# Help deciding on Gassifier wood boiler



## Den69RS96 (Nov 15, 2011)

I recently joined the site, but I've been reading the forum for a while.  With oil prices getting out of control I'm looking to heat with wood.  My wife is strictly against adding a wood or pellet stove inside the house, so I need something outdoors.  My home was built in 2005, its a 2025 sq ft colonial.  We have hydro air (2 zones) and a very efficient oil furnance around 87% and  and my wife likes to keep the heat low for some reason, so we use approximately 800-850 gallons of oil a year. With our second baby here, I expect the oil usage to go up to 850-900 gallons of oil year.  When we built our house, oil was around $2.00 a gallon so it wasn't that big of deal.  Well this year we locked in at $3.99 a gallon.  I don't see it getting any cheaper, only more expensive so this is why I'm considering a OWB.  At the current trend, I'll be paying $5 dollars a gallon in 3 years which is crazy. 

I live in a very wooded area so alot of the wood I could get would be free, however initially I would probably buy the wood until I get set up (wood shed and splitter).   Right now whatever I cut up, I give away.  I do plan to use my oil furnance to heat the water in the warmer months, so I would basically heat my house and water from Nov through April with the wood boiler.  I figure 5-6 cords of seasoned wood per year would be a good estimate.

In MA, the current owb are legal for sale:

Central boiler E classic 1400,2300,2400,3200
Garn 1500 (indoor boiler certified for outdoors)
Portage and Main Optimizier 250
Heatmore 2000 SSR II
Emprye Pro 200 and 400
Wood doctor HE8000

I don't have room for the Garn in my basement and I don't want to build another shed for the boiler so I pretty much eliminated that one.  I'm leaning towards the Eclassic 1400.  The dealer told me that I may need to step up to the 2400 if I decide to heat my 24x24 garage which i plan to insulate in the near future.    The Portage and main boiler and Emprye pro 200 are also both boilers I'm considering as well, but I have no idea how much they cost.  I really don't know to much about the wood doctor or heatmore boilers.    Any thoughts would be appreciated.


----------



## rkusek (Nov 15, 2011)

You might be paying $5 a gallon much sooner than 3 years.  Be real careful about going the OWB route.  I was leaning toward a Central Boiler Classic before I found this site.  The E-Classic seems to have many problems the manufacturer doesn't want to deal with and is leaving the dealers high and dry with warranty claims as noted by one of the pros here.  Not saying it could not work but you are probably looking at 10 grand for this boiler,  and they appear to do their R & D after the produce and sell the product from my observation.  I worked for a company like that once.  Once they moved on to the next thing, they left everybody high & dry unless they got sued.  The dealers took the brunt of it with many customers going to more reliable brands.  Read up on all you can before you make your choice.


----------



## muncybob (Nov 15, 2011)

You have to build a shed? If so, have you considered build it big enough to store an indoor boiler? A "fireproof" addition that is well insulated may be more efficient than something standing out in the elements?

My wife was against an indoor unit too....too messy, what about bugs, smoke in the house, etc etc.  I finally convinced her to give it a try and if after the 1st year she was unhappy(which would make all of us unhappy!) then I would do something outdoors.   
2+ years later and she loves it. I keep the area very clean(sweep up after most loadings). It seems I hardly ever have to bring wood indoors as she seems to enjoy that task. Now that w are past the learning curve there is almost no smoke leakage in the basement and we benefit from the boilers heat loss up into the living area. We also were using 800-850 gallons of oil a year and now we burn around 3 1/2 to 4 cords per year.

If you are fairly certain you'll be burning wood soon you might want to stop giving it away and let it season.


----------



## Den69RS96 (Nov 15, 2011)

I finished off half of my basement, so room in my basement is at a premium.  The remaining half of the basement contains the furnance and oil tank.  About 1/4 of the unfinished side is used for storage and the rest is my workshop.   I'm not to keen on keeping a wood burning furnance within 25ft of my 275 gallon oil tank so I would definitely prefer the unit outside.  I suppose I could build a little shed around an indoor unit after i check with my insurance co.  Are indoor units that much cheaper than an outdoor gassifier?


----------



## muncybob (Nov 15, 2011)

I'm not sure on the pricing, but if I had to go outdoors in bad weather I would like to have some shelter while loading up the boiler. At the very least to have an extended roof over you on those rainy days.  If I were to build a shed I would try to have enough room for several days worth of wood in it. Don't forget a hook on the back of the door to hang your coat, it'll be warm in there!

I understand your concern about the boiler and the oil tank, I have 2 oil tanks within 15' of my boiler. Was concerned at first but now that I see how safe the unit is I'm no longer bothered...but I should take 1 tank out as I'll hopefully never use it again!


----------



## maple1 (Nov 15, 2011)

For me, the easier basement install coupled with being able to maintain the fire all winter in a robe & slippers (if I wanted to) trumped the very much added cost & work of an outdoor install. There are some catches though, of course, like needing two flues, and room for wood. Distance to oil tank is a non-issue (as long as there isn't an oil leak that hot coals can land on), I think mine is around 12ft from my current firebox. There is likely a code or insurance spacing requirement though. If it has to be outside, I would definitely get it and the wood in a shed or building of some kind. But then there is storage to consider too, which you may be able to better avoid or live without with a OWB - likely not a clear cut answer here, a lot is situation dependant.


----------



## flyingcow (Nov 15, 2011)

I think an indoor boiler(gasser) is what $4500 to $7000. Depends on brand. Or get a Froling' for what $13,000? High end stuff there.

An E-Classic is pushing $12,000ish? Figure for every 100 gals of oil, you'll burn 1 cord of seasoned wood in the E-Classic.

A gasser with well seasoned wood....A cord of wood equals 150 gals, sometimes 175 gals of oil. I was burning 1000 gals of oil a year round. replaced it with 6.5 cords of wood. Pushing 7.5 because we keep the house a lot warmer.

The installation costs are lower( I think) with the OWB. basically just Tee into system. 

My boiler is next door in my garage, I mean wood storage facility. For me, works well out there. I have my storage in my basement. And i'm really spoiled, as my wood is stacked on pallets right off of the splitter. Got a tractor to FEL the wood into the building.


----------



## ISeeDeadBTUs (Nov 15, 2011)

Others here, especially the pros, will correct me where I'm wrong, but I think hydro-air will require hotter water temps than radient. This may impact the usefulness of storage.

Sounds like you are dead set on doing the fire outside. I will concur with everyone else that you will want whatever unit you go with to be out of the weather will a MINIMUM of a week's worth of wood.

Since you don't sound like you have recent experience burning wood, I think you will want to minimize the possibilities for problems. The pregnant bride will NOT be happy if this doesn't go smoothly!! :grrr: 

My recomendation is to make a spreadsheet of all the possible boilers, classified by type, strength and weakness. Someone around here used to have a database of all the users on the forumn showing which unit they run.

There are many more designs/adaptations available today then just say a couple of years ago. Sometimes, as you know, a new design needs to work the bugs out. But at the same time, all designs were new at some point.

Become a sponge and read everything you can around here. It's prolly the closest you'll ever get to a pyrolitic engineering degree!


----------



## Duetech (Nov 16, 2011)

Building a shelter around the boiler is ideal but not always in the immediate future especially with another young one on the way. Just basic raising of children calls for pay for the unexpected up front. Now for my point. In my experience with a gasifier stored in an unheated building you will find that the wood needs to be heated. Most OWB's will take whatever you throw into them Gassers have to have dried wood. Cold dried wood is a moisture condensator and will chill the gasser dramatically. Having the wood in a heated (by the gasser) shed will reduce thermal shock to the gasser. At -10*f a gasser will heat the air which is laden with moisture and that moisture will then condense on the -10 wood. There is little means for the moisture to leave the combustion chamber and the condensed moisture that does evaporate can again re-condense on the cold/cooler wood. Two hours of pampering a tempermental gasser situation at 2 a.m. and a frustrated wife with a tempermenatl baby is not a sitution that you want this unit to get you in to. Save your firewood and read the postings in this forum HARD. Of the units you have listed the Portage and Main and Empyer garner most of my attention with Portage leading the way. The reason I say that is the Portage seems to be over loaded with heat exchanger tubes but it is because of the extra tubes you can probably burn a little less than optimum wood (that is... cold and not moisture content) and get a speedy recovery. Portage has a 350 out now too but I have trouble with the 250 msrp and know I would choke on the 350. If you want to build a fire proof heated wood /boiler shed look into Roxul insulation.


