Outdoor Wood Furnace Info
Outdoor Furnaces - Manufacturers with NON EPA-Certified Models Only => Shaver Furnace => Topic started by: tulenutn2o on February 18, 2012, 07:55:14 PM
-
Seems that Shaver may have been fudging? see:http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=viweaniab&et=1109252550607&s=22144&e=001Aolzl4VTrC3yXa6u3hxWhlVwCHxLUl_GzPzhIGZIe-bP_hjhcld9OjQi8_rxp7epcFFD0ohg_KcZQEKUxZ5Fb6gK1ECQtGrzv3CR4S65CY5XBiEjG5mgS1wPzrWpdVQJh0B4SQXbu0jdEZcvA196nkXDk7EEGf47ltc0BjHDe2Bibgk1tGheop4W7d2_TMyHe4ME9LVyheBIeYSLU25lJ9E07l97oBzF_rtZuPTnfOrRFPyp71lyshsNRqRQm0FswpFkthkaAA7bj3V-7ng1gA==
-
I can't get the link to work but i can't imagine them ever actually testing them.
-
Try this. http://www.irs.gov/irb/2011-48_IRB/ar16.html?utm_source=HEAT+Feb+2010+Issue+36&utm_campaign=HEAT+2-18-12&utm_medium=email (http://www.irs.gov/irb/2011-48_IRB/ar16.html?utm_source=HEAT+Feb+2010+Issue+36&utm_campaign=HEAT+2-18-12&utm_medium=email)
-
It looks like all the griping the legitimate companies did finally did a bit of good.
-
It looks like all the griping the legitimate companies did finally did a bit of good.
All the legitimate companies might as well have done the same thing if all they do is tell them to stop giving out the certificates.
-
How is the efficiency of an OWB measured? I have a Shaver 165 and I have burned for the most part dead tree timber (already fallen) since October. I heat a two story home with two heat exchangers plus DHW. My total cost out of pocket for the wood I burned would be less then $200. I will probably save over $2000 by not buying propane this winter. I am happy with that.
-
The EPA are revamping the test.
-
You didn't have to have an EPA test done, it could be done by anyone from what I can gather , that's how they got away with it. But RSI is right, everyone should have if they just ask em to stop. Shoulda had to refund the tax payers
I did some numbers under central boilers section on ridge kids stove if you want to see hoe to calculate efficiceny on your unit at home. His cb 5036 was about 48% efficient, right in line with most conventional boilers. I have checked a couple hardys and they have been in the upper 30's. The heatmaster e series and portage and main double pass conventionals probably are in the 60-65% range based oN what checking ive done
-
Okay,
In "layman's" terms what in the hell does all of this mean? Explanation please "without" bashing the Shaver product. We Shaver owners have to always put up with that kind of talk, so just lay it out plain and simple for me. Thank you kindly.
Lugnut
-
Plain and simple..
They ripped off every tax payer in the country for there own gain. Claiming ther stoves were 75% efficient to qualify for the tax credit. They knew all along they weren't even close to those kind of numbers. However they wanted there piece of the pie and didn't want to develop a stove that could actually do that.
So, they mid led every customer, the IRS, and every tax payer to line there wallets.
It's fraud at it's most common sense, what I meant by legitimate companies, was the ones who actually spent 100k dollars developing a stove to make 75%, they griped enough to get it to stop. Shaver wasn't the only one doing that, but they were the most forceful and misleading through there claims. Across the industry shaver is hated by most manufacturers because they feel they give the whole industry a bad name through activities such as this one.
That's as simple as I can put it, no personal opinions involved
-
In all honesty, we should ALL get tax credits for burning 100% renewable energy to heat our homes! I could see getting a tax credit for a high efficiency gas or electric furnace because you are using less fossil fuel but we aren't burning ANY (except the tiny amount for fans and pumps). If they are really concerned about the environment they should bend over bacwards for people like us! I believe though that is not really the case...... :-\
-
Thanks Tinner, for getting a hyperlink on here that worked.
-
just looks like just another mud slinging episode to me.
-
just looks like just another mud slinging episode to me.
The IRS makes the info available and you expect people to be happy they acted in such an unprofessional manner?
