Massachusetts renews innovative stove change-out program

Changing face of wood stoves in America includes a comeback of catalytic stoves 

Massachusetts announced an 8th round of annual funding for its innovative wood stove change out program. The program was the first in the country to develop a change out program that gave higher incentives to fully automated stoves and stoves that provide a verified efficiency on the list of EPA certified stoves.  The program has since been discontinued but may come back again.

The program, updated in April 2019, changes some of the rebate levels and provides consistently higher levels of rebates than most change out programs. It now offers Massachusetts residents between $500 and $3,250 for upgrades, depending on the stove and income level of the family.  To be eligible, households must have an operating, uncertified wood stove to trade in for a new wood or pellet stove.  Rebates can cover 30 - 80% of costs of the new stove and installation.

Governor Charlie Baker said in a statement the change-out program "improves air quality across the commonwealth and helps residents save money by adopting more efficient, cost cutting heating technologies."

The program favors appliances that burn more cleanly in the hands of consumers by offering the highest rebates ($1,750) to pellet and fully automated stoves that have listed efficiencies over 65%. The highest wood stove rebates ($1,250) can be claimed for catalytic (or hybrid) or non-catalytic stoves that emit 2 grams an hour or less and have a listed efficiency of 65% or more on the EPA list. The lowest rebate of $500 covers non-cat stoves that emit between 2 and 3 grams and do not have a listed efficiency. Income-based rebates for low income residents range from $2,000 to $2,750, plus the efficiency adder if the stove has a listed efficiency.

This table is reproduced from the Change-out Program Manual (pdf).

Massachusetts provides a helpful list of rebate amounts for all stoves that emit under 3 grams an hour. There are 596 stoves on the list. As a sign of the changing face of wood stoves in America, 216 or 36% of these stoves have verified efficiencies on the EPA list. Just two years ago, in the spring of 2017, only 87 stoves had listed efficiencies of 65% or higher. 

This shows that in a short span of time, consumers have far more access to efficiency data than in the past. Change out programs like this one help drive consumers to purchase higher efficiency stoves. According to people familiar with the Massachusetts program, most consumers buy stoves with listed efficiencies rather than forgo the $500 - $750 efficiency adder.  New York and Maryland also now include efficiency criteria in statewide stove incentive programs.

In a further sign of changing times, we are seeing a major resurgence of catalytic stoves. Fifty of the 216 stoves with verified efficiencies are cat stoves, compared to 61 that are non-cat. Many manufacturers are now using the term "hybrid" for stoves that have a catalyst and robust non-cat secondary combustion. Given the spotty reputation of catalytic stoves in the 80s and 90s, some manufacturers appear to be using catalysts to pass the 2020 standards but not advertising that the stove has one. In the Massachusetts change out program, hybrids are treated like catalytic stoves and receive the higher rebate.

Pellet stoves comprise the biggest share of stoves with listed efficiencies with 95 models. This high number of pellet stoves is a reflection of the ease of getting pellet stoves re-certified to the 2020 standards, which require efficiency testing and disclosure.

Steve Pike, CEO of the
Massachusetts Clean Energy
Center announced the program at
the Fire Place in Whately MA.

Possibly the most surprising part of the Massachusetts list is that the  6 stove models under 65% efficiency are all pellet stoves. It is vital for consumers to rely on the efficiency figures on the EPA list because most stove manufacturers continue to provide exaggerated or misleading efficiencies on their websites and promotional materials. For example, the Regency Greenfire GC60 made by Sherwood Industries was tested at 60% efficiency, which had to be disclosed on the EPA list.  But the manufacturer's website says "76.6% optimum efficiency."

Massachusetts' program gives its highest stove rebate of $1,250 to "fully automated woodstoves (FAW)" that consumers can "load and leave." A FAW is defined in the program as a "stove that (a) automatically adjust the stove’s airflow and therefore includes no manual airflow controls and (b) has sensors that provide temperature-control capabilities." There are currently four such stoves on the list. Determining which stoves can be designated as fully automated is tricky. Other states and change out programs are interested in this issue as well.   The development of automated wood stoves could eventually reshape how we think about wood stoves, as they transform an age-old technology into a modern, high-tech appliance.

