Ban on wood-fired boilers-Its started.

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
JeffHK454 said:
Absolutely some of the stupids things Ive ever seen on this site where typed in this thread! You think I'm a tree hugger because I think a "oh well , try and catch me" attitude is stupid!

You can trace everything that's had the crap regulated out of it back to the people that said "they will never catch me" or "screw them it's always been like this"

I don't know If WFBs are bad or good I just read whats presented, Rspike has supplied a bunch of publicly available info about there short comings with no rebuttals other than...."I don't care about the pollution cause it blows away":confused: .

Please WFB people, change my mind.

JH

Gee, I'm sorry,

Serious rebuttal number 1. My CancerMaster billowing smoke on full fire.

<IMG SRC=http://tinypic.com/2uhpie8.jpg>
 
Last edited:
OK just one more. Same day, same stove, same fire. Sorry, no pics from the internet, just my backyard.

The Cancermaster smoking up three counties (no tires in this fire BWalker)

<IMG SRC=http://tinypic.com/2uhwq37.jpg>
 
Butch(OH) said:
OK just one more. Same day, same stove, same fire. Sorry, no pics from the internet, just my backyard.

The Cancermaster smoking up three counties (no tires in this fire BWalker)

<IMG SRC=http://tinypic.com/2uhwq37.jpg>

From those pics it looks like it burns very cleanly, who is it manufactured by?

I see you live in Ohio, who distributes them and what size is it sq ft wise?

I have friend that's in the market for a OWB and has been looking for one that has a good reputation for workmanship and efficiency.

The reason that OWBs take so much abuse is if you type in "Wood fired outdoor boiler" in a Google search you get a 1000 hits and there 95% negative and the 5% that aren't are sites selling them.

Like it or not 99.9% of opinions nowadays are formed from reading and seeing pics on the net , I'm surprised that there's not a bunch of positive spin websites contesting the misrepresentation of OWBs.

That's assuming they are being dealt a bad hand?

JH
 
JeffHK454 said:
From those pics it looks like it burns very cleanly, who is it manufactured by?

I see you live in Ohio, who distributes them and what size is it sq ft wise?

I have friend that's in the market for a OWB and has been looking for one that has a good reputation for workmanship and efficiency.

The reason that OWBs take so much abuse is if you type in "Wood fired outdoor boiler" in a Google search you get a 1000 hits and there 95% negative and the 5% that aren't are sites selling them.

Like it or not 99.9% of opinions nowadays are formed from reading and seeing pics on the net , I'm surprised that there's not a bunch of positive spin websites contesting the misrepresentation of OWBs.

That's assuming they are being dealt a bad hand?

JH

Mine is a Woodmaster and you can find dealer info on thier web site. My dealer is in Wilmont, I am between Columbus and Mansfield. I know what you mean about the net searching and that is one of the reasons I posted these same pics a week or so ago. There are 4 different makes operating within a mile of me and when it gets cold you are more than welcome to PM me and Ill take you on a guided tour.That beats any dealer hype or believing what I say eh? I think part of it is in what a person calls bad smoke. Like it or not there are places in this country where letting a Taco Bell fart in your back yard could land a person in trouble with pollution authorities, I don't live (thankfully) in one of those places. The forced draft boilers will smoke for maybe 2 minutes when coming up to temp from a long off cycle and about the same period of time when fresh wood is loaded but I have personally never seen smoke like some of the web pics even at the worst moment. The natural draft units like Central Boiler will smoke a tad more but again, personally I have never seen a CB smoke like the smoke cloud pics on the internet. Believe it or not I never even considered smoke to be an issue until I read about it on the internet and I have watched the units close to me for several years. Quite obviously there are some issues or they would not be singled out but I think that other things besides boiler design have given them a bad rap and that fuels the fires of regulation irregardless of the real reasons. One is the short stacks that are Std equipment, two is summer operation for domestic water heating and people are outside, three is the fact that the boiler Mfgs used to tell you about half under their breath that a person could use them for an incinerator. I have been told that 20 times at shows or by dealers. I am also sure that rotten or wet wood would add to smoke. A boiler system is a major investment, one thing the antis have right, and you should do some research. You will find precious few dissatisfied boiler owners in real life, one of the reasons I went with one. Fuel usage is going to be greater than an inside unit of the same efficiency for a number of reasons one of them being there is heat loss through the door, pumps and lines even with insulation. Another reason is the entire home is heated unlike most stoves that heat a room or two. But i seriously doubt that a properly installed one would use 25 cords as I have read on the 'net about. The owners I have talked to who have switched say about 25% more wood used but they are all heating domestic water too.
Have a nice evening
 
