[Stoves] The other side of airpollution

[AJH]

On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:20:50 -0400, Kevin Chisholm wrote:


>The chimney per se is probably quite inefficient as a heat engine. However, 
>I would suggest that the improved combustion resulting from the induced 
>draft would result in significant fuel savings, and reduced wastage of fuel 
>through either uncombusted fuel gases, or excess air losses. Obviously, a 
>poorly designed or operated stove system can negate these potential 
>advantages.

Kevin I agree, I was just asking you to state the bounds of your
"fact" that chimneys could be made to work more efficiently than a
flueless stove. Chimneys have major benefits but a flueless stove with
a fan is probably more efficient at delivering heat into a pot.

>While there could very well be significant improvements in "open flued, 
>solid fueled, stove systems", do you think they can be improved to the 
>degree that they would be approved for inside venting in Canada, the US, or 
>England?

No but it's not because they are inherently incapable of burning
cleanly enough for indoor use it's because of the possibilities of
misusing them. In much the same way we in UK cannot install pellet
stoves with simple balanced pr short flues, they have to comply with
the standards for normally aspirated solid fuel devices, which means
an insulated flue discharging above the eaves. It's not that the
pellet furnaces cannot meet standards allowed for natural gas
appliances, it's to do with the possibilities of running them badly.

The fact is that the standards that we in the developed world use are
too expensive for the developing world, they reflect our compact with
our peers that we will look after each other in agreeing to abide by
certain rules. What is hidden in that agreement is the *need* for
cheap energy but that's a philosophical point with no place on
[stoves] which seeks to find solutions for the disadvantaged on an
already strained planet


AJH