# Garn WHS3200 & Wood Gun E500 â€“ Another Night Out [Part 7]



## jebatty (Feb 10, 2012)

See Part 6 for links to Parts 1-6.

I'm lamenting the lack of any real winter this season, cold that is. With the Deep Portage improvements, including the added 4000 gal of pressurized storage, correction of the problem with the return water protection valve for the Wood Gun, and more accurate gpm flow calculations through use of measuring differential pressure on the circulators, the only other thing that's needed is a few really cold days and nights to again put these two fine boilers through some high output paces. That cold weather still is not in the forecast, and may not happen this season. 

Observational and anecdotal perspectives:

1) The 4000 gal new storage (plus the 3200 gal of the Garn) has enhanced the combined boiler system performance considerably. The ability to have 7200 gal of 160F+ water has really smoothed out supply temperature and simplified operation of the heating system. With nearly 2 million stored btu's, good for 4 or more hours of heat from storage only, both day but especially night operations have become effortless.

2) It is now all but impossible to overload either boiler to cause the Garn temp to get too high or cause the Wood Gun to idle. Based on general winter cold conditions, the chief operator sets a target temperature for mid-tank of the 4000 gal storage tank, and staff just loads either one, the other, or both boilers to achieve that target during the day and especially for stating the night. Load 100 or so lbs of wood, which is pretty much a full load for either boiler, and walk away.

3) Staff preference and hot water temperature requirements have shifted to more use of the Wood Gun over the Garn, primarily because the Wood Gun puts out 170-185F water consistently when fired without needing to preheat any of the 7200 gal of storage. The 4000 gal storage tank is supplied directly by the Wood Gun and is plumbed as a hydraulic separator, and if storage is down to 130F, for example, firing the Wood Gun delivers that extra hot water to the top of the tank, which flows through to top of tank supply to system, and the heating system has all the hot water it needs. Extra boiler output then can gradually heat the entire tank without shorting or delay in supplying the heating system demand. Also, I don't think the Wood Gun ever has gone into idle this season, which was an unpleasant occurrence (to be avoided) last year.

4) Garn use has been heaviest in two situations. First, in fall and early winter (and probably also this coming spring) when higher temperature water has not been needed. Second, to quickly boost the temperature of the entire 7200 gal of storage. At temperatures seen so far this season, the Wood Gun output normally is sufficient to meet system demand, but at higher demand periods it cannot also build-up reserve storage temperature very quickly. This is where the extra output offered by the Garn is very helpful, as both boilers together have an output to system in the range of 1 million btuH, or around 500,000 btuH for each.

5) Perhaps best of all from an economic perspective, use of LP for space heating from the now backup LP boiler system is 0, and use of LP for DHW has been greatly reduced. No more big payments to the "oil man." Plus, use of local wood has supplied jobs for local loggers and firewood cutters, supported local families, and aided the local economy -- all through use of a local, sustainable, fuel wood source of energy. This is a win - win operation for jobs and the environment.


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Feb 10, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> See Part 6 for links to Parts 1-6.
> 
> I'm lamenting the lack of any real winter this season, cold that is. With the Deep Portage improvements, including the added 4000 gal of pressurized storage, correction of the problem with the return water protection valve for the Wood Gun, and more accurate gpm flow calculations through use of measuring differential pressure on the circulators, the only other thing that's needed is a few really cold days and nights to again put these two fine boilers through some high output paces. That cold weather still is not in the forecast, and may not happen this season.
> 
> ...


Jim, I thought the Garn 3200 could fire at 1 million btu by itself? Randy


----------



## jebatty (Feb 10, 2012)

The Garn specs show 700,000 btuH maximum output under specific conditions. The test burns last winter indicated on a *continuous, not maximum, burn basis* sustained output was in the region of 500,000 btuH.

[added] For my Tarm and based on 5 years of operation I use rule of thumb average output over a burn of 75% of maximum rated output, which for the Tarm is 140,000 x 75% = 105,000 btuH. This seems to also be about right for the Garn: 700,000 x 75% = 525,000 btuH.


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Feb 10, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> The Garn specs show 700,000 btuH maximum output under specific conditions. The test burns last winter indicated on a *continuous, not maximum, burn basis* sustained output was in the region of 500,000 btuH.
> 
> [added] For my Tarm and based on 5 years of operation I use rule of thumb average output over a burn of 75% of maximum rated output, which for the Tarm is 140,000 x 75% = 105,000 btuH. This seems to also be about right for the Garn: 700,000 x 75% = 525,000 btuH.


The old rating for the 3200 was 350,00 to 950,000 btu. Garn has revised ratings on its revamped website, whats up Heaterman? Randy


----------



## Como (Feb 10, 2012)

I narrowed my choice down to the Wood Gun and the Garn, having one of each was not an option I considered.

I remember reading the Wood Gun literature and it saying that storage was not required. I As everything I had read suggested otherwise I costed it with storage, but not this much.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 10, 2012)

I believe the WG design is to totally close off air supply when it goes into idle, which I suppose should eliminate the smouldering/creosote issue, while maintaining sufficient heat to restart the fire as water temperature drops and the WG comes out of idle. Call it what you will, but with the E500 there is quite a moment of excitement when it comes out of idle -- major puffing or more like an explosion. DP found that adding storage so that idling would not occur is a better outcome.


----------



## Como (Feb 10, 2012)

It is sort of the way OWB's work, which is why I dismissed it.

I am sure this is a much better solution.


