wood stove good or bad?

diyfrank · January 23, 2009, 08:51:27 PM

http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_6970_346054_346054
It says not for washington??
How come?
There is one on CL for $150.

Jens · January 23, 2009, 08:55:34 PM

Probably because it isn't an airtight design, and not EPA approved. I personally, have no problems with these stoves, and it is what we planned to get, all sold out here though. There's always next season, good thing for short winters!

January 23, 2009, 09:03:31 PM

Frank I am not real sure but it is something like CA when it comes to emmissions and not catalyic (sp?) converter (after burner) I think. Here anything goes. That even includes the old double 55 gallon stoves kits.

diyfrank · January 23, 2009, 09:09:40 PM

Not EPA certified It says.
$330 new?? sounds cheap built. Do you suppose this would give you trouble due to cheap craftsmanship?

MountainDon · January 23, 2009, 09:20:47 PM

BAD. Cheap chinese cast iron, not airtight and not worth trying to make it airtight.

WA state has ~~some of~~ the most stringent rules regarding wood burning stoves. Probably not legal for new installations in a home anywhere because it's not EPA approved. Many places you could get away with it in a workshop or remote cabin.

I've seen its junior sized sibling and it was probably not worth the money charged for, IMO.

January 23, 2009, 09:33:47 PM

The one I saw was so leaky there's no way the fire would likely carry overnight. My opinion of course.

I spent months, most of a year, looking for the low cost, well built, safe, efficient and decent looking wood stove I 'knew' had to be lurking someplace. Never found anything that met all those factors that was less than $700 - $800. Early on I found the VC Aspen, but said 'no way - too expensive' . In the end that's what we did buy, for $50 more than the price was when I began the search.

Maybe my criteria were too picky, but I never saw a used stove that I wanted either; at least not close enough to consider.

diyfrank · January 23, 2009, 10:09:54 PM

Thanks for your replies.

Don, That's why I asked.
I knew someone had see one.
I've been eyeballing that one in your cabin. It's steep but I don't want something I'll regret later either. Kind of like cheap whiskey.

MountainDon · January 23, 2009, 10:33:01 PM

How big is your place? How cold will it get outside?

We are happy with that VC Aspen. It looks good, works well. We have 432 sq ft actual interior space. When it is quite cold it does take a while to get the cabin warm. Like it was 27 degrees inside and it took 4 hours to raise the temp to 67. Looking at that, a larger stove might be better.

However, we have no problem carrying a fire overnight once the cabin is warmed up; fill at 11 PM, get up at 8 AM, when it has been down in the teens overnight. Oh and that's with only R13 in the ceiling at present. Come spring that will be increased to about R50 with blown in cellulose.

We probably could have done with a plain flat folded and welded steel stove for less if we'd found a used one. It would have been larger which on the one hand could be a plus in warming up from a cold start. On the other hand we didn't want a big stove taking up more space. And I never had anyone say they didn't like the looks of it. VC makes visually appealing stoves; more so than many.

diyfrank · January 23, 2009, 10:59:34 PM

The cabin will be 16 X Actual floor space will be 301 sq ft. It will have a loft and 12 / 12 roof so it will be a large space. Judging by yours would you suggest larger or about right? I plan on R walls and R floor and ceiling.

1 wood door and 1 window per wall double pane used unkown.

January 23, 2009, 11:08:35 PM

I think it should be fine. One difference between our places is we have no loft, so the heat has less height to fill. I calculate we have about 3450 cu ft. With a loft and smaller floor space you may have about the same cu ft.

We also have a 24 VDC ceiling fan that is not yet operational; have to get the 24 VDC battery bank set up in spring. The fan will help circulate the air and should speed the warm up a bit.

With a loft will you also have a section with a cathedral ceiling? A fan would help that a lot.

diyfrank · January 23, 2009, 11:33:52 PM

I'll put a fan in.
Its not too bad during the summer but the fall gets fairly cold.

MaineRhino · January 24, 2009, 08:06:37 AM

I had a stove very much like that one in the first post. Very unsafe to use IMHO. With the sq. footage you have I would go a little bigger, and use an airtight stove. The wood stove is no place to go cheap, you get what you pay for.

