Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Concerned » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 17:10:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WisJim', 'I')nsulation is cheaper than fuel in the long run. Our present house is an old 2 story farmhouse, gradually remodeled and insulated over the last 17 years, with wood heat. We replaced the old woodburning forced-air furnace with a new one last fall, and burned a bit more than half as much wood this winter as in most previous winters. Our new furnace is a Charmaster Chalet:
http://www.charmaster.com/wood.html and we are pleased with it. It also has a coil to preheat our domestic hot water, which we have set up with a 50 gallon water heater tank, so it is also reducing the amount of LP (propane) that we use in the winter to heat water. Our house is about 1800 square feet plus the basement, and we will use about 3 to 3.5 full cords of mixed hardwoods to heat it this winter.


There is so much that could be done if everyone started investing now. Energy is just too cheap.
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box."
-Italian Proverb
User avatar
Concerned
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Thu 23 Sep 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby benzoil » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 17:33:54

I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I suspect that wood is measured by volume rather than weight because it's a ton easier to get out a tape measure and measure the size of the stack than to put that stack on a scale. Buyer is assumed to know that pine is a lot different than oak/maple.
TANSTAAFL
User avatar
benzoil
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Windy City No Longer

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 18:00:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('benzoil', 'I') don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I suspect that wood is measured by volume rather than weight because it's a ton easier to get out a tape measure and measure the size of the stack than to put that stack on a scale. Buyer is assumed to know that pine is a lot different than oak/maple.


Also remember that seasoned wood (air dried) is a lot lighter and burns appreciably hotter than gree and still wet wood. Even green wood cut ibn winter has a decent moisture content compared to several months seasoned wood. Idealy this winter you burn the wood that you cut the wonter before and which has been seasoning since under cover so that it will be dry and light.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Commanding_Heights » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 18:08:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('benzoil', 'I') don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I suspect that wood is measured by volume rather than weight because it's a ton easier to get out a tape measure and measure the size of the stack than to put that stack on a scale. Buyer is assumed to know that pine is a lot different than oak/maple.


Actually measuring by size is NOT the way to measure a cord. The proper way is by weight. It all has to do with density and btu's. For example a cord of pine wood weighs 2669 pounds and only puts out 17.1 million btu's per cord. (I would not reccommend burning pine btw. but that's another issue) On the other hand a cord of white oak weighs 4012 pounds per cord and puts out 25.7 million btu's per cord. That's a difference of 1343 pounds and 8.6 million btu's. Assuming that you need 8 cords (which is much more than I use, but I live in the mid-atlantic) you're paying $400 to $480 for 136.8 million btu's for pine and 205.6 million btu's for white oak. That gives you a difference of 68.8 million btu's between two different types of wood. That means you need twelve cords of pine to equal the btu's of 8 cords of white oak. At $50 to $60 a cord that's a $200 to $240 difference for the same amount of btu's. Don't fall for the cord by size trick.

If you're looking for free wood. just call some grading and landscaping companies and tell them next time they are doing some clearing of hardwoods in your area you'll take them. Offer to even pay for they gas for delivery but don't let them charge you! This is because they either have to pay dumping fees for the stuff or pick through it to find the premium for the mill. After they pick the premium they still have to pay for dumping the rest. Most will be more than happy to dump at your place when they pay $60 to $75 a dump load at the local landfill. It's just additional cash in their pocket and gas paid for a job they had to do anyways.

It also strikes me that this thread really can't answer the question of how many cords a person needs. Although I guess it could be calculated based upon energy usage. There are just too many factors like passive solar, insulation, location, microclimate/landscaping, people in the house, comfortable temp, additional energy sources etc etc...
User avatar
Commanding_Heights
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu 09 Nov 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby steam_cannon » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 18:09:16

SOME small IDEAS.

Having a back up plan is a good thing. Like making a warm room with a tiny "back up" stove. Having a small ice fishing stove when you need it could make a big difference. And if you need to change your location, many small light stoves can go anywhere, like in a fishing tent.

Extremely Tiny Woodstoves
Image Image
"The original Very Small Woodstove is the Jotul 602, from Norway. This model is a mere 12 inches wide, 19 inches deep. They are found most often in cottages and cabins in the woods, where the 602's good looks are a highlight. It's been around almost forever. Jotul claims over 1 million of these have been manufactured. Waterford and Garden Way produced a near identical stove called the Reginald 101, but it is no longer in production, but available used, as is the Jotul 602. Although very small it can heat amazingly well." http://www.jotul.us

Image Image Image
http://www.marinestove.com/futurestoves.htm
http://www.walltentshop.com/FourDogStoves.html
http://goodoutdoors.theshoppe.com/wilde ... stove.html

Also I was reading an article about how some people in Poland use tiny wood stoves for extra heat in apartments. They are certainly small enough to stick a stove pipe out a window (with fittings).

