Multi-fuel or wood stove for house?

[Athy]

 

Guess what I am saying is get a multifuel stove and burn solid fuel and only use wood when you want it to be "pretty".

I largely agree - though you'd surely use wood to get the fire going?

Wood does not produce as much heat, but it produces it far more quickly than coal. So when you want rapid heat (for example when coming into a cold house having been out all day or away) then it is very useful to have some wood to hand.

[Geo]

Just measured the temperature with one of those point it at the heat things as I reloaded the wood, reading 350C with the door open. So even on a dying fire it is not much below Burley's magic 400C and I suspect when burning the reload will be up there.

[mross]

Burley quoted 600C

[Mac of Cygnet]

Not really no, a dedicated wood stove has no grate to allow bottom air, which coal needs

Multifuel stoves are a comprise but a good compromise if there is any doubt about fuel supply

Indeed. How does a 'multifuel' stove work then? Does it have a grate? (I suppose it must, to burn coal or similar) Do you take the grate out to burn wood, or do you burn both with the grate in - surely the wood won't burn efficiently or stay in. I remember our previous home stove, Jotul 1, came with an optional grate which we used to burn the coal we had left over, then took it out, and have only burned wood for the past 30 years (the Jotul lasted over 20 years and went through 2 back boilers).;

[Athy]

Indeed. How does a 'multifuel' stove work then? Does it have a grate? (I suppose it must, to burn coal or similar)

Our Clearview certainly has one - and it burns wood efficiently, leaving only ash in the morning. This may be partly because it has two damper/flue/air vent/whatever controls, one of which allows air in below the grate, the other above it.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Athy

[Geo]

Burley quoted 600C

 

Think if you read stage 2, 400C is the magic figure and it is where creosotes produce in stage one spontaneously combust and the temp jumps to 600C, rockets is the word they use. It could also explain why the temperature rise on my stove after a reload is remarkably quick from order of 100F to 250F in a minute or so. Smoke wise there is none visible.

[tree monkey]

Indeed. How does a 'multifuel' stove work then? Does it have a grate? (I suppose it must, to burn coal or similar) Do you take the grate out to burn wood, or do you burn both with the grate in - surely the wood won't burn efficiently or stay in. I remember our previous home stove, Jotul 1, came with an optional grate which we used to burn the coal we had left over, then took it out, and have only burned wood for the past 30 years (the Jotul lasted over 20 years and went through 2 back boilers).;

Really

 

I suspect there isn't much differance between a multifuel stove grate and a dedicated coal stove, maybe less hole more metal?

 

As I am sure you know, the trick to burn wood is to keep a good bed of ash, something a coal grate is designed to prevent.

The grate is also designed to allow air to be drawn through the coal, something that is not good for the careful control of wood fires

[Geo]

Really

 

I suspect there isn't much differance between a multifuel stove grate and a dedicated coal stove, maybe less hole more metal?

 

As I am sure you know, the trick to burn wood is to keep a good bed of ash, something a coal grate is designed to prevent.

The grate is also designed to allow air to be drawn through the coal, something that is not good for the careful control of wood fires

 

On the Morso, the grate is only about half the area of the fire bed area in the centre and the sides are solid and the back and front only have a few air inlets in them. When burning solid fuel in the Morso there are side blocks available to keep the solid fuel over the grate. So the Morso seems to give the best of both world to me, it retains the wood ash to give the wood a bed and has a good grate with a tray for the removal of the solid fuel ash.

[peterboat]

A Rayburn is too big for my needs!

I've lived with a Burley for a week, so I know what it looks like.

different beast to the fireball

 

On the Morso, the grate is only about half the area of the fire bed area in the centre and the sides are solid and the back and front only have a few air inlets in them. When burning solid fuel in the Morso there are side blocks available to keep the solid fuel over the grate. So the Morso seems to give the best of both world to me, it retains the wood ash to give the wood a bed and has a good grate with a tray for the removal of the solid fuel ash.

It does, but if burning wood its best on a bed of ash and a stove designed purely for wood why compromise do the job properly

[tree monkey]

different beast to the fireball

 

It does, but if burning wood its best on a bed of ash and a stove designed purely for wood why compromise do the job properly

Its a comprise I suppose, I was perfectly able to run my morso stove on 100% wood but I would imagine a dedicated wood burner would be even better

[Lord Gadbury]

We had a Mulifuel stove installed in our house, we asked ourselves the same question as the OP.