----------



## muncybob (Feb 10, 2012)

Jim, I solved the "explosion" you described by reducing the fesh air intake. The damper is at about 85% closed and no situations since and seems to burn fine. Still, I plan to have storage one day primarily to help in the shoulder seasons. I'm sure the efficiency would be slightly better with storage too since the fire is not instantly defeated when it comes out of a burn so there is a very short period of smoldering.


----------



## bpirger (Feb 10, 2012)

Jim, sounds like an extremely fine setup there....and one to be proud of.  I really like the idea of independence and supporting the local communities.  How much wood is burned in a season, say this year and we can extrapolate to normalcy.

I'd think the community would be very happy with the setup, especially the much easier overnight tending.  I'd think this system would make a great article in a trade magazine...not sure if Fine Homebuilding would be right, but something along that line.

Efficient, convienient, supporting local folks, and renewable.  What more could be asked from the system?


----------



## jebatty (Feb 10, 2012)

Thank you. The volunteer pay is great, too -- got them to double it this year. Last winter, which may more typical, wood use was in the range of 85-90 cords for 56,000 sq ft. This year would have been less, even with the same winter as last, because of other energy improvements: new exterior doors and most windows.


----------



## Como (Feb 10, 2012)

That is not much at all.

Sort of gets difficult putting a financial argument for energy improvements when you are saving a few cords.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 11, 2012)

Singed Eyebrows said:
			
		

> jebatty said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not a clue. I have never messed with a 3200 or even been around one. There are a couple articles about them on the www but I don't recall if they talk about output.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 11, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> It is sort of the way OWB's work, which is why I dismissed it.
> I am sure this is a much better solution.



A large Wood Gun with plenty of storage would be nothing like an OWB? A Wood Gun is a gassifier, an OWB is certainly not. Maybe I am not understanding what you meant there. Sorry if I am.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 11, 2012)

Gasifier said:
			
		

> Como said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He's referring to idling, which in any boiler is detrimental to efficiency and emissions.  

I recently saw a test document in which several brands of boilers were used including a very high tech Euro model with computer controlled combustion. Emissions were very bad when the unit was operated at low loads of 25% or less. Storage and complete consumption of the fuel load is the only way that one can stay "clean" through the entire fuel load. Idling or shutting down the fire is less than ideal in any type of boiler. This will be proven to be fact if the agencies involved ever get their junk in a hunk.


----------



## maple1 (Feb 11, 2012)

Gasifier said:
			
		

> Como said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think he simply means a Wood Gun is designed or intended to idle, as is an OWB?

I think I would have to admit that, in my mind at least, I would equate a Wood Gun to a gassing OWB in design & operation.

EDIT: typed too slow again & got beat to it...


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 11, 2012)

Heâ€™s referring to idling, which in any boiler is detrimental to efficiency and emissions.

I don't think that is a good comparision. But I understand what you mean Heaterman. I hear ya. I guess I do not understand why he said that and then said that is why I dismissed it. When storage would solve that problem easily.

Maple1. He did not say a Gassing OWB. But, I hear ya. Again. Maybe I am not understanding what he meant.


----------



## Como (Feb 11, 2012)

I know at least one GOWB that is run flat out. Well most of the time anyway.

I need to look if Wood Gun still promote this method of operation. Just to make it clear when I was doing my comparison is did it on the basis that the Wood Gun would need storage.

My gut feel is that with storage the Wood Gun would produce better figures than a Garn in most cases, without worse. Probably not a lot in it.

I remember speaking to a guy in Telluride who had one and was very happy with its performance.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 11, 2012)

My hope was that we would hit a spell of -10 to -30F days/nights this year, a week long or so, and I could really push the Garn WHS3200 and Wood Gun E500 in a system that will demand everything these two boilers have to offer. Obviously, that would be an extreme operating scenario, but with data collection and as much objective analysis as I could offer, the results might be interesting, at the least.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 11, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> I know at least one GOWB that is run flat out. Well most of the time anyway.
> 
> I need to look if Wood Gun still promote this method of operation. Just to make it clear when I was doing my comparison is did it on the basis that the Wood Gun would need storage.
> 
> ...



I remember seeing, and complimenting your set up with your pictures. Looks like a nice set up Como. I get more curious as I think about it though. And when I read your statement of comparing it to an OWB, it made me think about it even more. I can understand that statement, I guess, if you were thinking of no storage. That it would idle like an outdoor wood boiler. But certainly would not burn like one when back in operating mode.

From a business standpoint anyway. What made you decide on two boilers? It would seem that two Garns and the "stuff" to go with them, would be much more money than the price of one large Wood Gun and adequate storage. And the cost of maintaining them both. I suppose I could see one supplying the heat while the other is warming back up or is down for cleaning/maintenance. Don't get me wrong Como. I am not critisizing your system. I am new to this stuff. I just ask questions out of curiosity. And knowing that when I get the answer I will have learned something. That is always a good thing in my book. If you don't mind, please fill me in on your decision making process. I am interested on how your system will function.


----------



## Como (Feb 11, 2012)

It was a close call.

I would need to look up the numbers but cost wise there was not much in it. When you add storage. If memory serves me right in this scenario they have staff feeding 24/7 if needed. I like to sleep.

I had also gone through a very nasty winter and had a few issues with equipment failure.

So for me the biggest issue is overnight, you heat during the day then put the last load in and have you enough btu's to get through.

Because of our location we have massive temperature swings at any time, it has been relatively warm, nearly hit 30F today, we could have been -30F, we were last year. We easily can drop 20F as the sun goes down.

Also I will be burning year round so I thought ganging would be better.