"Please WFB people, change my mind"

JeffHK454 said:
Absolutely some of the stupids things Ive ever seen on this site where typed in this thread! You think I'm a tree hugger because I think a "oh well , try and catch me" attitude is stupid!

You can trace everything that's had the crap regulated out of it back to the people that said "they will never catch me" or "screw them it's always been like this"

I don't know If WFBs are bad or good I just read whats presented, Rspike has supplied a bunch of publicly available info about there short comings with no rebuttals other than...."I don't care about the pollution cause it blows away":confused: .

Please WFB people, change my mind.

JH
Yeah , Thats what i have been asking and nothing has come up in the two different threads. Its like when it get down to it and information is posted its like a bunch a kids laying on there back , kicking, scratching and screaming. Well my pick up truck is from the 1960 and it dont smoke , no emissions and it gets 80 miles to the gallon of gas. ........... Yeah , right. Anybody can say anything , lets see some tests. Any proof on the other side of the fence ? And the talk about smoking up the neighborhood with tires and RR ties is just childish. Again , when the chips are down some just lay on there backs kicking and screaming.
 
Is the proof of efficiency the smoke out the stack, is it that simple? I do know in the auto industry that just because you can't see pollutants doesn't mean there not there. Did that make sense?

Rspike, when your stove is running at its least efficient , like in start-up does it smoke? If your stove had thermostatically controlled feed air how much would it effect efficiency?

I know these will be guesstimates but I'm trying to get an idea of how far the two are from each other in terms of burn quality.

Jeff
 
JeffHK454 said:
Is the proof of efficiency the smoke out the stack, is it that simple? I do know in the auto industry that just because you can't see pollutants doesn't mean there not there. Did that make sense?

Rspike, when your stove is running at its least efficient , like in start-up does it smoke? If your stove had thermostatically controlled feed air how much would it effect efficiency?

I know these will be guesstimates but I'm trying to get an idea of how far the two are from each other in terms of burn quality.

Jeff
Yes , My stove will smoke on a reload until the wood is chared ( 10 minutes at the start up of every load ) a load will run any where from 4 hours to 12 hours depending on how much wood is loaded. All wood should be seasoned to get max BTU's out of the wood. Here is my stove pipe and wood burning. Note the difference of smoke stains from an EPA stove to a outdoor wood boiler ( Butch(OH) pic's ) Pic #1 House stove Pic #2 shop stove pic #3 Butch(OH) OWBoiler pipe.
<img src="http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a97/Roospike/1-1.jpg">
<img src="http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a97/Roospike/4.jpg">
<IMG SRC=http://tinypic.com/2uhpie8.jpg>
 
JeffHK454 said:
Is the proof of efficiency the smoke out the stack, is it that simple? I do know in the auto industry that just because you can't see pollutants doesn't mean there not there. Did that make sense?


Jeff
Your understanding is correct to say that its not just that simple. Stoves are tested in a lab of emissions out put. The 3 biggest killers of OWBoilers is #1 they cycle off and on and smoke every time on start up , #2 No secondary burn chamber to burn the smoke ( thus is another reason they are only 25%-50% efficient ) and the third #3 is the outer water jacket that cools the main burn chamber and lowers combustion and burn box temps.
 