----------



## Gasifier (Nov 16, 2011)

Hey. Welcome to Hearth.com, and the boiler room. You said you plan on insulating the 24x24 garage. Do you have any room in the garage to put the boiler in there? Is it attached to your house? The reason I ask is if you plan on insulating the garage, which means you will probably heat it, even if you only heat it to 40 or 50 degrees, the heat radiating of the boiler could heat it for you. Insurance company wise, you would probably have to have a seperate room walled off, in the back of the garage maybe, and built to code. You would have to look into that building code. But, you would not have to build a seperate building, your garage would be heated by your boiler's heat. My boiler is in my basement, but you said that is not good for you. I heat my garage, my house, and my domestic hot water (DHW) with my boiler. I like the fact that the heat coming off of my boiler is heating something that I want heated. But the garage install would all depend if you wanted to lose that space in the garage or not. Something else for you to consider. Have a good one.


----------



## Den69RS96 (Nov 16, 2011)

Thanks for the suggestions.  Unfortnately the list of boilers in my original post are the only ones that are legal for sale in MA since 2008.  As appealing as it is to have one downstairs, it just isn't an option.  Same for the garage.  My garage is attached to the house.  I just finished restoring my 69 camaro and my wife parks on the otherside.  Between all my tools, both cars, and my tractor my garage is pretty much full. 

I didn't consider keeping the wood warm with an owb only dry and seasoned for at least a year.  Thanks for the tip. 

I've been reading and doing searches for a while now, however, I learn something new all the time.  I really don't have a lot of wood burning experience and I realize there will be a learning curve so I'm preping myself now.  Right now I'm still in the research phase.  10-12K is a lot of coin to put down on a secondary furnance when I have a pretty efficient oil burner, but its something I'm will to do within the coming years.  We have a propane fireplace and we already pay over $5 for that.  They say the price is determined by useage which i think is complete bs.  I believe the oil companies around here and starting to hike prices because they can.  I don't enjoy having someone just reach into my wallet and take out whatever they feel they want.   I'm not one to shy away from something unknown.  I look forward to heating with wood and saving alot of $$$ always puts a smile on my face.


----------



## Gasifier (Nov 16, 2011)

One thing I did notice about your list is that several of them seem to have a lot of BTU output for your application. With a pretty new house(2005) I bet your insulation is fairly good. Include your garage and you are at 2601 sq. ft. Do you think that some of them may be to big for your situation? I just took a quick look at them and started wondering about it. Several of them just seem like a lot of BTUs for your situation. I know those are max. output ratings.  Just thinking out loud.

Central boiler E classic 1400 (209,000btus), 2400 (250,000BTU), 3200 (306,000BTU)

Garn 1500 (indoor boiler certified for outdoors)  (250,000 BTU)

Portage and Main Optimizier 250      up to 300,000BTUs (up to 5000sq.ft.)

Heatmore 2000 SSR II    didn't see BTU output rating     (up to 5000 sq. ft.)

Emprye Pro 200 and 400   230,000BTU and 330,000BTU   (2000-4000 sq. ft.)

Wood doctor HE8000         up to 250,000BTUs (up to 8000sq.ft., in warmer winter climates?)


----------



## willworkforwood (Nov 16, 2011)

Den69RS96 said:
			
		

> ..... I really don't have a lot of wood burning experience and I realize there will be a learning curve so I'm preping myself now. ..... I look forward to heating with wood and saving alot of $$$ always puts a smile on my face.


It sounds like you might be thinking about next year, which would be fine because it's good not to rush this decision.  By doing further research, and waiting until next year to purchase, you would give yourself the opportunity to accomplish 2 important things. First, assuming that everything works out, you can acquire a full year's supply of (reasonably) seasoned wood, if you start on it now. Second, and even more important, you will find out if you really want to move ahead with this. You mention buying a splitter, but you can get to work using whatever maul or axe you currently have. Or, maybe get a big pile of rounds and rent/borrow a splitter to see how that goes. The important thing is that you need to find out if you really can commit your time to this year after year. The folks who post on this forum are "all in" on wood burning. Getting a good supply of seasoned wood becomes a high-priority activity. And you will have to process "free" wood in order to save alot of $$$, as you said above.  But it also needs to fit in with everything else we do, and not cause major sacrifices, especially family activities.  If you start doing this, and notice that you start to resent the amount of time it's taking, or just simply can't find the time, then perhaps you might need to reconsider your plan. This actually happened to someone I work with. He had intended to add a wood furnace, and started to process firewood.  But he quickly found the time commitment to be just to much - family time just didn't have any wiggle room, and he (correctly) abandoned the furnace idea.  Hopefully this works out for you, but if not, you can find out without spending anything other than your time!


----------



## Den69RS96 (Nov 16, 2011)

Guys thanks for the advice.  

I'm definitely not rushing into this thats for sure.  All my neighbors heat with wood and I have a few friends and family members that do as well.  I know a good amount of my time is going to be spent bucking/splitting/stacking, probably more time than I think.   Some years I might have to buy most of my firewood as my kids are more involved in afterschool activities.  Bottom line they come first.  If that means buying some of the wood, then thats the route I'll go.  I'm kind of leaving that open right now and thats something I'll figure out as I go.  I most likely will also buy a few cords already split as well.   Even if I buy 5-6 cords of wood a year, I'll still save almost $1500-$2000 grand in oil at current prices once the OWB is paid off.  I'm sure in the future the savings will increase.

Gasifier,

I was just listing all of the available OWB legal for sale in MA.   Most of those are way to much for my needs.  

I went to various sites and plugged in my oil useage etc and all of them said I should be fine with their smallest units.


----------



## flyingcow (Nov 16, 2011)

FWIW- My wood is stored in an unheated garage. No problems with burning. Biggest thing is it should be kept dry out of the elements. I season my wood outside at least a year(uncovered), Than stack the pallets in garage before snowfall.


----------



## Duetech (Nov 17, 2011)

Storing wood outside and moving it inside to burn is alot different than having the gasifier outside and storing the wood outside too. The unit I have is an EKO40 and the wood was 3 years old split and stored inside for two. So I guess the type of boiler could easily make a difference.
As far as splitters you might want to look at the newer rack and pinion gear models like Super Slpitter.  Hydraulics have been the norm when muscle power was too tedious. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V95e-sMQTL8&feature=pyv&ad=5975540770&kw=wood splitters looks like it will save some time.


----------



## Northernliving (Jan 29, 2012)

flyingcow said:
			
		

> I think an indoor boiler(gasser) is what $4500 to $7000. Depends on brand. Or get a Froling' for what $13,000? High end stuff there.
> 
> An E-Classic is pushing $12,000ish? Figure for every 100 gals of oil, you'll burn 1 cord of seasoned wood in the E-Classic.
> 
> ...



The indoor dual fuel gassers that I've looked at from Tarm and Wood Gun at $13-$15k delivered.


----------



## EffectaBoilerUser (USA) (Jan 29, 2012)

I would really think twice about having the gasifier in a remote boiler room if at all possible. 

I have an effecta lambda 35 boiler and 1,000 gallons of storage in an insulated lean-to that I added to the rear of my garage. By having it in the same "room" as my garage I am able to keep my 24 x 40 insulated garage at 55-65F depending on the outside air temps (when its below zero outside my garage is at 55 and when its 20-30F outside my garage is at 65F). Keep in mind that this is done without any type of heating devices in my garage (my well insulatged garage is kept warm using the heat from the boiler/chimney during a 5 hour burn and the heat that leaks through the insulatged water storage tanks). In addition, I did not have to use any expensive underground, insulated tubing.

I know of another person who has an effecta lambda 35 boiler with 1,000 gallons of storage in his basement and is heating a 5,000 sq. ft. house.

Prior to my effecta lambda 35 boiler I had an EKO 40 and I would never recommend that anyone put one of these in your house. These boilers leak smoke around the upper door gasket (and a very sticky smoke at that). In addition, when the door is opened the smoke also escapes out of the primary chamber.

With my effecta lambda 35 having a negative draft system (fan at the rear of the boiler) and a special smoke evacuation port directly above the upper, primary chamber door the smoke that escapes out the door is very, very little.

Hope this helps you in your decission making process.

Brian


----------



## stee6043 (Jan 29, 2012)

Effecta Boiler User said:
			
		

> I would really think twice about having the gasifier in a remote boiler room if at all possible.
> 
> 
> Prior to my effecta lambda 35 boiler I had an EKO 40 and I would never recommend that anyone put one of these in your house. These boilers leak smoke around the upper door gasket (and a very sticky smoke at that). In addition, when the door is opened the smoke also escapes out of the primary chamber.
> ...



