, on models, of wood, pellet, or propane furnaces? Setups tips? anything?

I'm on my own here, and I'd like some sage advice. Currently if I ran my propane furnace only and kept my house at 69 degrees, it'd cost me over 6k a year to heat. No deal!

Chris


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Jun 26, 2011)

gitmo234 said:
			
		

> Hello all!
> 
> After making it through a cold winter in a 2700 or so square foot house, 25 foot cathedral ceilings, poor insulation and only a fireplace insert until january, I'm ready to take the plunge and buy a furnace. First, this is my first home and I was unprepared for the cost of propane in my area, at over $3 a gallon, I have a 1000 gallon tank, and I filled it in january and started using it. It was gone, keeping my house at 68 degrees, in right about two months. I'm sitting on 300 gallons now.
> 
> ...


If I had that situation I'd concentrate on firewood & leave the propane backup a distant 2nd. I would also buy a gasification boiler & use coils in the ducts so you have the forced air you want. There is the Kuma Vaporfire(I believe) that is reported to be clean burning & is a furnace. I would be leaning towards a Lambda boiler now as you just light them & walk away. Froling, Effecta are 2 real good ones. Good luck, Randy


----------



## woodsmaster (Jun 26, 2011)

I think if you are mostly going to burn wood or pellets I wouldn't be to concerned about upgrading the propane furnace. It would be a few years or more before you see any return on that 9% difference. I also like boilers like randy, but a add on furnace is probably a few thousand cheaper when said and done. At 6,000 a year you better do something sooner than later.


----------



## laynes69 (Jun 26, 2011)

I also wouldn't worry about the furnace. Ours is 25 years old and it's 90% efficient. The woodfurnace was put in the home when the lp furnace was. Overall It has maybe 5 years of use and still looks new inside. Concentrate on firewood and get that drying. Airsealing will be just as important as insulation. With your tall ceilings and square footage it sounds like you will need a larger woodfurnace. I would look at the Max Caddy from PSG. It has a blower that will regulate itself based on temperatures in the plenum to keep even heat. It's also a secondary combustion furnace. We have the little brother the Caddy and its a very nice furnace. After adding insulation I would get a rough idea on the heat loss. That will allow you to size the woodfurnace correctly. When I did our ductwork, I tried to size everything correctly. Upstairs we were still cold while the downstairs was warm. After adding much needed attic insulation, the upstairs is now as warm as the down. If your ductwork isnt too small, the added insulation may correct some of the heating. You just don't want ducting that's too small for the furnace. You will never get the flow needed for heating. Good luck, sounds like your on track.


----------



## PassionForFire&Water (Jun 26, 2011)

I would put my money first in insulation, second in more insulation and 3rd in even more insulation. Also, consider replacing your windows with high performance windows.
they call it "*Deep Retrofit*" these days.
Then I would start thinking about ... a wood/pellet boiler.
Without upgrading your insualtion you will still be heating your yard.


----------



## gitmo234 (Jun 26, 2011)

Thanks!

Insulation is a priority but if I at least get a wood or pellet furnace I can keep warm cheaply compared to last year. Last winter I spent most of the time struggling to keep my house at around 60 degrees, and that was usually just the living room. Once I got the chunk of change to fill the tank, I kept it at 68.

If I have a pellet or wood furnace I can stay warm, however inefficiently, way easier and cheaper than with gas, even if I have the same insulation. If I spend $1k on pellets this year, thats still a huge savings and manageable, however wasteful it may be.

Right now, according to my ruler from home depot, my attic is sitting at about R-25 insulation. My crawl space under the house has poorly installed R-19 over about 75%, the rest has fallen off or doesnt exist. The duct work is also un-insulated for the most part. 

Towards the fall I will be dropping lots of cash on insulation and spending lots of time in the attic and crawlspace putting up insulation.  Another problem is I have a TON of windows and french doors. About a month ago I installed curtains on the bulk of them. That should help some. Until then one entire wall of my living room was basically a gigantic window. 


Is there any reason to elect standard wood over pellets, in a furnace? I'm not well enough known in the community to get as much firewood for cheap or free as my neighbors do, although they help me once they've gotten theirs for the year. Last year they got about a cord for me in return for me helping cut. 

I'm holding off on insulation for now because of the heat in the attic. I'm going to throw down a layer of R-30 over what I already have. 

I'd also like to see if there are any covers for sun windows designed to prevent heat loss. I have six of those in my bathroom and one in the kitchen.