Try this link for some owner/user ****-chat. There are users and sellers that are in this group so you will get both sides of the coin on views.

[email protected]

Here is a sample of one:

"scottsworth wrote:
>
> It took me about 2 months in all, from pouring the
> concrete pad (we were doing a lot of concrete patio stuff here last
> year anyway), to collecting the boiler in our diesel PU, to having
> it loaded onto the pad with a backhoe to wiring and plumbing it.
> Then filling it with water, adding corrosion inhibitor and testing
> it, and adding the wood and firing it up...
>
> As for the hot water heat recovery, if you have a flat plate HX you
> will be fine. A side-arm takes a little longer to recover the heat
> from teh boiler to the water heater.
>

I think our total time from delivery to actually using the system was 3
months. We had our foundation ready, our dealer delivered the stove and
set it perfectly on the foundation for us. They also had all the
supplies we needed, all the PEX hose and even gave us the crimping tool
to use as long as we needed it.

The only problem we had that we couldn't find answers to easily was an
issue with water quality, we had conflicting information and were
reluctant to do anything wrong after making such a big investment in all
of this. We had to find another source for water to fill the boiler
because our well water is too salty. After calling our dealer and CB
one last time, we went ahead and filled the boiler and used one jug of
anti-corrosive, which worked out fine. After the first 24 hours of
running the pump to circulate, the pH tested 8.0 so all is well.
Apparently there has been a change in the anti corrosive but the
instruction book still has the older information. Or something.
Anyway, that was the only real problem we had. We were understandably
reluctant to "just go ahead" and fill the boiler when the book said we
had to have a starting pH of 6.5 and our water tested 6.0. I bought 5
gallon jugs of de-ionized water from a local water company to make up
the difference between the rain water we had collected and what we
needed. I think we had 140 gallons of rain water, which we ran through
a makeshift filter of clean cotton T-shirts. The first pH test after
running the pump for 24 hours was fine, like 8.0, so we knew it was OK.

We do have the side-arm water heater exchanger, and I'm happy with my
water supply. I have not yet run out of hot water, and I've tried my
best. I think the flat plate exchanger was quite a bit more expensive,
and we thought we would be fine with the side arm. I don't remember the
difference in recovery rates between the two, but we decided it wasn't
worth the extra expense for us. There are four of us in the household,
and we have a 50 gallon water heater, so we should be fine even after
our boys decide that daily showers are a real virtue. I have been using
hot water for all towel loads and anything else I want extra clean,
before when we used propane to heat our water I almost never used really
hot water.

Today is our second day of heating the house. We heated one day last
week and now today temps are low enough that the blower has come on
several times during the night. My husband installed a valve and
temperature switch so that when the thermostat calls for heat, the valve
to the heat exchanger in the furnace plenum opens and water circulates.
Then, when the temperature comes up in the heat exchanger, the blower
starts. He wanted it this way so that we weren't blowing cold air
around for a few minutes, and it is working perfectly. We are very
pleased, and our house is comfortable.

My father has heated with and indoor wood stove for about 30 years, and
he told us that we would be using double the wood that he uses. It is
not cold enough yet to know for sure, but so far I think we are *not*
using double the wood that an indoor stove uses. I know there are many
variables involved, but we are keeping a small-ish fire going most days,
and only use 3 logs per day on average. This is nice dry maple and oak,
about 20 inch logs. For sure, I don't miss all the smoke, and the bugs
and spiders that come in on firewood when it's hauled into the basement!"
 
OWB disinformation campaign

JeffHK454 said:
Absolutely some of the stupids things Ive ever seen on this site where typed in this thread! You think I'm a tree hugger because I think a "oh well , try and catch me" attitude is stupid!

