I agree ,you will need a lot more wood ,and that would be overkill for such a small house.
Wood Stove For 100 Year Old Farmouse Advise Request
- Thread starter marsofold
- 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. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
jetsam
Minister of Fire
My neighbor loves his OWB, but he uses a LOT (probably at least 5x) more wood than I do for the same heat. Maybe 10x if you factor in that he also burns that thing all summer for DHW.
My friend burned over 15 cords a year with his OWB, they do eat wood, I'd put a wood furnace before one of those, of course a properly positioned stove would be number 1.
Ashful
Minister of Fire
I know people burning 25-30 cords per year in their OWB, to heat typical 2500 sq ft. Two-story colonial houses. Two of them were briefly regulars on this forum. One guy here was running 30 cords per year to heat a well-insulated 2-bay garage shop, as well. The amount of wood those things eat and waste is obscene.
maple1
Minister of Fire
I would likely rephrase just a little and say '...CAN eat and waste...' . 'Traditional' OWBs have lots of horror stories around them no doubt, but there are some situations where a new EPA OWB, installed right and operated the right way and fed the right stuff could be a viable solution, IMO. But to get this reply back to this thread topic, this isn't one of those situations, at all.
OK. No OWB. What do you guys think of batch box rocket stoves? Look at http://batchrocket.eu/en/
Homebuilt of course. Supposedly the most efficient way to heat.
Homebuilt of course. Supposedly the most efficient way to heat.
SpaceBus
Minister of Fire
I don't think I've read a long term success story with a rocket stove/mass heater. Tiny fireboxes mean lots of tending.
There are lots of claims made about all kinds of rocket stoves. And it is not nessecarily a bad idea. But many of those claims are simply nonsense not backed up by fact.
Rocket stoves are a complicated solution to a simple problem that can easily be solved with a self contained widely available free standing all in one modern EPA wood stove. Keep it simple.
maple1
Minister of Fire
After seeing my father constantly on the look out for wood and working in the woods to supply his OWB I realized pretty quickly that while I love processing firewood I would quickly tire of making it a year-long pursuit.
OK. I'm back. While I didn't measure the flue, it is rectangular and eyeballs to be around 12" x 6"-7". The fireplace diemsions are: 23" wide x 7.5" deep x 29.25" high from floor to underside of decorative arch surrounding the fireplace. There is a brick wall inside separating this fireplace from its twin on the opposite side of the wall going up about 4 feet high into the flue. So my questions are: #1 could I use a 45 degree double wall stovepipe section on the output of the stove going feeding into another double walled short pipe going into a 45 degree double wall stovepipe section in the fireplace going vertical up into the flue? Hopefully it would give me the 6"+ needed for safe clearance from the foreplace and I wouldn't have to use a thimble into the wall.. #2 what stove comes closest to my ideal of: preferred rear-venting for minimum stovepipe height, under 500Lbs (my floor isn't the best), absolute minimum 2.3 cubic feet firebox volume, preferred NON-catalytic design, maximum $2800 cost. I'm looking at an Osburn Inspire 2000 even though it isn't rear-vented. The rear-venting Jotul f50 TL Rangely looks tolerable if rather heavy (569Lbs). If I absolutely have to do a thimble on the wall, then I'm looking at the Drolet HT-3000.
OK, looking at what options are actually existing for sale online, I've whittled it down to two stoves: The Jotul T50 Rangely stove and the Osburn Inspire 2000 stove with the minimalist base. Please help me with this choice. I prefer long burn times, less fussiness about the chimney draw, and long term low maintenance.
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Two medium non-cats, so don’t expect long burn times from either. The Osborn lists theirs at 8 hours max, likely optimistically, Jotul doesn’t even list theirs.
if you forgive that one issue, Jotul is known for making some of the highest quality stoves on the market. I just wish they had some basic tech specs listed, they don’t even list the firebox volume anywhere I can find it.
Osburn lists 75k max BTU, whereas Jotul lists only up to 32k, but this is almost definitely due to a discrepancy in test method, Jotul is using the EPA test load and Osburn is likely using hardwood to hit that number.
if you forgive that one issue, Jotul is known for making some of the highest quality stoves on the market. I just wish they had some basic tech specs listed, they don’t even list the firebox volume anywhere I can find it.
Osburn lists 75k max BTU, whereas Jotul lists only up to 32k, but this is almost definitely due to a discrepancy in test method, Jotul is using the EPA test load and Osburn is likely using hardwood to hit that number.
The Osburn is 2.3 ft3 and the Jotul is 2.55 ft3. What happens to a catalytic stove's performance after the catalyst needs replaced but hasn't been? Does the catalyst physically degrade and prevent any operation of the stove, or does the stove just run less efficiently but usably?
jetsam
Minister of Fire
A cat stove with a dead cat won't have any secondary burn unless it's roaring, and even then it won't be anywhere near as complete as a healthy reburn in a noncat.
The reason we all love EPA stoves is that an efficient stove puts out more heat with less wood. If you burn a cat stove without the cat, you will be hauling more wood for less heat.
Ceramic cats can physically degrade if they are abused mechanically or thermally. In a well designed stove with an educated operator, they do not. Steel cats only physically degrade from mechanical abuse.
For an occasional user, cat replacement may not happen in the stove's lifetime. For a 24x7 burner, it can be every couple years. Manufacturers recommend 10,000-12,000 hours, and I have found that 12k hours is pushing it for shoulder season use.
Similar threads