-
what i have learned from this site is most on this site dont whant enything from the gov we are looking for the freedom from them and strive to be self reliant and at least my gole is to go off the grid, but back to the tax that iam not smart enough to do my self H&R block was going to give me a creidt for my homemade dog if i only could find out how to be tax free
-
Yea let's openly support fraud.... It's ok to like your stove! But to openly say it's ok for companies to fraudulently do business is wrong. Where do you draw the line? When the fraud doesn't benefit you?
-
In an earlier post I asked the question about how the EPA tested the OWBs for a efficiency rating. I really was not trying to get to the method involved, I was basically getting at how could they determine the efficiency(more of a philosophical question) They can do a test and say OWB "A" gets more BTUs then OWB "B" from the same amount of wood but if I only spend $200 for gas and I save $2000 by not buying propane, I would think that the EPA formula would need to be: total BTUs from wood burned/ total BTUs available from $200 of unleaded gas that I used to get the wood. Because the wood I burned grew without any help from non renewable sources.
It is kind of like saying one solar panel is 12% efficient and another is 14% efficient, because all the energy collected from the sun is free so if the input energy is more or less free who cares?
-
No tax credit for me.....just sayin
-
If you purchased a Shaver and got the tax credit, you did nothing wrong. The way it was written all you needed was a certificate from the manufacturer that said it met the requirements.
The tax credit had nothing to do with epa testing. Anyone could do it. There are approximately 8500 btu's in a pound of wood. It you burn a pound of wood and 4250 btu's are transferred into the water then it is 50% efficient. Nothing else is important. Some companies that had the certificate for the tax credit spend a lot of money having a 3rd party do the testing. How accurate their test were is questionable but apparently Shaver just said theirs were without doing any testing.
On solar panels there is so much energy available. If a panel is 12% efficient it just means it was able to collect 12% of the solar energy that hits it. All it does for you having more efficient solar panels is you use up less space.
-
I agree with Mark Twain.
-
[]
On solar panels there is so much energy available. If a panel is 12% efficient it just means it was able to collect 12% of the solar energy that hits it. All it does for you having more efficient solar panels is you use up less space.
[/quote]
less space means less panels means less cost to produce the energy
i am getting paid 80 cents per kiliwatt hour i prouce. if my panels are 14 percent and my neighbors are 12 percent and we have the same amount of panels and they cost the same amount to install i will produce more KW hours in the same amount of sunlight as him ... efficiency is profit
wood is the same...if we are both cutting wood, it is free..but the cost to aquire that wood is not. i burn 10 loads and your stove is more efficient and you only burn 7 i have that added cost of what it costs to go and retrieve that other 3 loads...truck , tractor whatever i use to transport..wear ontthe saw , gas..ect. efficiency is savings
my stove likley sucks in efficiency but it is what i could make my self at the time. perhaps i will make a more efficient one next time around but also i will look at the intial cost and how long it will take to recoup that cost..efficiency costs up front. many of us cant afford it but the government is saying..if you cant afford it then you can pay the big guys monthly for the crap they are polluting with because they pay the pollution tax
-
[]
i am getting paid 80 cents per kiliwatt hour i prouce. if my panels are 14 percent and my neighbors are 12 percent and we have the same amount of panels and they cost the same amount to install i will produce more KW hours in the same amount of sunlight as him ... efficiency is profit
What do you mean by same amount? Same rate wattage or same sq coverage? If you and your neighbor have the same wattage of panels they will make the same amount of power. His being less efficient just means his are covering more area.
I was referring to the tax credit about the efficiency of wood boilers.
-
I agree with Mark Twain.
;D
-
What do you mean by same amount? Same rate wattage or same sq coverage? If you and your neighbor have the same wattage of panels they will make the same amount of power. His being less efficient just means his are covering more area.
I was referring to the tax credit about the efficiency of wood boilers.
our systems are both rated on the name plate as 10 kw we both have the same amount of square footage in area however my panels are of one make and his are of another , my panels are slightly rated more efficent than his so my panel (in the same amount of sun) reach that maximum output of 10 kwph sooner than his and they produce at that maximum output longer
-
What was the tax credit? When I bought my Shaver 165 last August my dealer said I could get $300, which is the tax credit anyone can get for a pellet burning wood stove.