You can trace everything that's had the crap regulated out of it back to the people that said "they will never catch me" or "screw them it's always been like this"

I don't know If WFBs are bad or good I just read whats presented, Rspike has supplied a bunch of publicly available info about there short comings with no rebuttals other than...."I don't care about the pollution cause it blows away":confused: .

Please WFB people, change my mind.

JH

There are many OWB sites on the web. You can do a Google search yourself and you will find most of it is biased against OWBs. The pollution issue is mainly BS and many of us have posted photos showing the little amount of smoke that our OWBs are giving off as they are being used. Note that we have Woodmasters, Central Boilers and some custom made units. Most show very little or no smoke, which in fact is the way that most of these system run most of the time. We are not all making this up. I was amazed when I saw a Central Boiler unit in use when we went to look at them. I had real all this BS about how smokey they are. Not so. My EPA fireplace smokes a lot more than the CB OWB does here. But that is my personal point of view... so lets look at one of your so-called 'publicaly available info about the short somings' of OWBs on the web. A common one posted by the state of New York is:

http://www.woodheat.org/technology/NYSOBreport.pdf

This site is obviously anti-OWB slanted. They site 'typical' designs but leave out the details and names of boilers. The graphic of the OWB chimney comparison to a house chimney is absurd. Our standard CB boiler stack is well above our house roofline here. They show a stubby stack that barely clears the OWB roof, and compare that to a two story house chimney. Now... is that a factual data being reported to the public? No... looking further they show photos of really smokey OWBs in so-called 'common' operation. They do not say where the OWBs are, what the manufactures are that are burning, and what is being burned in them. No, they leave out those details becasue that would not support their claim. If they were non-biased, they would post this information. Oh, but they go on and report "limited study" details by the EPA and all the rest of the data is shown comparing everything to that LIMITED STUDY. Oh, but based on that information, we can extrapolate all this evil and horror about OWBs and disinform the public. And pile on facts about all wood smoke, or any smoke for that matter, and make all sorts of claims that do not really relate directly to OWBs in particular, say as compared to an old fireplace. Then they refute the efficiency of using wood boilers, the 'real' cost of wood compares to burning gas and oil. Somehow their math says that I am not really saving any money here... and I will not recover my investment, but my wallet says otherwise. Our electric bill is $200 less a month this year! Oh, but they go on about other regulations and states that have regulated OWBs. Then they post information about NY state regulations. Then... they actually post some good data about why you should not burn pressure treated wood, tires, garbage, etc. in OWBs. This is interesting, as they show photos of OWBs that are obviously being misused and burning something other than seasoned firewood. Odd twist... then they go on to state that the boiler tests were not consistant nor is there a testing standard, and thus the data that is posted is varied. Then they say that the testing should be considered as a whole. Why is that? If the testing is BS, of what value is the total sum of the testing results? So, what exactly on this NEW YORK STATE OFFICIAL SITE relavent to anything regarding outdoor wood boilers? Other than to show some smokey boiler photos, say that some 50 people made complaints, and make wild claims based on "varied" testing results???? :angry:

I could pick apart many other sites, but I guess the anti-OWB people will not care about facts or claims or accurate testing or actual photos posted by many of us here. Disinformation is out there and being digested by the masses every day, and spit back out so much and so often as to confirm the original disinformation... :bang:
 
SOooooooooooo ..... Your saying that everybody should take "your" word for it over state testing and EPA testing of 7 different brands of outdoor wood boilers? Well why not just bring back the old wood stoves and cook stoves that was around before the EPA stoves ? The old stoves heated the house and saved on electric , Natural gas , LP and fuel oil . Jim Bob says " there fine and nothing wrong with them and they dont smoke" There you have , If Jim Bob says there ok and dont smoke then it must be official no matter what state test and EPA test say. Common .......... Lets see some real #'s Want to see lab test that say otherwise. All lab test show 25%-50% efficiency and 50-80 grams per hour of emissions. If that were any better, than the outdoor wood boiler companies would have the lab test to show it. PS The outdoor wood boiler companies do have lab test but it would not be wise to post the #'s and try to sell stoves. It would be like Ford trying to sell new pick up truck that only get 5 miles to the gallon. Jim Bob's word is not proof enough to change minds over state and EPA test. Thats why there are bans on outdoor wood boilers.
 
