Yep, the new PEs can, otherwise they couldn't sell them...not a good business model.
New limits are 2.0 g/hr, 2.5 for the optional cord wood test. IIRC, the new LE Super box puts out 1.8 g/hr, about equal to my Keystone cat.
Last edited:
Pacific Energy and 2020
- Thread starter Newburnerwisconsin
- 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.
New limits are 2.0 g/hr, 2.5 for the optional cord wood test. IIRC, the new LE Super box puts out 1.8 g/hr, about equal to my Keystone cat.
You can go to stove websites, go to the page of the stove you're interested in, and they should have the specs listed.
From what I understand, being 2020 compliant is not simply a matter of having previously been tested at below the new limits. The test is new. My current noncat is an NC30 and the EPA does not list it as being approved for use after 2020 even though the emissions rating from old tests are below the threshold.
The EPA maintains a list of actual approved stoves and some are noncats. The latest revision was March of this year. Some very good and clean stoves have not earned their green stripe.
Here's the current list.
(broken link removed to https://www.epa.gov/compliance/list-epa-certified-wood-stoves)
I am not impressed that noncats are on the list. Many of them have always been pretty clean but more important is the efficiency and range of actual outputs. This new information that is only now honest might be the most impressive part of the new regulations.
Chuck the Canuck
Feeling the Heat
If you scroll to the bottom, it says "Wood heaters that meet the 2020 particulate matter emission standards in green highlight."
A person at the local air board told me that beginning May 2019 (I'm assuming the person did not actually mean May 2020) stoves in the replacement program will have to be 2020 compliant in California.
I should be able to order the stove next week. I'll be curious to see what version of the T5 PE will ship to my local dealer. I stated earlier, the dealer is running down all stock and doing orders for other stoves not in stock.
I should be able to order the stove next week. I'll be curious to see what version of the T5 PE will ship to my local dealer. I stated earlier, the dealer is running down all stock and doing orders for other stoves not in stock.
Last edited:
The big question will be what to do, if by chance, I actually get to choose between the old and the LE version?
(I'd be inclined to go old, but the EBT is a temptation.)
(I'd be inclined to go old, but the EBT is a temptation.)
OT, but how short do you have to cut your splits to fit N-S in the T5/Spectrum/Super box? Can you go a bit longer E-W?
AlbergSteve
Minister of Fire
A year and half ago when we inquired about, and paid for a T6, we found out about a month later PE had no idea when they might have any in production. We ended up with a BK and have no regrets. The dealer I was using implied at the time that there were "production issues". I drive by PE's shop a couple of times a week and they have had a "help wanted" sign out front for as long as I can remember. My guess is, with the tight labour market here on the island, it's probably not easy getting skilled line workers.
Chuck the Canuck
Feeling the Heat
From what I know and have experienced: Super LE models have been going out for the entire winter season on my front (Ontario, all over), and for the most part are working fine. As begreen said, most issues I have dealt with are unfamiliarity with a new product and or minor set up issues (eg had a guy lose his baffle pin and was running his stove with the baffle askew and no gasket). From my understanding, the main difference here was the addition of the EBT2 and the removal of the secondary are linkage from the man damper control.
Summit LE models started rolling in late in the year so we've only had a few go out. This model did have a baffle and flame shield change. A bit early to have any definitive feedback yet.
Still not aware of Vista or Neo model changes.
As has been my experience with the Summits (already having the EBT2) if you have an overdraft condition pipe dampers will be your friend. As long as the set up allows it, I'm all for them as I don't mind having greater control of more aspects of the burn. I'm of course more concerned for the insert models going forward, as pipe dampers are simply not an option.
Summit LE models started rolling in late in the year so we've only had a few go out. This model did have a baffle and flame shield change. A bit early to have any definitive feedback yet.
Still not aware of Vista or Neo model changes.
As has been my experience with the Summits (already having the EBT2) if you have an overdraft condition pipe dampers will be your friend. As long as the set up allows it, I'm all for them as I don't mind having greater control of more aspects of the burn. I'm of course more concerned for the insert models going forward, as pipe dampers are simply not an option.
Thanks. That was very helpful information. I'll keep my fingers crossed on production.
