Jotul - You should only burn hardwoods

[Big J]

57 minutes ago, trigger_andy said:

 

Open Chimney or Flue? If its an open Chimney then I can see why you did not have to bother. 

Clay flue, with 6" steel flue inserting into it. I reckon it retained a lot of heat once warm, so maintained a higher flue gas temperature and less condensation. 

[Mark Bolam]

That’s the one J.

My folks had an old Northumbrian farmhouse with a massive stone chimney.

They used to slumber the fire overnight (they kind of had to, Northumbrian winters often meant ice inside my bedroom windows in an uninsulated old place).

The volume of soot swept out every year filled bag after bag.

Proper big, furry soot.

[Big J]

We've all had this conversation a million times on Arbtalk. Stihl versus Husqvarna, what's the best firewood and just how rubbish are Nissan Navaras? 

Most important with burning wood is what you are using to do it and how you operate that device. You can have the driest oak in the world, but if you are using an open fire, you'll have more soot than someone burning softwood at 30% MC on a well controlled stove. 

 

Second most important is the fuel. Dry is always best, but there is some wiggle room if your device and your method are spot on. You could say it's not the wood, but how you use it that matters.

 

We've lived in generally poorly insulated old houses for the last 10 plus years and a big stove is just needed. It's not often fully stoked, but when the temperature drops below an average of 0c outside, it's on fully. I envy those of you that only get through a few cube on a 5kw stove, but that's not an option for us. 

 

[difflock]

YAWN!

 Since the winter of 1997 we have been burning a mix of Birch to start and pure conifer this past 15 years, into a clay liner flue surrounded by vermiculite, slumbered overnight when on the Birch, but re-lit each morning on the Conifer

AND the flue has NEVER been cleaned and still pulls like a train.

Nuff said!

[richardwale]

2 hours ago, difflock said:

YAWN!

 Since the winter of 1997 we have been burning a mix of Birch to start and pure conifer this past 15 years, into a clay liner flue surrounded by vermiculite, slumbered overnight when on the Birch, but re-lit each morning on the Conifer

AND the flue has NEVER been cleaned and still pulls like a train.

Nuff said!

Burnt softwood and a bit of hardwood, on our stove for 10 years and we get about a cornflakes bowl of soot each year. 

[trigger_andy]

2 hours ago, difflock said:

YAWN!

 Since the winter of 1997 we have been burning a mix of Birch to start and pure conifer this past 15 years, into a clay liner flue surrounded by vermiculite, slumbered overnight when on the Birch, but re-lit each morning on the Conifer

AND the flue has NEVER been cleaned and still pulls like a train.

Nuff said!

Cant argue with that I suppose. I guess Ive been proved wrong. What penance do I have to fulfill?  

 

I do find it odd that at least two Stove Manufacturers stipulate Hardwood Only though. Why would they do this unless they had good reason for doing so? Why would they intentionally lose potential Softwood burning customers unless they had a good reason to? Same with the Norwegian Institute, I mean the Norgies are a Nation devoted to the Stove. They are also still bloody worried about Russia invading. We have Bomb Shelters in all our work buildings by law (old law)  Anyway, they have spent feck knows how much researching this,and take it way way more seriously that we do in the UK. I cant help thinking they know more than we do in the UK. 

 

I sure dont have all the answers but having friends with literally thousands of acres of land, so much land they have mountains, mountains covered in Birch they laugh at the thought of bothering to drag softwood out. They save Sawmills, Salmon Rivers you name it. All old family land. Makes me super jealous.  

[difflock]

Hmmm?

Are there any other differences between Conifer and Birch, since in the Scandanavian context I presume hardwood means Birch and not Oak or other hardwoods.

Like the acidity of the flue gases, or the temperature produced, i.e. could they simply be seeking to prevent damage to the stove body or lining materials, by recommending hardwood over softwood?

Or perhaps Scandanavian chimmney construction is different to UK specs?

But if so I would have imagined they would be more specific in their wood specification, since I have seen on here that burning undiluted Oak is bad practise due to the acids produced (if I am remembering correctly)

I always like to know the "why"?

I would certainly much prefer felling, handling, splitting and burning Birch, if it was available in sufficient quantities.

The Conifer could then blow down and rot insitu.

And the smell from the Birch bark burning is a pure bonus.

Marcus 

EDITED

Erm

I went back and read the first post, and it was quite detailed about other hardwoods, so I am still perplexed.

Edited February 13, 2019 by difflock

[aesmith]

9 hours ago, trigger_andy said:

...

I do find it odd that at least two Stove Manufacturers stipulate Hardwood Only though. ...

Surely that's only one and a bit, if Jotul only makes that stipulation in the UK and not in their other markets.

[openspaceman]

1 hour ago, difflock said:

I would certainly much prefer felling, handling, splitting and burning Birch, if it was available in sufficient quantities.

So would I simply because it's less work per dry weight  of firewood plus it has less water to lose, so in a poor season or low ventilation it will dry whereas the softwood may not (though the softwoods do seem to dry easily). Also the fire burns for longer because the dried density per log is higher, so less tending of the stove.

Edited February 13, 2019 by openspaceman

[trigger_andy]

3 hours ago, aesmith said:

Surely that's only one and a bit, if Jotul only makes that stipulation in the UK and not in their other markets.

Id have to see that for myself to be honest. Never realised so many here read Norwegian.