Modern vs old stoves
- Thread starter snobuilder
- 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.
They set standards. Stove companies choose how to meet those standards.
And btw every step along the way those standards have given us far better stoves. Even if you don't care at all about emissions the modern stoves just work better. More heat from less wood and less creosote in the chimney so less chance of chimney fires. What's not to like?
Responsible for setting standards that gave us far better stoves? Yes. Responsible for whatever problem this person is having with their stove (which overall is a very good performer) not in any way.
They "allow" a private company to be be "creative"...ALLOW????? WTF?....how benevolent of them
....LOLHave you ever used a modern stove? How many chimneys do you work on a year to compare old vs modern stoves?They "allow" a private company to be be "creative"...ALLOW????? WTF?....how benevolent of them
What is it that you have against stoves that simply work better?
They "allow" a private company to be be "creative"...ALLOW????? WTF?....how benevolent of them
Yes. The "how" is not dictated in any way. The creativity of the capitalist companies is where the "how" comes into existence. Yes the fact "that" they have to be better than a minimum standard is dictated. Just like your car kills you a lot less frequently today than 45 years ago.
I for one am happy about that.
Still reading up on all of the problems folks are having. This site is a wealth of info.
I burn 2-3 cords every year for decades. Heat 1800 SF . I do it efficiently as the Daka is in the basement and distributes the heat throughout the house.
A simple bimetal air intake damper on this stove is mostly a set and forget operation. Very simple without any need to over complicate something as basic as building a fire. Fretting over getting a few more BTUs out of a stick a wood while taking away control of the flame from the end user is dangerous and unnecessary IMO.
I will keep researching.
What stoves take control away from the user? How are new stoves more dangerous than old ones?
Btw your stoves bimetallic intake does exactly that.
Have you bothered to read all the problems people have with pre EPA stoves as well? There are many
People who usually come to the forum are those seeking info, those with a problem, and stove enthusiasts. We don't hear from the many thousands of people that are happily heating with their stoves.
FWIW, if you didn't baby sit our old Jotul F602 closely after a fresh load, it would take off like a rocket.
Somewhat off-topic, but I'm curious what verb you would prefer to have be appropriate - require? mandate? forbid? 'Allow' is pretty much what you're aiming for if you want a small/anarchic government, as in 'most/all actions are allowed'. How else would you describe the government's position in relation to an action that is neither forbidden nor required? (yes, I realize the the EPA is requiring that stoves that are manufactured meet certain standards - I'm specifically curious about how you would describe the lack of requirements in relation to how to accomplish that).They "allow" a private company to be be "creative"...ALLOW????? WTF?....how benevolent of them
OK..... you asked.
These are simply MY observations and opinions. I have no ill feeling towards this mostly very helpful website.
Problems I have read about on this site;
Wide open secondary burn intake ports causing overfires at extremely high temps. No way to snuff out the air supply once you realize its out of control. Blaming the end user as having the "wrong" set up. Blaming the end user as being out of compliance when the real problem is a stove design that is initiated by EPA guidelines. Manufacturers are forced to comply or possibly go under. Chimney temps so extreme that new designs and testing was necessary to get the proper heat rating. .
How does more heat up the chimney equal efficiency?
My bimetal damper is the ONLY air intake and can be closed if need be unlike the new EPA stoves with wide open secondary ports with absolutely no end user ability to close them off. All in a supposed increase in BTUs. What's the use if it turns your home into an uncomfortable 85 degree inferno?....LOL
IMO
The EPA came up with regulations for a drop in the ocean sized pollution control. Much ado about nothing. A solution without a problem. But that's their highly funded job. A relatively small brush fire in CA., CO,...etc will dwarf the pollution output of all of the residential wood heat fires in the past 100 years.....LOL....JMO
I apologize to the OP for the hijack of this thread . My initial comment was tongue in cheek and most anyone with a sense of humor will understand. I did not think it would trigger an attack in defense of continued flawed government interference in the private manufacturing sector.
Much like a planet saving government designed gas can for your lawn mower that spills more fuel than it saves.....Thank gawd for the private sector that now has a kit to fix THAT mess. I am hopeful the same will happen to the "modern" post- EPA wood stoves.
JMO.
Release the hounds
!
Trevor Tahclep
Burning Hunk
Guys do not waste your time and energy on this idOK..... you asked.
These are simply MY observations and opinions. I have no ill feeling towards this mostly very helpful website.