One important characteristic of wood stoves that does not appear on any list of stoves is whether the stove was designed for, and tested with, cordwood. Change out programs may see value in giving an extra rebate to encourage more consumers to use stoves designed to burn with cordwood instead of crib wood.

The 2019 Commonwealth Woodstove Change-Out Program has a budget of $450,000, which adds to the more than $2 million in funding for change-outs since the program began in 2012. The program has helped more than 2,300 residents swap out their non-EPA certified, inefficient stoves for newer, cleaner models. More than 500 of these rebates went to residents earning less than 80 percent of the state median income.

The program is run the by Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) in coordination with the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER). Residents must have the new stove installed by a Participating Stove Professional who ensures that the old, uncertified wood stove is destroyed. There are currently 65 stove professionals participating, double the number from 2 years ago. Installers are encouraged, but not required, to be NFI or CSIA accredited.

Technology Design Challenge to Promote Top Performing Pellet Stoves

A yearlong project to test and assess pellet stoves is entering its first phase this summer.  This first phase focuses on the most popular pellet stoves in North America and aims to help consumers identify the most efficient stoves and how best to operate them.

(The Pellet Stove Design Challenge is now accepting applications for innovative pellet stoves and individual participants at the April 2016 Workshop.)

The initiative is being led by the Alliance for Green Heat with a wide group of partner organizations and stove experts.  Pellet stoves are increasingly popular in North America and Europe, are far cleaner than wood stoves and have enormous potential to replace fossil heating fuel. 

2013 Design Challenge
in Wash. DC

The second phase of the project will feature an international stove technology competition to spotlight innovative and high performing pellet stoves and prototypes.  The project will culminate in an international gathering at Brookhaven National Lab in New York, where pellet stoves will be tested and the top performers will receive awards.  The focus will not just be on low emissions and high efficiency in a test lab setting, but also in the hands of consumers.  The application to submit pellet stoves and stove prototypes for the competition will be available later this summer.  The competition and workshop is scheduled for the week of April 4, 2016.

Ben Myren, Tom Butcher and others
in a lab at Brookhaven at the 2014
Wood Stove Design Challenge

This pellet stove challenge marks the third Stove Design Challenge, and the second to take place at Brookhaven. Previous challenges, including the inaugural Wood Stove Design Challenge on the National Mall in 2013, focused on promoting technological innovations that would help ensure wood stoves burn cleaner in the hands of consumers.  All the Stove Design Challenges involve stakeholder engagement in testing and assessing stoves, the opportunity to see and understand how testing works, and workshops and roundtables that bring together industry, regulators, air quality groups, non-profits and the media.

Phase one: Testing of Popular Pellet Stoves

There are approximately one million pellet stoves in North America.  Unlike the wood stove market, which has many manufacturers, most pellet stoves are made by just a handful of companies.  The Alliance will independently test some of the most popular models made in North America and Europe for emissions and efficiency.  The first round of tests will follow EPA lab testing protocols, while the second round will approximate how some consumers might use the stoves to better understand the range in efficiency when stoves are burned clean as well as dirty.  We will also test the stoves for noise level and ease of cleaning and repair. We may also test heat output and efficiency differences using high and low quality pellets.

Prior to both rounds of testing, the Alliance will explain what test methods and procedures are to be   used and seek input from industry and other stakeholders.  Testing will begin in an EPA accredited test lab and then move to Brookhaven National Lab.  The project expects to produce some data about the variability and reproducibility of emissions and efficiency in pellet stove testing. 

Planning meeting for the 2013 Design
Challenge. Pictured (left to right) Ray
Albrecht, Rod Tinnemore, Mark Knaebe,
John Ackerly, Melissa Bollman, David
Agrell, Norbert Senf, Ellen Burkhard  &
Tom Butcher. Photo: by Norbert Senf

To get better baseline data on some popular stoves, the Alliance for Green Heat submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the EPA asking for emission and efficiency data for each of the four tested burn rates.  The Alliance also asked for moisture and ash content of the pellets used in the certification tests.  The EPA provided some of the data but issued a partial denial for efficiency values, pending a process to see whether the stove manufacturers will challenge the release of that information.

