Efficiency of a Stoker Stove Vs. a Hand Fired Stove

User avatar
windyhill4.2
Member
Posts: 6019
Joined: Fri. Nov. 22, 2013 2:17 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1960 EFM520 installed in truck box
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Crane 404 with variable blower
Coal Size/Type: 404-nut, 520 rice ,anthracite for both
Location: Jonestown,Pa.17038

Post By: windyhill4.2 » Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 3:51 pm

windyhill4.2 wrote:
Sat. Nov. 04, 2017 8:02 am
If one looks at the overall running expense of the different coal burners,the handfed stove will be the big winner.If tended properly,a hand fed stove will go MANY yrs with no parts replacement except for gaskets. If no blower is used to move the heat,there is no additional expense to operating a handfed other than the coal.
I still will stick with this opinion.LLoonngg term...overall efficiency..
Handfed without a blower will burn coal with next to nothing in maintenance & repairs,& will do that for many yrs,can't say that about a stoker or boiler.

User avatar
scalabro
Member
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed. Oct. 03, 2012 9:53 am
Baseburners & Antiques: 2 Crawford 40's, PP Stewart No. 14, Abendroth Bros "Record 40"
Coal Size/Type: Stove / Anthracite.
Other Heating: Oil fired, forced hot air.
Location: Western Massachusetts

Post By: scalabro » Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 3:58 pm

Lightning wrote:
Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 3:26 pm
Now that is HOT!
(pun intended lol)

I had a feeling you would dig that pic Lee :lol:

k-2
Member
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu. Sep. 28, 2017 10:57 am
Stoker Coal Boiler: K2- Keystoker
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska Stoker Stove
Coal Size/Type: Rice
Location: Coal Township Pa

Post By: k-2 » Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 4:14 pm

ad356 wrote:
Fri. Nov. 03, 2017 10:55 pm
i actually have natural gas on this property but NO WAY am i going to heat an old 1,500 sq ft farm house for $6-700 per year...... i really need some storm doors and i could reduce it even more. national fuel can suck it. i hate utility companies, they are thieves with their multiple delivery charges and weather adjustment fees. coal has been the most price stable commodity in the time i have heated with it.
I hear you there. Nat. Gas is dirt cheap to the gas company ,but not to the consumer. The PUC has let them load up the bill like crazy with all kind of nonsense. Last bill i got for a rental was $75 and out of that i actually used $15 worth of nat. gas. Rest was Customer Charge, Delivery charge for the gas to go through their rusty pipes. taxes,fees, ect ect. Imagine if you were getting coal delivered and the guy wanted $750 for $150 worth of coal. Same thing.

k-2
Member
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu. Sep. 28, 2017 10:57 am
Stoker Coal Boiler: K2- Keystoker
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska Stoker Stove
Coal Size/Type: Rice
Location: Coal Township Pa

Post By: k-2 » Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 4:28 pm

ad356 wrote:
Fri. Nov. 03, 2017 10:55 pm
NO WAY am i going to heat an old 1,500 sq ft farm house for $6-700 per year...... i really need some storm doors and i could reduce it even more.
so the question, does someone burning nut burn less then rice; just from an educational point of view. im not looking to convert, this thing is the best source of heat i have ever had.
Im burning about the same amount in a K-2 stoker, Avg 3 ton lately per season. Yea i know it uses coal just to keep lit but i crank the feed way back when its not that cold and shut it down altogether if a few days over 60 and nights over 45 are forecast. Its boiler and i have some big ass cast iron radiators on it,one of which im sure holds more water than the whole stoker.


ad356
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat. Sep. 21, 2013 7:07 am
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: keystoker 90K
Location: north java, ny

Post By: ad356 » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 9:47 am

Rob R. wrote:
Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 1:50 pm
Well, anyone that wanted to shut their stoker off on a warm day can do so - there is a guy on here that does just that.

The catch is what other fuel source you use to produce DHW and take the morning chill off, and at what point that becomes more expensive than just letting the stoker idle or the stove simmer.

yeah, i am one of those guys. why run my stove if there is no need. that constitutes a waste. my coal stove is my only real source of yet. yup i shut it down and re-start if the temps get over 55 during the day.

k-2
Member
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu. Sep. 28, 2017 10:57 am
Stoker Coal Boiler: K2- Keystoker
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska Stoker Stove
Coal Size/Type: Rice
Location: Coal Township Pa