-
What was the tax credit? When I bought my Shaver 165 last August my dealer said I could get $300, which is the tax credit anyone can get for a pellet burning wood stove.
Well it applies to stoves that are 75% efficient which pellet stoves are, your shaver however is not. This is what the IRS is onto them about. Last year the credit was 1500, this year it's only 300. But either way, it really don't qualify
-
What is the Shaver efficiency rating, if you know it?
-
Based on similar designs I'm guessing 45% or so...we did some numbers for ridgkids central boiler and it was 48%
I've checked hardy's in the upper 30's
-
and the rest....?
-
My standard ncb 175 I think was around 52-54 last year when I ran it...
I think my heatmaster 5000e is likely close to 60 based on some quick calculations, very similar to what your 325g would come in at...
-
When doing the testing they put a continuous load them so they never idled. That is the way all the gasifiers are tested too. It gives a higher efficiency rating that way.
-
That's true that it's not real world numbers. The test was so flawed that at times they were supposively making more btu than they were putting into the stove
-
My standard ncb 175 I think was around 52-54 last year when I ran it...
I think my heatmaster 5000e is likely close to 60 based on some quick calculations, very similar to what your 325g would come in at...
Could you explain how you do the calculations please? I would like to run the numbers on my own stove.
-
I believe all of the testing is flawed and being promoted by big oil/government. Same as with gas mileage in cars and everything else. One EPA test they actually ran out of dry seasoned wood so of course the test was not accurate. Testing is also incredible expensive and only one testing lab?????
-
I believe all of the testing is flawed and being promoted by big oil/government. Same as with gas mileage in cars and everything else. One EPA test they actually ran out of dry seasoned wood so of course the test was not accurate. Testing is also incredible expensive and only one testing lab?????
Where did you hear any of this?
The testing was flawed but I can assure you govt or big oil had nothing to do with that.
As far as running out of wood? They often use a manufactured wood block that has a known moisture % and number of btu's
The test showed the stoves to be more efficient than they really were... The EPA gas numbers I have always found to be fairly accurate
-
My standard ncb 175 I think was around 52-54 last year when I ran it...
I think my heatmaster 5000e is likely close to 60 based on some quick calculations, very similar to what your 325g would come in at...
Could you explain how you do the calculations please? I would like to run the numbers on my own stove.
It's not easy and you need a moisture meter... If you go to the central boiler section you'll see where i did some number crunching for ridge kid, he didn't like the results but they were right in line with other similar models
-
then what are the numbers for the shaver?
-
Both efficiency and particulates depend on what you burn and how you burn them.
So I guess first of all to get sensible numbers you would have to decide what a normal scenario is.
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
-
i figured if someone took the time to post this( the op ) that there would be the actual numbers the EPA came up with?
-
Why would the EPA have come up with any numbers? This has nothing to do with them. It is the IRS that said they better stop making false claims.
I doubt they have any test results either. They probably asked Shaver for them and they didn't have any.
-
i figured if someone took the time to post this( the op ) that there would be the actual numbers the EPA came up with?
What sort of numbers were you looking for and why do you want them.
-
if i was led to believe that the unit i purchase was at least 75% efficient and all of a sudden it is found to be not, i would like to know what efficiency it actually is.
i see Scott has ran the efficiency rating numbers on other units and am surprised that the shaver efficiency numbers haven't showed up. so that is the numbers i'm looking for and what i do with the is my business.
-
if i was led to believe that the unit i purchase was at least 75% efficient and all of a sudden it is found to be not, i would like to know what efficiency it actually is.
i see Scott has ran the efficiency rating numbers on other units and am surprised that the shaver efficiency numbers haven't showed up. so that is the numbers i'm looking for and what i do with the is my business.
I sure hope you weren't led to beleive you were buying a stove that is truly 75% efficient. In reality your around 40. The half inch firebox is super hard on efficiency by itself, in actual testing for every 1/8" you go up in thickness past 1/4" you lose 12-13% if effieciency. In these stoves it's about transferring heat into the water quickly, it either goes in the water or out the stack, thicker metal slows down the rate of transfer and therefore kills efficiency.