----------



## gitmo234 (Jun 26, 2011)

Also, I'm budgeting about $10k for this.. MAX. Less being preferred. This money will all be put toward making it cheaper to live in my home. So far, cutting electricity very slowly with new appliances and light bulbs, I've managed to cut my electricity bill from $300 a month to $50 to $80 a month. Then again, I replaced 45 standard bulbs with CFL bulbs and my ditched the Girlfriend after she spent ladies night with another dude, and since I dont cook for myself, the electric stove gets no use now.


----------



## laynes69 (Jun 26, 2011)

You will find in today's market there are alot of woodfurnaces that are very efficient. Maybe not as high as a gasification boiler but far greater than the furnaces of yesterday. I don't like pellets for the simple fact of supply and demand. I burn wood because we have a wood lot and are surrounded. You will need to look at the costs of wood compared to gas and pellets. There is a fuel calculator on here as well various places online. A few cases of Caulk will help some of the airleaks inside. If your walls have little to no insulation I would consider dense pack cellulose. It will insulate and airseal at the same time. If the ductwork runs through unconditioned spaces, it needs to be insulated. A tub of mastic and a brush will go a long way in sealing the ductwork which can account for huge pressure differences in the home and air infiltration. Sometimes you can find thermal drapes on sale. They seem to work from what I have seen. I would take it it's an old home? A woodfurnace sounds like it will be within your budget. A nice boiler system will go well over your budget.


----------



## smokinj (Jun 26, 2011)

I am heating 2700sqft. What kind of source do you have for firewood? Equiment so on and so? Skill set?


----------



## gitmo234 (Jun 26, 2011)

The house was built in 1973, but the last owner just didnt maintain it and added on without proper insulation. He owned a large construction company so I got the proverbial painters house, thats poorly painted. Except I got the contractors house that was poorly maintained and built on to. 

As far as equipment, I have a chain saw and a shed. Last year the neighbors helped me with finding wood and giving me what they could. I'd help with the manual labor and collection and we'd divide it into thirds.  Its a small town and I'm the relative outsider so I dont have sources for free wood yet, and no wooded lots. So, if I get wood I can get some by helping the neighbors, which results in about a cord or so, max, OR I can buy it from craigslist or local tree services.

I'm considering buying tons of actual logs to save $$ and cutting/splitting them myself. The neighborhood I live in is a close community, so we have a log splitter that I can use, we just chip in on repairs and service, divided evenly.


----------



## laynes69 (Jun 26, 2011)

You would be in the 8-10+ cord range with the sound of the heating. Maybe less depending on the heat load. That would give you a basic idea on wood. Around here a load of logs will run around 100.00 a cord sometimes a little less. You would save quite a bit over gas or oil and be much warmer. If the wood is cheap enough it might just pay to buy it cut and split. If you go that route buy for the next year so it has time to season. Asking around and looking on craigslist will sometimes bring a good score.


----------



## smokinj (Jun 26, 2011)

gitmo234 said:
			
		

> The house was built in 1973, but the last owner just didnt maintain it and added on without proper insulation. He owned a large construction company so I got the proverbial painters house, thats poorly painted. Except I got the contractors house that was poorly maintained and built on to.
> 
> As far as equipment, I have a chain saw and a shed. Last year the neighbors helped me with finding wood and giving me what they could. I'd help with the manual labor and collection and we'd divide it into thirds.  Its a small town and I'm the relative outsider so I dont have sources for free wood yet, and no wooded lots. So, if I get wood I can get some by helping the neighbors, which results in about a cord or so, max, OR I can buy it from craigslist or local tree services.
> 
> I'm considering buying tons of actual logs to save $$ and cutting/splitting them myself. The neighborhood I live in is a close community, so we have a log splitter that I can use, we just chip in on repairs and service, divided evenly.




When wood tight like that a really nice epa stove could be another option. Keep in mind with that sqft can use alot. My case 12 cords is not uncommon. epa stove 4.0 cuft box could be about 6 cords. Something to think about and a much easier set-up. I dont have the best furnace and also heat my hot water with lots of new insulation I have it down to 10 cords, but I start a fire about the first of Oct and let it go out about Mid May!

So If your burning this fall you better get your full boost on! Oh, that saw your back and the commiment better be a STRONG ONE! :coolgrin:


----------



## flyingcow (Jun 26, 2011)

I  also think you might want to look at a wood stove. Low $$$ input. located right should help. Then look into a few yrs ahead and install radiant staple up where you can, if you have a basement, you can access the first floor easily. If you got places that need new floors, look into a warm board type of radiant. Or low temp rad panels. And then put a well designed gassification boiler in, with storage. This will give you time to get a routine for putting up 10 cord of wood a year.


Insulate, caulk, spray foam,etc. You could start sealing the cracks up right now. I took the inside trim off of my windows and foamed 'em good. Made quite a difference. We also use the weather shrink wrap for windows, that stuff works. A hell of a ROI. And as you noted, curtains are a big help also.

