Heated Up!

Case Study Finds Wood Costs Least of Alternative Energy Sources

2012-01-25T11:58:00.000-08:00

The Cumberland times ran an article yesterday titled "Don't Knock Wood as an Energy Source" discussing how Derrick Bender, University of Maryland Extension educator, is in the middle of a case study comparing the cost of using wood, wind and solar as alternative energy sources. The laboratory? A house in Cumberland, MD that has solar panels on one side, two wind turbines on the other and a wood-burning furnace in the garage.

"According to numbers crunched thus far by Bender, a homeowner who self-installs a furnace and cuts his or her own wood will pay a little more than 4 cents per kilowatt hour. Having the furnace installed, but cutting own wood increase the cost to almost 6 cents per kWh. Having the furnace installed and buying wood jumps it again, this time to almost 13 cents per kwh.

On the other two hands, the cost for wind is almost 29 cents and the tab for solar almost 33 cents."

Bender will present a free workshop on Feb. 7, from 7 to 9 p.m., titled “More Heat, Less Firewood.” You can read the full article here.

AP Story from Maine on Wood Heat

2012-01-23T07:37:00.000-08:00

The Associated Press recently wrote a story titled "Wood heat heats up as homeowners give boot to oil." The article focuses on the rise of wood heat in the state of Maine, but is also receiving national coverage. It has already been picked up by Dayton Daily News in Ohio, the Washington DC Examiner and perhaps more to come. The article cites recent home heating trends and quotes Alliance for Green Heat President John Ackerly:

You can read the full story here: http://bangordailynews.com/2012/01/22/news/state/wood-heat-heats-up-as-homeowners-give-boot-to-oil/

EPA Delays NSPS Again

2012-01-09T06:47:00.000-08:00

Alliance for Green Heat, Jan. 6, 2012 - Thelong awaited proposed New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for residentialwood heaters is being delayed yet again. EPA claims that it will be out thissummer for the 90-day public comment period, and noted in a PowerPoint presentation thatsince this NSPS is not court ordered, such delays are possible.

The Alliance for Green Heatbelieves the multiple delays in this proposed NSPS, which now add up to severalyears, have allowed tens of thousands of polluting outdoor wood boilers to beinstalled. It has also deprived consumers of being able to select moreefficient, money saving wood and pellet stoves. Until real efficiency numbersare published, the consumer is left without one of the most important pieces ofinformation in their purchase.

“Even before the recentbelt-tightening at the EPA, the agency has not provided the resources thatwould allow it to efficiently carry out this NSPS,” said John Ackerly,President of the Alliance. “Given themillions of low and middle-income families that rely on wood heaters, woodheaters should have more priority within the EPA.”

The EPA has publicly released adraft summary of the new NSPS, which will establish mandatory and stricteremissions thresholds for almost all wood heating appliances. (Fireplaces, pizzaovens, chimneys, etc. are still exempt.)

The new non-cat wood stovestandards are one of the mildest, going from 7.5 to 4.5 grams an hour, a standardthe EPA acknowledges is already met by 85% of wood stoves. However, in additionto particulates, a minimum 70% efficiency standard is being added (high heatvalue) toreduce carbon monoxide (CO). Real efficiency numbers will be disclosed for eachstove for the first time.

Catalytic stoves are being held to atighter standard (2.5 grams an hour), potentially giving them the reputation ofbeing the cleanest stoves on the market. EPA noted that the catalytic hearthcoalition is arguing that all wood stoves be held to the same standard. In theEPA’s PowerPoint presentation, the EPA said they are requesting “comments anddata to support other options for promulgation, e.g., establishing one limit of2.5 g/hr for both non-catalytic and catalytic stoves.”

In the boiler arena, there is a similar discrepancy as there isfor wood stoves: indoor boilers are being held to a less strict standard thanoutdoor boilers, and the EPA is likely working to make the case that theyshould be. Boilers will have to meet one threshold in 2014/2015 and a stricter,Level 2 threshold in 2017. In this arena, the EPA is requesting “comments anddata to support additional options for promulgation, such as co-proposal ofLevel 2 immediately”.