A Wood Gun with Storage would I am sure have worked as well, a lot of storage.

But I will never know for certain.


----------



## WoodChoppa (Feb 11, 2012)

I'd love to see an Econoburn EBW-500 included in this ring, that would be quite the fight!


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 11, 2012)

WoodChoppa said:
			
		

> I'd love to see an Econoburn EBW-500 included in this ring, that would be quite the fight!



 :lol: I would like to see that big of an Econoburn, with storage, at work as well WoodChoppa! Not looking for a fight. Just curious of Como's decision making process.


----------



## TCaldwell (Feb 11, 2012)

Jim, Is there a night with the froling planned? Would be curious as to the actual performance data vs. brocure info.
tom


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 11, 2012)

Jim,

I am checking out the Deep Portage website right now. Cool. When I clicked on it there was not much info on the Gassification systems yet? What are you doing there anyway?  :lol: Get back to work!  :lol: No, seriously. I am going to do some reading on the site. Interesting. Are you going to be making up public information/description for the Gassification system? Hey, looks like you got closer to some of those temperatures you wanted! NOAA says it is -8F there. That was quick. How are those beautiful wood burning boilers humming along now?!!


----------



## jebatty (Feb 11, 2012)

Oooh - yes - I would like a date night with the Froling. It was installed late, already into the heating season, and there are a few minor things I would like to adjust in the plumbing to bring the Froling up to 100% of the capability I believe it can deliver, and I can't do that during the heating season. I also need to install more sensors to monitor and data log all key locations. Will have to wait until next heating season for a serious and detailed report.

Staff is very satisfied with the Froling in that for a 6000 sq ft structure, forced air heating, not built well regarding insulation, windows and doors, the Froling so far this winter has provided 100% of space heating and DHW. In doing that it has replaced 2 - LP forced air furnaces (remain as backup), have to check on their btuH rating, and an electric DHW heater. Savings have been substantial. The coldest night this winter was -25F, and as installed the Froling met all demand, although at this temp it had no excess output to add to storage. The Froling has met the goal, but I think it can do better. 

My current major focus at DP is analyzing the DHW system for the main facility with the goal of the WG/Garn eliminating need for supplemental hot water through an LP hot water heater during high demand periods. A large commercial BoilerMate is being used now to provide DHW during the heating season, along with a 1000 gal DHW storage tank. I don't think much thought was given by the installer to performance capability to meet need, but I think again some plumbing adjustments may result in improving the performance, and/or other recommendations will be made. Analysis is ongoing.

Also on the agenda is debugging the evacuated tube DHW solar system installed late last summer. This may be performing too well during the summer and design changes likely are in order, along with design changes to allow it to perform during freezing weather. 

-9F outside right now, will be a bright sunny cold day.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 11, 2012)

> Are you going to be making up public information/description for the Gassification system?



This too is on the list, but staff likely will need to take the lead on this. Already 100's, if not 1000's, of people have toured the energy centers at Deep Portage, which include the Wood Gun/Garn main wood energy facility, the Froling installation, two solar hot air furnaces, an evacuated tube solar hot water system, 10 kw wind turbine, and 12 kw solar electric arrays. If any of you get into Minnesota, you may want to put this on your list of things to see and do. Staff is happy to provide tours at any nearly any time, and with advance notice I likely can join the tour. You also would be welcome to visit my humble Tarm installation. Welcome!

The WG/Garn system alone has resulted in savings of $50,000/yr as compared to energy cost when LP is at $2.00 gallon. As bpirger said, 





> Efficient, convienient, supporting local folks, and renewable.  What more could be asked from the system?


 -- that would be a good description of the energy mission at DP.


----------



## leaddog (Feb 11, 2012)

Gasifier said:
			
		

> Como said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I also was going to get a wood gun but with my research on gasifiers I saw the need for storage. The manufacturer keep saying it wasn't need or recomended. That was a major mistake I feel on there part but was done because adding storage added a large cost to the mix. Other dealers here said the same thing because if they started talking storage they backed away because of cost. Can you get by with out it. YES BUT the advantages far out weighed the added cost. But with new ways of doing things it's not easy to get people to understand. Cost WAS a very big factor in my getting the eko. 
leaddog


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 11, 2012)

I completely agree that AHS is making a mistake by saying storage is not necessary. Yes, they can be run without storage. But it is not the best way to run them. They should manufacture tanks and offer them to the customer as an added benefit. Something they could buy with the boiler, or add on in the future. I think more manufacturers should sell small, pressurized tanks to go with their boiler. Ones that can fit through a normal size, 36" exterior door way. Even if they were 250 gallons each, people could buy what they could afford at the time and add on later by plumbing them together if they needed to. For many small to medium size homes it would seem like 500-750, well insulated gallons, would be a tremendous benefit to their system. I know the cost would go up. But system efficiency and environmental pollution would be so much better with that storage. I would hate to see how much my Wood Gun would idle without my 400 gallon buffer tank.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 11, 2012)

Jim, if DP ever wants to get away from cordwood I'll get them one of these. Drew and I will come up there and spend a month with you installing it. Provided of course that we can get in some fishing action. ; 

http://www.viessmann.ca/en/products/wood/Pyrot.html

click on the pdf brochure.


