Lowest gph
- Thread starter mikey
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Grams per hour. Open up the epa list in the sticky and sort.
Honestly, anything approved for sale is so clean that your operational variation can more than erase any difference in the ratings.
Honestly, anything approved for sale is so clean that your operational variation can more than erase any difference in the ratings.
That's exactly right. The fuel and operation of the stove are the greatest variable with modern stoves. This is similar to EPA gas mileage ratings. They don't account for someone with a lead foot.
right but a lead foot in a honda is different than one in a hummer, you have to start somewher.
Yes, that's all it is. Quibbling about a .06 gm difference is pointless. One may not match the EPA numbers unless burning only cribbed 2x4s in a preheated stove.
I would say that the three most impactful ways one can influence the environmental issues with wood burning are 1. Get a stove that qualifies for the tax credit. 2. Burn truly dry wood, i.e. less than 20% moisture content. 3. Burn (and install) according to the manual (yes, read the *$%#% manual, and that includes the manual of the moisture meter).
It is likely that the variety of wood between one load and the next will already result in bigger gph differences than the 0.06 begreen notices. So do your stinkin' best with the fuel and follow instructions. That's all there is to it.
Do that, and you'll be as clean as you can be. And if that is not clean enough, then I think wood burning may not be a good match for your (admirable) principles.
(And I repeat, I find your focus on doing the right thing here for our planet to be right and admirable.)
It is likely that the variety of wood between one load and the next will already result in bigger gph differences than the 0.06 begreen notices. So do your stinkin' best with the fuel and follow instructions. That's all there is to it.
Do that, and you'll be as clean as you can be. And if that is not clean enough, then I think wood burning may not be a good match for your (admirable) principles.
(And I repeat, I find your focus on doing the right thing here for our planet to be right and admirable.)
One more thought about the reason that this question might be being asked. Low emissions does NOT mean high efficiency. Those two can happen together but they are not directly related.
You can have a very clean burning wood hog.
You can have a very clean burning wood hog.
The difference between a 74% stove and a tax-qualified 75% stove is negligible and as noted, will be lost in differences of operation and fuel. It's an arbitrary line in the sand. If the goal is to burn as cleanly as possible, then this thread is worth a read. It contains more relevant information than some stove manuals:
www.hearth.com
Ways to burn cleanly
This letter was posted on the Alliance for Green Heat's FB page. I thought it was worth sharing here. It brings up very good points. It's often not the stoves, but the fuel, draft, and how the stoves are run. https://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/opinion/letter-ways-to-clean-up-wood-burning/
www.hearth.com
I agree reliability and ease of use maintenance etc is a bigger factor to me than a percentage point or two of efficiency. Or a tiny bit more emissions
I’ve been saying that for a few years. Maybe I could pick a more “efficient” stove, that’s loaded 3 times a day, or my BK that’s loaded once a day. Efficiency in the real world is less work and easy to use.
By that definition, the most efficient stove is also likely the simplest with the least maintenance over time.
Similar threads
