Fluecube's Blog

…because they’re protecting imports from carbon scheming ‘clean heat’ trade partners – present in the EECA Energywise scheme… 60% EnergyStar heat pumps, 40% clean air certified whatever.

Under agreements with the Energy Efficiency Conservation Authority (EECA), the programme was required to put heat pumps in 60% of homes and other energy-efficient heating in 40%.

www.fluecube.com — Sun, 10 Jul 2011 02:14:36 +0000

Re article: http://www.tongyiheatpump.com/N_view.asp?nid=92 (Otago Region – Clean Heat, Clean Air programme)

How many homes in New Zealand is 60% and how many of that 60% actually needed air conditioning I do wonder. What came first, the commercialised global Energy Security Policy regime favouring world leading energy providers, their media public health scaremongering, or global carbon market propaganda? A lot of money, misused science and inappropriate domestic laws have passed without clear, inclusive communication from government. It’s been commercially shifty and undemocratic.

What is more sustainable, energy self sufficient, efficient and preserves the conservation of electricity more than a well maintained – low emissions wood heating installation? The public need to be more involved in discussions that birth commercialised schemes such as these EECA ones, especially when the outcome is going to be government officials standing behind them with a red hot poker. “How old’s that appliance? That has to go. It’s okay though, we will give you a loan to buy a new one and if you buy electric we’ll even give you more to pay back in your council rates.

In my opinion forget electric start – manufactured-fuelled pellet burners. Forget air conditioners that increase electricity demand. Forget expensive gas, oil and diesel. Heat air, food and water with wood. Just don’t make smoke. Burn properly and stop drawing attention to yourselves. There has been a lot of money spent on energy market propped-up public relations, making it look worse than it is but it isn’t pleasant. Some people still use a clothes line instead of an EnergyStar rated clothes dryer you know. If you can’t stop it under the conditions of normal operation then try the technologies available out there to assist you. Self sufficiency is a precious thing and it could save your life one day.

Incentives can be given to the rural sector to grow hard woods especially for wood heating. How much of a wood heater can be recycled at the end of its life compared to other heating appliances? Almost all of it. If smoke emissions are controlled how much is this heating method taking away from the environment? Burning wood is carbon neutral. If wood supply is a worry then its simply a case of replacing what is removed. Green areas might actually increase and with a more diverse range of tree species. Pine is probably the worst heating wood commonly used. Australia grows excellent fast growing hard woods. Why not export them? Gum is great and once you have a fire going Wattle is amazing.

I have got cynical due to the downgrading of wood heating from many environmentalists who only regurgitate what they’ve studied. There’s a lot of work to be done and with so many trained to record pollution – how many are actually solving it? The same studies are repeated. The same cost-benefit analysis statistics appear. What is actually being done?! Australia and New Zealand have been heavily influenced by schemes pushed by America’s EPA and Clean Air Act of the 1980s and 1990s. The energy transitions in the marketplace need to look to forestry and sustainable supply of renewable resources. Related zero emissions technology too. I do like the idea of biomass power on small scale but not if it is going to increase the cost and demand for domestic firewood needed for low cost heating. With cleaner log or chip burning possible why make pellets?

Carolyn Young, Oregon DEQ, 1988 “We’ve found stoves that reduce pollution by 70% in the lab. Now we need to find the stoves that operate best in the home.”

www.fluecube.com — Sat, 04 Jun 2011 06:09:17 +0000

Exerpts from The Bulletin, Bend, Oregon, November 10, 1988 “Wood Stove Results Won’t Hit Bend” – quotes from Carolyn Young, (then) public affairs officer for the Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon, USA:

“It’s not too much a surprise that the way stoves are operated in homes is not the same way they’re operated in the lab.”

The state’s pioneering five year old wood stove certification program bans the sale of stoves that don’t meet smoke emission standards. About 150 wood- burning heating devices have met the standards.

According to the DEQs 1987 Air Quality Annual Report, however, recent tests conducted by Omni Environmental Services Inc. of Beaverton of certified woodstoves in homes in Vermont, New York and the Yukon have shown that the performance did not match the lab results used in the DEQ program.