----------



## bpirger (Feb 11, 2012)

Heaterman....how much does one of those Viessman's set one back?  Say for a system equivalent to a Garn 2000?  My brother has a tree business, sadly he lives a couple of hours away....but he does keep my Dad in wood.  He chips so much wood and then tries to give the stuff away.  I remember back when I was building the house and on heatinghelp.com (a fabulous HVAC place by the way, not wood focused) and was turned onto Viessman, likely by hot rod (in hot water..same guy I think).  Great stuff....  I found Buderus as well, I think regarded as #2, and people actually had heard of them here in the States in 2001.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 11, 2012)

The Viessmann could have been in the running 3 years ago. From the brochure and for use of chips I see 35% max MC, which adds some flexibility, but still requires some drying before use. Storage, freezing, handling, would be quick items of concern. Also the added processing and transportation. DP is in a heavily forested area, round wood is readily available from local loggers at semi-load cord prices, and local labor bucks, splits, delivers and stacks to requirements, 24" for the Wood Gun and Garn, 18" for the Froling (smaller splits).

I would really enjoy seeing a Pyrot in action and talk to operators on their experience. Bio-energy is and will remain an exciting area of renewable energy.

Thanks for the link.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 11, 2012)

bpirger said:
			
		

> Heaterman....how much does one of those Viessman's set one back?  Say for a system equivalent to a Garn 2000?  My brother has a tree business, sadly he lives a couple of hours away....but he does keep my Dad in wood.  He chips so much wood and then tries to give the stuff away.  I remember back when I was building the house and on heatinghelp.com (a fabulous HVAC place by the way, not wood focused) and was turned onto Viessman, likely by hot rod (in hot water..same guy I think).  Great stuff....  I found Buderus as well, I think regarded as #2, and people actually had heard of them here in the States in 2001.



The smallest model in that particular line would be around 600,000btu  if I remember right. I wouldn't even hazard a guess as to what a system including automated chip feed would run but I would bet you would crack 6 figures. 
I have yet to see any real movement from Viessmann on their residential sized boilers but if they did it would change the playing field here. They have an outstanding line of product ranging from standard style boilers to "creme de la creme" computer controlled, O2 sensing, variable firing rate for both cord wood and manufactured wood products. Like these......   http://www.viessmann.com/com/en/products/Wood_heating_systems.html   click on the 35-170kw pdf if you want to drool on your keyboard. Those will be in the range of a Froling if they ever get here. 

From what I have been told the regulatory agency climate here (EPA) and its total lack of clear direction is the main impediment to bringing them here. The other issue that Viessmann has is the ASME certification that other manufacturers choose to ignore. .....You have to be around the Viessmann people and their organization to understand the mentality. Nothing happens, nothing moves, nothing is introduced until every last detail is 100% handled. They will never change as long as that family owns the company.

HH.com is a fantastic place for info on hydronic and steam heating and Dan Holohan does a great job of keeping it fresh and current. You are correct in your assumption that "in hot water"="Hot Rod".....you'd have to see his cowboy boots with the red and yellow flames to see how he earned that nickname. He started out as a contractor in Colorado and as they say, the cream rises to the top. He's now the technical trainer for Caleffi and it's mighty gracious of him to drop in here from time to time.


----------



## gorbull (Feb 12, 2012)

Don't know if anyone has paid attention to this biomass burner out of Kentucky but it looks to be a game changer due to it's smaller size and reasonable cost.  They make 100,000 and 500,000 btu models and soon will put out a 250,000 btu boiler.   http://www.bioburner.com/


----------



## SmokeEater (Feb 12, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> Jim, if DP ever wants to get away from cordwood I'll get them one of these. Drew and I will come up there and spend a month with you installing it. Provided of course that we can get in some fishing action. ;
> 
> http://www.viessmann.ca/en/products/wood/Pyrot.html
> 
> click on the pdf brochure.



Heat, these are some awesome looking and sounding boilers that could find a home in many mid sized buildings up here in NNY.  I've been involved in some larger wood burners over the years, but not with this kind of technology.  Only thing I didn't "swallow" in the brochure was the claim about CO2 neutral.  CO2 has been a favorite pain in my butt over the years and there is sooo much science indicating that CO2 has been the nemesis of mankind because of its connection to global warming.  Good proof is that CO2 is an insignificant minor contributor to global warming that even NASA has determined in recent studies that even if the atmospheric CO2 were DOUBLED, the Earth's average temp might rise 1.6 degrees C.  Brochure's great, except for!

JD


----------



## Como (Feb 12, 2012)

The Pyrot is 6 figures.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 12, 2012)

Doesn't "carbon neutral" with regard to bio-mass combustion refer to bio-mass which if not combusted normally would decompose in the environment and release its CO2 into the atmosphere over the decomposition period, which may be a period of years, and at the same time is bio-mass which is replaced by new growth bio-mass (sustainability) of at least equal carbon mass which then removes at least the same amount of CO2 from the atmosphere, thus "carbon neutral" over the cycle? In the short term there may be a net increase in CO2, but over the cycle CO2 is neutral. 

I see that the Bio-Burner also states "carbon neutral." My wood usage and that of DP is carbon neutral because both of us use firewood that is grown in areas where as trees are removed, new trees are planted or regenerated to replace what was taken.

The Bio-Burner uses a single stage combustion process with temps 1000-1600F, not quite as high as gasification boilers. But temps in this range are sufficient to combust CO and hydrogen, and with the controlled burn of small feed/batch fuel it is plausible that the Bio-Burner can achieve the claimed efficiencies. 