I would never recommend anyone put a boiler outside their house.  To each his own I guess?  

It must be magic that allows _my_ EKO 40 to operate smoke free in my basement.  I never knew I had such a rare EKO!


----------



## mikefrommaine (Jan 29, 2012)

stee6043 said:
			
		

> Effecta Boiler User said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's interesting that effecta boiler 'user' always manages to say something negative about other boilers in most of his posts. Makes you wonder if he is actually an effecta boiler 'salesman'?


----------



## stee6043 (Jan 29, 2012)

mikefrommaine said:
			
		

> stee6043 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So I'm not the only one that noticed this trend?  I was guessing he gets paid by the number of times he types "effecta lambda 35".


----------



## EffectaBoilerUser (USA) (Jan 29, 2012)

Yes, I 100% agree that the boiler should NOT be placed outside. By being outside you loose all the radiant heat coming off the boiler and chimney to ambient. In addition, you are required to bundle up before going out in sub zero weather to fill the boiler with wood.

This is why I built a lean-to off the back of my garage and placed the boiler and storage in this room.

Regarding the smoke issue, I operated my EKO for 3 years before selling it and purchasing my effecta lambda 35 boiler. Thus, I am speaking from experience when I mentioned the smoke issues I had with my EKO. On many occasions the smoke in my 28 x 40 garage got pretty bad and really stunk.

When I first purchased my EKO from Cozy Heat and was having problems with it, someone recommended this website and thus after hours of blogging and posting I quickly learned that the smoking issue was common for the EKO. There were many posting s regarding the smoke issue and the updated silicon gasket on the EKO boilers. If you go to the "fine tuning your EKO" thread you will see many discussions about this common problem.

A few years back they came up with a silicon dipped, fiberglass rope seal to help reduce this problem.

I purchased one of these seals and it reduced the smoke issue. However, if the top, primary door of the EKO was opened during the middle of a burn the smoke would still roll out of the front of the boiler. After 3 years of operating my EKO boiler I will agree that it did keep my house, hot water and hot tub warm. However, it took a lot of my time and great attention to detail when making fires and when/when not to open the upper, primary chamber door.

I now have almost 2,000 hours of operation on my effecta lambda 35 boiler (this boiler keeps track of, and displays, the total operating time of the boiler in addition to the amount of time since the last cleaning occurred-when I clean the boiler I answer "yes" when the control panel asks if the boiler was cleaned) and I have never touched the door gaskets on it and it does not smoke. 

In addition, it requires a maximum of 5 minutes/day of my time.


Hope this helps clear up any confusion from my previous post.

Brian


----------



## Noggah (Jan 29, 2012)

Hey Den, 

Welcome. I have to greatly disagree with huskers about the e classic. That may have been accurate about previous models. I really don't know, but I am truly happy with my 2400. It is very clean. Very little maintenance and does the job very nicely. I get 12-14 hour burns when it stays in the teens and 24 hour burns when it is mid 20s or higher. I have not attempted to use the warranty, but have read others accounts where they had no problem. You will certainly want a structure of some sort to store your wood in that is close to or attached to the boiler. I have not noticed any problem with the wood being stored outside at ambient temp. This is my first year with my classic and just used a 10x20 framed tarp, which is working so far. I will be building a pole barn this year that will hold two years worth of wood. I just came in from cutting some timber that will be milled into the frame. I do have 13k in my boiler, but with free wood expect a 3-4 year payback. it is quite a commitment, but at least the fuel company does not have me by the short hairs. Keep reading and make an informed decision that will work for your situation.


----------



## Como (Jan 29, 2012)

I think it was the 2300 that had the problems, but the one I know has had none.

Remember long burn times = partial combustion with the loss of inefficiency and other issues that entails.


----------



## Noggah (Jan 29, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> I think it was the 2300 that had the problems, but the one I know has had none.
> 
> Remember long burn times = partial combustion with the loss of inefficiency and other issues that entails.




The stove buttons itself up pretty tight when idle, between burns. I am using very dry hard wood and have not had any problems with creosote. I am only filling it half to two-thirds. If if does not need wood in the morning I don't put any in. I personally don't believe that my long burn times are showing a loss of efficiency. When the coals get small enough to fall into the secondary gasification chamber they are burned to ash, which is very thorough combustion. The only maintenance that is usually need is to check the air inputs (cleaned them out once this season, but scrape them daily with wood hoe for good measure) and remove ash once every two or three weeks.  I think this stove is very well built. The controls are impressive and far beyond what I had expected. Set point, differntial and a timer that adds air to the firebox at your set interval and duration to keep the fire from going out if the stove idles too long. Digital read outs for the water temp, which you set and gasification air temp. I have seen this get as high as 1200 df. Just observations I have made while operating this season so far.

Sorry, I'm a little passionate about my stove.


----------



## EffectaBoilerUser (USA) (Jan 29, 2012)

When you mention the 1200F temperature can you clarify exactly what you are measuring at this temp.

Thanks,

Brian


----------



## goosegunner (Jan 29, 2012)

mikefrommaine said:
			
		

> stee6043 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You do know that he is in fact a Effecta boiler Dealer right?

I'm not saying that they aren't good boilers but his user name should probably read "Effecta Boiler Dealer"

gg


----------



## Noggah (Jan 29, 2012)

The 1200 df is measured with a thermocouple in the gasifcation chamber where the secondary burn is completed,


----------



## StihlHead (Jan 29, 2012)

stee6043 said:
			
		

> I would never recommend anyone put a boiler outside their house.  To each his own I guess?
> 
> It must be magic that allows _my_ EKO 40 to operate smoke free in my basement.  I never knew I had such a rare EKO!



Let me ask you this: have you ever lived in a house with an OWB? I have never seen a wood burning appliance that is completely smoke free... ever. Of course, here in the wild west we do not have many houses with basements. Far more typical here to just have a crawl space. From my experience with both indoor and outdoor wood burning appliances, I would HIGHLY recomment that people consider putting the boiler outside. Main reasons: no smoke inside, it all stays outside (wood, bugs, debris, dust), FAR lower fire hazard, room saved, etc. You can place them so they are not far from the house and you are not exposed to extremes. I mean, I have to go out there anyway and get wood off my piles to feed the indoor wood stove here; same effort to feed a boiler outside and loss wood hauling. Some loss of radiant heat outside, yes, but the advantages far outweight the disadvantages in my view. I actually got to like going out to feed the boiler, outside. Had to take the dogs out anyway... 

As for planning, it is highly dependant on the space being heated, the existing floorplan and heating system, and the local, regional and state laws. I would recommend any Central Boiler, having owned and installed a classic model myself, and living with the great results. Open unpressurized boiler systems with hydronic floor heating are the way to go. The people at CB were extremely helpful with sizing my hydronic Hx (I mean, it was perfect), they were very good on the phone with design help and spoke American English, and they made more than good on the warantee (damper door replaced for factory defect, controller replaced, free anti-corrosion given to use because of boil-over due to defective damper). The units are bullet proof with high quality steel, and they will last 20 years or more, easilly. They have also been around, which in the OWB world is a rare thing. Many OWB companies have come and gone, and many are (or were) fly-by-night operations. 

I also heard about how 'bad' CB quality was on 'earlier models' and how much they smoked, how the insulation caused them to rust, and the general evils of OWBs, etc. etc. All disinformation and simply not true. The CB unit that I installed is still firing at my ex's place for 6 years now. The CB rust inhibitor is good stuff and works. The OWB smoke is little; I posted photos of it on another thread here. Firebox rust was non-existant to the extent that I stopped cleaning the firebox before shutting it down in summer months. I just put a plastic bucket on the stack and left the ashes until fall when I refired it. Creosote does not cause rust, if anything it inhibits it. The only problem is if the creosote is wet or traps water under it against the steel. Similar problem if the ash traps water. I rough scraped the sides and ash pan with a garden hoe as we burned, gave the unit a good hot fire to cook out the water before shutting it down for the season, and that was it. Shut her down, fire her back up. Yes, the older classic CB models do eat wood. That was not really an issue for us there though, as she has 100+ acres of huge trees (grand for, doug fir, black and white oak, chinkapin, hemlock, madrone, etc.). All the free wood that we needed. We burned far more wood in slash piles every year than in the boiler (in Oregon you are responsible for burning slash and are liable if you do not). We burned about 10 cords a year there, 2200 sq ft heating and DHW, lots of windows and skylights, toasty warm all the time. 