I guess a possible additional advantage of having an EPA2020 model is if you ever decide to sell it in the future. Who knows what local restrictions will be in place for selling pre2020 EPA models, such as there are now for preEPA stoves. Hopefully, though, I'll never want to sell it.
Yes, a 30series BK has been on my mind with all the wonderful reports of long burns, but hearth dimensions didn't quite make it without alteration. The stories of potential smoke/creosote (albeit slight chance) would also leave me with apprehension, because I know that such smells would result in it being mothballed and demote the stove into a just a very expensive room decoration. (Also the stove replacement program doesn't allow you to switch choices unless your original choice will not work.)
Pacific Energy has done some updates to their website stating the availability of their EPA2020 stoves.
(broken link removed to http://pacificenergy.net/support/tools/2gramemissions-2/)
Here's part of it:
2020 EPA Ready Products
Certified and Shipping
Super LE Wood Stove
Super Classic LE Wood Stove
Summit LE Wood Stove
Summit Classic LE Wood Stove
Summit Insert LE
Alderlea T5 LE Wood Stove
Alderlea T6 LE Wood Stove
Testing completed/certified – Estimated shipping summer 2019
Super Insert LE
Vista LE Wood Stove
Vista Classic LE Wood Stove
Vista Insert LE
Alderlea T4 LE Wood Stove
Alderlea T5 Insert LE
Neo 1.6 LE Wood Stove
Neo 1.6 Insert LE
It is important to note that once a model is EPA 2020 approved, it may not be automatically available or reflected on the website and/or in print brochures.
(broken link removed to http://pacificenergy.net/support/tools/2gramemissions-2/)
Here's part of it:
2020 EPA Ready Products
Certified and Shipping
Super LE Wood Stove
Super Classic LE Wood Stove
Summit LE Wood Stove
Summit Classic LE Wood Stove
Summit Insert LE
Alderlea T5 LE Wood Stove
Alderlea T6 LE Wood Stove
Testing completed/certified – Estimated shipping summer 2019
Super Insert LE
Vista LE Wood Stove
Vista Classic LE Wood Stove
Vista Insert LE
Alderlea T4 LE Wood Stove
Alderlea T5 Insert LE
Neo 1.6 LE Wood Stove
Neo 1.6 Insert LE
It is important to note that once a model is EPA 2020 approved, it may not be automatically available or reflected on the website and/or in print brochures.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you very much for the update. PE seems to really have thier act together on this. I spoke with a local dealer today and they claimed 7 to 10 days to order a LE stove from the Minneapolis warehouse. Dealer was not sure about Jotul. They are not saying much at this time. Time will tell what happens to each company.
I have an installation set for end of May. I heard my regional warehouse is still stocked with T5 Series D version and waiting to run out before stocking with the LE's. It may be out of my control as to which version I get, but to be honest, I'm now beginning to hope a bit more for the LE with the EPA2020 EBT2(?) design and just keep my fingers crossed that it works well. Regardless of EPA2020 rules, maybe PE would have done some of these changes earlier if it weren't for the required cost of testing the stoves each time they did a major change? (Only their engineers really know.)
So here's a little thought flow, excuse me.... Like the weather, I've spent a lot of time thinking about things that I really can't change now that I'm contractually (voucher program) committed to a stove . I can't count the times I've looked at the EPA test report for the Super series LE and the 1 page EPA report for the Series D trying to decipher information from them. I'm beginning to conclude that besides volume of the stove, there's not a whole lot to learn for a lay person like me. (Can somebody tell me how they get their efficiency calculation from the data? ) Both reports seemed to be 14 or 15 pounds of crib wood (which I don't plan on burning) placed in the stove in the way I would never burn. The new reports give more detail - like now I know that the minimum BTU rating just comes from that 14 pounds of crib wood burning a the low level - perhaps a benchmark reference, but not replicating my future use of the stove. And to imagine these reports are based off of a small sample size of only 5 or so total burns and only 1 or 2 burns at each level, when we all know how much variability there is in the wood burning process - I'm not going to split hairs on small differences produced by their data.
What has recently struck me when comparing the two reports , is that with the crib wood, the minimum burn level for each stove still has them burning about the same number of Kg/hour of wood (.95ish) for both the Series D and LE stoves. The higher burns (air level wide open) are also roughly the same for both versions of the stove. So perhaps as far as the user goes, there's not a whole lot of functional difference.