Funding for the ongoing Wood Stove Design Challenge initiative has been provided by the New York State Energy and Research Development Authority (NYSERDA), Osprey Foundation, the US Forest Service and the Alliance for Green Heat.

More information about this yearlong project will be posted on our website, blog, Facebook page and monthly newsletter.

Minimum Wood Stove Efficiency Standards Will Save Consumers Millions

Efficiency standards will benefit both consumers and industry

Alliance for Green Heat, October 29, 2012 - Efficiency standards being proposed by Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) are requirements placing limits on the energy consumption of appliances and equipment, and they have become benchmark standards for a range of appliances and devices, including office equipment, heat pumps, and air conditioning equipment.

MEPS have stimulated the economy by saving consumers and businesses billions of dollars in utility costs, money they can now spend in other areas. The Department of Energy estimates that efficiency standards have saved an average of $15 billion a year, a figure expected to double by 2025. And federal investments in these standards are paying off: every federal dollar has net an average of $650 in energy savings.

Efficiency standards for wood and pellet stoves and boilers are a good investment. A large portion of the savings in the residential sector come from efficient space-heating equipment, as space heating accounts for 30% of US energy bills and is often the greatest expense for low-income families. Efficiency standards for gas furnaces are estimated to save 46 trillion BTUs of natural gas annually by 2020 and 108 trillion BTUs annually in 2010, enough to heat more than 2 million homes for a year. Similar regulations for wood stoves would reduce our nation’s wood and pellet consumption and give homeowners extra capital to put back into the economy.

Standards in the wood and pellet industry are direly needed. Currently wood and pellet stove efficiencies range from the mid-80s to as low as the 30s for new stoves, based on high heating values (HHV). Pellet stoves, which are widely believed to be more efficient than wood stoves, are often less efficient because of excess air to keep the glass clean. Low-efficiency stoves consume excessive amounts of wood, increasing the running cost and wasting natural resources. Stoves that are low efficiency due to incomplete combustion also release higher amounts of noxious gases and particulates, pollutants that pose health risks to households and their surrounding communities.

Some opponents of efficiency standards make the case that mandatory standards are unnecessary and if left unregulated, consumer demand for more efficient products will naturally drive manufacturing of increasingly more efficient technology.

However the lack of standards may actually limit the ability of demand to drive advancement in the industry for all price points. Without MEPS, high-efficiency is often treated as a “special feature” by manufacturers, coupled with deluxe options on high-end stoves; these more expensive models may not be regularly in-stock and available to most consumers or in their price range. As suggested by one study[1], in an imperfect market manufacturers prefer this sequestration of high-efficiency products because it maximizes profits: they can charge high-income consumers more for appliances with this “special feature,” giving them as much efficiency as they are willing to pay for, while offering low-income consumers less efficiency than what they pay for. Furthermore, as customers take a number of features into account when purchasing an appliance (e.g. color, size, sticker price, and manufacturer) and because of the lack of variety in available and affordable high-efficiency models, many consumers are resigned to settle for mediocre models that will cost them much more in the long run.

It also should be considered that in many wood-heated households the residents have little choice in the stove installed in their homes. According to a 2009 survey by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 1.7 million rented households in the U.S., a good number falling in the low-moderate income bracket, heat primarily with wood. Landlords are more likely to have low-efficiency equipment that is cheap upfront but saddles tenants with expensive energy bills each month.

There is concern that mandatory standards will significantly increase the purchase price of stoves, making them out of reach of the low-income communities that rely on them the most. However, this has not been proven. DOE efficiency standards for both refrigerators and central air conditioners did not lead to any significant price increase, as some had feared.

the EPA have the potential to save consumers millions in fuel costs and help bring biomass stoves and boilers into the mainstream of heating equipment in the U.S. All major consumer appliances have or will soon have minimum efficiency standards, particularly in the HVAC sector. Success of minimum efficiency standards for other appliances provides compelling evidence that efficiency standards can help drive technology forward, leading to benefits for health, industry, consumer finances, and the environment.