I would love to put in a CB gasifier OWB here, but I am not likely to be here much longer. So I will put in a cheap heat pump and an EPA wood stove, and leave them here.


----------



## StihlHead (Jan 29, 2012)

How do you delete an errant post here?


----------



## Northernliving (Jan 30, 2012)

Thanks guys for all the info.  I'm looking at inside and outside at this point.  I have a nice Woodstock that I'm heating with now in my family room with a very open floor plan. It does a great job; love the ambiance of the fire and warmth but can't do it all in a 3600 sq ft home and it doesn't have DHW.   I get zero smoke inside with it.  None - zip. The mess is definitely there though with bringing all the wood inside.  That's why I find the outside boiler so appealing.  Mess is outside and I don't have to haul 8 cord of wood into my basement (it is a walkout, though).   My garage is part of my house, so I can't put the boil there, and my hobby barn is several years away.  

So, I'm looking at the Tarm and Wood gun as inside options, and was interested in the Porter and Main and the Heatmor as outside options.  I was thinking that the CB E-Classic was problematic based on other reading, so thanks for the endorsement there (Nice to hear from a fellow Mainer, too - have property in Bethel and on Moosehead Lake)

The advantage of inside is that you capture the boiler heat loss and you don't have to go outside to load it, but you do have to lug all the wood INSIDE from outside and the mess is OUTSIDE.  I'm leaning to the OWB, but haven't completely made up my mind.  Wanted to keep the project under $10k, but it's looking more like $12-13k at this point.

North


----------



## Como (Jan 30, 2012)

A couple of other options:

Pellet Boiler
Wood Chip Boiler

The former is nearly as hassle free as a fossil fuel boiler.

If you get really cold the chips need conditioned storage or regular processing to avoid freezing into a lump.


----------



## Noggah (Jan 30, 2012)

Hey North,

It is kind of comforting to see how many Mainers are here and it is great to be surrounded by people of like minds. I hope your search for the right stove is successful. I planned for three years before buying mine. It is worth the time and money investment in the end.


----------



## bpirger (Jan 30, 2012)

Without a doubt there is loss in the underground piping, the boiler outside in a shed or a free standing, etc.  But this can be minmized with proper installation and purchasing of proper materials.  See the sticky on the undergound lines.  Pay careful attention to what you bury in the ground.

I have a Garn outside in a shed.   Garn is insulated, shed is not yet.  I know I have some loss out there, and no doubt in the ground, but it is great not having the mess inside.  Also, we do have to go out once a day and start a fire.  It's 80' away....no big deal in any weather.

Used to (and still have) the Lopi Liberty inside, a great wood stove.  We do burn more wood in the GArn, also heating all the DHW, and without a doubt, have some extra loss.  System is not yet "ideal".

I would have LOVED to put the Garn in the garage....but it would take a a fair amount of room, and more importantly to me, I didn't like the idea of a raging roaring fire in the garage in the event of a flammable material presence.   From time to time there's a gas splill or similar in the garage....it'd scare the crap out of me.  Having had a housefire in my youth, killing my little brother, I don't need to have the concern.   Insurance companies often are unhappy, requiring the unit to be in a walled off unit with no entrance from the garage.

Everyone is differnt, everyone will tell you what works for them.  You have to decide of course what works for you.

Every now and then I wish I could go and stand in front of the blazing Liberty for that deep, full body roasting.....but since I had the Garn online in NOV11, we haven't had a single fire in the Lopi.  Now I just lay on the 80 degree floor if I need too.    But it isn't the same.


----------



## stee6043 (Jan 30, 2012)

StihlHead said:
			
		

> stee6043 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



  Hey, Stihl, I was trying to be "overly dramatic" with my statement regarding having a boiler outside.  That was the intended tone of my entire post.  I'm not an OWB basher.  In fact, I don't really care what anyone does with their boiler.  Hence my "to each his own" comment.  I was just shooting back at Effecta for the fun of it.  I enjoy having my boiler inside for a lot of reasons.  But certainly there are plenty of reasons others may chose otherwise...


----------



## heaterman (Jan 30, 2012)

Personally I would not recommend any of the outdoor gassers at this point. There is some serious junk coming down the tracks. It appears EPA is evaluating their test protocol and finding that the claimed outputs and efficiencies are totally off base in regards to the PhaseII certifications these units received.


----------



## goosegunner (Jan 30, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> Personally I would not recommend any of the outdoor gassers at this point. There is some serious junk coming down the tracks. It appears EPA is evaluating their test protocol and finding that the claimed outputs and efficiencies are totally off base in regards to the PhaseII certifications these units received.



I have heard similar that the OWB gasifier manufacturers are not happy about the up coming change is testing procedure.

How do you think the current  indoor technology will do with the new tests?


gg


----------



## Como (Jan 31, 2012)

You can find more accurate information for Boilers sold in other countries.

Generally OWBs are specific to the US.


----------



## heaterman (Jan 31, 2012)

goosegunner said:
			
		

> heaterman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The indoor gassers will do OK. Some better than others but from what I have seen, the Euro style wood burners do pretty decent when connected to reasonable storage. 

The OWB's that supposedly meet PhaseII are another story and I offer the following for anyone considering one of these units that are claimed to comply. 

EPA is well aware of the fact that the initial PhaseII testing was way off base and they went to Brook Haven National Labs and NYSERDA for "backup testing" and review of the results published by the OWB manufacturers. The lengthy and very detailed report came back with positively scathing results. .........let's just say there is a very good reason one of the biggest OWB dealers near me recently sold his business.

  Read the following paragraphs directly quoted from the "conclusion" pages of the final report and draw your own, but it pretty much flatly states that none of the results are accurate, emissions are higher than claimed, efficiencies were drastically overstated and in many cases physically impossible.   


*"The technical review of the test results for the 23 White Tag qualified hydronic heater units presented here found
more than 90 percent of the existing tests had questionable results for efficiency and/or particulate emissions rates or
were missing data necessary for their determination. Additionally, of the units reviewed, a significant number were
not conducted within the precision required under the method and some testing was conducted outside of the
prescribed heat-load categories."*

Then it went on to say..........

*"There are significant concerns about the efficiency measurement method and results of the M28 OWHH tests. For
many of the units tested, the accuracy of the energy output value derived from water temperature and flow rate
measurements on the supply side of the heat exchanger is poor, and the reported efficiency levels are considerably
higher than those based on stack loss measurements. Where this occurred, the efficiency results are either very
inflated or simply not thermodynamically possible."*

Regardless of the level of inaccuracy in the test, I would, at this juncture recommend that no one purchase any OWB for the simple reason that there will be very few, if any, that can actually hit the standard and will subsequently not be able to survive business wise. You may be left with a unit which has no warranty coverage and no factory backing as the factory has disappeared and the company folded up. This is happening already.........HeatSource for example got out while the getting was good. Many more will follow. The basic premise of operation for an OWB does not lend itself to high efficiency or clean burning.
 I fully realize that is a pretty broad statement and I may make some enemies over it but I feel that people who are considering an OWB need to know the facts. You simply cannot "idle" a load of 200-300 pounds of wood and expect clean burning characteristics and high efficiency presently claimed. The physics simply are not there to support what these manufacturers are claiming. It's not like they can reinvent fire itself.


----------



## Como (Jan 31, 2012)

Excuse my french, bit it does fall into the bleedingly obvious category.

I think there will always be a rump market, but for how many players?


----------



## Northernliving (Jan 31, 2012)

bpirger said:
			
		

> Without a doubt there is loss in the underground piping, the boiler outside in a shed or a free standing, etc.  But this can be minmized with proper installation and purchasing of proper materials.  See the sticky on the undergound lines.  Pay careful attention to what you bury in the ground.
> 
> I have a Garn outside in a shed.   Garn is insulated, shed is not yet.  I know I have some loss out there, and no doubt in the ground, but it is great not having the mess inside.  Also, we do have to go out once a day and start a fire.  It's 80' away....no big deal in any weather.
> 
> ...



bpirger,  I have a couple of questions on your garn.  What size shed is it in?  Are you using additional storage or just what is in the garn?  Does you system use antifreeze?


----------



## Den69RS96 (Jan 31, 2012)

Heaterman,  thanks for the info.  I definitely keep that in mind when if I decide to go the OWB route.  I constantly check my state to see if any regs have been passed.  I'll be checking much more often now.


