Ashful
Minister of Fire
I probably wasn't entirely fair, there. I went from a cold stove to coals in 5 hours, not cold stove to cold stove (or coals to coals) in 5 hours. I should probably add an hour for "complete cycle" time. But yes, I was releasing BTUs at a good clip, and the key damper was dialed right to 0.06"WC.@Ashful 5 hours! Wow. With damper keeping draft in spec? That must have liberated those Btus to your space at a rate much higher than the epa spec sheet indicates is possible.
From memory (maybe faulty):Since softwood is easier to lift it won’t take twice the calories. I thought softwood was only like 25% less energy dense than your oak.
Looks like 22.1 vs. 17.4 million btu per cord so red oak vs pine is even closer. Like 21% more exercise and loading!
White oak = 24 MBTU/cord
White pine = 14 MBTU/cord
Difference = 1.7x volume basis
We can pick apart the sloppy math, on my part, but the point of my statement remains: softwood = almost 2x more felling, splitting, stacking and hauling, for the same BTU's.
BK's aren't magic, they just give us a wider range of available burn rates than other stoves. Their efficiency is slightly higher than most, but not by enough to really bear on the hardwood vs. softwood discrepancy.With different stove, no comment, but with BK, well you know.