I think it is a credit that new ideas, designs and even technologies constantly come to market to better meet needs. These almost always are more expensive in up front $$$ cost because through efficiency they reduce the end social costs, which are not paid for in less efficient combustion processes. If users/consumers had to pay the social costs of their space heating appliances (such as costs from smoke, air pollution, combustion by-product chemicals, particulates, disease, medical care, tainted foods, birth defects, etc.), I would guess that the high efficiency appliances likely would be less expensive than the low efficiency appliances.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 12, 2012)

*If users/consumers had to pay the social costs of their space heating appliances (such as costs from smoke, air pollution, combustion by-product chemicals, particulates, disease, medical care, tainted foods, birth defects, etc.), I would guess that the high efficiency appliances likely would be less expensive than the low efficiency appliances. *

Preach it brother Jim!!

This is the side of the equation I have seen totally ignored by nearly all people when it comes down to initial cost of a boiler or project. It's really sad when you realize that discussions about "trade-offs even take place but I have heard them in meetings with boards, committees, GC's and engineers. We all wind up paying the price in the long run.  It is also definitely not limited to wood burners. It holds true regardless of the choice of fuel.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 12, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> Jim, if DP ever wants to get away from cordwood I'll get them one of these. Drew and I will come up there and spend a month with you installing it. Provided of course that we can get in some fishing action. ;
> http://www.viessmann.ca/en/products/wood/Pyrot.html click on the pdf brochure.



Very interesting. I went back one page on the website to the wood fired boiler called the Pyrotec. One of the things I thought was interesting was that they say "For wood fuels with max. water content of 50%." And with the Pyrot, "For wood fuels with max. water content of 35%".

Why would they not advise the burning of wood with a lower moisture content? Is it because the customer, us, wants to be able to burn wood without having to wait for it to dry? Seems like many people do this. Burn higher moisture content wood for convenience. When all it takes is some planning, and one year to get ahead to burn wood with a lower moisture content. Why burn wood with more water in it? They put fires out with water.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 12, 2012)

I would support social costing of nearly everything. There is no free ride. The grim reaper waits in the shadows. If social costing was to start somewhere, fossil fuels would be my first choice because fossil fuels are a major input into almost everything.


----------



## SmokeEater (Feb 12, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> Doesn't "carbon neutral" with regard to bio-mass combustion refer to bio-mass which if not combusted normally would decompose in the environment and release its CO2 into the atmosphere over the decomposition period, which may be a period of years, and at the same time is bio-mass which is replaced by new growth bio-mass (sustainability) of at least equal carbon mass which then removes at least the same amount of CO2 from the atmosphere, thus "carbon neutral" over the cycle? In the short term there may be a net increase in CO2, but over the cycle CO2 is neutral.



True, "carbon neutral" means exactly that.  Living green organisms, herbaceous and woody, along with others, all use CO2 to build sugars and ultimately proteins and other plant material.  If burned or decomposed the same CO2 is released.  Some CO2 doesn't immediately get to the CO2 stage in combustion because of, for some reason or other, doesn't completely combine with enough oxygen.  We then refer to this a CO emissions and because of its chemical and physical properties consider it to be a "pollutant" which is a contributor to smog, creosote, health problems due to its toxicity and etc.  My effort was to announce that CO2, a very different substance, is quite innocuous.  CO2, is not a pollutant, not toxic (poisionous), but can cause suffocation because it's dense and can "push" oxygen out of the way, is a very ineffectual greenhouse gas, though millions (billions) of us think not, and is a growth stimulant for all green plants.  In fact, many greenhouse operators increase the amount of CO2 in the greenhouse atmosphere up to about 2000 ppm to enhance biogrowth.  I guess that I get annoyed when companies, governments, faux climate scientists try to scare us over our emissions of CO2 and attempt to convince us that it is the root cause of global warming.


----------



## woodsmaster (Feb 12, 2012)

gorbull said:
			
		

> Don't know if anyone has paid attention to this biomass burner out of Kentucky but it looks to be a game changer due to it's smaller size and reasonable cost.  They make 100,000 and 500,000 btu models and soon will put out a 250,000 btu boiler.   http://www.bioburner.com/



 100,000 BTU would be to small for me on desighn day and 250,000 is to big even with storage.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 12, 2012)

SmokeEater - you and I will disagree on the long term effect of fossil fuel contributed CO2 buildup in the atmosphere. This thread does not need to rehash that here. In the current living things carbon cycle we agree that CO2 is neutral.


----------



## SmokeEater (Feb 12, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> SmokeEater - you and I will disagree on the long term effect of fossil fuel contributed CO2 buildup in the atmosphere. This thread does not need to rehash that here. In the current living things carbon cycle we agree that CO2 is neutral.



Agreed, but note that, although nothing should not be studied and discussed, CO2 can be "put on the back burner" as being a major contributor to our concerns about our use of plant derived fuels their effect on warming.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 12, 2012)

Yours is the last word. Will not engage in the discussion on CO2.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 12, 2012)

Gasifier said:
			
		

> heaterman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They will do very well with lower MC fuel but the reality of chips is that they are nearly impossible to"dry" without mechanical means of tumbling/aerating. Hence the necessity of designing boilers with grate and combustion technology that can deal with the fuel as it is presented. Basically the drying process happens in the boiler. I have heard that the chip production companies are working with 2 local co-gen power producers to design a pay scale based not only on tonnage but also MC. The boiler operators realize they have much less ash, cleaner combustion and less problems overall with drier fuel.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 12, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> Gasifier said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Understood. Thanks heaterman. Now. Why "For wood fuels with max. water content of 50%." on the cordwood boiler Pyrotec then? Does it have to do with business? In other words, you will attract more customers if they see they can burn wood from very low moisture content to 50%  m.c. ?