----------



## skfire (Jan 31, 2012)

http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/en/Public...les/Publications/Research/Environmental/10-19 staged combustion biomass boilers acc.ashx

http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/en/Public...t/~/media/Files/Publications/Research/Biomass Solar Wind/10-01_european-wood-heating-technology.ashx


good reading(and I am not endorsing one way or another) and an insight to where they are heading with the current ongoing report, as Heaterman said.
I have heard they are using certain boilers as benchmarks and I do not know how favorable or "fair" the process is, but it sure will create an upheaval.

Scott


----------



## Como (Feb 1, 2012)

There is no need to reinvent the process, there are already standards used elsewhere, they just need to be adopted.


----------



## bpirger (Feb 1, 2012)

North:

My Garn is in a 24x16 shed (or is it 24x12...argh, I can't remember...and I'm not at home!)  I only have the 1500 gallons (a little less I believe in actual volume, maybe 1400) within the Garn.  I have no antifreeze, just water.  If I lost power or similar, I think it would take a LONG time for the Garn itself to freeze...like a month or more.  But, the piping could freeze quicker...so hopefully power will never be lost for that long.  One of these days I hope to get a good generator, just in case of the horrendous storm scenario....

Actually, in the house now (i.e. other side of the plate HX), I do have antifreeze...but when I hook up the addition this Spring/summer, I will flush what is in there and fill with just water.  Again, presumably power won't go out "forever", I won't get hospitalized "forever", etc.  Where "forever" means time for everything to freeze up.  

I'll measure the width of the shed.  Heck, I should get some pictures of the whole thing too....  EDIT:  24x16.  I can store about 1.3 cords along one of the 24' walls of the building....a month plus for me.  One a month, spending an hour bringing wood from the woodshed into the Garn barn.  I also have an 8' wide overhead door.  Higly recommend something like this for easy wood entry.


----------



## martyinmi (Feb 2, 2012)

heaterman,
   Lets all live under the presupposition that the Garn is more efficient than any gasifying OWB ever built. If they are all tested tested side by side against the Garn, the Garn will be ???(fill in percentage) higher than all others.   Thanks


----------



## heaterman (Feb 2, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> heaterman,
> Lets all live under the presupposition that the Garn is more efficient than any gasifying OWB ever built. If they are all tested tested side by side against the Garn, the Garn will be ???(fill in percentage) higher than all others.   Thanks



Sorry to ruffle your feathers. It is certainly not my intent. 

I use Garn as a yardstick not so much because it is the most efficient thing on earth but rather because the unit itself and the test numbers they pronounce are based on sound engineering. Martin Lunde would not/did not test to the EPA standard because he knew it was hokey in the first place. I respect him for making a stand and daring to raise a little stink about it.
More in the industry should do the same.

This is of course just my own personal opinion and anyone here is certainly free to call it junk and disagree.


----------



## barkeatr (Feb 2, 2012)

i know the efficiency of my profab 200 gasser. by golly,  its 100%.    my formula?, divide tons of heat by not much wood x reasonable investment cost to the third power and invert that with happy wife dog and teenage daughter =100% happy camper.    Its quite simple really.


----------



## goosegunner (Feb 2, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> heaterman,
> Lets all live under the presupposition that the Garn is more efficient than any gasifying OWB ever built. If they are all tested tested side by side against the Garn, the Garn will be ???(fill in percentage) higher than all others.   Thanks



Sounds like we may know soon as they are going to redo the tests.  Some of the OWB manufacturers reported numbers from their chosen  testing facility that are not therodynamically possible. They continue to advertise those numbers as a sales pitch.

After observing my system run with storage I can tell you that it runs 4-6 hours a day and smoke is virtually non exsistant, clear stack.  It would be pretty hard to smolder wood on and off all day and be as smoke free and efficient as batch burning. The Garn also has the advantage of heat loss being absorbed into the massive water jacket.


gg


----------



## Como (Feb 2, 2012)

A Gassifying OWB is a bit of a contradiction.

I guess it means an OWB that can operate in both normal OWB mode and more efficiently.

So you would have to either specify the mode or take an average?

A friend of mine has a CB 2300 and operates it flat out at c 50% efficiency as good as I can tell.

The ones that are loaded twice a day or less are going to be well below that.


----------



## barkeatr (Feb 2, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> A Gassifying OWB is a bit of a contradiction.
> 
> I guess it means an OWB that can operate in both normal OWB mode and more efficiently.
> 
> ...




why would a gassifying OWB be a contradiction?  Im just curious what your definition of an OWB is?


----------



## Como (Feb 2, 2012)

Outdoor Wood Boiler.

Outdoor - impractical/unsafe to have it in your building.

Wood - the implicit ability to accept a wider rang that would be able to burn efficiently. Ability to smoulder.

Boiler - heats hot water.

I would also add no provision for storage, usually specified by manufacturer that it is not needed. Inability to meet most first world pollution standards.

Obviously there are gassifying wood  boilers that can be located outside.

Also you know it when you see it.


----------



## barkeatr (Feb 2, 2012)

Ok, I get it...I think some folks still use the term OWB when they are talking about generation two gassification boilers, but I see your definition is that when the word OWB is used its referring exclusively to Generation One non gassifying units.  Cool.


----------



## Como (Feb 2, 2012)

OWB's

Gassifying OWB's - Generation 2 is out for debate

Gassifying Wood Boilers

Simplistically.


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Feb 2, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> heaterman,
> Lets all live under the presupposition that the Garn is more efficient than any gasifying OWB ever built. If they are all tested tested side by side against the Garn, the Garn will be ???(fill in percentage) higher than all others.   Thanks




You know I don't quite get where your coming from with this. 
Don't get me wrong I know how you feel, as I too believed all the OWB sales pitch BS & like you bought an OWB.
Yes...I know I didn't do the research, didn't check the math, or the physics, or the laws of thermodynamics.
Sooo...in the end when I am looking for someone to blame, all I have to do is stand in front of a mirror.
AFA I know "Heaterman" does not tell the EPA how to test, what to test, or how the results will determine who passes/fails.
He is nice enough to pass along info that he gets through his industry affiliation & IMO that's a good thing.
Sooo...when the tests are done & some manufacturers get their tags while others lose theirs.
I fail to see how that's his fault, or even how he had anything to do with it, aside from encouraging everyone to burn cleaner.
Perhaps, if you feel I am wrong or not seeing the whole picture you could clear this up for me.
Oh & BTW AFA the eff % you asked to be filled in, the Garn & many other indoor gassers are going to hit the mid to high 80's on a regular basis.
My OWB & many others are going to hit 20's % on a bad day & when they really get cooking they will very occasionally hit 40's %. 
That's about as good as they can get given the math, the physics & the laws of thermodynamics. I know...sucks to be us.


----------



## barkeatr (Feb 2, 2012)

I think martyinmi's comment was directed towards a certain apparent "my toy is better than yours" attitude, that while under the cover of the talk of efficiency facts and the laws of thermodyamics comes across very strong.  THat might not be the intent, but it is the result.     now, if we are discussing thermodynamics, lets look at the big picture. 

I think there are lots of ways to look at efficiencies, this white tag efficiency is just one of them and quite narrow in scope.   In these efficiency comparisons being tossed around, is the embodied energy and efficiency of the final install included? some of these large heating units require concrete pads that could hold up a saturn 5 launch vehicle and the amount of energy it takes to produce concrete is outrageous. look it up.   The same thing goes for the amount of steel going into some of these units, is the steel recycled or do the boiler specs call for steel from china? It becomes more important when you are using 15-20  times more of it. Closer to the direct argument:  Infrastructure requirement vary with the heating solution you have selected, some require large buildings and amounts of insulation used to attempt to hold in the heat.  Are the units tested in installed situations where the sitebuilt insulation techniques can be part of the efficiency?  I have seen some of these installs and the opportunity for efficiency losing thermal bridging would cause problems in my climate. Martyinmi mentions testing side by side but if you tested them side by side coming off the truck it would not be fair to the uninsulated Garn.   Some units require daily start up..are the efficiencies of a cold start and burning the ink laden sunday paper included?  or do the testers start with a nice hot fire regardless of how the fire got to that point.   Is the embodied energy of the transportation included?  Did the truck delivering this unit burn 5 years of #2 diesel to deliver just one of these units ?  what happens when 2000 gallons of anti freeze laden water gets dumped?  If we are comparing installed situations vs off the truck,  then please include a subcategory outdoor gassers that have chosen this fairly easy upgrade to increase an already efficient burner to even higher levels.  I can keep going.  I work on schools, Im involved with installing large boilers among other things.  These Garns as big as a large commercial boiler requiring large capitol investments to install and construct fully functioning infrastructure around them.  Maybe some folks can out of pocket this kind of investment,  but others are financing.  Do the efficiency calcs include the gas this investor burns up going to work for another year or two to pay for the final cost?