Problems I have read about on this site;
Wide open secondary burn intake ports causing overfires at extremely high temps. No way to snuff out the air supply once you realize its out of control. Blaming the end user as having the "wrong" set up. Blaming the end user as being out of compliance when the real problem is a stove design that is initiated by EPA guidelines. Manufacturers are forced to comply or possibly go under. Chimney temps so extreme that new designs and testing was necessary to get the proper heat rating. .
How does more heat up the chimney equal efficiency?
My bimetal damper is the ONLY air intake and can be closed if need be unlike the new EPA stoves with wide open secondary ports with absolutely no end user ability to close them off. All in a supposed increase in BTUs. What's the use if it turns your home into an uncomfortable 85 degree inferno?....LOL
IMO
The EPA came up with regulations for a drop in the ocean sized pollution control. Much ado about nothing. A solution without a problem. But that's their highly funded job. A relatively small brush fire in CA., CO,...etc will dwarf the pollution output of all of the residential wood heat fires in the past 100 years.....LOL....JMO
I apologize to the OP for the hijack of this thread . My initial comment was tongue in cheek and most anyone with a sense of humor will understand. I did not think it would trigger an attack in defense of continued flawed government interference in the private manufacturing sector.
Much like a planet saving government designed gas can for your lawn mower that spills more fuel than it saves.....Thank gawd for the private sector that now has a kit to fix THAT mess. I am hopeful the same will happen to the "modern" post- EPA wood stoves.
JMO.
Release the hounds
. It is impossible to reason with ...................!
saberbass
Member
O.K. i'll bite, does anybody remember the 70's? The great lakes were dying from industrial pollution, lead in gasoline with cars getting 8 mpg, DDT, acid rain? holes in the ozone? No recycling ? Too bad the EPA ruined that.
Ok any stove appliance etc needs to be installed and operated property for it to work as designed safely and efficiently. The only time good modern stoves are uncontrollable is when they are installed with to much draft or they are operated improperly. How is that the EPA s fault?OK..... you asked.
These are simply MY observations and opinions. I have no ill feeling towards this mostly very helpful website.
Problems I have read about on this site;
Wide open secondary burn intake ports causing overfires at extremely high temps. No way to snuff out the air supply once you realize its out of control. Blaming the end user as having the "wrong" set up. Blaming the end user as being out of compliance when the real problem is a stove design that is initiated by EPA guidelines. Manufacturers are forced to comply or possibly go under. Chimney temps so extreme that new designs and testing was necessary to get the proper heat rating. .
How does more heat up the chimney equal efficiency?
My bimetal damper is the ONLY air intake and can be closed if need be unlike the new EPA stoves with wide open secondary ports with absolutely no end user ability to close them off. All in a supposed increase in BTUs. What's the use if it turns your home into an uncomfortable 85 degree inferno?....LOL
IMO
The EPA came up with regulations for a drop in the ocean sized pollution control. Much ado about nothing. A solution without a problem. But that's their highly funded job. A relatively small brush fire in CA., CO,...etc will dwarf the pollution output of all of the residential wood heat fires in the past 100 years.....LOL....JMO
I apologize to the OP for the hijack of this thread . My initial comment was tongue in cheek and most anyone with a sense of humor will understand. I did not think it would trigger an attack in defense of continued flawed government interference in the private manufacturing sector.
Much like a planet saving government designed gas can for your lawn mower that spills more fuel than it saves.....Thank gawd for the private sector that now has a kit to fix THAT mess. I am hopeful the same will happen to the "modern" post- EPA wood stoves.
JMO.
Release the hounds
You are very confused, modern stoves run at much lower exhaust temps with higher firebox temps all while keeping creosote deposits to a minimum when run correctly. I am not sure where you got the idea that they run at higher stack temps but it simply isn't true.
What new designs and testing for chimneys are you referring to? As an industry pro I don't know of any.
And stoves that pumped out smoke constantly and filled chimneys with creosote. It's so horrible that we now have clean burning stoves that use much more of the available BTUs in your wood.
So again have you ever used a modern stove? Or are you simply basing your opinions on input from a site where people come to ask for help with issues they are having?OK..... you asked.
These are simply MY observations and opinions. I have no ill feeling towards this mostly very helpful website.
