Basso Loto

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:23:24 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 07:31:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-12 17:00, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:39:34 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-12 14:43, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:03:29 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-11 20:29, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 06:58:31 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-09 14:57, John B. wrote:

[...]

In fact I can't remember any house having it's chimney cleaned so it
must not have been a common happening.


That is like with safety belts, grandpa's car didn't have them and he
lived well into his 90's. Yet we won't drive without.

I'm not saying that they don't happen, just that I never saw it happen
and we lived in one neighborhood and my grandparents lived about a
mile away and I think that if a chimney fire had happened in either
neighborhood it would have been BIG NEWS all up an down the street so
I think I would have heard about it.

But I would winder about why a chimney fire occurred twice within a
reasonable length of time.
Not setting their stove correctly, i.e., burning too rich a mixture
and generating too much "soot"?


The usual, making a fire in the stove and dampering it down too much.
That results in a hardcore creosote layer. They had smoke crawling out
of the chimney all the time. Even after those fires they did not learn.
Most people do not learn this, for whatever reason. Problem is that the
incompetence on the part of people with wood stoves also results in a
lot of wood burning bans that hit people who are competent in that domain.

Probably a defect in the modern educational system. Nobody seems to be
educated regarding how to manage wood fires any more. :-)


To my surprise the vast majority of "smoky burners" are old people. They
are also very resistant to learning anything knew about it, proclaiming
to be experts. One woman had the chimney smoking so bad that people
walking farther up the street started coughing. She usually threw one
lone log into the stove with just a few burning embers in there and
didn't even bother to open the air intakes. Upon suggesting to do it a
little differently she respomnded "Well, that's how my late husband
always did it and he knew!"

Loyalty! I just love it :-)


But both the "damper" in the pipe and the air inlets on the stove work
together to control the fire and improper adjustment have a major
effect on both the heat generated and the amount of wood burned.


Modern stoves like ours only have inlet controls. Primary air jets for
the initial phase (on/off control) and then a secondary air control with
vernier. The trick is to adjust that secondary so you have a sustained
hot burn above the wood (it mostly burns the wood gas) but no less air.
The result is a wood burn with no smoke and no smell as it should be.


... If
you have to cut and split your own firewood you will learn to be
frugal :-)


I just split another half cord of oak, by hand. Yet I'd never pollute
the neighborhood with smoke. Smoke crawling out of the chimney means
lots of unburnt particles in there so dampering a fire down too much is
actually a wasteful use of firewood. This is the key fact that most
self-proclaimed "experienced" wood stove users do not understand.

Perhaps, today. But when I was a boy wood fires were apparently much
better understood although no one worried about smoke in the sense of
contaminating the atmosphere but certainly in the sense that they
weren't burning the wood efficiently and therefore "wasting" wood...


I remember the not so good old days when as a cyclist I came through
small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough. There are
undoubtedly lots of people who lived there and needlessly and gruesomely
died of lung cancer because residents didn't know how to properly
operate a wood stove.

When I was a boy growing up in a northern New England town everyone
heated their house with either wood or coal, some people, my paternal
grandmother for example, were still cooking with wood, and I can't
remember any fumes floating around. Granted that 50 or 60 year old
memory is perhaps not so acute, but still, I think if the town had
been covered with a choking cloud of smoke I would have remembered it.

remember that in a northern New England climate where things certainly
do freeze that what's in the woodshed has to last until spring as the
snow is too deep to get to the woods to cut more.

My grandfather used to spend a month a year cutting trees in his "wood
lot", cutting to length, splitting and hauling back to town in order
to heat his house for the winter.


We have become decadent and now buy 3-4 cords/year. I add about a cord
each year from our yard and from splitting rounds that neighbors didn't
want.

Four cords of wood is about 512 cubic feet of wood. My grand dad's
"wood shed" was a building about (from memory) 25 ft long 10 ft wide
and probably 12 feet high. He packed it, literally, to the rafters by
late September or maybe October and burned it all by spring.
--
cheers,

John B.

jbeattie wrote:


Don't you guys have NG?
https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every
other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants.

