In message , Andrew Gabriel
writes
In article ,
Bill writes:
There is, of course the ancillary question about why, if it's a
condensing boiler, we see so much 'steam' from it. If it were condensing

You can't see any steam from it - steam is invisible.
You see the water droplets as a result of condensing the steam.

fully, surely we should see no visible exhaust. Are we losing huge
amounts of latent heat here? Is a second stage condensing process worth
looking into?

That's why I put 'steam' in single quotes. What I was thinking was that
there might be more real steam in the output than there should be, and
that this steam was condensing into what I see after it left the flue.

What comes out does feel quite hot, so I'd have thought that a further
heat exchanger stage might be worthwhile. If the condensing boiler were
not condensing every bit of steam, this could also capture the residual
latent heat. Are there such things as add-on heat exchangers or would
this have to be a bodge it and see winter project?
--
Bill