The Studies, which involved just 55 homes, indicated that smoke pollution was reduced only 30 percent to 40 percent instead of the 70 percent reduction achieved in the lab. (Gene Barton, Bulletin writer)

“The question in terms of research now is not just how the stove operates in the lab, but taking different types of stoves and seeing if they operate well and efficiently under a different variety of conditions.”

“Certainly over time that’s exactly what the research wants to focus on. We’ve found stoves that reduce pollution by 70% in the lab. Now we need to find the stoves that operate best in the home.”

A Rain Hat/ Chimney Cowl is not a Modification – re ‘modification’ in your Appliance Manual

www.fluecube.com — Fri, 27 May 2011 22:50:35 +0000

Some are being told this and it’s being misunderstood. The FlueCube is not classed as a pollution control device (that fits inside an approved installation – like a scrubber) it’s a rain hat/ cowl – an accessory placed on top to protect the flue from weather (its just one along with very few available that works in favour of reducing emissions and improving wood heater performance). Whether you use the original Rain hat/ ADD cowl or H Top, Direction Cowl, Chinaman’s Hat, Butterfly Cowl, Rocket Cowl, Spinning Cowl, or FlueCube cowl, your appliance warranty does allow it. The propaganda expressed by some retail and certification vested interests is that each one of these cowls has had to go through thorough scientific testing, i.e. monitored and approved on each of the models of their certified appliances, in both natural (range of realistic atmospheric variables) and controlled (measurable) factory conditions. They’re not. There is no standard in the NES or building code that can legally stop you placing different rainhats/ cowls above your wood heater installation – as long as they do not reduce the flow of gases exitting the flue. Many common models available already do this. If a cowl ends up black and the operator knows they are doing everything else right, then the cowl is probably reducing that flow of gases, is innefective and should be replaced. If you allow soot and creosote to build up you have a chimney fire hazzard. The ultimate difference between lab results and field results is atmospheric back pressure inside the flue system.

Insurance covers the authorised appliance and the flue attached to it. ECANZ, Nelson City Council, all NZ councils and The NZ Home Heating Association, AS/NZS 4012, 4013 and AS/NZS 2918:2001 are the laws. You won’t find in them the law that justifies councils to restrict the FlueCube’s use. Nelson Council and Nick Smith know it was tested re ‘overheating’ in the lab using the testing equipment available supporting their certification scheme and it did not. If they were able to identify the science they would also know it ‘could’ not. The wood heating appliance and flue lab testing used to certify within these environment laws is not enough to keep wood/ biomass heating clean enough to get past PM10 and 2.5 regulations as directed by higher government pushing alignment of energy security, economics and climate change policy. It is the view of FlueCube International that the testing for appliance certification misses out the crucial ‘atmospheric pressure’ element that the FlueCube is especially designed to correct. All manufacturers have had to do is build appliances that will pass the measurable controlled conditions of the lab. They pay their fee, their appliance is rated, councils force home-owners to buy heat pumps – good for state dividend feeding electricity providers, or pellet burners – good for state dividend feeding pellet fuel manufacturers, and new certified log burners – necessary for manufacturers/ retailers who have had to pay thousands to have their wood heaters tested to a National Standard! Our living costs all the while sky-rocket and a major earthquake hits Christchurch, enlightening those who may have exchanged a wood heater for a heat pump that it was a crap idea due to the long periods without power. If it happened in the middle of winter?

The FlueCube is proving to over 200 New Zealanders, and some overseas buyers that after it was trialled on two of the inventor’s pre 1994 double burner Fisher fires (one with wetback) for two years that atmospheric back-pressure caused on wood burner chimneys is one of the most noticeable causes of poor lighting, heating performance, wood fuel usage, and pollution. Whether this is recognised by academics and the standards or not, its very true, the FlueCube works, is legal, and air quality from wood heaters’ it’s attached to is noticeably improved. A recent customer applauds the cowl as they no longer get smoke odours coming in from their air ventilation. The testimonials received from those using it, or those that use to complain of smoke and odours from those heaters are coming back very positive.