I also think you should not replace the propane furnace. Least not now, see how the wood thing works out.


----------



## lampmfg (Jun 26, 2011)

If your interested in efficiency, safety, and a greener tomorrow do some research on the Kuuma VaporFire 100.  The VaporFire has been independently tested by Intertek yielding a 99% combustion efficiency.  I've owned mine for 28 years and haven't cleaned out the chimney once as a matter of fact I don't even own a chimney brush.  "No smoke means no dangerous creosote!!"


----------



## smokinj (Jun 26, 2011)

lampmfg said:
			
		

> If your interested in efficiency, safety, and a greener tomorrow do some research on the Kuuma VaporFire 100.  The VaporFire has been independently tested by Intertek yielding a 99% combustion efficiency.  I've owned mine for 28 years and haven't cleaned out the chimney once as a matter of fact I don't even own a chimney brush.  "No smoke means no dangerous creosote!!"




Wood that is 99 percent? Wow that beats a gas fire place with no vent......I call BS!


----------



## laynes69 (Jun 26, 2011)

From what I have read, I don't think the Kuuma would have enough output to heat his home. Whats the output of the Kuuma on high fire? This is from the website:

* Generally furnaces rated at 100,000 BTU per hour operate less than 1/3 of the time, with an actual heat output of less than 33,000 BTU/hr.
** Estimate. Could vary with different types of installation and wood.


----------



## begreen (Jun 27, 2011)

Based on the house description, propane is the last thing I would consider for fuel. Unfortunately with the super high ceilings you are heating a lot of cubic footage too. Ceiling fans can help a bit here, but heating these big boxes is a challenge as you have found out. I would not change the furnace yet, especially if it is going to be used for back up heat. However, if the ducting is uninsulated and/poorly laid out, fixing that will help. 

If you want a wood furnace add-on I'd look at an EPA model like a Hot Shot, Caddy or the Kuuma. But first confirm that you can vent it. If there is no flue set up for solid fuels, the wood furnace will need to have a nearby exterior flue added. Some houses are not easy to do this due to the plenum and main furnace location. If that doesn't work out, perhaps consider installing a big stove where you need the heat. It will work the best if located somewhat central in the house on the first floor. Don't update the gas furnace unless it needs replacing. 

Also, if you are set on wood heat, how much wood do you already have split and stacked? These units want dry wood. Don't listen to claims for furnaces that say they will burn green wood. Stick with dry wood for a clean flue and maximum heat output. White oak takes 2 yrs to season. If you are buying wood, get it now.


----------



## FyreBug (Jun 27, 2011)

If I may add my own experience with insulating my house... Mine was built in the 50's. Had cellulose blown in the walls and attics 2 years ago & made a huge difference. I also looked at windows since I have the originals. But I did some calculations and had some professionals come over to take measurement and quote and the more honest ones told me what I had figured... The impacts  of new windows was not going to be that great (in my case anyway) and the ROI was going to be much too long. So I passed.

If you are looking at furnaces, pay a little more for an EPA rated appliance. The extra cost is made up by the fact you'll be using less wood, they typically vent into a 6" chimney or liner (vs 8" for non-EPA), longer burn time, less pollution & there is still some govt rebate program on these high-efficiency units. Make sure to measure your headroom (clearance to combustibles) and we'll help you figure it out. Advantage of wood vs pellet = Typically cheaper, easier access to fuel. Disadvantage, if nobody is home to look after it you immediately go to the more expensive fuel (Propane in your case). With some you can get even more convenience with a water pre-heater loop to heat your hot water tank. With many models you can have an oil burner or electric element to make it a stand alone furnace.

Pellet furnaces have the extra convenience of having a large hopper (for ex. the PSG Caddy Alterna has a 240 lbs hopper). You can dial in your level of heat (BTU) required for your house and like any 'standard' furnace it will keep your house at the same heat level. A thermostat will ensure the furnace shuts down or at the very least dial down to the minimum - therefore not waisting fuel. Think of them as  standard furnace but you have to fill in the hopper from time to time. Depending on your usage an average 240 LBS load can last you 3 days or more. (depends on sq ft, insulation etc...). You can also put a hot water loop & electrical element on some of them. Depending on your area a bag of good quality pellets will be around $3-$4 per 40Lb bag.

Hope this helps.


----------



## barkeatr (Jun 28, 2011)

Insulation is the highest priority, with the reduction of air infiltration (depending how bad it is now) comes in a close second.  You can insulate all you want but if the air is exchanging through any number of leak spots..your money on insulation is rendered less effective.  Get a blower door test done.  Fine Homebuildng has exceptional articles on blower door testing and overall tactics for energy upgrades.