MEPS are gaining traction in developing countries that have larger low-income populations that can benefit from lower fuel costs. In Latin American, mandatory MEPS now exist Mexico, Brazil and Uruguay on a product-by-product basis. The growth of MEPS is expected to continue as more and more countries work to reduce energy use and reduce reliance on fossil fuels, and as MEPS become more widely recognized as a very cost effective measure.

 

AGH’s has previously published a blog article on this topic:  http://forgreenheat.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-efficiency-debate-required-or.html

---

[1] Fisher, Carolyn. “Who Pays for Energy Efficiency Standards?” Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 4-11. Feb. 2004.

The Efficiency Debate: Required or Reported?

Many of us in the wood heating community have learned a lot about efficiency lately. We’ve learned that pellet stoves appear to be less efficient than wood stoves, when many of us thought they were more efficient, including the EPA. We’ve learned that possibly up to half of all wood stoves on the market today would not pass a 70% HHV minimum efficient threshold – even though they all met a 75% LHV threshold for the tax credit in 2011. And, we learned that industry is gearing up to fight a minimum efficiency requirement in favor of just reporting the efficiency.

The Alliance for Green Heat believes that a minimum efficiency standard is needed, no question. The only question is where the bar should be set and when. Minimum efficiency requirements are becoming standard for major appliances and we believe wood and pellet stoves are better served by being part of the energy efficiency mainstream, not fighting to be outside of it.

A 70% minimum is likely the best minimum efficiency to include in this NSPS and the debate should center on how long manufacturers have to meet that minimum. One option is to say stoves must be 65% efficient a year or two after promulgation and 70% within several years after that.

Then, we think it’s vital that our industry have an Energy Star program that recognizes the most efficient and cleanest stoves. This will help consumers and our industry gain greater support from policy makers, regulators, the environmental community and the general public.

One reason minimum efficiency standards are needed is that the cheap price tag on inefficient products in Asia often is greater selling point than its efficiency label. Are the high quality domestic stoves producers really willing to compete with cheap, inefficient stoves for the next 10 or 20 years? This would be a great disservice to an industry that is still dominated by high quality domestic manufacturers.

Minimum energy efficiency standards have reduced energy costs for consumers by billions of dollars each year. To date, every federal dollar spent has resulted in an average of $650 in net savings, and has also helped spur product innovation: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/. Minimum standards of energy efficiency for major appliances are firmly established by the U.S. Congress in Part B of Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA): http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/laws_regs.html

According to one authoritative study by the Consumer Federation of America, nearly all Americans (95%) think it is beneficial for appliances to become more energy efficient and most (78%) think it’s very beneficial. Nearly all Americans (96%) think energy efficiency is important for personal financial reasons and almost all (92%) think it’s important for the environment as well. Substantial majorities of consumer even favor increased efficiency when it increases the purchase price of the items. And, about two thirds of Americans know that the government requires most appliances to meet minimum energy efficiency standards: http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/CFA-Appliance-Efficiency-Report-3-11.pdf

The EPA has been far too slow and timid in establishing the regulations that will help propel this industry forward. The first NSPS was a lifeline for this industry and this NSPS can be just as beneficial. This NSPS could help propel wood and pellet stoves into the mainstream of the renewable energy movement. Look at the example of Europe. Efficiency standards have gone hand in hand with soaring sales of more efficient wood and pellet equipment.

There are pellet stoves on the market today that are under 50% efficient and even below 40%. Imagine those families who keep pouring 40 pound bags of pellets into an appliance that is half the efficiency of what it could and should be. Wood and pellet stoves appeal to Americans because they save them money. It’s all about efficiency. Does the industry really want to publicly fight against a minimum efficiency standard that will save consumers millions of dollars?