Problems I have read about on this site;
Wide open secondary burn intake ports causing overfires at extremely high temps. No way to snuff out the air supply once you realize its out of control. Blaming the end user as having the "wrong" set up. Blaming the end user as being out of compliance when the real problem is a stove design that is initiated by EPA guidelines. Manufacturers are forced to comply or possibly go under. Chimney temps so extreme that new designs and testing was necessary to get the proper heat rating. .
How does more heat up the chimney equal efficiency?
My bimetal damper is the ONLY air intake and can be closed if need be unlike the new EPA stoves with wide open secondary ports with absolutely no end user ability to close them off. All in a supposed increase in BTUs. What's the use if it turns your home into an uncomfortable 85 degree inferno?....LOL
IMO
The EPA came up with regulations for a drop in the ocean sized pollution control. Much ado about nothing. A solution without a problem. But that's their highly funded job. A relatively small brush fire in CA., CO,...etc will dwarf the pollution output of all of the residential wood heat fires in the past 100 years.....LOL....JMO
I apologize to the OP for the hijack of this thread . My initial comment was tongue in cheek and most anyone with a sense of humor will understand. I did not think it would trigger an attack in defense of continued flawed government interference in the private manufacturing sector.
Much like a planet saving government designed gas can for your lawn mower that spills more fuel than it saves.....Thank gawd for the private sector that now has a kit to fix THAT mess. I am hopeful the same will happen to the "modern" post- EPA wood stoves.
JMO.
Release the hounds
I work in the field every day on a wide variety of stoves and your observations and opinions don't reflect what is actually going on in the real world.
Are you familiar with catalytic stoves? It sounds like all your problems are with non-cat EPA stoves. My EPA stove just has one air intake with a control valve that I can open or fully close if need be, and I can get more BTUs out *over a longer time period* than with a pre-EPA stove, meaning I don't have an uncomfortably hot stove room.OK..... you asked.
These are simply MY observations and opinions. I have no ill feeling towards this mostly very helpful website.
Problems I have read about on this site;
Wide open secondary burn intake ports causing overfires at extremely high temps. No way to snuff out the air supply once you realize its out of control. Blaming the end user as having the "wrong" set up. Blaming the end user as being out of compliance when the real problem is a stove design that is initiated by EPA guidelines. Manufacturers are forced to comply or possibly go under. Chimney temps so extreme that new designs and testing was necessary to get the proper heat rating. .
How does more heat up the chimney equal efficiency?
My bimetal damper is the ONLY air intake and can be closed if need be unlike the new EPA stoves with wide open secondary ports with absolutely no end user ability to close them off. All in a supposed increase in BTUs. What's the use if it turns your home into an uncomfortable 85 degree inferno?....LOL
IMO
The EPA came up with regulations for a drop in the ocean sized pollution control. Much ado about nothing. A solution without a problem. But that's their highly funded job. A relatively small brush fire in CA., CO,...etc will dwarf the pollution output of all of the residential wood heat fires in the past 100 years.....LOL....JMO
I apologize to the OP for the hijack of this thread . My initial comment was tongue in cheek and most anyone with a sense of humor will understand. I did not think it would trigger an attack in defense of continued flawed government interference in the private manufacturing sector.
Much like a planet saving government designed gas can for your lawn mower that spills more fuel than it saves.....Thank gawd for the private sector that now has a kit to fix THAT mess. I am hopeful the same will happen to the "modern" post- EPA wood stoves.
JMO.
Release the hounds
pre epa stoves (500F) have hotter flu temps than non epa (250F)
My epa 2015 compliance stoves have adjustable secondary control, need less heat? add less wood
Ashley furnace wide open secondary's doesn't over fire on 25' chimney unless primary is to open 10 hours plus on a load
When a new epa regulation is put into affect stove shops sell old non complaint stoves highly discounted and and new stove purchasers sell their used stoves, I like this I can buy a premium stove for a few hundred compared to a few thousand.
I wish the EPA would of just left the regs where they were, they were good enough. What was the old reg 4gph? A 2 gph emissions difference isn’t going to make any difference when most people don’t burn properly. How does this effect stove costs, how many people can afford a $3-4k stove? Will we see a return to homemade smoke dragons? Maybe the EPA would be better off educating people, old stove exchange programs and making new stoves more affordable? It seems to many people the EPA is taking baby steps to eventually ban wood burning.
There are still plenty of budget stoves available at roughly the same cost as pre 2020 regs. Yes prices have gone up on stoves but the spikes we saw didn't really correspond with the 2020 regs. They went up with the increase in steel prices then with increase in transportation costs.
Similar threads