----------



## Tennman (Jun 29, 2011)

Thanks for your service LT. My only 2 cents is to search here to read discussions/opinions on an "indoor boiler" in an out building vs the same boiler in the home. You'll find two passionate camps depending on your priorities for boiler location and BOTH camps are RIGHT. I left my older propane furnace in place and it now serves as the backup or the quick warmup source for early mornings. Point is if you use the propane little, efficiency becomes less relevant. Good on you that Girlfriend is gone. Now find a reliable girl and boiler. BTW.... I'm of the NEVER in my home camp.


----------



## cfarms (Jun 30, 2011)

I would seriously look into the Kuuma at www.lamppakuuma.com     I have seen them burn and it is amazing the heat you get out of it and how clean it burns! I bought one this spring and am looking forward to this heating season Good like and keep us posted on what you decide!


----------



## btuser (Jul 3, 2011)

smokinjay said:
			
		

> lampmfg said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Everybody stop!  We've been doing it the hard way.  

Forget about the new furnace.  Not worth it for another 9%, plus you're only going to get the advantage of the modulation during the shoulder seasons which is when a wood stove is doing its job.


----------



## Don2222 (Jul 4, 2011)

Hello

A great method that is 100% approved to duct your heat is to get a Wood Pellet Stove with ducting connections in the back that are meant to be used for this purpose. They are called â€œDucted Wood Pellet Stovesâ€ and a common one is made by Ecoteck.

http://www.ecoteck.us/ducted-heat/

As you can see by the smaller red arrows at the top of the pic below, warm air can be moved to other rooms or upstairs with this wood pellet stove using the proper duct work and stove connection.


Description of â€œDucted Wood Pellet Stovesâ€ from Ecoteck in above link.

The Ecoteck wood pellet stove range also includes 3 ducted units for people who want more even heat diffusion throughout the home. Ducts conveys heat from one room to another and distributes it throughout the home, spreading the stoveâ€™s warmth over as wide an area as possible.

Models equipped with the air canalization use 2 pipes, 3.15 Inches in diameter, to service other rooms. Depending on the model, the delivery of the air for canalization can be in the top or in the bottom part.

In the Elena Airplus, the second fan for the air canalization, can be activated simply by pushing the button on the display.

In the Laura & Veronica, there is the possibility to adjust the front and back air delivery by adjusting a lever.

More info on Ecoteck Laura 11kW Ducted Stove
Ducted Heating with wood pellets
Wood pellets are one of the few truly environmentally friendly ways to heat. Ducted stoves have a two extra warm air outputs at the rear of the unit and these can be connected to aluminum ducts routed other rooms in the property. A simple mechanical flap controls the ratio of air coming into the main room compared with the air being diverted to the back. All wood pellet stoves require a 13amp electrical connection.

â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”-

Hope this answers your question, good luck


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 12, 2011)

smokinjay said:
			
		

> lampmfg said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




A lot of people are mixed up on the BTU's required to heat a home because oil and gas furnaces do no run steady hour after hour.  If they did you'd spend $20,000/yr. to heat a home.  As it is some people are spending over $4000/yr. to heat their homes.  They cycle on and off.  Your BTU needs are delivered intermittently.  If your home is poorly insulated, or if for some reason you let it cool down, your oil and gas furnace would then run steady.  Generally, a furnace rated at 100,000 BTU/hr. runs from 1/4 to 1/3 of an hour on the coldest of MN. days delivering about 30 to 40,000 BTU's/hr. to maintain a comfortable heat level for your home, i.e. 70 degrees F.  Most people feel cool in their homes in between the on and off cycles of the oil and gas furnaces, therefore many people prefer wood heat because it's continuous.

Now, heating a home with our VaporFire furnaces is really special because they deliver very even continuous heat hour after hour.  They don't smolder the wood and then blast the wood ( the two extremes) like other wood furnaces.  Instead, its unique automatic draft system avoids these extremes with a continuous front to back burn pattern that allows the user to adjust the burn rate, which in turn varies the BTU output.  In mild weather you use a low setting for 15-25,000 BTU's/hr., in moderate weather a medium setting for 25-45,000 BTU's/hr., and in cold weather a high setting for 45-60,000 BTU's / hr.  It adjusts simply by turning the knob on the computer from low to high and anywhere in between.  Most people never go above the medium setting all winter long.