Another thought, about frozen pipes... In a house a person could install drains for the water system and set up a warm room, all just in case. Most houses don't have any way to drain the pipes, like this one:
http://www.kunstler.com/Grunt_wrecked_house.html

In Old Sturbridge Village, a reenactment museum near me, the people who lived here years ago didn't have any plumbing in the walls, so freezing water pipes was not a problem. Interestingly they only warmed up their house if someone was sick. In one building, in the winter they had hanging frozen meat in the room the children slept in. The old days sure were something else! Fun fun! :roll:
Last edited by steam_cannon on Wed 11 Apr 2007, 18:15:14, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
steam_cannon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2859
Joined: Thu 28 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
Location: MA

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Commanding_Heights » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 18:14:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('benzoil', 'I') don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I suspect that wood is measured by volume rather than weight because it's a ton easier to get out a tape measure and measure the size of the stack than to put that stack on a scale. Buyer is assumed to know that pine is a lot different than oak/maple.


Also remember that seasoned wood (air dried) is a lot lighter and burns appreciably hotter than gree and still wet wood. Even green wood cut ibn winter has a decent moisture content compared to several months seasoned wood. Idealy this winter you burn the wood that you cut the wonter before and which has been seasoning since under cover so that it will be dry and light.


This is a VERY good point and something I forgot to mention in my above post. When paying by weight DON'T pay for green wood.

The optimal mosture content is somewhere between 20% and 30% for cured. I'd be interested to know if anyone has any links to weight reduction of certain woods after cured. How many hundreds or thousands of pounds are lost after a 60% to 70% water loss.
User avatar
Commanding_Heights
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu 09 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Commanding_Heights » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 19:03:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '=')"Gideon Most important thing about woodburning - use seasoned wood.


So true!

The following is taken from http://www.chimneysweeponline.com/howetwd.htm

Airtight woodstoves extract heat from wood in two ways. The primary source of heat from a woodstove is the combustion of the wood itself: the secondary source is the combustion of the gasified resins and unburned wood particles that result from the primary fire. Unless yours is a very primitive model, you'll find a baffle plate of some kind near the top of your stove, between the fire chamber and the flue outlet. This is where the secondary burn occurs, and where your stove creates up to half the heat it delivers to you. The amount of secondary combustion that occurs varies widely from model to model, largely due to advances in heat extraction technology over the years; a twelve-year-old baffled airtight can be presumed to operate at about 45% efficiency, while many of today's EPA approved woodstoves exceed 70% efficiency. The big difference between the older woodstoves and today's woodstoves can be found in the baffle area, where newer, more sophisticated techniques have been incorporated to re-burn the exhaust gases.

When you add an unseasoned or wet piece of fuelwood to your fire, the water contained in the wood heats up and turns to steam, which mixes with the exhaust gases and extinguishes the secondary burn. Regardless of how sophisticated your baffle system is, this cuts your heat output by up to 50%, and results in cool, water-laden exhaust filled with unburned particles and exhaust gases. This wet, heavy, high-density smoke travels very slowly up the chimney, where it cools even further, condensing onto the walls of the flue and causing excessive creosote formation. So, when you burn unseasoned or wet wood, you dramatically DECREASE your heat output, while dramatically INCREASING the likelihood of chimney fires.
Another drawback to burning wet or unseasoned wood is creosote formation on the viewing window. No matter how good the airwash design that keeps the window clean, it won't work when the firebox is full of wet smoke. A blackened viewing window is one of the most reliable indicators that the fuelwood is improperly seasoned.
User avatar
Commanding_Heights
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu 09 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby kjmclark » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 20:42:50

This is our stove:
Image
It doesn't look like Lopi is carrying this model anymore. It's supposedly 70% efficient. It sure does a good job of heating our house, but our house is only 900sq. ft. I insulated the heck out of the attic last year, and we seal the windows with plastic film. We also don't bother heating the basement, but we send the exhaust air from the gas dryer into the basement with a special vent. My wife is also fond of baking.

It's really nice having that cooking surface on the stove, btw. The two levels make for a great cooking/warming set of surfaces. We boil down most of our maple sap on the stove in the late winter.