The subject afterall is air quality and how we can improve it. Standards applied to wood heating appliances make an improvement of up to 70% in controlled ‘ideal’ conditions and only a very slight improvement in real life winter conditions. The right cowl, right wood and responsible operation does the rest. Extending flues can be a counter-productive exercise as this increases back-pressure issues. There is now more flue to heat through cold winter air on start up and it cools down faster overnight. Private businesses and manufacturers that want to be involved should be encouraged to look into the success the cowl design is having and AS/NZS standards could look at including atmospheric back-pressure on chimneys as a significant element in wood burner performance and pollution.

We will not stop improving wood heater use and allowing biomass heating to continue as the main form of domestic heating. It’s not as if people are living without the need for natural gas or their connection to the electricity grid yet but I have read about energy security policy and its presence in new global economic framework. It is no surprise it attracts carbon offset investment rackets from those who heard about it first. It only perpetuates the ill effects of obsessive, unconcionable profit & power hunters – including the inevitability of throwing life-promoting ecosystems off balance.

The UNFCCC and the 100 billion dollar a year green climate fund: How’s this not just another IMF or Aid agency where the world bank and a few swindling profiteers in these countries win and the majority of their populations lose to hunger or genocide? I am cynical – sometimes it pays to be but I’m not in total disagreement with all of it. The schemes are optimistic and perhaps we should keep our blind unquestionable faith in them. Truth is though, wood and biomass are the most abundant heating fuels on the planet suited to domestic heating in winter. Less is more. Solar has always been a good idea but people still have to consider the manufacture and use of non-renewable materials to produce it on large scale. Wood heaters are built with the ability to recycle. The true reality of environmental consciousness in our world of centralised industry, financial institutions and financial trading markets unfortunately means a greater scaling down, not a scaling up in production and new money. As soon as Global Warming was announced, many were set to profit from it including one of its major prophets, Al Gore. He’s ready to sit everyone down in front of that screen of flickering catastrophic images again. “Expose the deniers!” If it’s so dire why doesn’t he set an example and DO SOMETHING about it. There has been very little practical work being done which is odd due to the rhetoric being of immediate importance. I suppose that the positive outcome from a stinking load of manure is you can grow roses in it.

Also strange: although the toxins from wood/ biomass smoke are being addressed with the FlueCube clean air organisations from the start have been less than interested. Some in fact are anti it due to it supporting the use of wood heating. It appears they’ve been indoctrinated. It’s set in their minds to build lynch mobs against wood heaters – wiping them and the bastards who use them completely from the modern world, regurgitating stuff like “There is no safe level of PM10/2.5 pollution”, “my child has asthma because of you” – emotional stuff. Thanks EPA & your sponsored Lung Associations for frightening us all. The appliance is not the enemy, i.e. the polluter, however the environment it’s used in and inadequate education on how it’s used, is. If environmental authorities can be comfortable in knowing that there is no reason that smoke and bad odours should escape out a chimney, then the odd polluter can be identified, notified, educated, monitored, and if they continue to breach, apply penalties. We cannot allow outlawing/ phasing out of self sufficient heating appliances when methods are available to improve on what has already been achieved. A wood stove is a central hub to the home. Your fuel (pre-graded if you like) can be sourced from a forestry replanting scheme or less corporatised rural plan. Wood heaters can be cooked on, heat the air and your central water supply. There is a responsibility to how its used just as with all appliances. The energy policies need to get real.

I’d love to see how they came up with these figures. This is how they try to convince the law makers and public inside the USA that all wood burners are bad.

www.fluecube.com — Sun, 13 Mar 2011 20:14:00 +0000

“A single wood burner, operating efficiently, can produce as much particulate pollution per hour as two large diesel trucks, 45 automobiles, 1,000 oil furnaces or 1,800 gas furnaces, he said. Sometimes owners burn more than clean wood, including unsplit logs, wood treated with creosote, household garbage, automobile tires and even animal carcasses that worsen pollution levels.”