Keep in mind that all wood has the same # of BTU's pournd for pound.  The heavier more dense wood (oak, hickory, maple) have more available BTU's/piece than the lighter less dense wood such as poplar and pine, only because each piece weighs more.  Every pound of wood that is 100% dry has  approximately 8,600 BTU's /pound.  Say for instance your home needed 100,000 BTU's/hr. to heat, it would take 11.6 pounds/hr. of 100% dry wood to heat it.  Now, if your wood has a 20% moisture content, each pound of wood has only 6,880 BTU's in it (it's 8600 x .80).  Then if your wood furnace is only 60% overall efficient, your BTU's would only be 4,128 BTU's/pound (that's 6,880x.60).  This would result in a ridiculous amount of wood, 24.2 pounds/hr., to get the needed 100,000 BTU's/hr.  In a 24 hr. period that would mean 576 pounds of wood needed for 100,000 BTU's/hr after hr.  This would result in probably more than 20 cords of wood to heat your home for one winter.  It makes more sense to say that most homes in the coldest of weather only use the 30-40,000 BTU's/hr and probably use 7-10 cords of wood/season to heat their homes.  With our VaporFire furnaces that are 85% overall efficient and 99% combustion efficient most people use only 3-5 cords of wood to heat their home/season and that's what makes our furnace very special.  To top if offf we also have the clean burn of less than 1 gr. emissions/hr.


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 13, 2011)

lampmfg said:
			
		

> smokinjay said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Those are quite impressive numbers. Any particular reason they are not EPA certified?


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 13, 2011)

Those are quite impressive numbers. Any particular reason they are not EPA certified?[/quote]

Here is where many people are very confused.  Right now the EPA does not even have a test for hot air furnaces, and from talking to a few insiders with knowledge in the area EPA certification probably won't be required until 2014.  Also it probably won't be an efficiency testing but rather an emissions test, because if your emissions are low your efficiency will be good.  We hear it will probably require less than 5 grams of emissions per hour because if it goes any lower than that the majority of companies won't have the means, time, or ability to adhere and be forced to quit manufacturing their furnaces and in turn put them out of business.  The Vapor Fire furnace line has been my career project for the past 30 years which includes thousands upon thousands of test burns and many design changes.  With endless and I do mean endless work hours we were able to achieve less than 1 gram of emissions per hour which is unheard of.

Here is how we began our certification/testing process.  In 2009 the opportunity evolved to offer the tax credit with efficiency certification so we decided to take use Intertek (Who runs 3 of the 5 approved efficiency testing sites in the country) and it's testing facility in Madison, WI.  Once we received the great efficiency results we were asked if we would also like to have the emissions tested so we would have the information ahead of time for any changes that we would need to make or potential advertising we would like to do.  Being a smaller company with limited means this was not an easy decision to make, because the cost is substantial.  However we new that in order to survive and reach our goal of manufacturing the most efficient indoor wood furnace in the world and a truly green product we needed documented proof.  This documented proof is located on our website where a PDF of the test results can be found.  

Rest assured that when the opportunity becomes available for EPA certification we will be first in line.  On a side note we have received recent calls from some of our competitors many of which, will have a lot of work to do by 2014, inquiring about the emissions testing process that we underwent.


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 13, 2011)

lampmfg said:
			
		

> Those are quite impressive numbers. Any particular reason they are not EPA certified?
> 
> Here is where many people are very confused.  Right now the EPA does not even have a test for hot air furnaces, and from talking to a few insiders with knowledge in the area EPA certification probably won't be required until 2014.  Also it probably won't be an efficiency testing but rather an emissions test, because if your emissions are low your efficiency will be good.



[/quote]

Actually, Wood, Pellet, Biomass furnace & boiler MFG can voluntarily certify their furnace with EPA under the NSPS phase I (7.6g/hr). PSG Caddy is an example of that. 

EPA delayed their Phase II announcement until January 2012, in which they have announced their intention of removing EPA exempt status from most categories including Biomass Central Heating. Once they announce their intention, they will provide 1 to 2 years for MFG to comply. It is very unlikely, EPA will require the same standards as wood stove for Central Heating (likely 4.5g/hr) but rather they stated they might follow the Canadian Standard (CSA B415.1) which it itself borrowed from some European & other Standards. This Standards will not be grams per hour but rather grams per megajoule (MBTU). So rather than imposing a time limit for emission it will rather take into consideration Energy released vs pollution released. This is a much better standard for large firebox. However, it will very much take into consideration a minimum efficiency and minimum burn rate. 

This new standard will directly affect all MFG of Biomass Central Heaters. Therefore if you want to have a voice, make sure to join HPBA and participate in government regulatory affairs workshops.

On a side note, you mention less than 1 gr per hour. EPA requires stating the emission as a weighted average over 4 burn cycles. Is your stated similarly or just the lowest reading on a particular burn cycle?