1.jpg
2.jpg
3.jpg
4gross.jpg
5.jpg
6ph-stv2.jpg
7.jpg
8.jpg
 
http://www.mass.gov/dep/air/community/burnwood.htm#owfb

Outdoor Wood-Fired Boilers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given the high costs of oil and natural gas, a growing number of people in Massachusetts and elsewhere across the country are looking at outdoor wood-fired boilers as potential money-saving solutions for heating their homes.

These units are typically located outside the buildings they heat in small, insulated sheds with short smokestacks (usually no more than six to ten feet tall). They burn wood to heat water that is piped underground to provide heat and hot water to occupied buildings.

Outdoor wood-fired boilers are substantially dirtier and less efficient than most other home heating technologies. An investigation by the New York State Attorney General's Environmental Protection Bureau found that even when used properly, one of these units emits as much fine particle pollution as:

2 heavy-duty diesel trucks
12 EPA-certified indoor wood stoves
45 passenger cars
1,000 homes with oil heat
1,800 homes with natural gas heat
NESCAUM, the Clean Air Association of the Northeast States, has also completed an Assessment of Outdoor Wood-Fired Boilers.

With their large, smoldering fires and short smokestacks, outdoor wood boilers create heavy smoke and release it close to the ground, where it lingers and exposes everyone in the area to nuisance conditions and health risks. Although these units are designed to burn dry, seasoned wood, some people use them to burn green wood, which generates much more smoke, and even household trash or construction debris, which not only can release a harmful array of chemicals but is also against state law.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not established emission limits for outdoor wood-fired boilers. Even when these units are operated according to manufacturers' instructions, they often create nuisance conditions that are prohibited by state air quality regulations. Municipal fire departments and boards of health also have the authority to control outdoor wood-fired boilers, and some have enacted by-laws or ordinances that prohibit or limit the use of these units.

MassDEP and local health boards have taken enforcement actions against people who own and operate units that have caused excessive odor or smoke. Regardless of how much a unit might have cost to install, sometimes the only way to resolve the nuisance conditions an outdoor wood boiler creates is to stop using it permanently.

If you are thinking about buying an outdoor wood-fired boiler, first check to be sure it is legal to install and operate one in your community, and if so, whether there are any specific restrictions you need to know about. Second, consider the impacts an outdoor wood-fired boiler could have on your neighbors and their property. Finally, if you do purchase a unit, never use it to burn anything other than dry firewood, and to the extent you can, operate it only during the cold weather months.
 
OWB Victims ?

OK, full disclosure here: I don't like OWB. There, it's done!:biggrinbounce2:
Here's why: except for only one maker, all the OWB's are like the old Ashley wood stoves that gave wood burning the bad rap: creosote makers. Push in the wood, damp the fool down, make creosote to make chimney fires, bother the neighbors...seriously bother. It stinks. It's why wood stove manufactureres and the EPA spent the time and $$$$ to engineer stoves that burn cleaner and , repeat, AND more efficient. Damn, when we bought our first "EPA stove" in 1990, it saved me near 1/3 of the wood mass for heating. No bull. Look it up.
Now, I don't much care for those ordinances and rules on behavior. But when you get into someone's face, then what do you do ? 9mm into the OWB ??? ;) Give me the Glock John.
Point numero 3: the OWB are frankly silly. You need a whole lot of plumbing, power, valves, switches, anti-freeze, etcc... to make the beast operate. Forget the fact that you have take your little body outdoors ( OUTDOORS !) to feed the beast. You want to go out at oh-dark-hundred on a balmy February morn to load the thing ?
Still think they're a good idea ? What do you do when the power goes ? Yes, Downeast at least, we have outages at least 3-7 days a year. :blob2: Rant over.