Jim Thompson, the Allegheny County Health Department air program manager

“real-life emissions are typically higher than laboratory results due to variability in the wood-burner operation, installation, fuel type, moisture and quality”

www.fluecube.com — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 22:00:35 +0000

So officially the only reason laboratory ratings will be exceeded in the field is because of the Appliance Manufacturer (6-$7000 to test & certify their appliances) , the Installer (their fault – their money) , or the Owner (spot fines) . There is no mention of weather conditions or geography that could alter laboratory ratings regardless of it being obvious. Back pressure from cold weather does affect emissions and efficiency ratings. The lack of this consideration is causing these extensively written about carcinogens in wood smoke to blow back into your living spaces and possibly more than what you’d witnessed from your older burner. The improvements in town air quality recordings that authorities preach are more likely due to promotions that have manipulated the public to swap to electric or gas powered appliances, not due to any significant improvements in the already self sufficient and carbon neutral wood burning ones. With a woodheater and FlueCube you keep a greater control of your heating costs and won’t give clean air authorities any good reason to bully any more money out of you. No emissions. No worries. Let them deal with the real polluters.

-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-

Warm Homes Technical Report
Real-life Emissions Testing of Wood Burners in Tokoroa

Authors: Colleen Kelly, Victoria University Suri Mues, Ministry for the Environment Wayne Webley, Applied Research Services
Published in June 2007 by the Ministry for the Environment Manatū Mō Te Taiao

1.1 The NES and the Ministry’s performance review

It is not appropriate to compare the real-life results with the NES limit of 1.5 g/kg because the NES is based on laboratory test AS/NZS 4013, and real-life emissions are typically higher than laboratory results due to variability in the wood-burner operation, installation, fuel type, moisture and quality. The sensitivity of certain wood burners to these variables is highlighted under real-life conditions, whereas under laboratory conditions these variables are tightly controlled.

Some council inspectors reported to be blocking perfectly legal clean air technology

www.fluecube.com — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:56:38 +0000

I cannot reitterate enough that certification granted to wood heating appliances without any consideration of atmosphere in, around and above the appliance’s exhaust should be invalid for the purposes of both national environmental laws and council bylaws promissing to reduce wood smoke pollution. The very function and immediate visible results of the FlueCube cowl is enough proof showing just how significant the exhaust and atmosphere’s influence upon it is. The efficacy of the woodheating appliance is improved greatly with the FlueCube. It corrects the condition inside the exhaust/ flue pipe to a perpetual and consistent vacuum. No more down draft – no more back pressure. These negative effects have always caused wood heating appliances to be smoky and innefficient.

A misconception perhaps is that the FlueCube is fanning the fire – applying extra air to make the fire burn hotter, altering the certified ratings and increasing fire risk. It does not. It only removes negative atmospheric effects that clog up the flue. It only allows the possitive results gained inside the lab to remain consistent and valid in the field. Its ability to keep the whole system clean in fact reduces risks of chimney fire. This has not been possible until now. We are disappointed to hear reports that some inspectors are blocking the consumer from installing the effective cowl even though our customers have been overjoyed with the results. We have around 150 happy customers around New Zealand.

FlueCube has never received anything in writing from the Nelson council asking not to supply locals with the effective wood smoke and wood heater efficiency fix. The lack of interest or intrigue from the authorities for such a simple pollution fix is perplexing. Nevertheless one customer told us that because a neighbour of his complained about smoke from his chimney a council inspector recommended he install a FlueCube. We know of a small number of inspectors that do tell retailers and customers they are not allowed to install the fix. We are very interested in these individuals and would like to hear any stories. Please write to us at info@fluecube.com