For pellet stoves, the EPA has set anemission level far above what most pellet stoves produce – 4.5 grams an hour,the same as wood stoves. If this occurs, the United States would be the onlydeveloped country that does not hold pellet stoves to a stricter standard thanwood stoves. It may also undermine the ability of consumers to use pelletstoves on bad air quality days, when wood stoves can’t be used. The Alliancebelieves the pellet stove industry should be positioning itself as a cleaneralternative to wood stoves and suitable for densely inhabited areas. The EPAmay be willing to lower that standard and says they are requesting “data andcomments to support additional options for promulgation, e.g., tighten thelevel in “2015” to 2.5 g/hr.”

The EPA’s draft recommendation forsingle-burn-rate stoves is 3 grams an hour, and also a minimum of 70% efficiency,and they are requesting “comments and data to support additional options forpromulgation, e.g., 2.5 g/hr.” The EPA also notes that single-burn-rate stoveshave been the “largest exemption for wood stoves in existing NSPS in terms ofnumber of units sold (>40,000 units/year).”

The EPA’s request for “commentsand data” on all these appliances classes is laudable but there appear to befew data sets that the EPA doesn’t already have that are professional andsubstantial enough to make a difference. EPA has had to rely on industry tofund and produce various studies because EPA does not have the resources. Thishas put a financial strain on industry, which is essentially made up of a fewdozen small manufacturers, but also given industry a more powerful position inthe process.

Partly because of lack of resources, EPAwas not able to undertake a number of initiatives that it considered in thisNSPS. Also, as EPA noted in the PowerPoint, “Some states are disappointed thatwe are not proposing carbon monoxide (CO) emission limits, visible emissionlimits, and requirements for energy audits, proper sizing, heat storage, andcertified installers.”

Wood Stove Changeouts Improved Air in Libby, but …

2012-01-06T11:11:00.000-08:00

Four years after the changeout of 1,200 uncertified woodstoves in Libby, Montana, the definitive air quality study has beenreleased. Not surprisingly, it foundthat changing out stoves improved air quality and children’s health. But some findings were surprising. For one, indoor air quality did not always improve;in fact, it got worse in some homes. Another interesting find was thatno health differences could be found in kids from homes with wood stoves comparedto those without them. Overall, the airquality benefits were not as great as expected. The detailed report was published along with a thorough critique of the report by health experts pointing toward whatfuture studies should also consider.

* Air emission standards in the UnitedStates typically regulate the specific type of device, the fuels, and heat outputs.A recent report indicated that this may allow gaps and variation in coverage,and some residential and small-to-medium–sized biomass units may not be subjectto environmental regulations (Handley et al. 2009). In contrast, regulations inEurope are issued according to heat output and type of feeding device (manualor automatic), which provides 100% coverage. More importantly, European PM2.5 standards forwood-burning appliances are significantly lower at about 0.02 to 0.05lb/million BTU heat output compared with state regulations in the United Statesat, for example, 0.1 lb/million BTU in Massachusetts and 0.6 lb/million BTU inNew York State (Handley et al. 2009). This indicates that in the United Statesthere is room for improvement in terms of reducing emissions from wood-burningappliances. (p. 40)

* It is not clear whether the total numberof wood stoves in the community increased in the meantime, because more peoplemay have chosen wood as a cheaper fuel, because of an increasing populationsize, or both. (p.43)

* In addition, there may be other sources ofPM2.5inthe area, such as wood- or coal-burning fireplaces and boilers that were notcovered by the changeout program. New York State has noted a tripling in thesales of outdoor wood boilers since the early 1990s (p. 44)

* The wood stove changeout program should beconsidered a success because 95% of older, high-polluting wood stoves in Libby,Montana, were replaced with more efficient certified wood stoves or withheating systems that did not burn wood. .. However, the air quality improvementwas not as large as might have been expected based on the dominant contributionof wood burning to ambient PM2.5 concentrations in the area and the approximately50% expected reduction in emissions anticipated from each certified stovecompared with uncertified models. (p. 45)