----------



## smokinj (Jul 13, 2011)

btuser said:
			
		

> smokinjay said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lol yea my 10 cords a year is an @ss kicker....If there was any wood that gives 99 percent would be awesome! Just got to vent it in the house I guess....Burns that clean it should be fine...lol


If your interested in efficiency, safety, and a greener tomorrow do some research on the Kuuma VaporFire 100.  The VaporFire has been independently tested by Intertek yielding a 99% combustion efficiency 


Thats pretty miss leading statement!


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 13, 2011)

FyreBug said:
			
		

> lampmfg said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think that I remember reading somewhere where the Caddy that you are talking about is something like 7g/hr, which won't cut it when the new phase II testing takes place.  We had some testing done in the early 90's and were around 4 g/hr already then.  For us it doesn't really make any sense to EPA certify our furnace until Phase II standards are actually decided upon because pretty much everyone qualifies under Phase I.  

It is less than a gram under multiple burn cycles and our grams per megajoule is already measured so take a look on the following links under test results:

I'm actually having problems with the links but go to the website and under each respective furnaces web page click the test results link which will take you to the signed PDF with all of the details. 

I should have said that under Phase I the EPA doesn't have a good standard for hot air furnaces yet so thanks for clearing that up.

The cleaner the better...


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 13, 2011)

lampmfg said:
			
		

> FyreBug said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's the point... If it was that easy everyone would pass it including Kuuma. Only the Caddy has passed EPA phase 1 precisely because it is so difficult. Phase 1 is actually harder since the larger the fire box the more difficult since you are asked to meet the same standards whether your firebox is 1 cu ft or 6 cu ft.  It's like asking a dump truck to have the same gas mileage as a 'smart' car. If you can pass Phase 1 it is more likely you will pass Phase II since the requirement is no longer grams per hours but grams per energy released. 

If you already pass phase 1 requirement it gives you a marketing leg up if you can put the EPA stamp on your units- we dont mind the competition... it makes us better.


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 13, 2011)

I just got off the phone with our contact at Intertek and he told me it is impossible to get our Forced Air Indoor Wood Furnace (Not a boiler) EPA certified in the US (different than Canada where a standard is already in place) because there is not even a standard set yet and like I said earlier it probably won't be required until 2014 (after it is first decided upon) at the earliest.

I see you were tested by Intertek also so why don't you post your entire test results for the PGS Caddy E.P.A. wood add-on forced air indoor wood furnace so we can do a little comparison of apples to apples?  I was able to find Average emissions rate: 6.56 g/hr Average  and a heating efficiency: 71.43%, compared to our 4 burn average on the Vapor Fire 200 of .76 g/hr and overall efficiency of 83.8%.  

The next testing we are planning on having done is for Canada certification, because we are getting requests almost daily. 

Rest assured when Phase II first becomes decided and then implemented in the US we will have no problem passing.  

I agree competition is good for everyone...


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 13, 2011)

smokinjay said:
			
		

> btuser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What's so misleading?  I'm just taking the information straight out of our test results from Intertek.  You can view a signed PDF on our website if needed.

High Burn

    1.0 Grams/Hr of Emissions 

    99.4% Combustion Efficiency 

    82.4% Overall Efficiency 

Medium Burn

    .45 Grams/Hr of Emissions 

    98.1% Combustion Efficiency 

    84.4% Overall Efficiency 

Low Burn

    .65 Grams/Hr of Emissions 

    98.9% Combustion Efficiency 

    86.3% Overall Efficiency


----------



## smokinj (Jul 13, 2011)

ss="spellchecked_word">lampmfg</SPAN> said:
			
		

> ss="spellchecked_word">smokinjay</SPAN> said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This I understand and think most could figure it out. Post 13 on the other hand had me thinking something completely different! Hop you can understand that from a consumer point of view.... :cheese: Overall Efficiency The only number that means something me me, or most laymen...86.6 is very impressive!


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 14, 2011)

Oh, now I understand what you are saying. 

Sorry and thanks.


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 14, 2011)

lampmfg said:
			
		

> I just got off the phone with our contact at Intertek and he told me it is impossible to get our Forced Air Indoor Wood Furnace (Not a boiler) EPA certified in the US (different than Canada where a standard is already in place) because there is not even a standard set yet and like I said earlier it probably won't be required until 2014 (after it is first decided upon) at the earliest.
> 
> I see you were tested by Intertek also so why don't you post your entire test results for the PGS Caddy E.P.A. wood add-on forced air indoor wood furnace so we can do a little comparison of apples to apples?  I was able to find Average emissions rate: 6.56 g/hr Average  and a heating efficiency: 71.43%, compared to our 4 burn average on the Vapor Fire 200 of .76 g/hr and overall efficiency of 83.8%.
> 
> ...