My favorite book on wood heating is "The New, Improved Wood Heat" by John Vivian, available used at Amazon for $10. A bit out of date, but full of great ideas and wisdom. Just don't split wood like they show in the picture on p. 344. (Splitting wood with your maul on a billet, next to an axe w/ head buried in the top of the same billet!)

For the record, we use between 4 and 6 face cords per winter. This winter we used 5 I think. We had a few face cords left over from last season and ordered a cord late in the winter.

I agree with everyone who said seasoned wood. There are also a number of good references online for green and seasoned wood moisture content.
User avatar
kjmclark
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Fri 09 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Heineken » Wed 11 Apr 2007, 22:13:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Commanding_Heights', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'N')o one has mentioned the labor (and time) involved in heating one's place entirely with wood.

As someone who heats entirely with wood, I can tell you that this is a huge oversight.

Also, Gideon is right: There is an inverse relationship between how fast wood grows and how much heat energy it supplies. That is because the slower wood grows, the denser it is, and vice versa. "Fast-growing" methods (like coppicing) aren't a magic bullet.

Wood can play an energy role in a future world, but it will be a radically different world with far fewer people.


Do you have any links/docs that dismiss coppicing as a "magic bullet"? I'm truly not trying to be a smart ass, I'd really like to read some opposing view points. My understanding is that even though the density of the wood might not be as much and the btu's not as high, the enormous growth rate more that compensates for that. I even tried a coppice experiment with a 1/4 acre wooded lot I own that has mainly poplar. (I know, I know not the best wood for heat but it is a fast grower) I was able to cut more than enough coppiced wood with some to boot in a 3 year time span.

I've also heard of people chopping the coppiced wood into bits and getting a larger return (over the long term) from wood stoves due to increased mass and less space for oxygen. Kinda like coals putting off heat for days. I know the heat wouldn't be as hot but it does make sense that maybe the wood would burn/smolder longer.
But like I said this is just something I've read/heard here and there and have no proof.

When you refer to labor involved are you referring to cutting, hauling, stacking or loading the stove. I'm guessing all of the above.

Not to beat a dead horse but coppiced woods are once again much easier to deal with in this sense because you're not dealing with trees weighing tons that require chain saws, and lots of feul for hauling. They also take a lot less time to dry.



I'm not trying to bash coppicing. For some situations I can see how it would make sense, such as, perhaps, for people with a lot of open land and relatively few trees. No, I don't have any links, just my own experience with wood and wood-burning.

Cutting coppiced wood still requires a chainsaw unless you have a very short winter (like maybe two days long). :)

I don't agree that methods (or species) that promote fast growth compensate for the low-density wood that results. Low-density wood tends not to form coals, which is crucial to making a hot, long-burning, clean fire. What you tend to end up with with low-density wood is a lot of smoky fluff and a fire that needs constant tending and refueling. Not to mention less heat. I'd think that chopping coppiced wood (or any wood) into tiny bits and trying to burn the result would make the problem even worse unless the stove is equipped to handle that (like a pellet stove).

Yes, the labor involves all of those things plus splitting (a biggie), cleaning out the ashes and disposing of them (I put them in my garden), chainsaw maintenance, and periodically cleaning the stovepipe (I do it just annually, but some authorities recommend more frequent cleanings). I also have to dismantle my catalytic combuster and clean it, along with the area where the pipe enters the stove, which collects creosote particles. (I hate the catalytic combuster, but I'm stuck with it for now since I have a 1980s-era Englander.)

Oh, and don't forget collecting (or making) kindling. Very important.

And then all the work in keeping the fire running just right. Many adjustments during the day, and many trips to the woodshed over the course of a week.

So between the labor items you listed and the ones I added, labor is a huge component of wood heating. I don't mind the work, and I'm used to it. But it's there, a big fat reality of this way of life.

I use mostly white oak, taken from thinning cuts to improve my stand. It's a wonderful wood. I'd burn hickory (which is even better), but I don't have much hickory and I'm trying to encourage its reestablishment on my land.
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia
Top

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Tanada » Thu 12 Apr 2007, 06:40:20

Speaking of Cottonwood and Pine we had a special name for those when I was growing up, Gopher Wood. Why? Because as soon as you got the fire stoked you had to Go-For-Wood because it would be ashes by the time you returned.

This thread drums up some strange memories ;)
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby nocar » Thu 12 Apr 2007, 08:01:40

Growing, cutting and seasoning your own wood certainly requires a large lot and lots of labor. I think we can develop systems that are more convenient for the user, and more adapted to city life.

Wood burning district heating is a possibility. In Sweden (and Finland I believe) it is very common for cities and neighborhoods to have district heating plants that heat water for tap water and radiators. In fact, district heating systems were used already in the happy cheap oil days, and were rather easily converted to burning renewable fuels. Most of them do these days.