Woodswalker · January 24, 2009, 09:16:35 AM

Frank,

All the comments so far are right on. WA has strickter standards than the EPA. If you like Don's, I have a very similar stove I'll sell you for $250. Was made by Waterford (Irish), has glass in the door, is EPA certified, and in nice shape. The stove has firebrick on the sides, and refractory cement in the bottom. Used it for two winters to heat my home in Lacey, but have switched to a Godin, that burns coal or wood. If you want, I can even deliver it over to your Curlew site when I head over to my cabin there in the spring. If you contact me at my regular email, I can send a pic.

Steve
sprestin@aol.com

glenn kangiser · January 24, 2009, 12:05:20 PM

Our old 1920 Round Oak is nearly air tight and if I wanted to reseal the joints where it goes together it could be , but it is so close to air tight that it easily holds a fire all night. It was one of the better stoves of it's day and is still excellent today. The castings are so well made that they are thin yet air tight. Not common in much of today's junk.

January 24, 2009, 12:22:00 PM

I have to say, I have this very stove. I heat my entire 1500 sq ft house with it. true, it's not airtight and yes I must get up and chunk it at least once during some single digit nights, but it does what a wood stove should do... heat. never could figure that california, washington thing.

Jens · January 24, 2009, 01:47:21 PM

that's kinda what i thought about it Zion. Sure, you get what you pay for, but sometimes a little less convenience is fine if is saves a lot of green. IMO, 6-7 hundred dollars is a lot of green, hell, thats two months mortgage! Is that all the actual benefit is to airtight? Just that it doesn't need attention overnight? I have never understood why, or what the big deal is. Better than a fireplace at heating and retaining coals I would imagine. Plus, the way I think about it, if I can buy it cheap, save up for a better one in the meantime, then sell the first one (usually for almost new cost), then where is the harm with that?

zion-diy · January 24, 2009, 04:18:41 PM

Yeah to me the name of the game is save money. Of course I should have mentioned that it only cost me $35 dollars for the stove. found it on ebay. new, still in box in north Little Rock. no reserve. man I love them auctions. I guess after 3 years use, in don't owe me anything :-)

MountainDon · January 24, 2009, 05:28:59 PM

Why would someone want to pay more for a wood stove that is EPA approved?

Back when catalytic converters, air pumps and all that crap was making our 1970's automobiles cost more and perform poorly, getting lousy mileage and all, I was against the rules changes. I will admit to having run a few engines without the crap that was forced on the auto makers. However, as time has passed the auto manufacturers were able to return performance and increase fuel mileage as they cleaned up the tail pipe emissions.

Even with greater numbers of cars on the road the air is cleaner than it was in the 70's.

It's the same thing with wood burning stoves. New designs with smoke passages that allow gases to be burned further result is smoke that pollutes less. The same can be achieved with catalytic converters, though IMO, that is a second rate method as converters may need replacing. For these systems to work the stoves must be made airtight and remain airtight with little maintenance.

So again, why would someone want to pay more for a wood stove that is EPA approved?

For the same reasons they purchase more expensive organic foods, or grow their own. For the same reason some folks seek out raw milk. For the same reasons some drink bottled or filtered water. For the same reasons some avoid vaccinations. For the same reasons some folks really do not like second hand cigarette smoke blowing their way. Better health, a cleaner more pleasant environment, and sometimes to have a prettier looking stove.

In some places it means you can use your EPA listed stove any day of the year while non listed stoves and fireplaces can not. (No burn days in some places like ABQ.) There are some exceptions to the EPA rule, even in the state of WA.

As one who is generally NOT interested in government interference, I do appreciate the fact that sometimes there have been beneficial results.

Jens · January 24, 2009, 08:05:15 PM

Thanks for the explanation Don, makes sense. With the amount of people in this world, poorly burned fuel is definitely not too cool, whether autos, powerplants or otherwise. Is that the advantage to an airtight box though? Is that necessary to have a complete burn? I know you are not a stove manufacturer, but I don't understand how a non-airtight stove couldn't burn clean. One idea I've been thinking about, is to have a secondary burn chamber above the box, that the smoke travels through before going up the chimney. In theory, you would burn quite hot, and any unburned exhaust would combust within this second chamber through ignition heat put off by the box. Kinda like a cat, I guess. I don't understand why the box would need to be airtight for this to work though.