its crazy, but I almost detect a kind of class warfare against the OWB..but if you look at the term without preconception and inside industry appropriatness, isnt the garn, outdoors, burns wood, and it heats water?   I mean, most folks cant put one of those units in their basement can they?  I guess I'm missing insider information. Maybe we need a white tag test for that. 

ultimately its important that the efficient burning of wood becomes more widespread.  I live in a very large poor rural area...around me, every winter a trailer or 200 year old house ( usualy one of each)  burns to the ground from a woodstove ignited fire, spewing out enough toxins and particulates to make up the difference between efficiencies of hundreds of generation 1 OWBs and the more efficient approaches.  Im not advocating OWB for everwhere, but we have naturall, environmentally desired, forest fires that make this efficency argument ridicoulous.  Two years ago the forest fires in canada actually changed our climate for two weeks. im not advocating for inefficent burning, im just saying please put the lab test into perspective.     I know that my "under debate" outdoor gasser provides plenty of heat on two large armfulls of wood a day when its cold, has a blue flame in the gasification chamber and has lots of heat exchange tubing that remains fairly clean in one of the coldest sunless climates in the US.    If this drag and drop technology (ready to plug in outdoor gasser) could become more affordable and give safe, renewable and affordable heating to more folks it would be good for all of us.  Despite my rant, the Garns are beautifull machines and a probably more efficient in the lab, but We all pursue the best choice we can afford, some are smaller solutions than others but its all good!  Im gonna hit submit post and run!


----------



## Como (Feb 2, 2012)

I think the thread is being derailed due to mention of the Garn, which has a very small share of the Gassifyer market.

The pressure on my concrete slab is less than in a a garage.

I drive an old truck, probably gets 16mpg. A new one will get 22mpg and is significantly more powerful to boot.

So if I was in the market for a new truck I would want the new specs, not the old. And it is cleaner.

As far as OWB's are concerned as each State goes its own way then the chances are that in many any proper stats will have zero effect, my assumption is that they will in the mass market areas, which is where you would want the impact anyway.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 2, 2012)

barkeatr said:
			
		

> i know the efficiency of my profab 200 gasser. by golly,  its 100%.    my formula?, divide tons of heat by not much wood x reasonable investment cost to the third power and invert that with happy wife dog and teenage daughter =100% happy camper.    Its quite simple really.




...........looking for the "like" button here............ ^


----------



## timbur (Feb 2, 2012)

Barkeatr , I love your way of calculating your efficiency rating , it doesn't get any better than that !

Looks like you really like your Pro 200 , I have been considering becoming a dealer for the Empyre  Pro Series 


Tim


----------



## martyinmi (Feb 2, 2012)

Holy Mackerel, 
  Some of you guys read too much into things. I was actually asking a legitimate question- namely,how will OWB GASIFYERS stack up against the Garn IF they are tested the same way? Will the Garn, or even the European style indoor gassers out perform the gasifying OWB? Or will it be the other way around? Words like reactants, thermodynamics,reaction thermodynamics,entropy,delta t's,catalysts,inhibitors,stoichiometry,photosynthesis, and formulas like (delta)S=(delta)Q/(delta)T, or even E=MC2 are not needed in the response to this question. Simple layman's terms please.

   Thanks!

   barkeatr-
Your formula is nearly identical to mine, except your girl is my boy and your dog is my wife's cat. Will mine consume more renewable resources, or will yours? Or maybe it doesn't matter as long as they are happy and our beer is cold


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Feb 3, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> Holy Mackerel,
> Some of you guys read too much into things. I was actually asking a legitimate question- namely,how will OWB GASIFYERS stack up against the Garn IF they are tested the same way? Will the Garn, or even the European style indoor gassers out perform the gasifying OWB? Or will it be the other way around? Words like reactants, thermodynamics,reaction thermodynamics,entropy,delta t's,catalysts,inhibitors,stoichiometry,photosynthesis, and formulas like (delta)S=(delta)Q/(delta)T, or even E=MC2 are not needed in the response to this question. Simple layman's terms please.
> 
> Thanks!
> ...



Sorry if I misinterpreted your intent. 

Simple layman's terms, you, me & any other OWB brand we care to name, in a side by side comparison with a garn or any other indoor wood gasifyer that we see so often in the forums & that is operated as intended, are going to be absolutely killed. Our units burn & then smoulder, they're units are designed & built to burn flat out until it's gone, then rest. Our units burn & smoulder from the first day of heating season until the last, theirs never should. If we want a side by side comparison we have a prayer at we need to find ourselves the owner of an old seton clone, who posts as cutting his wood from the forest, dragging it close to his seton clone with say a tractor, cuts it into pieces that will fit in his seton clone & tries to burn it, no splitting allowed for him. Then we have a prayer, as he will spend about as much time in full gasification mode as a gasifying OWB does, we just need to have his unit run without storage just like any OWB. Then yes we have a prayer, just don't ask me to lay odds or take bets on the winner.


----------



## maple1 (Feb 3, 2012)

So then would a Wood Gun be somewhere in the middle? It is touted as a start & stop unit that doesn't need storage and doesn't burn flat out until the fuel is gone - however, from what I know about them, they're pretty darned efficient? I was thinking there should not be much difference in efficiency between a gassing OWB and a Wood Gun.


----------



## Como (Feb 3, 2012)

I just got back from taking the dog to the Vet.

He has a CB OWB, not sure which one, looks middle size.

He gets through 40 cords a year so I guess idling is not an issue, he also splits.

The building is about 4,000 sq ft and not that old so I assume reasonably well insulated.

When it gets really cold the propane kicks in.

We always talk about wood etc, he mentioned adding another boiler but I do not see that it would be worth it. Best  bet is to run this one till it falls apart.


----------



## woodsmaster (Feb 3, 2012)

I think his best bet would be to get rid of the cb and get a gasser If he could cut his consumption by % 30  it wouldn't take
to long to pay off.


----------



## maple1 (Feb 3, 2012)

I'm thinking anyone burning 40 cords of wood a year to heat 4000 sq.ft. has some serious issues somewhere - OWB or not.

Are those 'real' cords?


----------



## heaterman (Feb 3, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> I just got back from taking the dog to the Vet.
> 
> He has a CB OWB, not sure which one, looks middle size.
> 
> ...





I've never seen a dog that has a CB..........



sorry, couldn't resist


----------



## heaterman (Feb 3, 2012)

OK guys, let's leave brand names out of the discussion entirely. Here is a set of factors/issues that are going on or have gone on which get my blood pressure up.

For years the OWB industry and their representatives/sales force condoned and in many, many cases actually promoted and encouraged outrageous burn practices by claiming their units would:
*burn green wood
*operate at amazing efficiency
*provide literally any amount of heat required through 1" pex
*be capable of burning your garbage, dead animals, old tires and in short anything you threw in them
*be "green" in the sense that their unit was better for the earth than burning fossil fuels
*save you enormous amounts of money.

Now we begin to see the results of that with EPA coming into the picture...........which brings up another serious matter entirely.
EPA came up with a test protocol for OWB's, both standard and gasifying types based on a test method from the 70's/80's which was used for small wood burning stoves such as Jotul and Lopi to name a couple of the type.
This standard was/is fatally flawed for two reasons. Number 1 was that it bears nearly no resemblance to real world use and number 2 was the application of that test by the OWB manufacturers themselves. Let me just say this about the PhaseI and PhaseII rated units. There is nearly no credibility in the numbers generated by those tests. They should not be believed in any way and the numbers generated should not be used by anyone in forming an opinion or making a decision. They are truly that bad and that far off base. I can't say it any more strongly than that without testing my Christian vocabulary.

So what's the answer?

After messing with these things for the better part of 20 years it is readily apparent that the paramount issues that become plain when selecting a clean burning and efficient system regardless of whether it is gasification or not, boils (pun intended) down to two factors.

Batch burning and heat storage.

I will flatly state that nearly any boiler, in any installation, will burn cleaner and transfer more heat when the fire is not shut down and allowed to burn the fuel load completely. This of course means that storage for the heat is a requirement rather than an option. 
Even a basic old style indoor boiler will show improvement in efficiency and emissions when combustion temperatures are kept high. 

I have a few more thoughts but I gotta hit send. Just got a phone call from a customer with an OWB peeing out the back of the water jacket............