----------



## gorbull (Feb 12, 2012)

"100,000 BTU would be to small for me on design day and 250,000 is to big even with storage. "

I recently visited the factory and they're actually using the Bio-Burner 100 to heat their 6,000 sq. insulated industrial building in Madisonville Kentucky so the output may be a little deceiving when compared to a wood burner.  It's producing a true 100,000 btu's per hour, every hour or less if you chose, unlike a wood boiler the output and burn process is quite precise and controllable.  By controlling the fuel feed rate and air input the combustion process can be monitored and adjusted using the input from the combustion, stack and water out temps. very cool.   As a bonus it has a propane or NG  igniter and backup burner built right in.

If you suspect I have a bias you would be correct...but I have also recently looked down the throat of the Pyrot machine and concluded that although nice it is just too expensive to be a viable option for anything other than projects funded with government (FREE) money.


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 12, 2012)

gorbull said:
			
		

> I have also recently looked down the throat of the Pyrot machine and concluded that although nice it is just too expensive to be a viable option for anything other than projects funded with government money.



How else can we move forward in achieving a sustainable future for the children?  Clearly relying on the bankrupt capitalist paradigm has brought us to the brink of disaster.  Hope for the future lies in community action in partnership with enlightened governmental oversight to promote sustainable initiatives that demonstrate our commitment to implementation of tomorrow's solutions today through global synergistic empowerment.

We need to step forward and take up the challenge to be a part of global solutions that invite the participation of all the stakeholders.  It has never been more true that success in reducing our carbon footprints will require great strides in increased government funding.  And if this means more free money for you, me, lolly, dolly, and everybody then what are we waiting for?

--ewd


----------



## jebatty (Feb 12, 2012)

MC and transportation costs are the gorillas in the room for wood chips. Unmerchantable timber can be chipped at the logging site, which is economical, but then transportation to the user site gets prohibitive, as compared to the delivered cost of other fuels, at somewhere between 40-100 miles, depending on the local economics. 

But what a "waste" to dry the chips using btu's from the combustion process or other energy than letting the sun and wind dry for free. I can only imagine how much worse the economics are when transportation to a drying site, handling, and the transportation to a user site are involved. In my area unmerchantable leftover from logging is either given without additional charge to the logger (built into the logger's bid price for the timber) or at a very small surcharge. 

For residential use especially other issues are storage and freezing. High MC chips could become a hard, frozen mass when needed most.


----------



## gorbull (Feb 12, 2012)

Warning, we are teetering on the precipice of a dangerously hot topic!  My take is that governments are prone to spending without regard to economic principle, ignoring the bottom line or the payback schedule.    Private industry can not afford to do this.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 12, 2012)

> Warning, we are teetering on the precipice of a dangerously hot topic!



You're right, and maybe a topic many of us would like to pursue. BUT PLEASE NOT ON PART 7 OF MY GARN/WOOD GUN THREAD!    I would appreciate the Garn/Wood Gun threads to be mostly on topic. Thanks. Cheers.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 13, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> MC and transportation costs are the gorillas in the room for wood chips. Unmerchantable timber can be chipped at the logging site, which is economical, but then transportation to the user site gets prohibitive, as compared to the delivered cost of other fuels, at somewhere between 40-100 miles, depending on the local economics.
> 
> But what a "waste" to dry the chips using btu's from the combustion process or other energy than letting the sun and wind dry for free. I can only imagine how much worse the economics are when transportation to a drying site, handling, and the transportation to a user site are involved. In my area unmerchantable leftover from logging is either given without additional charge to the logger (built into the logger's bid price for the timber) or at a very small surcharge.
> 
> For residential use especially other issues are storage and freezing. High MC chips could become a hard, frozen mass when needed most.



I'll be the first to say that chip feed systems and boilers that use them are economically viable only on a load of half a million btu's (constant) or higher. When you get past that point you really start tallying serious labor costs with cordwood and need a small army and a system to process/handle basically 1 cord per day of operation. I have a couple people (industrial type use) that are going through 70-100 full cords per year and it is basically a full time job for one person plus additional labor for around the clock firing during the winter. 

When chips are stored in large silos or even piles on the ground, they tend to create their own heat due to low level "spontaneous combustion". This is precisely because of the high moisture content. Those of us in farming communities know what happens when you put wet bales of hay in the hay mow of a barn. Same thing with the wood chips. The local co-gen plant has actually had their outdoor pie of chips catch fire a couple times. 

Interestingly, much of the fuel for both of the local plants 14MW and 30MW IIRC, is processed in the UP of Michigan and trucked all the way down here. In some cases I am sure that the trucks travel as much as 300 miles one way and of course go back empty. Seems pretty expensive at 6mpg for one of those rigs. The company that supplies the 14MW plant has 9 semis on the road every day. Cost of the wood product itself must be very cheap.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 13, 2012)

Jim,

Thanks for posting the information on your "nights out" with these two large output wood boilers. I appreciate it.

Being a Wood Gun owner, I find them interesting. And I would like to ask you a few questions about the boilers at the Deep Portage facility. 

1. How old is the Wood Gun?

2. How often does the ceramic nozzle on the Wood Gun have to be changed? And. Have you changed the nozzle yourself?  How was that for a job?

3. How often do the boiler tubes get cleaned?

4. What is the typical M.C. of the wood being burned in the Wood Gun?

5. What species of wood are being burned through the Wood Gun?

6. How often does the Ash cyclone pan get cleaned out? 

If you could add any things learned about preventative maintenance with the Wood Gun here, that would be greatly appreciated. Any problems experienced, lessons learned, problems solved, etc.

I do not know the Garns. But am curious about them.

