Narrowboat Heating - What's Best?

[system 4-50]

2 hours ago, Dave123 said:

Bags of coal and wood are so much simpler and easier to source and carry.

You are joking.

[Alway Swilby]

It seems burning wood is a bad thing.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/17/wood-burners-urban-air-pollution-cancer-risk-study

 

 

 

21 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

You are joking.

 

I must say I was thinking of replacing our multifuel with a diesel stove because diesel requires no carrying at all. And as regards sourcing it it comes from a fuel boat just like the coal does at the moment.

[Mad Harold]

14 minutes ago, Alway Swilby said:

It seems burning wood is a bad thing.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/17/wood-burners-urban-air-pollution-cancer-risk-study

 

 

 

 

I must say I was thinking of replacing our multifuel with a diesel stove because diesel requires no carrying at all. And as regards sourcing it it comes from a fuel boat just like the coal does at the moment.

I think burning anything is bad.

However,a multifuel stove is simple and reliable and untill we get electricity that is "too cheap to meter" as was promised,then burning fossils is really the only option. Especially on a boat.

[IanD]

20 minutes ago, Mad Harold said:

I think burning anything is bad.

However,a multifuel stove is simple and reliable and untill we get electricity that is "too cheap to meter" as was promised,then burning fossils is really the only option. Especially on a boat.

Yes this is true. What the article shows is that woodburners are *really* bad for small particulates, the same thing that caused the dieselgate scandal when it was realised they were *really* bad for health.

 

"Research published in the last year has shown wood burning in homes is the single biggest source of small particle air pollution in the UK, producing three times more than road traffic, despite just 8% of the population using wood burners.

Even new wood burning stoves meeting the “ecodesign” standard still emit 750 times more tiny particle pollution than a modern HGV truck. Wood burners also triple the level of harmful pollution inside homes and should be sold with a health warning, according to scientists."

 

So burn HVO, gas or diesel (in ascending order of CO2 emissions, also bad) instead. Or ignore the problem and say "it doesn't matter" or "I don't believe the scientists" or "I don't care"...

Edited December 17, 2021 by IanD

[MtB]

4 hours ago, IanD said:

Yes this is true. What the article shows is that woodburners are *really* bad for small particulates, the same thing that caused the dieselgate scandal when it was realised they were *really* bad for health.

 

"Research published in the last year has shown wood burning in homes is the single biggest source of small particle air pollution in the UK, producing three times more than road traffic, despite just 8% of the population using wood burners.

Even new wood burning stoves meeting the “ecodesign” standard still emit 750 times more tiny particle pollution than a modern HGV truck. Wood burners also triple the level of harmful pollution inside homes and should be sold with a health warning, according to scientists."

 

So burn HVO, gas or diesel (in ascending order of CO2 emissions, also bad) instead. Or ignore the problem and say "it doesn't matter" or "I don't believe the scientists" or "I don't care"...

 

Oh, now you've REALLY spoiled @peterboat 's day with that! 

[George and Dragon]

On 16/12/2021 at 11:00, peterboat said:

I have about 10 tons of Hawthorne its over 2 years old getting older by the week, seems to burn very clean and hot.  The stove was 2k new and Defra approved so I think it will be ok. I have to say it's a revelation how much better than multi fuel stoves  burns for longer and much cleaner and is so controllable awesome and at 400 squids secondhand a bargain 

Hawthorn does burn very hot. I try to mix any I get in with some beech or sycamore

[George and Dragon]

On 17/12/2021 at 09:54, Alway Swilby said:

It seems burning wood is a bad thing.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/17/wood-burners-urban-air-pollution-cancer-risk-study

 

On 17/12/2021 at 10:33, IanD said:

Yes this is true. What the article shows is that woodburners are *really* bad for small particulates, the same thing that caused the dieselgate scandal when it was realised they were *really* bad for health.

 

"Research published in the last year has shown wood burning in homes is the single biggest source of small particle air pollution in the UK, producing three times more than road traffic, despite just 8% of the population using wood burners.

Even new wood burning stoves meeting the “ecodesign” standard still emit 750 times more tiny particle pollution than a modern HGV truck. Wood burners also triple the level of harmful pollution inside homes and should be sold with a health warning, according to scientists."

 

So burn HVO, gas or diesel (in ascending order of CO2 emissions, also bad) instead. Or ignore the problem and say "it doesn't matter" or "I don't believe the scientists" or "I don't care"...

Having recently spent a week with no other heating source than a wood burning stove I'm not about to get rid. 

 

The relative cleanliness of the diesel truck is a very recent phenomenon - there are still plenty of diesel vehicles on the road that emit a cloud of black smoke whenever they accelerate and, I'm told, some drivers who 'turn the wick down' when it's time for the MOT and then turn it back up again.

[peterboat]

2 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

 

Having recently spent a week with no other heating source than a wood burning stove I'm not about to get rid. 

 

The relative cleanliness of the diesel truck is a very recent phenomenon - there are still plenty of diesel vehicles on the road that emit a cloud of black smoke whenever they accelerate and, I'm told, some drivers who 'turn the wick down' when it's time for the MOT and then turn it back up again.

It's  a good point most boats have very dirty diesels powering them as they don't run hard enough to enable clean up equipment 

[agg221]

1 hour ago, peterboat said:

It's  a good point most boats have very dirty diesels powering them as they don't run hard enough to enable clean up equipment 

Ours certainly was. Continuous clouds of smoke, oil pouring out of the bottom of the exhaust onto the cabin roof, until it got a good workout dredging the S&W. It is now pretty clean until it idles through a long lock flight, following which there is a bit of smoke as it warms up again.

 

I think a lot of the issue with smoky engines arises from fitting too big an engine in the first place. Diesels like to be worked. Too big an engine and it never gets much above light running and the bores glaze up.

 

Alec

[gatekrash]

3 hours ago, George and Dragon said:

 

some drivers who 'turn the wick down' when it's time for the MOT and then turn it back up again.

This was a standard trick back when I was competition trialling my land rover. The pump was wound up to overfuel from low revs so that the pick up was instantaneous and the turbo kicked in straight away with no lag, but the downside was a big puff of black smoke as soon as you touched the throttle. MOT time it would get wound back off again until the next trial. Having said that the landy probably only did about 100 miles a year and 90% of that was in low range !

[George and Dragon]

21 minutes ago, gatekrash said:

This was a standard trick back when I was competition trialling my land rover. The pump was wound up to overfuel from low revs so that the pick up was instantaneous and the turbo kicked in straight away with no lag, but the downside was a big puff of black smoke as soon as you touched the throttle. MOT time it would get wound back off again until the next trial. Having said that the landy probably only did about 100 miles a year and 90% of that was in low range !

Turbo? Of course. Not that the Series III had anything so sophisticated.

[gatekrash]

11 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

Turbo? Of course. Not that the Series III had anything so sophisticated.

When I started with my 1959 S2 then we just tweaked the carb mixture up a bit and wound off the steering lock stops so that the tyres hit the leaf springs on full lock which made it go round corners tighter 😁