----------



## maple1 (Feb 3, 2012)

If storage is not present or possible, I think there is also a large underestimation on how much refined operating procedures can improve efficiencies. I am discovering this myself this winter with my old smoker - spurred mainly by the sudden almost very painful realization in December that on my new two story steel roof cleaning my chimney in the winter is NO place for anyone to be. I have been seeing improvements by doing a LOT of resplitting with my electric splitter in the basement for daytime loads. But larger ones in just the timing and loading of fires. I load it up when the house temp is low and demand is high. I let it die out and burn up coaling when the house is up to temp & just maintaining. I let the boiler get down in temp and get most of its heat in the house before plugging it full of wood at bed time. I spend a lot more time keeping it as empty as I can of ash & coals. I treat the house as storage more, and let the interior temps get higher in the daytime - it is much easier to maintain a warmer interior, than heat a cold one. A cold interior sucks up a lot of heat even after the air temp has reached 70f. My woodpile is a lot larger than usual at this time of year (realizing that it has been a warmer fall/winter this year), but it is still generating creosote. I don't think quite as much, but I will be finding out in my next sweep (revised to messily do from the basement) in the next couple of weeks. But now I'm down there with my head in the boiler almost every hour or so - can't wait to get rid of this thing.


----------



## BoilerBob (Feb 3, 2012)

+1 Maple
I do the exact same loading procedure as you, and I now burn 5 to 6 cord of wood, no oil, per season. Before I used to burn 7 to 8 cord plus $1500.00 of oil.
When I load boiler, I leave a tunnel in the firewood at the bottom of boiler for air flow. Boiler temps go up faster if I do this, my boiler is 35 years old, round firebox like garn. It is a 1976 HS Hedler Tarm from Denmark. Not efficient but works like the day it was installed.


----------



## Como (Feb 3, 2012)

> I just got back from taking the dog to the Vet.
> 
> He has a CB OWB, not sure which one, looks middle size.
> 
> ...


[/quote]




> I've never seen a dog that has a CB..........



Ahh but the dog is a she, broke a bone in her leg. If anybody asks me again how she did it.... She has not told me, they can ask her.

Burning Pine mainly at say 40% maybe and keeping it at 70F with people coming in and out, sounded right to me.

He gets most of his wood for 'free' or from clients who may have outstanding bills. 

A new Boiler will cost.

Last visit we discussed the need to set up a cop op to buy a wood processor. A Chomper would do.


----------



## Como (Feb 3, 2012)

maple1 said:
			
		

> So then would a Wood Gun be somewhere in the middle? It is touted as a start & stop unit that doesn't need storage and doesn't burn flat out until the fuel is gone - however, from what I know about them, they're pretty darned efficient? I was thinking there should not be much difference in efficiency between a gassing OWB and a Wood Gun.



It can operate without storage, but it operates better with it.

I looked at the E500, but would have had storage with it.


----------



## stee6043 (Feb 3, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> OK guys, let's leave brand names out of the discussion entirely. Here is a set of factors/issues that are going on or have gone on which get my blood pressure up.
> 
> For years the OWB industry and their representatives/sales force condoned and in many, many cases actually promoted and encouraged outrageous burn practices by claiming their units would:
> *burn green wood
> ...



In all fairness, Heaterman, I'm not sure you can entirely "blame" the OWB manufacturers for their methods nor can you blame them entirely for where we are today.  It's a natural cycle.  This to me seems hardly different than Chevy, Ford and Chrysler selling cars that burned leaded gas and got 7 miles per gallon for decades while they knew if they really tried they could build cars getting 20+ mpg.  Did the big 3 decide to get away from leaded gas (green wood) and start pursuing better mileage?  Nah, they were forced to.  No different than current safety requirements for cars today vs 30 years ago.  I would bet a few minutes of google searching would produce a GM advertisement from the 70's claiming you would be uber safe in their brand new station wagon with rear facing seats for the kids in back, no seatbelts required.

OWB manufacturers in the United States have never existed for any other reason than to make money.  And that's what they did.  Right, wrong or indifferent they found ways to make money and they did it.  And they probably created a lot of jobs in this country while doing it.  Shame on the idiot consumer who really thought burning trash in the OWB was the right thing to do.  I think the operators are more to blame than anyone.  It's no different than my opinion that no borrower has ever been victimized by a bank.  I have yet to meet anyone in this country that was forced at gunpoint to sign a sub-prime mortgage with rediculous terms.

Nonetheless, it seems we're on the cusp of big changes at the hands of the EPA.  Many of them needed, no doubt.  Did we survive the leaded gase era?  Sure we did.  And in 30 years our kids will probably be having this same conversation about the battery powered car revolution.  And who knows what that conversation will sound like: "constant fires, landfills full of batteries, "toaster through carwash syndrome").

Just my opinion though!


----------



## martyinmi (Feb 3, 2012)

Soooo...

   Will a Garn or any of the European gasifiers outperform a PolarG3 OWB, or perhaps a CB E Classic 3200 OWB in a side by side test using the EPA's current or future Phase 2 testing procedures?  Will a Garn prove more efficient with fewer emissions than, say, a Woodmaster Flex Fuel  30 KW or 60KW indoor/Outdoor Wood Boiler? Have they ever been tested by the EPA in such a manner. We all know that the current procedures are not accurate, so lets not factor their inaccuracies in right now. The EPA has, however, in their infinite wisdom,  incorporated a means to test wood fueled appliances whose design intent was for function inside a structure, haven't they? How will (do) these mass storage units compare?

   Just curious.


----------



## Como (Feb 3, 2012)

Probably best to drop the Garn from the equation.

As has been said the "European' Gassifiers are a class above the like of the CB, and the Polar looks similar to a CB.

The Woodmaster looks like a proper Gassifier, but that is as far as I can go.

There is an EN Standard, I think they are up to Phase 4 now? That has proven credibility.

You may notice that none of the ones you mentioned are exported, well outside of Canada.


----------



## heaterman (Feb 3, 2012)

The singular issue I have with the OWB industry is that unlike Ford Chevy or Dodge who never claimed their 10MPG cars got 20, they have advanced their products as clean and made efficiency claims that are bizarre to say the least and outright lies when you peel the hide off what they are saying. The PhaseII unit efficiency ratings (now deleted from EPA's website) were consumer fraud at its finest. 99% efficiency?? C'mon! I think there was one manufacturer who even listed over 100% IIRC.  These are PHASE II units supposedly tested under a protocol that had some semblance of realistic use when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. Many here have placed their faith in the EPA's Phase II ratings and will find that the product does not perform as claimed. The testing protocol is not worth the paper it is printed on. I would really like to see anyone here call one of these manufacturers and ask to speak with one of their engineers. Ask them point blank if they will back up their claims with some real documentation. Ask the makers of these 90%+ units where the condensate drain is.............my BP is going up again I can feel it.......

Your point regarding due diligence is well taken and very true. That should always be the case. How many among us though, have the level of expertise in the field to determine if claims being made are real and the product is being represented accurately? That being the case and adding the typical buyers excitement about purchasing something which is held forth as being the "uber boiler", leads to a situation where the buyer is easily taken advantage of. Like the old saying goes....In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

 We live in the USA which supposedly is a country with standards and laws, not to mention the fact that everyone here expects a certain level of morality to be present in business dealings. Taken as a whole, the OWB industry seems to have put profit before truthfulness and unit sales before customer well being. I can't stand that and no one else should accept it either.

Case and point. That leaking OWB from this morning is shot. It has pinholes everywhere and the unit is supposedly Stainless steel and "rustproof". Been in service for 9 years and it is scrap metal.


----------



## martyinmi (Feb 4, 2012)

heaterman,
   I will rephrase this question for you: Has the GARN ever been tested by the EPA and put on a list where gasifying OWB's might exist? And if so, did any gasifying OWB's place higher on the list than the Garn?

Also,
   How much did that OWB save its owner in those 9 years? Probably a 4-5k purchase back then. My guess would be that it returned it's owners initial investment in 2-3 years maximum.

Three simple questions. One word answer for each question will suffice.