-- Jay Beattie.


In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than
in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher
ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams.

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 16:59:58 -0800 (PST), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 3:23:19 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 07:31:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-12 17:00, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:39:34 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-12 14:43, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:03:29 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-11 20:29, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 06:58:31 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-09 14:57, John B. wrote:

[...]

In fact I can't remember any house having it's chimney cleaned so it
must not have been a common happening.


That is like with safety belts, grandpa's car didn't have them and he
lived well into his 90's. Yet we won't drive without.

I'm not saying that they don't happen, just that I never saw it happen
and we lived in one neighborhood and my grandparents lived about a
mile away and I think that if a chimney fire had happened in either
neighborhood it would have been BIG NEWS all up an down the street so
I think I would have heard about it.

But I would winder about why a chimney fire occurred twice within a
reasonable length of time.
Not setting their stove correctly, i.e., burning too rich a mixture
and generating too much "soot"?


The usual, making a fire in the stove and dampering it down too much.
That results in a hardcore creosote layer. They had smoke crawling out
of the chimney all the time. Even after those fires they did not learn.
Most people do not learn this, for whatever reason. Problem is that the
incompetence on the part of people with wood stoves also results in a
lot of wood burning bans that hit people who are competent in that domain.

Probably a defect in the modern educational system. Nobody seems to be
educated regarding how to manage wood fires any more. :-)


To my surprise the vast majority of "smoky burners" are old people. They
are also very resistant to learning anything knew about it, proclaiming
to be experts. One woman had the chimney smoking so bad that people
walking farther up the street started coughing. She usually threw one
lone log into the stove with just a few burning embers in there and
didn't even bother to open the air intakes. Upon suggesting to do it a
little differently she respomnded "Well, that's how my late husband
always did it and he knew!"

Loyalty! I just love it :-)


But both the "damper" in the pipe and the air inlets on the stove work
together to control the fire and improper adjustment have a major
effect on both the heat generated and the amount of wood burned.


Modern stoves like ours only have inlet controls. Primary air jets for
the initial phase (on/off control) and then a secondary air control with
vernier. The trick is to adjust that secondary so you have a sustained
hot burn above the wood (it mostly burns the wood gas) but no less air.
The result is a wood burn with no smoke and no smell as it should be.


... If
you have to cut and split your own firewood you will learn to be
frugal :-)


I just split another half cord of oak, by hand. Yet I'd never pollute
the neighborhood with smoke. Smoke crawling out of the chimney means
lots of unburnt particles in there so dampering a fire down too much is
actually a wasteful use of firewood. This is the key fact that most
self-proclaimed "experienced" wood stove users do not understand.

Perhaps, today. But when I was a boy wood fires were apparently much
better understood although no one worried about smoke in the sense of
contaminating the atmosphere but certainly in the sense that they
weren't burning the wood efficiently and therefore "wasting" wood...


I remember the not so good old days when as a cyclist I came through
small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough. There are
undoubtedly lots of people who lived there and needlessly and gruesomely
died of lung cancer because residents didn't know how to properly
operate a wood stove.


remember that in a northern New England climate where things certainly
do freeze that what's in the woodshed has to last until spring as the
snow is too deep to get to the woods to cut more.

My grandfather used to spend a month a year cutting trees in his "wood
lot", cutting to length, splitting and hauling back to town in order
to heat his house for the winter.


We have become decadent and now buy 3-4 cords/year. I add about a cord
each year from our yard and from splitting rounds that neighbors didn't
want.

Don't you guys have NG? https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants.

-- Jay Beattie.

Nope, no NG available. Instead we use solar heating. Cost is extremely
low here, much, much, much, cheaper than NG :-)

As an aside, I believe that you may be speaking of Natural Gas. As
opposed to No Good :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 16:59:58 -0800, jbeattie wrote:


Don't you guys have NG?