A more modern development is cogeneration of electricity and heat, using biomass. You get electricity and heat. Such plants must be large, though, and are not yet common.

I am also surprised that noone so far has mentioned wood pellets. Many homeowners in Sweden that are not connected to a district heating system now replace their oil furnaces with wood pellet furnaces.

Wood pellets have some drawbacks compared to oil. You need three times as much by volume (bigger storage place or more frequent deliveries) and some weekly emptying of ashes. 15-20 minutes work per week is what I read about. You set it up with an automatic feeding system to the furnace - that is why it requires so little work. The advantage today is the price - a lot less expensive than heating oil.

Not everyone might be familiar with wood pellets: They are industrially made from scrap wood, ground up and very dry, and then compressed into standard sizes, shaped like cigarette butts but about twice as big. Wood pellets burn very cleanly, with little smoke and pollution.

Of course district heating with wood and wood pellet furnaces in individual homes require more transport than growing your own wood around your house. In a totally oil free world - can we imagine wood-fuelled steam ships on inland waterways? Sailing ships with wood on larger bodies of water? (In fact, wood transporting sailing ships was the last commercial use of sails to disappear in Scandinavia, a viable business well into the 20th century.) Can we imagine ponies pulling carts on rails from the ships to the heating plants? Slow speeds and rather light loads need quite simple rails to increase efficiency and can be drawn right through neighborhoods, since there are little risk of serious accidents and noise. (Wasn't rail transport started with ponies pulling coal, by the way?) Can we imagine homeowners transporting their weekly load of pellets by bicycle trailer a few kilometers from the pony transport? Teenagers having their pellet routes (like a newspaper route except scheduled differently) for pellet distribution to homeowners who rather pay for the transport of their pellets?

A very nice thing about wood, wood pellets and such, is that it is not poisonous - a spilled load is no environmental hazard, and you need no specialized containers to transport it safely.

nocar
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Heineken » Thu 12 Apr 2007, 09:28:06

Growing wood doesn't require any labor, nocar. Given the right conditions, it happens naturally.

As for pellet stoves, I hate them. Why put oneself in the position of having to rely on, and buy, an engineered wood product?

In recent winters many people with pellet stoves had trouble buying pellets because of pellet shortages. And pellet prices soared.

Suddenly pellet stoves didn't seem like such a hot idea. :)
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby nocar » Thu 12 Apr 2007, 11:45:22

Well, if you own a wood lot and just have to contribute your labor, traditional wood is probably the way to go. Especially if you like the job.

The major premise was a city situation.

Cost going up with demand? Well since wood pellets are made from renewable material, old Adam Smith economy would say that supply soon should start to increase, when the producers discover this is a good way to make money.

In what ways are wood pellets loud? I have never heard this before. (Almost ten years ago when we had to change our heating system, I wanted wood pellets. Hubby thought the techniqe and the feeding thing looked very primitive and unreliable, so we installed a ground heat pump. Constantly dependent on electricity, which I think is the major drawback with heat pumps. It has worked fine, though. So I have no personal experience of wood pellets, but I know they are used more and more here. As are heat pumps)

nocar
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby nocar » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 04:24:27

OK Gideon then I understand. You are relieved of the (sort of enjoyable) task of putting in fresh wood, but instead get mechanical noise. The reason this issue has not surfaced in Sweden probably is that the typical situation here is an oil furnace in the basement being replaced by a wood furnace in the same place. Basements like this are usually used for furnace, general storage, perhaps a laundry room, possible a garage. A bit more noise from the furnace is not a problem.

nocar
nocar
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri 05 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby benzoil » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 10:22:49

Gideon raises an interesting point about location. Around here most people seem to have their wood burners outside. This could be because Michiganders just love going outside at the height of winter to toss logs/pellet bags around or for some other reason.

My understanding was that the insurance companies loathe wood burners and so most systems have been outdoor installs since the last energy crisis (late 70's). I've seen several outdoor pellet burner systems around here. The hopper for the pellets looks huge.

Placing one outside probably doesn't do too much to the overall energy efficiency since you'll need a pump indoors or out. Of course, this assumes your water line is relatively well insulated, unlike mine.
TANSTAAFL
User avatar
benzoil
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Windy City No Longer

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Frank » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 16:39:40

Outdoor boilers are horrible polluters; typically just a big fire box surrounded by water. They burn very inefficiently and use lots of wood. We installed a Tarm wood-gasification boiler with 600 gal. storage tank so it's always burning hot. Upside: easy to tie into existing hot water baseboard. Downside: expensive but that's about it. The simplest system is a smaller well-insulated house with wood stove. Outlying rooms get colder.