   Thank You


----------



## Como (Feb 4, 2012)

http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/owhhlist.html

* The wood-burning appliances that are "qualified" under the EPA's Voluntary Hydronic Heater and Fireplace Programs are not "certified" per EPA's Wood Heater New Source Performance Standard. Contact your state or local air quality agency for clarification on the type of wood-burning appliances, if any, that may legally be installed in your area

Please Note Energy efficiency numbers that have been calculated using the current test procedure are generating numbers that do not represent actual efficiencies. As such, we have taken down the efficiency column from this web site. Please bear with us while we review this issue.

http://garn.com/wp-content/themes/Chameleon/forms/GARN EPA 1 2 3.pdf


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Feb 4, 2012)

marty: you should be able to answer most of those Q's for yourself with a simple search on the EPA site, yes?
AFA payback goes, different for just about every install, heatload & a few other variables.

If you want to do a calc on cost of ownership on that OWB vs say a Garn as that seems to be the one that interests you the most. 
It would go something like this: Garn cost 12 -15 k depending on model, lasting 40+ years according to info here, we will use 40 to keep the math simple. 
Cost of boiler per year over lifespan $300-$375 per year.

OWB cost 4-5K, we will use your numbers, lasting 9 years as in the case above. Cost of OWB per year over lifespan $444- $555 per year.

Not looking good for us fellow OWB owner, I have not included the cost of removing 3 worn out units & installing 3 new ones over the 40 year span of the Garn. We know these don't give out in the middle of summer right, so I should have included some $ for the property damage we will suffer when it goes on the coldest weekend of the winter (typical, stuff never quits when you don't need it, always when you do) x 3. I also forgot to add inflation to the equation for those 3 extra OWB's we will buy with future $$$ not at todays price for sure. Probably a lot more I forgot to include as well, indexed to inflation of course because we get to do this 3 times more in the future, while the poor bored Garn owner only gets to have all that fun once. For know I had better stop, as thinking about all this extra money that I will need to spend is jacking up my blood pressure. 

Hope this helps to clear it up for us OWB owners.


----------



## martyinmi (Feb 4, 2012)

Canuck,

Answer to your initial Question: Yes

Also did a google search on the availability of a registry of 40+ year old Garns still in operation. I'll search some more tomorrow. It has to be there.

12-15K for installation? Things are very inexpensive up 'dere.

9 years is apparently a well documented age for all types of OWB's to mysteriously fail? My search engine must be lacking some relevant data there too. Dang neighbors, lying to me about 15 year old CB and 18 year old Taylor. You ever hear of a welder?

Need I continue?


----------



## goosegunner (Feb 4, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> Canuck,
> 
> Answer to your initial Question: Yes
> 
> ...



My first boiler was a used Taylor 450 that was 9 years old. It would have likely last many more years. The firebox was large enough that you could weld from inside easy.

I sold it and bought a indoor gasser. It is leaps and bounds better for over all satisfaction.  The Taylor smoked so bad it was embarrassing, I don't think you can compare them to any modern gasifier. I have been a paid firefighter for a long time. We have a saying,  "Smoke is fuel". 

gg


----------



## heaterman (Feb 4, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> heaterman,
> I will rephrase this question for you: Has the GARN ever been tested by the EPA and put on a list where gasifying OWB's might exist? And if so, did any gasifying OWB's place higher on the list than the Garn?
> 
> Also,
> ...



1. Simple answer ....no. EPA had/has no way of testing a Garn. Their protocol does not work with a storage based system.

2. My best estimate based on what my combustion analyzer tells me and what I observe is that OWB gassers will Max out at 55-60%

3. I would guess he broke even
Dug up and replaced cheap outdoor underground. Replaced several pumps. At least two controls and a draft blower that I know of. Yearly water treatment.  Cost of wood, harvesting the same, chain saws, splitter, not to mention labor at even $5/hr.  Just adding it in my head it's iffy...,.....


----------



## heaterman (Feb 4, 2012)

Marty, speaking to the point you make about length of life for OWB's, I had an interesting conversation with a representative from Farm Bureau Insurance last September at the Logging Congress in Escanaba. I was helping out in the display my brothers had up there for chainsaws and the insurance guy was right across the aisle from us. Over the course of the three days there we struck up a conversation about wood burners. He had seen a Garn outside along with many brands of OWB's that were there and we got talking about them all after I told him I was a "heaterman" by trade.
 He mentioned that his company insures heating equipment under their standard homeowners policy and that they were paying out many claims for failures on OWB's. I asked what brands and he rattled off 6-7 names, all of which are bandied about here and as far as their internal numbers showed they were pretty much all the same. He asked about the "one outside that looked different" which was the Garn. I told him I had encountered several in my travels that were well over 20 years old and had recently rebuilt one with a serial number of 29. To the best of my knowledge Garn has been made since about 1981-82 so I would guess that unit was near that with a serial number that low. The only brand of OWB I have seen make it past 15 years without a water jacket failure of some kind is a Hardy. There are several around here that I installed in the mid 90's that are still in use. I truthfully do not know of any of the other common brands that have gone much past 10 without having to undergo major repair. Both Of my brothers have OWB's that are 11 years old and both have had to have them welded up on more than one occasion. Both will probably buy indoor pellet boilers when they make the switch.


----------



## pybyr (Feb 4, 2012)

FWIW, the Portage and Main 250 that Marty seems to have, is, based on one I examined at a show, a true downdraft gasification unit with a very well designed multi-stage fire tube heat exchanger.  The design included some wonderful features for ease of checking and cleaning the firetubes.  I was impressed with design and robustness of its construction.

Econoburn also has an "outdoor doghouse variant" of their gasification boiler.

It's not where a wood boiler lives (OW or indoor) it's the technology it uses.  

A good outdoor unit should work fine and is probably better overall than something like a Biasi non-gasifier or a New Yorker non-gasifier.

PS- seeing a Garn in operation is what launched me into the current modality of acquiring and using a gasifier-- although at the time it seemed bulky and expensive.  I now think that by the time you factor everything in (plumbing, storage, controls, etc) then as long as you have a place to put a Garn, and a heating system that can use water down to moderately low temperatures, the Garn is impressively efficient in terms of dollars as well as combustion/ capture of heat.


----------



## Como (Feb 4, 2012)

I am trying to think under what circumstances an Insurance company would pay out on an OWB?


----------



## StihlHead (Feb 4, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> Case and point. That leaking OWB from this morning is shot. It has pinholes everywhere and the unit is supposedly Stainless steel and "rustproof". Been in service for 9 years and it is scrap metal.



SS is really not well suited to building fireboxes in boilers. It is less ductile than mild steel and more brittle, and it absorbs more heat than mild steel does so expands and contracts more. Hence it tends to warp and crack over time when heated. It is also a lot harder to weld than mild steel, and it is WAY more expensive. Never mind that it does not transfer heat neartly as well as mild steel. The only real advantage of SS is that is does not rust out. However there are anti-corrosives that prevent mild steel from rusting, and so they can last 20 years or more in a boiler, easy. 

Read: SS in a boiler = spendy sales gimmick (Avoid!)


----------



## heaterman (Feb 4, 2012)

Como said:
			
		

> I am trying to think under what circumstances an Insurance company would pay out on an OWB?



They are the only insurance company I know of that does that and it doesn't matter if you have a furnace, boiler or what it is fueled with. If it fails beyond reasonable repair, they will replace it. Pretty nice addition to a typical homeowners policy I would say.


----------



## martyinmi (Feb 4, 2012)

heaterman,
   FYI-If there weren't so many benefits associated with a gasifying OWB, I would have installed a Garn in an out building on my property. The European imports would never be a viable option for a variety of apparent reasons. Thank you for your reply's. I will be contacting you personally in the future.

   Marty


----------



## heaterman (Feb 5, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> heaterman,
> FYI-If there weren't so many benefits associated with a gasifying OWB, I would have installed a Garn in an out building on my property. The European imports would never be a viable option for a variety of apparent reasons. Thank you for your reply's. I will be contacting you personally in the future.
> 
> Marty



I think your P&M will prove to be one of the better OWB gassers Marty. They have an actual heat exchanger in them for one thing and a decent system for gasfication. 

By all means send me a PM sometime, maybe during my travels I could stop and see your setup. I have enjoyed meeting every single person I have come in contact with through this place.


----------



## maple1 (Feb 5, 2012)

martyinmi said:
			
		

> heaterman,
> FYI-If there weren't so many benefits associated with a gasifying OWB, I would have installed a Garn in an out building on my property. The European imports would never be a viable option for a variety of apparent reasons. Thank you for your reply's. I will be contacting you personally in the future.
> 
> Marty



What are all the apparent reasons for ruling out a Euro import?


----------



## Como (Feb 5, 2012)

heaterman said:
			
		

> Como said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So they basically have a rider that is sort of a maintenance contract.

Very nice. Never come across that before, wonder if they would do one on my truck...


----------