I looked at the test results and they look good (high burn). If they are similar for all cycles you should be good for CSA and upcoming EPA phase II. Good work!


----------



## samuel (Jul 15, 2011)

lampmfg said:
			
		

> Those are quite impressive numbers. Any particular reason they are not EPA certified?



Here is where many people are very confused.  Right now the EPA does not even have a test for hot air furnaces, and from talking to a few insiders with knowledge in the area EPA certification probably won't be required until 2014.  Also it probably won't be an efficiency testing but rather an emissions test, because if your emissions are low your efficiency will be good.  We hear it will probably require less than 5 grams of emissions per hour because if it goes any lower than that the majority of companies won't have the means, time, or ability to adhere and be forced to quit manufacturing their furnaces and in turn put them out of business.  The Vapor Fire furnace line has been my career project for the past 30 years which includes thousands upon thousands of test burns and many design changes.  With endless and I do mean endless work hours we were able to achieve less than 1 gram of emissions per hour which is unheard of.

Here is how we began our certification/testing process.  In 2009 the opportunity evolved to offer the tax credit with efficiency certification so we decided to take use Intertek (Who runs 3 of the 5 approved efficiency testing sites in the country) and it's testing facility in Madison, WI.  Once we received the great efficiency results we were asked if we would also like to have the emissions tested so we would have the information ahead of time for any changes that we would need to make or potential advertising we would like to do.  Being a smaller company with limited means this was not an easy decision to make, because the cost is substantial.  However we new that in order to survive and reach our goal of manufacturing the most efficient indoor wood furnace in the world and a truly green product we needed documented proof.  This documented proof is located on our website where a PDF of the test results can be found.  

Rest assured that when the opportunity becomes available for EPA certification we will be first in line.  On a side note we have received recent calls from some of our competitors many of which, will have a lot of work to do by 2014, inquiring about the emissions testing process that we underwent.[/quote]

I agree with Fyrebug's post:
Here is where I get confused by the message you are trying to deliver here:  It is confusing and misleading because it appears to me that you are just mixing up requirements for two (maybe 3) completely different categories of wood heating appliances - warm air furnaces vs. hydronic heaters.  There are NO testing standards for warm air furnaces in the U.S. at this time and it is confusing when you mention EPA Phase 1 or Phase 2 because it simply does not exist for warm air furnaces.  

There is a voluntary emission reduction program for hydronic heaters that had a Phase 1 and Phase 2 particulate emission limit.  That program is currently in Phase 2 with the particulate emission limit (0.32 lbs/million Btu heat output).  Efficiency is built into an output based emission limit.

There is a voluntary emission reduction program for fireplaces that have a Phase 1 and Phase 2 particulate emissions limit.  The Phase 2 Program has a particulate emission limit of 5.1 g/kg.  There are no efficiency requirements in g/kg (the amount of emissions per the amount of wood burned).

The Federal Limit for indoor woodstoves (non-catalytic) and pellet stoves is 7.5 g/hr (Phase II since 1990).  The State of Washington limits for the same two types of appliances is 4.5 g/hr - the number that EPA is shooting for Federally.

Warm Air Furnaces do not have any EPA limits or Programs and it is confusing when you are talking Phase 1(I) or Phase 2(II).  

CSA B415.1-10 has a grams per megajoule (g/mj) limit yet you are still talking grams per hour (g/hr).

Now if you were to review the EPA PowerPoint Presentation from March 2011 given at HPBExpo (google search it) the EPA does plan to regulate warm air furnaces.
**EPA already converts the g/mj from CSA B415.1-10 to lbs/million Btu heat output.
_EPA PP Draft:
Exempt from 1988 NSPS
Canadian B415.1-10 level
â€¢    0.93 lb / mmBTU heat output
Draft NSPS limit for PM
â€¢    0.93 lb / mmBTU heat output in 2014
Ask for comments on whether limit should be same as for hydronicheaters to avoid competitive imbalance_
_Therefore, EPA's Draft does not indicate a 5 g/hr limit for hot air furnaces, they have an output limit._

Also, lower g/hr numbers do not necessarily reflect higher efficiency.  A g/hr limit does NOT care if 90% of your heat goes out the chimney - regulators just want particulate emission lower in g/hr.  Output based emission limits are inherent with efficiency.  Many manufacturers of wood heating applinaces are concerned about EPA because with the proposed lower g/hr numbers for some category appliances EPA is also considering a set efficiency mark as well and it concerns many manufacturers.

I would suggest you join HPBA and their gov't affairs program so you can get up to speed.


