does anyone make a 75% efficient wood stove?

[sachsmo]

You know there is a $300 tax credit for 2009 for installing a 75% or better bio fuel heating device. Some of the pellet stoves are getting this but would like to know my options with wood stoves. Remember this has to be the EPA rating, some manufacturers homebrewed ratings are much higher than the (true) EPA ratings.

 

[November Wolf]

I believe Central Boiler's E-Classic has a epa rating of 85%.

 

[excess650]

Quadrafire

http://www.quadrafire.com/Products/Wood_Burning/Wood_Model.asp?f=4300STEP

 

[atvdave]

This thread may help Mobetter.. some suggest on this thread that you can get around the 75% EPA mark.

For me.. I'm screwed... I got mine in 2008.
sucks.. the only year they DON'T offer a rebate...

http://www.**********/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/32458/

 

[Haywire Haywood]

How much of a pain is a catalytic stove to maintain vs a non cat? I was reading that thread over at hearth about the tax rebate and in looking at a few stoves, it appears that the cat models are more likely to meet the requirements and be more efficient too.

The Lennox Montecito that we had decided on is rated at 72%, and since that is a manufacturer's "independent lab" rating, I assume that it's inflated at least 5-10%. Meeting that 75% in an impartial EPA test might be hard to do in a non-cat.

This has gotten me thinking about installing a tankless water heater.

Ian

 

[MishMouse]

Typically the EPA rates CAT stoves with a default of 72% and non-cats with a default of 63%.
http://www.epa.gov/Compliance/resources/publications/monitoring/caa/woodstoves/certifiedwood.pdf
Which is not a very good rating system.

My Harman TL-300 only produces 1.1 grams per hour which is far less then most stoves on the market, but it still is listed at only 63%. But since it burns more of the smoke, it should have a higher rating.

To meet the new standards and to hit that 75% requirement, the stove manufactures will need to redo there testing to get a true accurate rating instead of the default the EPA assigns.

 

[Haywire Haywood]

My Harman TL-300 only produces 1.1 grams per hour which is far less then most stoves on the market.

The Montecito claims 3.7g/hr and says it meets "EPA-II" and "Washington State" guidelines whatever they are.

Ian

 

[mechaniacal]

Based on this http://www.hpba.org/index.php?id=34 they are going to use a lower heating value to determine efficiency. My local stove shop showed me a letter from Jotul that said all of their stoves are expected to be 75% or higher and eligible for the tax credit with testing and documentation coming in the summer. Nothing On Jotul's site. The non-cat F400 I am looking at is now 73%, not too far to go, but it would be nice to know for sure before I buy.

I don't see anything at Vt. Castings or other stove company sites either. You'd figure stove companies would be all over this.

I'm tired of this useless fricken cold brick hole in my wall and there is still some heating to do yet this winter and spring. I'd rather go with a non-cat from what I understand of the differences. I wonder if the stove shop would stand by the letter if I bought now.

 

[Haywire Haywood]

That's great news.. maybe I can write off some of this stove install next year.

Ian

 

[Patrick62]

I could not resist

How many bricks do you have?


http://www.schucker.org/Wiki.jsp?page=RussianFireplace

 

[CrappieKeith]

You know there is a $300 tax credit for 2009 for installing a 75% or better bio fuel heating device. Some of the pellet stoves are getting this but would like to know my options with wood stoves. Remember this has to be the EPA rating, some manufacturers homebrewed ratings are much higher than the (true) EPA ratings.

They(IRS) has not identified what testing proceedure or what facilities they will accept for verification of the 75% yet.
I spoke with them today.
All manufactures are waiting to see what we have to do to comply with this new tax credit.

 

[ducati996]

Regency would be another

 

[Wet1]

http://www.**********/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/36224/

 

[CrappieKeith]

I could be wrong ,but I thought the EPA was conerned about particulates not efficiencies.
Is there a standardized test?

1 of the things I think about when it comes to in lab testing vs real life operation is that there are no 2 like operations.
How can there be a law that says ...whatever?

Should there then be a law that say's all wood burners(people) need to have wood moisture contents verified and flue diameters verified and insulation of that flue verified?
Just being rhetorical.

Aso to get a efficiency rating they measure co2 against flue gas temps.
What happens when you have a small fire compared to a large fire.
Will not the efficiency drop or raise?

I totally agree that smoke should be burnt.Less particulates in the air makes sense and more heat in the home makes sense along with less wood being needed makes sense.
What I do not go along with is how can the goverment basically mandate how we are going to heat our homes and with what are we going to use.
The Feds have always held a hands off approach to this issue.

