Wood-burning vs pellet stoves?
"Tim W" wrote in message
...
Timothy Murphy
wibbled on Sunday 15 November 2009 10:09
Tim W wrote:
Last time I checked, pellets were not (yet) a cheap form of fuel -
weight for weight compared with logs (and you loose the option to burn
your own timber scrap etc).
I might be missing something, but I thought the main point of pellets
was
for auto-fed systems like boilers?
Regarding the log stoves - I would think logs are the best bet vs
pellets.
First of all, I should confess that I am looking for a stove in Italy ...
The local supplier has a large range of modern pellet-burning stoves,
together with a few very ornate wood-burners.
According to the lady I was speaking to,
you have to choose between convenience and beauty.
Most of the stores round here (Tuscany) sell 15kg bags of pellets
for around ?6. (I may have that price wrong.)
The lady said that an average stove takes about 1kg/hour.
Not sure about the burn rate vs coal, but the price/kg is fairly
comparable
with smokeless coal.
I imagine it is fairly easy to buy logs, as there are many fallen trees.
I wouldn't like to help myself, as I am sure one has to have
several forms filled in in triplicate.
It's Italy... I'm sure there are a 100 forms, but does anyone take any
notice? It's normally the Brits that get hung up on not ignoring stupid
beaurocracy - I thought the Italians had that bit cracked. Ask your
Italian
mates what the done thing is.
--
Tim Watts
This space intentionally left blank...
I installed an attractive but not ornate wood-burning stove in Italy (Lake
Como) from an Italian manufacturer called MCZ; the model was called 'Orion'.
I chose it over a pellet stove because the latter are more expensive and
they depend on mains electricity for their fans -- if there's a power cut
the stove stops and you're left in the cold.
Logs (beech) round here are 11 euros a quintal (100kg) cut to size and
delivered.
Stephen
|