 

We have no free supply of wood and not a lot of space to season it if we did get it, hence our install.

 

It now gives us a choice which has worked out well, wood takes up a lot more storage space than solid fuel v's energy contained.

 

Same as the boat really, if we get free wood then we can burn that, surprising how long a 20KG bag of decent solid fuel will last in a NB.

 

As for the house, cost is equating to the same I would have spent on gas, but house feels warmer because the mass is warm, if that makes sense, as a solid fuel stove should be in all the time ( IMO )

[Geo]

different beast to the fireball

It does, but if burning wood its best on a bed of ash and a stove designed purely for wood why compromise do the job properly

 

Not sure I have understood what you are trying to say. The Morso is not designed as a wood-burning stove. It is a multi fuel burner. I personally have found over the years and through many stoves, including wood burners, that wood does not give the long slow heat that is needed to heat a house and requires too frequent reloading.

 

So I looked for something that would give me the advantage of being able to burn solid fuel, specifically anthracite, as well as giving me the ability to burn wood reasonably efficiently. Now having read the Burley write-up I do not think I am far wrong in choosing the Morso for the mixed fuel purpose. With an overnight load of anthracite the stove burns well and will go 9/10 hours without going out and still producing a good level of heat into the house.

 

The remains of the overnight anthracite then with the side plate of the Morso provides a good bed for the wood to burn on during the day and allows a good build-up of wood ashes.

 

So I think the Morso gives me the best of both worlds, particularly when there are periods when bulk wood can be difficult to obtain, but anthracite has yet to be in short supply down here.

 

Add to that, I think the calorific values of wood are below that of anthracite. I believe the average wood value is 5500 kWh/Tonne, while anthracite average is 8200 kWh/Tonne. I think you will find that wood is a more expensive that anthracite per kWh. That is why I have always thought of my wood by as my enjoyable luxury and my green contribution.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Geo

[Mac of Cygnet]

Really

 

I suspect there isn't much differance between a multifuel stove grate and a dedicated coal stove, maybe less hole more metal?

 

As I am sure you know, the trick to burn wood is to keep a good bed of ash, something a coal grate is designed to prevent.

The grate is also designed to allow air to be drawn through the coal, something that is not good for the careful control of wood fires

Yes, I know! The 'indeed' was agreeing with you!

[mross]

Morso stoves seem to be very expensive. Did you pay £1,500 or £2,000? ;-)

[tree monkey]

 

Not sure I have understood what you are trying to say. The Morso is not designed as a wood-burning stove. It is a multi fuel burner. I personally have found over the years and through many stoves, including wood burners, that wood does not give the long slow heat that is needed to heat a house and requires too frequent reloading.

 

 

I've never understand this tbh I have for many years burnt 100% woood and found it easily controlled, providing heat as and when I needed with limited imput required.

I have on many occasion let the fire tick over for 12hrs or more come home to a cosy boat with an easily revived fire

Wood is a good fuel all it requires is an understanding of how different timbers burn, similar to understanding the different coals

[mross]

The Stove Industry Alliance (SIA) found that 77% of people that have a multi-fuel stove only burn wood.

 

Read more: http://www.which.co.uk/reviews/wood-burning-stoves/article/wood-burning-stoves/multi-fuel-stoves-vs-wood-burning-stoves- Which?

 

I doubt if that's true for boaters! but it makes me think I will get a wood burner for the living room. The house has a cellar and I am wondering if the ash could go straight down to the cellar? Obviously into a container!

[Mac of Cygnet]

I personally have found over the years and through many stoves, including wood burners, that wood does not give the long slow heat that is needed to heat a house and requires too frequent reloading.

Don't know what you mean by 'long slow heat'. We've burned nothing but wood for over 30 years now, and have no problem whatsoever in keeping the stove (a Charnwood and its predecessor , a Jotul, and the one in the other room, a Forester) in overnight. Certainly a woodstove will need more frequent loading for the same heat output. This is axiomatic, given that coal has a higher calorfic value per volume than wood (although some very dense woods approach coal).