So I guess a fireplace would be totally against EPA, yet they still allow them to be installed. Its rather curious, actually. A totally inefficient burn, that lets off little heat, is ok, but a more (although less than EPA standards) efficient burn, that puts off more heat, and so doesn't have to burn as much, isn't ok. Of course, the hotter you burn, the fewer emissions there are anyway, so if you had that second chamber thing to keep the chimney from getting too hot, you would be back down to low emissions I would think. Kinda like how a well tuned, properly built hot rod engine, can actually have the same emissions as the new off the line stuff with all their added crap. Gotta take care of it properly though.

MountainDon · January 24, 2009, 08:48:15 PM

Without being airtight I believe it's not possible to control the burn to reduce emissions well. Your idea of a second chamber is more or less what has been done with my little wood stove. The air enters at the rear and flows towards the front on the stove, under an ash grate. This air is regulated by a thermostatically controlled flap. There is a secondary air inlet that is not regulated. It supplies air that is preheated and distributed at the top of the firebox via three multi-ported stainless steel tubes. This air is to allow full combustion of the gases given off by the burning wood, rather than have then disappear up the chimney. Try and work that into the design; makes sense to supply fresh warm air if you want something to burn. That Aspen is not as simple a little box as it looks to be.

Due to the sometimes weird and wonderful

ways of governmental rules, fireplaces are exempt from the EPA rules. However, the fact remains that an ordinary open front fireplace is a poor heating device; overall a net loss may be the result. There are many good inserts that give the fireplace effect (with glass doors).

WA state has the strictest rules...
Type of Device      Washington Limit      EPA Limit
Catalytic wood burning device      2.5 grams per hour      4.1 grams per hour
Non-catalytic wood burning devices    4.5 grams per hour      7.5 grams per hour
Factory-built and masonry fireplaces    7.3 grams per kilogram      Currently no limit

As a point of reference older uncertified stoves and fireplaces can release 40 to 60 grams of smoke per hour. My Aspen is rated at 4.3. It just sneaks in under the WA limit.

WA state even has rules on moisture content (20%) of the firewood; most places it's simply common sense to use dry wood. Any new wood burning device sold, offered for sale, or given away to Washington residents must meet Washington's standards. Even devices that are exempt from EPA certification must meet Washington standards. My understanding is that means you can not install a used old non-approved wood stove in WA state.

On top of all that the state or local government can issue total bans on wood burning under some circumstances, even if the stove is an approved model. One of the few exceptions to the rules would be older homes with no other source of heat. All new construction and significant remodels there must have a non wood heat source as well.

Nice scenery in WA state; too many rules, IMO. Well, okay it is darn beautiful,

might be worth it. $:-\$

MountainDon · January 24, 2009, 10:23:33 PM

Sounds like a great stove John.

John_C · January 24, 2009, 10:37:11 PM

If I can ever get around to building the smaller house of my dreams it will probably have the Aspen stove like yours.

I'm looking forward to feedback when you spend more time up at the cabin. I am concerned that a stove that small won't burn through the night.

MountainDon · January 24, 2009, 10:51:55 PM

For the size of our cabin, in the weather conditions we'll be there, I think it's alright. The overnight outside temp has dropped to about 16 a couple nights that I was up there. It carried 8 - 9 hours with still having a good amount of charcoaled wood left to get the fire going again with no problem. The firebox does require splitting some wood into rather small sticks so you can insert enough wood. The next model up might be better if the weather was below zero, the cabin bigger. I don't recall the price of it, but it was several hundred more.

We had a VC Intrepid back home. It heated out 832 sq ft house fine, overnight even with -30 degrees. At those temps there wasn't much left in the firebox in the AM; just enough to get it going again though.

CREATIVE1 · January 25, 2009, 02:34:45 PM

Here is a link to Washington state approved woodstoves. Many of the models seem to be available used.

http://www.swcleanair.org/woodstovelist.html

wood stove good or bad?

John_C

John_C