1. How old is the Garn?

2. What does the Garn have in it's chamber? Is there a nozzle?

3. How often do the boiler tubes get cleaned in the Garn?

4. What is the typical M.C. of the wood being burned in the Garn?

5. What species of wood are being burned through the Garn?

6. How often are the ashes cleaned out of the Garn? 

7. Is there a system in the Garn to do that similar to the Wood Gun?

And for the Garn owners out there. If you could add any things learned about preventative maintenance with the Garn here, that would be greatly appreciated. Any problems experienced, lessons learned, problems solved, etc.

Oh. What does the facility do with the Ash that comes from burning all that wood? I can not imagine the amount of Ash if they were not Gassification boilers! I can not believe how little Ash I produce compared to the wood stove. And that is a newer model stove with a "baffle" that creates a secondary burn in it.

Again. Thank you Jim. I appreciate the postings you do on these Boilers.


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 13, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> > Warning, we are teetering on the precipice of a dangerously hot topic!
> 
> 
> 
> You're right, and maybe a topic many of us would like to pursue. *BUT PLEASE NOT ON PART 7 OF MY GARN/WOOD GUN THREAD! *   I would appreciate the Garn/Wood Gun threads to be mostly on topic. Thanks. Cheers.





			
				jebatty said:
			
		

> I would support social costing of nearly everything. There is no free ride. The grim reaper waits ....





			
				jebatty said:
			
		

> ... I will disagree on the long term effect of fossil fuel contributed CO2 buildup ...



Whatever you say, after all it _is_ your thread to police, and obviously you know better than any what is on topic and what is not.  Sorry for intruding.

Cheers   --ewd


----------



## jebatty (Feb 13, 2012)

EW -- got me on those. Plea is guilty. As mentioned above, a topic many of us would like to pursue. A thread of its own would be great, if the Mods will let it float.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 13, 2012)

Gasifier -- I will take all of your questions to the man in charge. I know some answers, but I'll let the guy responsible provide the answers. Will be a day or two before I can respond.


----------



## Singed Eyebrows (Feb 13, 2012)

jebatty said:
			
		

> The Garn specs show 700,000 btuH maximum output under specific conditions. The test burns last winter indicated on a *continuous, not maximum, burn basis* sustained output was in the region of 500,000 btuH.
> 
> [added] For my Tarm and based on 5 years of operation I use rule of thumb average output over a burn of 75% of maximum rated output, which for the Tarm is 140,000 x 75% = 105,000 btuH. This seems to also be about right for the Garn: 700,000 x 75% = 525,000 btuH.


Jim, I hope I can ask of Dectra to clarify outputs of its boilers without sidetracking your thread. Frankly I'm shocked that what was a million btu boiler now puts out a continuous 500,000 btu. Mr Lunde? Randy


----------



## jebatty (Feb 14, 2012)

Gasifier, here are answers to your questions. Hope this helps.

General information:

About 85-90 cords are burned each heating season. In seasons 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 the Garn was used more than the Wood Gun because the Garn was so easy to operate and because of operating issues with the Wood Gun. Those issues were finally diagnosed as improper installation of the boiler return water protection valve and lack of storage. This season (2011-2012) the Wood Gun is being operated much more than the Garn. The Garn has been used primarily as a supplement to the Wood Gun and in mild, low heat demand weather. 

With the correction of the valve problem and adding 4000 gal storage, the Wood Gun is about as easy to operate as the Garn, and it quickly delivers 140 to 180F water to the system through the hydraulic separator storage tank. Most of DP's emitters are large air handlers and cabinet style unit heaters which require water in this temp range. The Garn, with its integral 3200 gal of water, takes a fair amount of time to heat to 140+, and this slow response makes it less practical in meeting DP's needs. Also, as experience last winter evidenced, the Wood Gun is well suited to both batch and continuous burns. The Garn with its integral storage is well suited to batch burns. 

1. How old is the Wood Gun?

Purchased and installed in 2009.

2. How often does the ceramic nozzle on the Wood Gun have to be changed? And. Have you changed the nozzle yourself?  How was that for a job?

Then nozzle was changed after two years. Work done by the lead operator at DP. Not overly difficult, but some of the ceramic pieces had to be trimmed to fit.

3. How often do the boiler tubes get cleaned?

The middle tube is cleaned weekly, the two side tubes stay clean, access and cleaning is easy. Purchased and installed in 2009. The bottom ceramic has been changed once.

4. What is the typical M.C. of the wood being burned in the Wood Gun?

Estimate is 20% +/-. Most wood is split, stacked and dried 1+ to 2 summers.

5. What species of wood are being burned through the Wood Gun?

Red oak, birch, maple, ash, some pine and aspen.

6. How often does the Ash cyclone pan get cleaned out?

The E500 has a 55 gal barrel to collect ash; fills up about every 5 weeks.

If you could add any things learned about preventative maintenance with the Wood Gun here, that would be greatly appreciated. Any problems experienced, lessons learned, problems solved, etc.

Since 4000 gal storage was added summer 2011, plumbed as a hydraulic separator, and has been operating this 2011-12 heating season, no problems at all. Prior problems were related to improper installation of the boiler return water protection valve, lack of storage and idling, and extreme puffing.

I do not know the Garns. But am curious about them.

1. How old is the Garn?

Purchased and installed in 2009.

2. What does the Garn have in itâ€™s chamber? Is there a nozzle?

The bottom 1/3 or so of the fire box is lined with fire or ceramic brick, no nozzle, but the fire tube out the back of the fire box is ceramic.