 

Edited for an errant '

Edited December 11, 2016 by Mac of Cygnet

[Geo]

Morso stoves seem to be very expensive. Did you pay £1,500 or £2,000? ;-)

 

I paid about £650 and today it is on Ebay for £595 and that was 8 years ago. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/322331774372?lpid=122&chn=ps&adgroupid=13585920426&rlsatarget=pla-75952154106&adtype=pla&poi=&googleloc=9045122&device=c&campaignid=207297426&crdt=0

I've never understand this tbh I have for many years burnt 100% woood and found it easily controlled, providing heat as and when I needed with limited imput required.

I have on many occasion let the fire tick over for 12hrs or more come home to a cosy boat with an easily revived fire

Wood is a good fuel all it requires is an understanding of how different timbers burn, similar to understanding the different coals

 

I would expect on a boat a Morso would never be allowed out of 1st gear so as to speak. However my mind asks how often do you have to clean the window?

Edited December 11, 2016 by Geo

[mross]

Anyone got a Pyroclassic stove? And yes, they are available in the UK. Can also have a back boiler. 84% efficient with a wet back.

[Mac of Cygnet]

This is a very informative document for those burning wood. You didn't write it, did you, TM?

[mross]

 

I [aid about £650 and today it is on Ebay for £595 and that was 8 years ago. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/322331774372?lpid=122&chn=ps&adgroupid=13585920426&rlsatarget=pla-75952154106&adtype=pla&poi=&googleloc=9045122&device=c&campaignid=207297426&crdt=0

Thanks for this! I have added Morso to my shortlist. not to be confused with Morco!!!

Edited December 11, 2016 by mross

[Geo]

Don't know what you mean by 'long slow heat'. We've burned nothing but wood for over 30 years now, and have no problem whatsoever in keeping the stove (a Charnwood and its predecessor , a Jotul, and the one in the other room, a Forester) in overnight. Certainly a woodstove will need more frequent loading for the same heat output. This is axiomatic, given that coal has a higher calorfic value per volume than wood (although some very dense woods approach coal).

 

Edited for an errant '

 

Well while it is axiomatic to you and me there seem to be many that it is not to.

 

One of the problems with burning wood as slowly as I think you are suggesting you do is the producing of tars which cool in the chimney and line it. I do not know these particular stoves but I will be pleasantly surprised if they do not produce tars overnight. The lack of tars is to me is one of the benefits of burning anthracite overnight. There is considerably more heat delivered into the house.

I would query your assertion that there are woods that approach a non-smokeless fuel and particularly anthracite. The best I could find was marginally over 5500 kWh/Tonne. I was being deliberately generous quoted for wood.

[tree monkey]

 

I [aid about £650 and today it is on Ebay for £595 and that was 8 years ago. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/322331774372?lpid=122&chn=ps&adgroupid=13585920426&rlsatarget=pla-75952154106&adtype=pla&poi=&googleloc=9045122&device=c&campaignid=207297426&crdt=0

 

 

I would expect on a boat a Morso would never be allowed out of 1st gear so as to speak. However my mind asks how often do you have to clean the window?

A wood fire is perfectly controllable and in my experience no dirtier than a coal fire, in fact coal dust is worse.

I've used wood to heat houses and boats and had no problems controlling the heat or keeping the place clean

[Geo]

Thanks for this! I have added Morso to my shortlist. not to be confused with Morco!!!

 

Yes definitely not to be confused with Morco Morso is the correct name

A wood fire is perfectly controllable and in my experience no dirtier than a coal fire, in fact coal dust is worse.

I've used wood to heat houses and boats and had no problems controlling the heat or keeping the place clean

 

 

Wood is controllable, but will not burn slowly and for a log period without producing tars. That is my experience and understanding. Anthracite will

[tree monkey]

This is a very informative document for those burning wood. You didn't write it, did you, TM?

nope unfortunately I didn't, good information though

 

Yes definitely not to be confused with Morco Morso is the correct name

 

 

 

Wood is controllable, but will not burn slowly and for a log period without producing tars. That is my experience and understanding. Anthracite will

Wood will of course produce soot/tar but that is part of understanding your fuel and following a sensible maintenance program