Far too expensive and not as reliable. It is going to cost $AUS5K to be
connected to the gas mains and $50/quarter plus usage charges.

Apart from the effort of moving it to shed storage, $400/ton is the wood
cost and it s far warmer than any gas or electric system.

On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
jbeattie wrote:


Don't you guys have NG?
https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every
other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants.

-- Jay Beattie.


In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than
in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher
ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams.

That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago,
that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very
efficient at low air temperatures.

There's this:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786


--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:
:On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
: jbeattie wrote:
:
:
: Don't you guys have NG?
: https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every
: other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants.
:
: -- Jay Beattie.
:
:
: In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than
: in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher
: ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams.

:That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago,
:that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very
:efficient at low air temperatures.

There are lots of units that have an efficency of greater than 100%
down to -14F.

:https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786

I'd have to see his numbers, but I expect he's under calculating the
efficency of the heat pump.

--
sig 112

On 11/14/2019 11:38 AM, David Scheidt wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:
:On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
: jbeattie wrote:
:
:
: Don't you guys have NG?
: https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every
: other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants.
:
: -- Jay Beattie.
:
:
: In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than
: in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher
: ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams.

:That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago,
:that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very
:efficient at low air temperatures.

There are lots of units that have an efficency of greater than 100%
down to -14F.

:https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786

I'd have to see his numbers, but I expect he's under calculating the
efficency of the heat pump.


??
Does 'efficency of greater than 100%' mean you get more
energy out than you put in?

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

AMuzi wrote:
:On 11/14/2019 11:38 AM, David Scheidt wrote:
: Frank Krygowski wrote:
: :On 11/13/2019 9:21 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
: : jbeattie wrote:
: :
: :
: : Don't you guys have NG?
: : https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats every
: : other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of pollutants.
: :
: : -- Jay Beattie.
: :
: :
: : In the Pacific Northwest, electrically powered heat pumps rate better than
: : in New England, due to cheaper electricity rates, higher SEER due to higher
: : ambient temperatures, and zero emissions from hydroelectric dams.
:
: :That seems to make sense. I was surprised to read, several years ago,
: :that Ontario was heavily promoting heat pumps. They're not very
: :efficient at low air temperatures.
:
: There are lots of units that have an efficency of greater than 100%
: down to -14F.
:
: :https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...neer-1.4024786
:
: I'd have to see his numbers, but I expect he's under calculating the
: efficency of the heat pump.
:

:??
oes 'efficency of greater than 100%' mean you get more
:energy out than you put in?

Yes. That's how heat pumps work. They pump heat from where you don't
want it to where you do, which is more effecicent that making the heat.
In the case of an air source heat pump used for heat, that's the outside
to the inside. used for cooling, it's the other way around.



--
What's the rule on that?

On 2019-11-13 16:59, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 3:23:19 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote:

[...]


remember that in a northern New England climate where things
certainly do freeze that what's in the woodshed has to last until
spring as the snow is too deep to get to the woods to cut more.

My grandfather used to spend a month a year cutting trees in his
"wood lot", cutting to length, splitting and hauling back to
town in order to heat his house for the winter.


We have become decadent and now buy 3-4 cords/year. I add about a
cord each year from our yard and from splitting rounds that
neighbors didn't want.

Don't you guys have NG?


Oh how I wish! But no, only propane here and thus price gouging.
Therefore, wood heat.


https://energykinetics.com/savingshe...elcomparisons/ NG beats
every other fuel in terms of cost per therm and low levels of
pollutants.


They forgot cord wood. It beats anything when it comes to cost per
therm, provided you do your homework WRT sourcing it.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2019-11-13 17:45, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:23:24 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-13 14:49, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 07:31:27 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-12 17:00, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:39:34 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-12 14:43, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:03:29 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-11 20:29, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 06:58:31 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2019-11-09 14:57, John B. wrote:

[...]

In fact I can't remember any house having it's chimney cleaned so it
must not have been a common happening.


That is like with safety belts, grandpa's car didn't have them and he
lived well into his 90's. Yet we won't drive without.

