

By John Ackerly | March 21, 2011










Authors: John Ackerly
President, Alliance for Green Heat and Board Member, BTEC
(202) 596-3974


3 Responses

  1. Roger



    John, I agree with most of what you say but there are other variables that should be considered before jumping on the wood-burning stove bandwagon. First, the GPH label on all EPA certified stove is obtained after testing in an EPA certified lab under ideal conditions. Meaning, the burn cycle is controlled, wood is dried to an optimum level, and only one species of wood is used. Obviously manufacturers' can design their stoves to pass the test, but once the stove is installed in a home the variables used to obtain certification are not realistically reproducible. Hence, the GPH label means nothing and neighbors in proximity to the wood-burner pay the price. Also, even if engineers can design stoves to theoretically equal the emissions from fossil fuels' extraction, refining, and transportation that means nothing to the neighbor of a wood-burner who ends up breathing the Particulate Matter 24/7 from a neighbor who could care less about drying his wood to create less emissions. Unless manufacturers' design a stove that cannot be abused by the average home owner, wood burning will always be a contentious issue pitting neighbor against neighbor, especially now that the internet has given people access to the science of PM 2.5. To add validity to my arguments talk to neighbors in the vicinity of a Phase II EPA certified Outdoor Wood Boiler. The internet is full of stories where people had to sell their homes at incredible looses to escape the smoke from these so called efficient stoves. Until we solve the problems associated with wood-burning at the micro-level (home owner) all the macro level theory in the world will not bridge the gap between those who burn wood and those who do not. Respectfully, Roger

  2. John



    Technology exists to produce pellets that are 50% wood and 50% clean burning polymer that has carbon dioxide and water emissions. Particulate emissions will go way down but carbon dioxide emissions from a non-renewable source will go up for these pellets. Because the BTU/pound is 70% greater than that of 100% wood pellets the particulate emissions would drop to a very low level. Neighbors may not object so much and the land fills won't fill up so fast.

  3. Roger



    I wish it was that easy John. Unfortunately, cord-wood burners will dominate the market as long as people pereceive them to be cheaper than pellet stoves.


    Leave a Reply


    Comments are closed