Post By: k-2 » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 10:17 am

There are several reasons some of us shut down.
One is ,when the house is already hot ,any added heat the boiler is making is not wanted. My boiler is under my kitchen and not too far from the bar in a finished 1st floor. I have no way to cool the bar area when it gets too hot as there are no windows.
If your house is insulated it wont get that cold overnight. Its was 34 outside yesterday morning and the house was 69 with the stoker off.
For HW, i get my HW for about $10 a month so its not worth it to carry additional ashes or make heat when the house is already hot. My stove on Idle would use about $35 worth of coal a month ,using another posters estimate of 11Lbs a day in a k-2 . I understand everyones situation is different, so whatever works.

ad356
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat. Sep. 21, 2013 7:07 am
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker
Stove/Furnace Model: keystoker 90K
Location: north java, ny

Post By: ad356 » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 10:40 am

k-2 wrote:
Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 4:14 pm
I hear you there. Nat. Gas is dirt cheap to the gas company ,but not to the consumer. The PUC has let them load up the bill like crazy with all kind of nonsense. Last bill i got for a rental was $75 and out of that i actually used $15 worth of nat. gas. Rest was Customer Charge, Delivery charge for the gas to go through their rusty pipes. taxes,fees, ect ect. Imagine if you were getting coal delivered and the guy wanted $750 for $150 worth of coal. Same thing.
something wrong when the "charges" exceed the value of the "product". im am not supporting the wages of whatever CEO as at the helm of national fuel. i would rather give it to the mining companies and keep the miners working. allot of anthracite is reclaim from bituminous mining anyways. we have a plentiful, economical resource, why not use it. the heating appliances are simple yet refined, reliable, and much lower overall ownership and operating costs. plus the heat, the heat is the best.

User avatar
Canaan coal man
Member
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu. Nov. 08, 2012 12:37 pm
Hand Fed Coal Stove: A little cubby coal stove in the basement
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood #6
Coal Size/Type: Stove And Nut
Location: East Canaan, CT

Post By: Canaan coal man » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 12:39 pm

hotblast1357 wrote:
Sun. Nov. 05, 2017 2:10 pm
Scalabro, the only way you can compare your baseburner to anything, is if you get a stoker stove the same rating, and run it in the same spot too the same chimney, under the same weather conditions.

I have ran a baseburner in the old house, but I cannot do this comparison as my stoker boiler is in a remote building.
I did this and saved roughly 1.5 tons of coal in my first year. Went from a channing3 to G6.


User avatar
hotblast1357
Member
Posts: 4035
Joined: Mon. Mar. 10, 2014 10:06 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1984 Eshland S260 coal gun
Coal Size/Type: Lehigh anthracite pea
Other Heating: oil furnace
Location: Peasleeville NY

Post By: hotblast1357 » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 12:43 pm

Where the weather conditions the exact same every day?

User avatar
hotblast1357
Member
Posts: 4035
Joined: Mon. Mar. 10, 2014 10:06 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1984 Eshland S260 coal gun
Coal Size/Type: Lehigh anthracite pea
Other Heating: oil furnace
Location: Peasleeville NY

Post By: hotblast1357 » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 12:44 pm

It’s a test that is practically impossible without have a lab to create the same weather conditions, it’s truly a pointless argument.

User avatar
Lightning
Member
Posts: 9717
Joined: Wed. Nov. 16, 2011 9:51 am
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: Overmodified/Bored out Clayton 1537
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite/Awesome Size
Location: Olean, NY

Post By: Lightning » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 12:51 pm

Personally I think it would be pretty difficult to determine an absolute efficiency improvement from one to the other. You would pretty much need to run one appliance for a number of heating seasons, then the other while recording HDDs and average temperature throughout the house, room by room to make it a fair comparison. It could be done at our level but it would take commitment and impartiality.

And placement would need to be in the same location of the house so that at the end of it you wouldn't have the variable of, "but the stoker was heating the basement too where as the stove is in our living room now".

User avatar
tcalo
Member
Posts: 1197
Joined: Tue. Dec. 13, 2011 4:57 pm
Baseburners & Antiques: Our Glenwood 109
Coal Size/Type: Nut Anthracite
Location: Long Island, New York

Post By: tcalo » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 12:58 pm

I personally think there is more control with a hand fed. I like the hands on approach, lets me know exactly what is going on with the fire.

User avatar
hotblast1357
Member
Posts: 4035
Joined: Mon. Mar. 10, 2014 10:06 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1984 Eshland S260 coal gun
Coal Size/Type: Lehigh anthracite pea
Other Heating: oil furnace
Location: Peasleeville NY

Post By: hotblast1357 » Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 1:11 pm

tcalo wrote:
Wed. Nov. 08, 2017 12:58 pm
I personally think there is more control with a hand fed. I like the hands on approach, lets me know exactly what is going on with the fire.

Control to what though? The fire itself or where the actual heat is going?

Post Reply

Return to “Coal News & General Coal Discussions”