I'm not saying that they don't happen, just that I never saw it happen
and we lived in one neighborhood and my grandparents lived about a
mile away and I think that if a chimney fire had happened in either
neighborhood it would have been BIG NEWS all up an down the street so
I think I would have heard about it.

But I would winder about why a chimney fire occurred twice within a
reasonable length of time.
Not setting their stove correctly, i.e., burning too rich a mixture
and generating too much "soot"?


The usual, making a fire in the stove and dampering it down too much.
That results in a hardcore creosote layer. They had smoke crawling out
of the chimney all the time. Even after those fires they did not learn.
Most people do not learn this, for whatever reason. Problem is that the
incompetence on the part of people with wood stoves also results in a
lot of wood burning bans that hit people who are competent in that domain.

Probably a defect in the modern educational system. Nobody seems to be
educated regarding how to manage wood fires any more. :-)


To my surprise the vast majority of "smoky burners" are old people. They
are also very resistant to learning anything knew about it, proclaiming
to be experts. One woman had the chimney smoking so bad that people
walking farther up the street started coughing. She usually threw one
lone log into the stove with just a few burning embers in there and
didn't even bother to open the air intakes. Upon suggesting to do it a
little differently she respomnded "Well, that's how my late husband
always did it and he knew!"

Loyalty! I just love it :-)


But both the "damper" in the pipe and the air inlets on the stove work
together to control the fire and improper adjustment have a major
effect on both the heat generated and the amount of wood burned.


Modern stoves like ours only have inlet controls. Primary air jets for
the initial phase (on/off control) and then a secondary air control with
vernier. The trick is to adjust that secondary so you have a sustained
hot burn above the wood (it mostly burns the wood gas) but no less air.
The result is a wood burn with no smoke and no smell as it should be.


... If
you have to cut and split your own firewood you will learn to be
frugal :-)


I just split another half cord of oak, by hand. Yet I'd never pollute
the neighborhood with smoke. Smoke crawling out of the chimney means
lots of unburnt particles in there so dampering a fire down too much is
actually a wasteful use of firewood. This is the key fact that most
self-proclaimed "experienced" wood stove users do not understand.

Perhaps, today. But when I was a boy wood fires were apparently much
better understood although no one worried about smoke in the sense of
contaminating the atmosphere but certainly in the sense that they
weren't burning the wood efficiently and therefore "wasting" wood...


I remember the not so good old days when as a cyclist I came through
small valleys or villages during winter and had to cough. There are
undoubtedly lots of people who lived there and needlessly and gruesomely
died of lung cancer because residents didn't know how to properly
operate a wood stove.

When I was a boy growing up in a northern New England town everyone
heated their house with either wood or coal, some people, my paternal
grandmother for example, were still cooking with wood, and I can't
remember any fumes floating around. Granted that 50 or 60 year old
memory is perhaps not so acute, but still, I think if the town had
been covered with a choking cloud of smoke I would have remembered it.


It's not the memory, it that you were used to it. Just like we all were
used to the fumes of car traffic while nowadays I can immediately smell
if a vintage car passing me had a stock engine or a modern one.


remember that in a northern New England climate where things certainly
do freeze that what's in the woodshed has to last until spring as the
snow is too deep to get to the woods to cut more.

My grandfather used to spend a month a year cutting trees in his "wood
lot", cutting to length, splitting and hauling back to town in order
to heat his house for the winter.


We have become decadent and now buy 3-4 cords/year. I add about a cord
each year from our yard and from splitting rounds that neighbors didn't
want.

Four cords of wood is about 512 cubic feet of wood. My grand dad's
"wood shed" was a building about (from memory) 25 ft long 10 ft wide
and probably 12 feet high. He packed it, literally, to the rafters by
late September or maybe October and burned it all by spring.


NE is a very cold area of the country in winter. We and neighbors used
to get by with two cords. Then global warming ... didn't happen and now
it has crept up to about four cords. Just fired it up again.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/