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 15, 2011)

Not sure if I understand all your points, but I'll re-iterate the points that I know are factual (not that yours arent')

1) You are correct, currently Biomass Central Heating is EPA exempt. However... manufacturers can submit their appliance under the current NSPS voluntarily. Some like PSG Caddy meet these requirements. For a manufacturer it provides some advantages to go that route. One and not a small one is bragging rights. Also it baselines their specs as per EPA standards so it is easier for consumer to understand ie. Efficiencies are listed as an average of multiple burn cycles rather than quote the best one which is typically on high-burn. It is *very* difficult to pass current EPA rules with a large fire chamber. 

2) While no one can crystal ball what actually EPA will end up doing. From our full participation in govt affairs, EPA have stated their intention to announce removing the EPA Exempt status from all appliance including Biomass Central Heating. The announcement has been slated for January 2012 with likely compliance by 2014.

3) It is likely (but not guaranteed) EPA will follow some of the same guidelines as CSA B415.1 for this Category. This is not just an 'emission' standard but much more comprehensive than EPA and include minimum burn rate etc...

Not sure why there should be a debate about this. Since EPA phase 1 inception in 1988 it has proven to be a good thing for consumers and manufacturers who spent the energy & effort to comply. Hopefully, Phase 2 will accomplish the same goals.


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 15, 2011)

If you read the rest of the posts I then said that there isn't even any type of EPA standard for hot air furnaces established so how could it get EPA certified in the US.  

All I'm stating is I think that the test results show that the Kuuma Vapor Fire Furnace is the most efficient and cleanest burning indoor forced air wood furnace on the market, until proven different.


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 15, 2011)

_If you read the rest of the posts I then said that there isn't even any type of EPA standard for hot air furnaces established so how could it get EPA certified in the US?_

Not sure how to re-phrase this. The point was made on a few occasions: 1) You can get EPA certification for any woodburner including central heating as long as you follow the protocol, pass the tests and get it certified by an accredited lab. You are then legally free to affix the EPA logo to your unit. This is voluntary.

_All I'm stating is I think that the test results show that the Kuuma Vapor Fire Furnace is the most efficient and cleanest burning indoor forced air wood furnace on the market, until proven different._

I never argued the point. Although one must careful to use words like *"the most"* since it implies a comparative study of other products out there (Most will not share their test results). Since many MFG's out there make claim of "the most", consumers are de-sensitized to such words. They will however put more weight behind certifications such as EPA since they realize the MFG must follow strict protocols to adhere to a standard.


----------



## lampmfg (Jul 15, 2011)

I agree with what you are saying.  As a smaller manufacturer we currently don't have a lot of room to spend more money than we already have on testing until it's required.  After speaking with some other manufactures they aren't very excited about the prospect of costly testing in the future.  I'm sure the process that you went through wasn't cheap.  

Some of my posts might not make as much sense as they should because I'm just relaying information, over the phone, from my dad that knows everything about his product (30+ years of tinkering and design).  Unfortunately his computer skills aren't as good as the knowledge he possesses, but believe me he verbally could get into the technical stuff with the best of them.

Cheers


----------



## FyreBug (Jul 16, 2011)

You are absolutely right. Back in 1988 when phase 1 was introduced many Mfg disappeared because they couldn't really move on to this new technology. Very few people will argue however that EPA legislation for wood burning was a bad thing. On the contrary, it was good for the environment, good for the consumers and good for those Mfg who spent energy & efforts to update their product offering. 

The fact EPA is moving to phase 2 should come as no surprise especially to those in the industry. EPA was mandated right from the beginning to have a phase 2 within a few years of phase one. Phase 2 was to be implemented in the 90's. By now we should have been at phase 3. Therefore all mfg's had a reprieve and a chance to catch up.

EPA somehow woke up a couple of years ago but the point is if a Mfg belonged to HPBA this would have not been a surprise to any of us. As it is EPA was slated to announce phase 2 this summer but delayed another 6 months. The point is we the Mfg knew since EPA inception the direction this was going. We've had 25 years to see the trend coming. If not, then HPBA gave us a voice to discuss these change ahead of time to minimize the impact on the industry and Mfg in particular. As a heads up, EPA is mandated to review a phase 3 within 5 years of phase 2 implementation. 

There is no shame in being a tinkerer. I've known a few of them that through sheer passion & dedication were able to outdo so called accredited engineers. I know one in particular who with limited resources was able to design a complete EPA stove line which has great efficiencies and EPA readings. To this day many MFG's try to replicate the results from those models. 

Based on your comments, you should do well with your product line when EPA phase 2 is implemented

All the best!


----------



## thehaas (Aug 3, 2011)

d.s.machine wood coal hot air furnace 205000btu heats up to 5000sf also make 160000btu unit both weigh around 800lbs total quality and well planned design watch on you tube at bodyshop18336 show in operation heating my shop


----------