3. How often do the boiler tubes get cleaned in the Garn?

Monthly to seasonally. Two access ports need to be removed, not as easy to clean as the Wood Gun.

4. What is the typical M.C. of the wood being burned in the Garn?

Same

5. What species of wood are being burned through the Garn?

Same

6. How often are the ashes cleaned out of the Garn?

A good ash bed is left in the fire box. A shovel full or two of ash is removed from the fire box after a burn and prior to start of the next burn. Ash volume is about the same as the Wood Gun.

7. Is there a system in the Garn to do that similar to the Wood Gun?

See prior answer.

What does the facility do with the Ash that comes from burning all that wood? 

Ash is spread lightly in open field areas.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 14, 2012)

Thanks Jim. I appreciate it.


----------



## muncybob (Feb 15, 2012)

More questions for you Jim....I assume they have had to replace the fan bearing on the WG? How many cords did it last and was it a fairly easy job? I don't recall the return water temp problem, what was it and how was it addressed?  Thx!


----------



## jebatty (Feb 15, 2012)

I will check on the fan bearing. I believe there were some fan problems, and will find out more. The return water protection problem involved the incorrect installation of a motorized 3-way valve to provide the 160F return water. It was installed incorrectly as a diverter valve and the Tekmar controller also was improperly installed. The effect was to inhibit the WG's ability to deliver its load of hot water, resulting in the WG idling extensively unless very careful attention was given to the wood load, and therefore to cause staff to use the WG as little as possible.


----------



## bpirger (Feb 15, 2012)

FWIW Gasifier, I clean my Garn HX one a year....takes about an hour...couldn't really be any easier.  Remove the "cover plate" from each HX tube and brush it out.  I remove ashes from the firebox with a square point shovel....about once a month.


----------



## brad068 (Feb 15, 2012)

Just a thought,  do any garn owners clean the tubes with the fan running?

 I clean the three before the fan with the fan running, then attach an old sawdust collector fan to the chimney with a fernco and clean the rest.  Works great to keep the fine dust moving outside.


----------



## Gasifier (Feb 16, 2012)

bpirger said:
			
		

> FWIW Gasifier, I clean my Garn HX one a year....takes about an hour...couldn't really be any easier.  Remove the "cover plate" from each HX tube and brush it out.  I remove ashes from the firebox with a square point shovel....about once a month.



That is "worth" a lot bpirger! For the amount of money we put into these heating systems, we need them to be easy. I have a little over $13,000 into my system. That's a lot dough. But, I have used maybe 5 gallons of oil since October 1, 2011 keeping a 4000sq.ft. house, 900sq.ft. attached garage, and our DHW for 6 people warm. I am guessing you probably have that much into your Garn and needed paraphenalia of pumps, piping, fittings, etc. The Garn sounds like a real nice boiler. Big. But nice. I had considered it. But I wanted the detached garage I built for storing my toys, I mean, my equipment that is needed for the required work to get done around the house and the family property. So, boiler and storage need to fit into basement. As far as I am concerned we are all lucky that these nice wood and pellet burning boilers and furnaces are available to us.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 16, 2012)

muncybob said:
			
		

> More questions for you Jim....I assume they have had to replace the fan bearing on the WG? How many cords did it last and was it a fairly easy job?



There have been no bearing problems with the WG fan. When the WG was installed, the contractor dropped the fan motor and bent the shaft. The motor was replaced and no difficulties since.

The Garn supplied motor failed twice, and Garn replaced without charge. Then the motor failed a third time. Garn advised that problems had been experienced with the motor and it furnished a new motor of a different design, this time at DP's expense. That motor was installed at the start of the 2011-12 heating season. So far it is good.


----------



## jebatty (Feb 16, 2012)

The comments on various users' experiences are good. I think it is important not to compare different models of the same boiler and expect valid comparisons, as operations, cleaning, and performance may and likely do vary between models. For example, bpirger cleans his Garn once per year, but he has a 1500. DP has a 3200, and at times DP may burn up to nearly a cord per day. Obviously, cleaning requirements will be different with this intensive use vs bpirger's use and experience with the 1500.


----------



## muncybob (Feb 17, 2012)

Jim, point taken. I did inquire about the fan bearing only because my owners manual states to expect to replace it every 15 cords or so. I wonder if DP's unit is even the same motor/bearing. I'm guessing it's not.  I can't imagine burning a cord/day though...that's a helluva  lot of wood!


----------



## Como (Feb 17, 2012)

Seems an odd way of measuring it, loke servicing your truck depending on how many gallons of fuel you have used.


----------



## bpirger (Feb 17, 2012)

I took it to be clear that the 3200 was seeing A LOT more wood then my 1500.  I burn maybe 1 cord a month,...so there you go.  My point in saying once a year with my 1500, and cleaning out ashes once a month (or less often likely), is to give the reader interested in his own use a range of parameters.  DP is obviously an incredible cool (or hot!) installation and application....but it is also an extreme application...compared to the homeowner.


----------



## muncybob (Feb 17, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> Seems an odd way of measuring it, loke servicing your truck depending on how many gallons of fuel you have used.



Not sure how else they could state it except to say it's an expected periodic maintenance item. I'm hoping to make it through our 4th season(next year), we should be well above 15 by then. Also hoping it's an easy job!


----------



## TCaldwell (Feb 17, 2012)

I too burn about a cord a month, however i clean the flue tubes with a wire wheel and drill extensions  every 6 weeks, It takes a very thin layer of flyash to insulate the fluetubes. There is 30degf +/- drop, well worth the 20 minutes of cleaning.


----------