To truly get to 75%, you would definitely have to have a gassifier as there is no way a conventional stove could ever come remotely close to those numbers
-
if i was led to believe that the unit i purchase was at least 75% efficient and all of a sudden it is found to be not, i would like to know what efficiency it actually is.
i see Scott has ran the efficiency rating numbers on other units and am surprised that the shaver efficiency numbers haven't showed up. so that is the numbers i'm looking for and what i do with the is my business.
Somewhere in the 25% to 30% range.
A friend of mine has a somewhat similar OWB and we reckon that he is getting near 30%. He does not have much idle time, really needs the next size up.
-
Boiler, it could be that low it's just hard enough to get folks to beleive there around 40. Ridges cb 5036 was around 48% with the best of products he could buy. Then if you through in a 25% reduction based on 1/2" vs 1/4". That would bring it down to the range you are talking about.
-
My standard ncb 175 I think was around 52-54 last year when I ran it...
I think my heatmaster 5000e is likely close to 60 based on some quick calculations, very similar to what your 325g would come in at...
Could you explain how you do the calculations please? I would like to run the numbers on my own stove.
Here is a link explaining how to do a DIY efficiency test that should at least get you in the ball park.
http://woodheat.org/bob-report.html (http://woodheat.org/bob-report.html)
-
Boiler, it could be that low it's just hard enough to get folks to beleive there around 40. Ridges cb 5036 was around 48% with the best of products he could buy. Then if you through in a 25% reduction based on 1/2" vs 1/4". That would bring it down to the range you are talking about.
We worked his out by looking at the previous years Propane use, Propane saved and approx amount of wood burnt.
There are a lot of variables but it sounds about right. He gets through a lot of wood but most of it is scrounged/donated. So buying a bigger/more efficient one makes no sense.
We also looked at another friends CB E Classic. Difficult to get a good number, we think about 50%.
Interesting link, sounds more accurate.
-
This link shows the same guy modifying his furnace the next year by completely lining it with firebrick. He said it made a huge difference in efficiency! I thought though that making the firebox "thicker" was supposed to cut down on efficiency???? I thought that it would just reflect the heat and send it right up the chimney???? Surely making the firebox an inch or more thick would make it like 80% less efficient.................(sarcasm intended)
http://woodheat.org/report-bob-modify.html (http://woodheat.org/report-bob-modify.html)
-
powerstroke,
Bob actually turned his conventional OWB into an up draft gasifier.... of sorts. His metal that was jacketed by water prevented him achieving gasification prior to the addition of the high temperature refractory board he used in his conversion. He can now achieve temps well over 1000*(probably between 1000* and 2000*) by burning his smoke and passing it by the full length of the ripple top of his boiler. That's where he gains all the extra efficiency. I think the biggest function of the firebrick was to serve as a place set the shelves on(I can think of a few other functions, but that's another topic). You can see it's only used on the bottom and sides. The Alumina fiber board was used for the shelves. Some brands of that product will withstand temps in excess of 3000*.
-
Yeah I seen that Marty. That is a pretty nifty little idea! I wonder if it does gassify very well. I guess with enough air it could work pretty well. ( obviously it is) It just seems that only having the heat on the roof of the firebox would lead to a massive hot spot and tend to boil the hell out of the water in that small area if that was really the only heat being utilized. Heck who knows.
-
Powerstroke, sorry every one rips on the thickness of shaver's boilers being less efficient. Personally, i think that free wood is the most efficient and don't care about the owb efficiencies. U may be the last one laughing when our fireboxes rust through and you have your thick steel shaver lasting a lifetime! :thumbup:
-
Yea Marty summed it up, he changed the whole function of the stove, the refractory increase temps tremendously and burn gases normally wasted
-
This link shows the same guy modifying his furnace the next year by completely lining it with firebrick. He said it made a huge difference in efficiency! I thought though that making the firebox "thicker" was supposed to cut down on efficiency???? I thought that it would just reflect the heat and send it right up the chimney???? Surely making the firebox an inch or more thick would make it like 80% less efficient.................(sarcasm intended)
http://woodheat.org/report-bob-modify.html (http://woodheat.org/report-bob-modify.html)
I am going to send this to my friend, this guy effectively converted his standard OWB into a Gassifying OWB without that much investment, cutting down on his wood usage and emissions significantly. I wonder what it cost him to do it?