Love to you all OWB people.:rockn:
 
OK, full disclosure here: I don't like OWB. There, it's done

I'll drink to that :cheers:

And I don't like the government shoving regulation down my throat and I don't trust them any farther than I can throw one of the fat butt bureaucrats.
There I have come clean too.

Facts in my case are
I place more importance on having the fire outside of the house than some do.
When I added in the cost of a masonry chimney to the cost of a inside stove or furnace the total installation costs come a lot closer than the anti crowd likes to crow about
I live with-in eye site of 5 boilers so I didn't have to rely on the web for my information. All are satisfied and no horror stories of train loads of wood needed.
I see no smoke clouds, just wisps when shut down followed by a brief period of smoke when starting up.
I have a near endless supply of wood on my farm and enjoy cutting wood so saving a pick up load a year is of no consequence to me.
I have two buildings to heat and that would have required two stoves and two chimneys (and don't like fabricated steel chimney systems)
Assuming steady gas prices and adding some money for system power and maintenance my boiler will be paid for in 2 1/2 years and that is figuring only the house heat and water for 8 months.
My system has been running for a month now and I have three neighbors, one across the road. One beside me about 150 feet an one behind me same distance. I actually asked them if it was annoying them in any way, answer, no.
My wood usage so far is in line with the demands placed upon it which is minimal heat and my domestic water.

I cannot vouch for particulate emissions, just smoke and have provided pictures. As for EPA supplied data and pictures I can prove that their smoke pictures are typical EPA hype so why would I trust the data, sorry Spike.

Anyone who would like an honest look at boiler operation is a welcome guest. I surely cant stop them from posting here what they see and smell.

I am stepping out of here, simple subject getting awfully deep for my simple mind. Have fun guys.
 
You Stihl-Ho You

Hey you Stihl-Ho You...you're right on target. It works where you are: large woodlot, buildings other than a home to heat, steady large suplly need. Go for it.
Our experience is with semi-rural/suburban burners with little experience with wood boilers or stoves.
Now, step away from the boiler :blob2:
 
Smoke and mirrors

Yes, post MORE disinformation photos showing the same smokey OWBs there. Collect all the smokey OWB photos that you can find and post as many as possible. Make sure that you do not inform anyone where the photos were taken, when they were taken, where they came from, and what type of OWB they are, and what is burning in them. Eventually you will glaze the public's mind about what public policy should be. Make sure that you extrapolate bogus information from vague testing and make sweeping assumptions from that data and claim that it can be summarised to support your claims that all OWBs should be banned or regulated, or even better, LICENSED so that the state can collect a fee for people using them.

Ooooooooooh, the report posted on the web site if from the *state of NY*.... thus anything they post should be accurate and correct, even if they say right in the report that the testing was varied and not based on any standards. They do not say what is burning in the OWB photos. Tires? Railroad ties? Used motor oil? They do not say when the photos were taken. Or where. Canada? Mexico? Iraq? They do not even say what brands or types of boilers were tested in the data that they post. Oh, they tested 7 out of what, 50 or so? Bozo boilers, Inc? Then they should tell me, a citizen of the *state of OREGON* what I should and should not believe based on vague and unsubstantiated data and photos?

Methinks not. I believe what I see and know to be true, and not what the state of NY attourney general tells me to believe. I swear, some of the idiots in this place are even dumber than some of the morons over on the Mother Earth News energy group. And hey Bubba, my name ain't Jim Bob. I have several advanced degrees in engineering, so I am, 'Dr James Robert,' to you. But just the same, that'll be me there with Darryl and my other brother Derryl burning tires in your front yard next week. We will take several photos of it, retouch them digitally, and post them on this site to "inform" the public about how badly your EPA certified and approved stove burns.

:notrolls2:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top