Deforestation was a major issue in Europe and New England before coal came onto the scene. That was, what, 250 years ago? Given population increase and lifestyle expectations, wood won't help much for the masses. I expect to have to defend our woodlot with force.

Never heard of anyone buying wood by weight.
User avatar
Frank
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Wed 15 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Maine/Nova Scotia

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Heineken » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 22:18:38

Good tips, Gideon.

Also:

Wear safety glasses and safety boots when splitting. And keep those legs SPREAD.

Extend the wrists (sort of angle them backward; it's hard to describe) when the maul is coming down so that the head hits the top of the log squarely, not at an angle. Significantly increases the effectiveness of the stroke. This is a great little trick I taught myself.

If you have to use a wedge, use the sort that is twisted (kind of like a screw), not straight. Much more powerful. (I dislike wedges, but every now and then they're worth the bother.)

When you're cutting up a tree, bear in mind that you will be splitting the pieces, so make your cuts cleverly so that the knots will least interfere with the splitting. E.g., put a large knot at the end of a piece, not in the middle. Cut branch junctions into sections short enough to split or small enough not to need splitting.

Anyone else got any other tips or advice on splitting?
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Fredrik » Sat 14 Apr 2007, 12:05:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nocar', 'W')ood burning district heating is a possibility. In Sweden (and Finland I believe) it is very common for cities and neighborhoods to have district heating plants that heat water for tap water and radiators. In fact, district heating systems were used already in the happy cheap oil days, and were rather easily converted to burning renewable fuels. Most of them do these days.


Yeah, I was thinking about collective heating with larger installations (power plants). I still believe this is a viable solution in more densely forested regions during the impending powerdown period.

I'm glad I started a lively discussion, although I'm not heating my own home with wood (just the summer cottage), so I don't have much experience to offer there.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nocar', 'I') am also surprised that noone so far has mentioned wood pellets. Many homeowners in Sweden that are not connected to a district heating system now replace their oil furnaces with wood pellet furnaces.


Pellet heating has practical advantages, but I expect it to become much more expensive in the future as wood processing industry it depends on is hit by the global economic recession. I believe that unprocessed wood will be the default heat source.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nocar', 'I')n a totally oil free world - can we imagine wood-fuelled steam ships on inland waterways? Sailing ships with wood on larger bodies of water? (In fact, wood transporting sailing ships was the last commercial use of sails to disappear in Scandinavia, a viable business well into the 20th century.) Can we imagine ponies pulling carts on rails from the ships to the heating plants? Slow speeds and rather light loads need quite simple rails to increase efficiency and can be drawn right through neighborhoods, since there are little risk of serious accidents and noise. (Wasn't rail transport started with ponies pulling coal, by the way?)


Well, I could imagine that... But I assume that more or less "normal" trains, running on electricity generated with coal or renewable energy sources will be the main means of transportation on the regional/national level. Unless the future energy collapse is much worse that I'm hoping it to be...
"Only scarcity and effort make life worth living."
"A fundamental, devastating error is to set up a political system based on [individual] desires." -Pentti Linkola
User avatar
Fredrik
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun 05 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Location: Finland
Top

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Pops » Sat 14 Apr 2007, 14:31:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', ' ') The best part about an indoor wood stove - put wood in and you have heat. No electricity, no wires, no water to freeze or pipes to break.

Negatives - work. Not for pencil pushers with soft hands.


Yep. Luckily, the best way to make less work is to cut the most energy dense (recognize that term?) wood – Osage Orange (Hedge) and Black Locust top most lists I see and they happen to grow like weeds around here. Lucky me!

As far as city dwellers I would think finding a good collier (charcoal maker) might be a partial solution. Charcoal has about the same btu/lb as mineral coal, I think, so transport – the big bugaboo in the future, might offset the waste of the process.

What do you think?
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Wood as an auxiliary energy source

Unread postby Heineken » Sun 15 Apr 2007, 16:09:19

White oak splits fairly easily if it's not green and if you've cut out the big branch junctions. I don't have much trouble with it. Red oak splits easier, but white oak burns and coals significantly better.

Beech---now there's a nightmare for splitting. But what a beautiful, clean-burning firewood it makes.

Red maple is also very nice, as you say, Gideon.

Yellow-poplar (like pine) is great for starting a fire or goosing it up. It's also useful when you need some heat, but not a lot of heat.
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest