Considering pellet heating (tractor, generator, homes, snow)

[karen_in_nh_2012]

Originally Posted by Nonesuch

All my experience with pellet inserts is negative, a freestanding pellet stove is a much better heat source, as an insert is artificially constrained by the space available in/on the fireplace hearth...

Honestly, so much depends on the layout and where the OP wants heat; that's what I wrote to the OP. I'm not sure why you had a bad experience with your insert.

My insert is a Harman (expensive) and as I described, it heats 90% of the first floor and much of the 2nd floor. I think -- but don't remember for sure -- that the BTU output of the insert was the same as that of a freestanding pellet STOVE, which is why I got the insert instead (I already had a fireplace in the living room, but it was useless AS a fireplace, so it seemed silly to get a stove for the same room).


ETA: I also thought about getting a wood-burning insert instead of the pellet insert, but my across-the-street neighbor at my last house heated his house entirely with wood and he did NOT recommend it -- he said it was much more difficult than pellets (he was thinking of me trying to do it on my own) AND made the house dirtier. The big advantage is that he still had heat in power outages, but they are really rare where I live.

[Nonesuch]

Originally Posted by BaptistFundie

I've got an unattached garage I was considering using a pellet stove for. But I suppose if I found an old wood stove that would work as well.

For a workspace like that, I'd go with whatever heating appliance was cheapest to acquire, install, operate.

In terms of install cost, many models of pellet stove can be vented out the wall, do not require a full chimney/flue. And you can kick it on only when you're using the space, plus pellet fire goes out a lot faster when you shut it off.

Originally Posted by karen_in_nh_2012

ETA: I also thought about getting a wood-burning insert instead of the pellet insert, but my across-the-street neighbor at my last house heated his house entirely with wood and he did NOT recommend it -- he said it was much more difficult than pellets (he was thinking of me trying to do it on my own) AND made the house dirtier. The big advantage is that he still had heat in power outages, but they are really rare where I live.

My neighbor has two fireplace inserts as primary heat source, runs both on "biobricks" (basically giant pellets), keeps them in a rack in the living room and they burn as cleanly as pellets, so difference in "dirt" would be from opening the firebox door to load in a new "brick" or three.

Cleanup is about the same, and when bricks are difficult/expensive to obtain, he burns regular cordwood.

[gemstone1]

The main negative that I've found with inserts ( I have one) is that unlike freestanding stoves, most inserts do not have an ash drawer. Which means that when it is time to clean out the ash, one must open the door and use a shovel to remove the ash...which is no big deal until it's time to unload that shovel full if ash into a receptacle.....then the ash billows all over everything in the vicinity.

As for pellet vs cord wood, there are plenty of reviews/opinions on line, one just needs to read and decide which is best for them.

Regards
Gemstone1

[karen_in_nh_2012]

Originally Posted by gemstone1

The main negative that I've found with inserts ( I have one) is that unlike freestanding stoves, most inserts do not have an ash drawer. Which means that when it is time to clean out the ash, one must open the door and use a shovel to remove the ash...which is no big deal until it's time to unload that shovel full if ash into a receptacle.....then the ash billows all over everything in the vicinity.

Most inserts don't have an ash drawer? Mine does, so I thought it was pretty standard.

So no, I don't have to open the door and use a shovel to remove the ash (which would be a pain).

Originally Posted by Nonesuch

My neighbor has two fireplace inserts as primary heat source, runs both on "biobricks" (basically giant pellets), keeps them in a rack in the living room and they burn as cleanly as pellets, so difference in "dirt" would be from opening the firebox door to load in a new "brick" or three.

Cleanup is about the same, and when bricks are difficult/expensive to obtain, he burns regular cordwood.

That sounds appealing, actually. If I move to Maine in retirement, I would definitely want a wood stove, and this sounds like it would be easier to use.

[M3 Mitch]

I have had an old Waterford Erin woodstove since 1991, my main source of heat. It has an ash drawer and I wouldn't want a stove without one, it makes a big enough mess as it is, ash does tend to get all over everything in the room, have to vacuum frequently to keep the mess down. Waterfords have not been imported to the US since about 1992. I got one of the last ones. You may find one used though.

I strongly prefer a wood stove because it works when the power is out, which is not that often around here but I like the reliability. Wood over pellets as it is cheaper, easier to store outside, and not subject to hoarders buying it all up like pellets can be.

Of course the downsides are the wood stove requires frequent attention, and does not keep the house at a constant temperature, much less do so automatically.

[Larry Caldwell]

Originally Posted by MechAndy

Wow.
We have a waterfront place on the Olympic Peninsula.
It seldom gets freezing here.
I see 40 degree temps often in the winter.
We have the view side of the house almost totally made of glass so there is that.

Going back to my original question .
Do any of you have any good options on just replacing my fireplace insert with one that feeds pellets?

Thanks again.
Andy.

Don't do it. At least your propane insert will work when the power goes out. Pull the chairs around the fireplace and keep warm. A pellet insert would be a cold box when you need heat.

[Rivertowntalk]

I have a Vermont Castings Vigilant stove, which is pretty old, but works fine. It's a top loader. I burn pellets and or wood in it. Pellets were down to $4 a bag and are very convenient and I just pour about a quarter bag into the stove at a time. I then can shut down the air and long burn them and they will go overnight. If needed, I throw a couple logs in. If the pellet price goes up, I burn more wood and fewer pellets.

[TimAZ]

I used to live in a semi-rural area in western Colorado. Around 2008 a lot of people started using pellet heaters and it absolutely killed the air quality, especially when we had inversions during the cold months. For some reason people thought that it was OK to run their pellet stoves even when a wood-burning ban was in effect. Pellet stoves create smoke just like wood-burning fireplaces and to me that is their biggest drawback.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by TimAZ

I used to live in a semi-rural area in western Colorado. Around 2008 a lot of people started using pellet heaters and it absolutely killed the air quality, especially when we had inversions during the cold months. For some reason people thought that it was OK to run their pellet stoves even when a wood-burning ban was in effect. Pellet stoves create smoke just like wood-burning fireplaces and to me that is their biggest drawback.

I have seen many articles making that claim about outdoor wood furnaces.

In my area they are very popular. But only for people who live over a mile from their nearest neighbor.

[Larry Caldwell]

Originally Posted by Submariner

I have seen many articles making that claim about outdoor wood furnaces.

In my area they are very popular. But only for people who live over a mile from their nearest neighbor.

The cheap outdoor wood furnaces are water jacket boxes that don't support a high enough combustion temperature to burn cleanly. The firebox needs to be over 600 degrees to consume all the wood toxins. A well operated flame tube boiler is not a hazard to the neighbors, and a blower on the firebox will burn even cleaner. The good ones are not cheap, and people who buy outdoor wood furnaces are looking for cheap heat.