Wouldn't think what small efficiency differences would be the most important issue...clearly seems which system is least affected by corrosion is the issue. (Has greater longevity)
Circulate ammonia laden air thru the least costly to replace air mover.
Barn Heating
-
McGiever
- Member
- Posts: 10130
- Joined: Sun. May. 02, 2010 11:26 pm
- Location: Junction of PA-OH-WV
- Stoker Coal Boiler: AXEMAN-ANDERSON 130 "1959"
- Hand Fed Coal Boiler: BUCKET A DAY water heater
- Hand Fed Coal Stove: Warm Morning 414A
- Coal Size/Type: PEA,NUT,STOVE /ANTHRACITE
- Other Heating: Ground Source Heat Pump and some Solar
-
Pacowy
- Member
- Posts: 3555
- Joined: Tue. Sep. 04, 2007 10:14 pm
- Location: Dalton, MA
- Stoker Coal Boiler: H.B. Smith 350 Mills boiler/EFM 85R stoker
- Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/anthracite
I believe the poultry barns in question are in Ontario, so both the quantity of coal used and the delivered price may make efficiency differences relatively more important for this application. I agree that the corrosion issue may be important if there are significant differences.
Mike
Mike
-
Willis
- Member
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Tue. Aug. 26, 2008 7:36 am
- Location: Cadiz, OH
- Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Combustioneer 24 FA w/ Will-Burt s-30
- Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Combustioneer 77, Stokermatic
- Hand Fed Coal Stove: Warm Morning 520,521
- Coal Size/Type: Washed stoker- Bituminous
Without getting to much scorn from my hard coal brethren I do have to ask the question - why anthracite and not lower cost bituminous coal. I could see a outdoor bit coal stoker fitting the bill. Portage and Main is one such builder. Not sure what part of Ontario but I Have shipped coal to London, ON for a reasonable price from Eastern Ohio. So I definitely think it would be competitive with Anthracite if not cheaper.