Not anymore. Some states require an EPA tag on a stove.
They refer to the EPA 40/60 rule subpart AAA. That rule exempts furnaces right in the 1st page in the exemption page.
Yes, some states (Wa.) has done 1 step further to include all wood burners.

Yukons are UL listed...UL does not list furnaces that are under 75% efficient.
In order to be that efficient you have to burn smoke to make those extra btu's plus have massive heat exchangeability to exchange that heat quick enough.

I don't know where I was going with this ,but I do know if you use a furnace,stove or OWB that is efficient who cares about the credit.
In the long run you'll be so far ahead of the game from the normal payback
that the small credit the goverment stimulus is offering will be a pitance
compared to what wood burning can put back into your pocket.

 

[mechaniacal]

My fireplace has just as many bricks as those Russian jobs, just no baffle to slow smoke or HEAT on it's way up the chimney.

This company is listing its non-catalytic wood stoves that they think will meet the 75% efficiency.
http://www.quadrafire.com/Tax_Credit/stimulus-tax-credit-stove.asp

They also post the following commentary.
"While the new tax credit takes affect immediately (and also applies to qualifying stoves already purchased in 2009), the Internal Revenue Service has not issued a full list of efficiency guidelines for manufacturers to qualify their products. If the IRS accepts the recommendations of the Hearth, Patio & Barbeque Association and the Environmental Protection Agency, we have determined that the following products will meet or exceed the guidelines*"

Efficiency from
http://www.omni-est.com/publications/Emission_Reduction.pdf
"Certified woodstoves and pellet stoves are more efficient than pre-EPA-certified conventional woodstoves. When a particulate reduction benefit analysis is conducted not only do the differences in emission factors need to be taken into consideration but the differences in efficiencies also need to be considered. This is because stoves with higher efficiencies will burn less wood, which means less total particulate emissions for a given heating demand. There are numerous ways to measure and report efficiencies26-40. There is no universally, or even generally, accepted standardized method to measure or report efficiencies, and in fact it is still an area of contention. The contention is often exacerbated by the competitiveness of marketing claims."

Nice rant Keith, when Yukon comes out with a Wood/Oil Steam Boiler let me know. It seems like you should come out a winner with this and I hope it works out that way. I'm about to buy a stove, so I sure would like to save $600 or so. I'm just trying to figure out if I should wait until this is hammered out or pick out a stove that will surely pass.

A buddy has wanted to replace his old stove with a new efficient model, but couldn't justify it. He might take advantage of this. That is a sale not made without the tax credit.

 

[CrappieKeith]

I don't know that was a rant ...more like questioning current policies and the way they become standards. I disgree with the blanket policies laid out with little real world applications.

As to buying a stove or furnace.....winter's almost over....I'd wait a few months to let the dust settle a bit on this issue of 75%.

 

[logbutcher]

How much of a pain is a catalytic stove to maintain vs a non cat? I was reading that thread over at hearth about the tax rebate and in looking at a few stoves, it appears that the cat models are more likely to meet the requirements and be more efficient too.
This has gotten me thinking about installing a tankless water heater.
Ian

Got both cat and non-cat running full time. Yes, the cat takes more fussing, BUT for the extra heat, efficiency, and air control it's worth the tiny extra.
Both stoves heating ( no backup or "from 68 F up" on a gas or oil furnace ) the same space with similar insulation, the non-cat Oslo needs loading close to 2X the Encore cat for similar heat. There's no way to get down and dirty scientific about it.
The non-cat is an easy load: fill the stove, wait 'til the temp rises ( ~ 500-600 F ), lower the air. The cat stove needs one extra step ( two if you're counting or have O.C.D. ) : load with full air, get the temp up, then drop the damper bypass for the cat, wait until the temp rises again to "light off" the cat, THEN lower the air. Simple really. We usually use an alarm for a reminding.
Routine yearly maintenance is the same except for the cat. It needs checking and cleaning each year. We replace the cat every 3 years or so if it's not lighting off after the vinegar bath cleaning ( again simple but smelly ) to restore and clean the paladium coating on the cat cells.
The VC cat stove parts are $$$$, and PITA to install.

Now for the tankless water heater: do it. Total cost around $1500. ( if you don't do it yourself ). Forget any real payback compared to gas or electric tankers, since you have unlimited hot water. Great for kids in the house. The bennie of long showers and running mulitple appliances at the same time make up for the savings.

 

[windthrown]

http://www.**********/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/36224/

Wow, $1500 toward a CB E-Classic boiler! That along with my $8,000 from Obama to buy a house should get me a house with an OWB fully installed! With me installing it of course...

Then I will resume the role as the world's most insane wood hound. Then again, the E-Classic is supposed to be more efficient, so I do not have to get as much wood as I did with the old Classic model.