I emailed a certain well known seller of PEs and that person praised both the Series D and LE as having had excellent performance, just one a bit cleaner. (True, one has a shorter track record.)
Regardless, with 20+ feet of straight up pipe, I'm suspecting I'll be having to cautiously learn some new burning techniques to keep either version of a T5 tame.
One last thought of this long post: What would be the biggest difference between secondary air linkage (series D) and EBT2 (LE version)? Having a smoke dragon, I can only try to imagine from reading posts online. Here's what I imagine:
- Secondary air linkage (series D): When you reduce (or increase) the primary air, the lever is connected to a second cover that also reduces (or increases) the secondary air intake. It's deterministic. Primary air opened, say, X cm^2 , secondary value opened k*X cm^2 with k is a factor of how much smaller the secondary is than the primary (so k<1). The user controls X, k is fixed.
- EBT2 (Series E): It has a small fixed secondary air, and the EBT2 valve adds additional air when there's a strong draft in the stove caused by lots of wood & gasses burning. So primary air is set by user, say, X cm^2. The user controls X. Secondary air is fixed plus the dynamic EBT2 system. So the secondary opening is, say, Y cm^2 when the EBT2 is closed and (Y+Z) cm^2 when the EBT2 is activated, where Y is the size of the fixed secondary opening and Z is the additional opening from the EBT2 when it is activated . The user has no direct control over Y or Z.
(I should stop having fun figuring out how to add equations to this forum and get to bed....)
If it were me, I'd opt for the series D, and here's why. It's a proven design, it's very clean burning. I don't want the be the test pilot for a brand new product in it's first year out. I have a PE Summit which is a close cousin to the T5 and burn a lot of wood. Every year, I get less than 1/2 of a coffee can of dry ash out of my 25' chimney, I'm not sure how much cleaner a stove can burn and still produce an acceptable level of heat output. Take a look at the new "clean" diesels, they get a fraction of the mileage of what diesels used to get, cost way more, and burn just a little cleaner.
The firebox in our T6 is the same as the Summit A. I would be happy if it had the newer firebox in the Summit C with the EBT2. Sometimes newer is an improvement.
And sometimes it is not, remember the Oldsmobile diesel engines from the early 80's? It pays not to be an early adopter.
One big change that has happened since EPA phase 1 is in the software used for stove design. This is making a big difference in helping manufacturers clean up stove emissions by studying computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Woodstock has done extensive computer modeling on their designs and SBI also for the 2020 ready stoves.
(broken link removed to https://www.engineering.com/DesignSoftware/DesignSoftwareArticles/ArticleID/18876/Using-CFD-for-Cleaner-Fireplace-Design.aspx?fbclid=IwAR0I2R7SGc32HJxE2icwb-JY5NbLUpOO9EQgOufl_a8ztjE5BEnyHtINtpY)
(broken link removed to https://www.engineering.com/DesignSoftware/DesignSoftwareArticles/ArticleID/18876/Using-CFD-for-Cleaner-Fireplace-Design.aspx?fbclid=IwAR0I2R7SGc32HJxE2icwb-JY5NbLUpOO9EQgOufl_a8ztjE5BEnyHtINtpY)
Computer modeling is all well and good until it meets the real world with real life situations. Ask the families of the 737 Max 8 disasters. They were marketed as being a much greener alternative to the older proven 737's. In reality it was a race by Boeing to catch up to Airbus at all costs.
There is little correlation. The modeling is just part of the design process. FWIW Woodstock stoves have a pretty good track record and they have been using CFD for awhile. The new SBI stoves look promising too. Note that the vehicles we drive today are much more efficient and reliable due to this type of modeling.
Edit: The Boeing situation is entirely different and should be taken up in a separate thread in the Inglenook if interested. The problem there was not computers, but corporate decisions and outsourcing. Blaming computers is like blaming the hammer after you smash your finger with one.
Edit: The Boeing situation is entirely different and should be taken up in a separate thread in the Inglenook if interested. The problem there was not computers, but corporate decisions and outsourcing. Blaming computers is like blaming the hammer after you smash your finger with one.
Last edited:
Our plan to buy a T5 Alderlea White has been pushed back another year, making it a 2020 model. I'm not considering this to be a set back at all
Similar threads
