The presenter does a pretty good job discussing the two technologies, but doesn't actually demonstrate the burning. He also doesn't hat mention that there are Hybrid stoves, that do both high heat and/or long burns as well as high efficiency.
Does high efficiency equate to putting the most heat per pound of wood into the space to be heated? We need a metric to measure that.
I'll listen to it again tomorrow morning, but I think he was making the point that the EPA measurement is measuring pollution going into the atmosphere and NOT heat efficency of heat to pounds of wood. Also to consider is needing a standard for what a pound of wood is, where in the real world it depends on what kind of wood, how long % water content etc.
I believe there is a "standard" for the wood, that the US standards and the EPA uses for testing. He does say near the end of the whole discussion of how they work that the Blaze King will burn much longer than the Osburn, but the Osburn will burn the same wood hotter and faster. So I think what he is actually saying, in different words, is that the BTUs (British Thermal Unit) are pretty much the same, and the variable is how hot and how fast an owner would take advantage of the energy. He might change his tune on the "pretty flames" if he actually watched the light show of a Fireview or any of the catalytic or hybrid stoves. The EPA has a pretty good site for this. Woodstove Database | Burnwise | US EPA
Yep, I just watched that video again for like the tenth time, too. Even I posted that video on here about a year ago. Good stuff, I like learning all I can
Ah, I didn't realize someone else had posted that video. What makes this a more difficult task to measure one stove against another is the variable of high heat/shorer burn times, vs. lower heat/longer burn times. Chances are the Secondary Burn technology stove given a set number of pounds of wood at a set wood type/water content would win in a high heat comparison. Where a Cat stove might win in a long burn mode. One of the reasons I really like my Absolute Steel is the hybrid technology makes it very good, if not the best, at both. Now to get opinionated, I have a good friend who has a Woodstock Soapstone Progress. That stove has everything going for it. Hybrid Tech and Soapstone exterior. Those things can heat big homes better than anything and still bring big heat to the party when called upon to do so.
Oh no big deal, I'm sure we have new members that might not have seen it yet. It's good that it comes around again
My stove pipe goes through my bedroom and I had a reburner tube stove. The amount of heat that came off the stove pipe made the room uncomfortably hot. I now have a Woodstock fireview and all the heat comes off the top of the stove from right above the catalyst. The stove pipe temp is much cooler and less heat is being lost out of the pipe. I prefer the catalyst stove. But to each their own.
I've got one too. I love it. Perfect size for my home and the centerpiece of the main living area. Also have an Absolute Stove in the downstairs family room area. The AS is a great heater but the Fv is my favorite.
As long as you're not smoking out your neighbors by burning tires, plastics, styrofoam, etc......................Gooberment at any level has no business in how we heat our homes IMNTBHO!!!
The EPA efficiency is not combustion or emissions efficiency, it is appliance efficiency like a furnace which is the amount of heat delivered to the room vs. amount of energy consumed by the device. The rest is sent up the stack which is how they measure it. Most of the good stoves (woodstock, BK, Kuma etc.) are very similar and quite high. There are some surprising dogs though from well known brands. Personally, I have a high heat application where I use a noncat at max output, and a low output application where I use a cat stove at low output 95% of the time. No value to be added for a hybrid mix of the two. I would consider a hybrid to be a cat stove since it has a catalyst.
Have you noticed any increase in creosote when you switched? Cooler stovepipes tend to allow creosote to form easier vs a hot pipe. At least it was my belief that is what happens, I was told/read somewhere to avoid those addon pipe reclaimers because of them creating more creosote.
The last time I cleaned the stove pipe I got almost a half sandwich bag of dust. I believe that the combuster has a more complete burn than a tube reburner stove (less particulate). I was a new to wood burning when I had a tube stove and the quality of my wood is much better. The first few years my wood was not bad ( year old ash) but now it is great. I used to get half a coffee can of creosote. Completely anecdotal and more than one factor but that has been my experience.
If you've ever seen the heat exchanger of a modern wood furnace, it's nothing but a huge magic heat device in the flue path. The problem was never the MH device but the operator trying to burn crap fuel in a crap stove at low burn rates for a long burn time. That causes flue temperatures to fall so low that junk quickly accumulates. I also switched from a modern noncat stone stove to a blaze king catalytic stove and the cat stove puts a lot more junk black flakey junk in the chimney. The noncat was so inefficient that it blew tons of heat up the stack and kept it light tan and very clean.
I get maybe a half can of soot in 2 years with my tube reburner. I took a picture of it one year and posted it here when we were discussing chimney cleaning. I think half a can might even be generous.
I’d be interested to see a complete list of the stoves you like, with the “surprising dogs” via brand and specifically by model. I’m not just asking about stoves that would fit your home application, just general stoves to make your list. Would be interesting to see some of the dogs too.
The complete list is the epa list. The context of the quote you took was that many stoves from well known brands tested poorly. Take a look at the list, you can sort by efficiency and see who sucked.
I was more interested in models you liked because of features, but that’s ok. I’ve looked at the epa list plenty.