-
Shaver Furnace is proud to announce that the Shaver Pro Series 165
has been tested and certified to be 75% efficient or better and this means that you will burn less wood than others!
cut & pasted from there add on E-BAY
-
They also have an add claiming there regular boiler is a gassification furnace because of the drop chimney design... Nothing but a joke
-
So is the Shaver company the ONLY culprit in claiming something they are not? By the way, NOT all of us that have Shavers opted for the thicker firewall. I went with the standard firewall thickness because if there is/was any kind of failure, it would fallback on their warranty...provided they would still be in business.
Guess it's time for me to compose the letter I've been meaning to send Mr. Billy Shaver. I WANT to know exactly what is going on and I will c/c my letter to the BBB of Arkansas.
Lugnut
-
Lug, I'm sure all companies mislead people but some more than others. Your Shaver will probably be around for a long time and just use a little more wood than some.
-
Bull is right, Lug.
ALL OWB manufacturers lie about their products to some extent.
"Honest OWB Manufacturer" is an oxymoron.
Yours will get more and more efficient every year as the burn chamber erodes away, but you'll still be heating with it. The rest of us will be on our 10th patch job before yours springs it's first leak!
-
Yours will get more and more efficient every year as the burn chamber erodes away, but you'll still be heating with it. The rest of us will be on our 10th patch job before yours springs it's first leak!
now i feel a whole lot better about the 7/16 fire box of the ole silver bullet! ;)
-
I have never believed the 75% claim and don't really care. I'm using less wood in the Shaver than my buddies Heatmor and Centrals and less wood than our old Wilkening home heater used each season for the last 25 years. The rugged simplicity of the unit appeals to me and it works well to heat our home and hot water. Total costs were under 4500 for stove and complete install. How can a person beat that?
-
ya same here happy with my 165 i will keep running till it quits. all my windows are blowed out from storm and still keeps house warm.
-
this is the reply they sent me through ebay when i asked them about the irs
YES, Shaver Furnace is proud to announce that the Shaver Pro Series 165, 250, 290 and 340 models have all been tested and certified to be 75% efficient or better. Who said that we didn't test them? All testing was done by an independent lab. We no longer claim a tax credit because that is over. Where did you read that?
This means that you will burn less wood than with others - with them being less than 75% efficient. That's proof, not just rhetoric.
The lab DID err in one part of the test and didn't follow IRS rules to the letter but we DID submit our furnaces to independent tests. THEY made the error, not us. We submitted the furnace and paid in good faith.
-
That is priceless! 75%? There are a lot of gassers that can't even make that. You would think if they were going to lie about it they would at least try and make it believable.
-
Indoor furnaces are more efficient than outdoor boilers. The heat is transferred to the air in the house and it's done. Outdoor boilers need to transfer heat to the water and then to the air in the house. In addition, outdoor boilers will have heat loss to the outdoors. Outdoor wood boilers also lose heat from the tubing to the ground. Indoor furnaces or boilers will have heat loss too, but it's inside the house so it helps to heat the house. Many people will have short hot burns with indoor furnaces. This will make better use of the gases in the wood. In addition, many indoor furnaces and boilers will make better use of secondary combustion (gasification). Outdoor furnaces sit and smolder for long periods of time. This makes less use of the gases in the wood. Some outdoor furnaces do gasification but they still have the other losses. Indoor wood furnaces cost a lot less than outdoor wood furnaces, but may not have the extended burn times.
I'd really like to see efficiency comparisons based on the BTU output of say Northern Red Oak to compare the various wood burning apparatus. I've been thinking of getting an outdoor boiler for some years, but I don't burn as much wood with my indoor furnace and so find it hard to justify the convenience of longer burn times. Does anyone have a valid set of efficiency numbers for wood burning appliances?