The law allows the interchanging of cowls. Here is the Nelson bylaw regarding stack requirements. Inspectors can suggest or encourage what cowls consumers can use. They cannot however dictate what cowl can or cannot be used for the purposes of consumers’ gaining a permit. No standard or approval process exists to pass a chimney cowl of this nature. If told the FlueCube cowl needs to be tested or passed it is to be considered unofficial and irrelevant until a testing process effective to its function or to any other cowl design is incorporated into the standard. The results are too effective to be ignored – or blocked for that matter Mr. Chief Inspector, Mr. Senior Policy Planner and Mr. Minister for the Environment. There is a lot of fiction in AQ3.1 to AQ3.4 in Nelson’s Air Quality Plan. They’d rather have smoke and contaminates “dispersed” rather than combusted. Nothing like a contradiction. You don’t think those “polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons’ are there concentrating in these appliances that try to do what the FlueCube achieves high out of harms way? Smoke on a still cold night or morning cannot be dispersed because of the heavy cold air. It falls. The FlueCube will stop it and combust its carcinogenic properties before it reaches the atmosphere. If its true that Nelson or Christchurch councils are attempting to block consumers from installing this cowl they are doing a great wrong. The public need to see the light and challenge the logic of enforced zoning and change-outs when a solution has been provided. This is a harmful TPP – FTA – EPA policy that New Zealand’s most productive workforce continue to suffer climbing living costs and unemployment from. We need to take responsibility and demand review of the quality of data that build these policies to safe-guard our future domestically.

Neville D’Herville is an electrical engineer with years of experience in identifying and solving a wide variety of industrial issues. His integrity from the field of his profession is helping the misled public beat wood smoke pollution at the smallest possible cost. He is improving the overall operation of the wood heaters. He understands safety and has designed the FlueCube to be safe as well as effective. If certain council employed inspectors continue to act in ignorance, blocking the use of the cowl then their town will continue to be blanketed in smoke in the cold winter evenings and mornings, fires will continue to chuff smoke into living spaces at the peril of residents’ health and furnishings, lighting will continue to be a frustrating task, and certified wood burner or not, the overall ratings and efficiency from lab results will be false after the consumer purchases and installs their appliance at home – in the real world.

The FlueCube – affordable woodstove technology protecting energy conservation, self sustainability and public health – without any strings attached.

www.fluecube.com — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 01:28:34 +0000

What is it?

An all-in-one chimney cowl that not only stops down draft and back pressures on enclosed wood heating appliances, it stops woodsmoke emissions from them too
Identifies winter weather conditions on the flue pipe as the major cause in woodsmoke pollution
Identifies that by keeping the tip of the flue heated creates the perfect vacuum conditions inside the flue
The first of its kind to effectively trap, compress and combust unburnt gases safely at the top of the chimney
100% off-grid technology, leaving the wood heating homeowner fully self sufficient
Built to last, manufactured from heat grade stainless steel
affordable, effective and easy to install

Hot air/ Cold air

Plumes of smoke being observed on a warm day will often rise straight upward. Only wind will alter the course as it is dispersed and it is unlikely by any other means to waft at ground level. The days that are warmer and clearer will often produce a hotter fire too and thus far less emissions. Newer woodstoves as well as many older ones included may produce no visible emissions at all on such days. But what about cold days? You know, when you’d actually light a fire.

Colder days, especially mornings are what we complain about. They’re the problem. Thick, bluish smoke concentrates and blankets neighbourhoods. Both newer and older wood heaters experience the same issues. A ‘clean air’ rated fire is only tested inside a lab and not inside the environment for which the purchaser uses it in. The theory is to reburn the fuel at the source – catalytic converters, extra air pipes etc. Whatever goes on with the heat source you still have heavier cold air blocking the appliance’s exhaust pipe at the top, choking it and causing it to smolder. When early technicians looked at the issue, they looked at the smoldering and straight away started work on how to make the fire burn more efficiently from inside the appliance. Many different ineffective cowls kept being produced, woodstove engineers scratched their heads and the two areas have seemed to remain separate from one another.

One thing is true. Open fires are not very efficient. They suffer draft issues from above and below. The fuel cannot burn efficiently or heat you efficiently. In saying that though it may just be that there isn’t a technical solution yet. Some smart engineer out there may find a way to solve the issues involved here. Enclosed burners do provide with the ability to cook food and heat water as well as give off plenty of radiant heat which is excellent. Before simply accepting government supported environment policy dictating to you to throw out your wood heater and buy new as based on ‘scientific’ data ’proving reason beyond doubt’ check out what technology is available first and be ready to have a say – questioning the methods for collecting this ‘proof”. We live in a world where many business practices may counter our faith in leadership, morality and the integration thereof. Environment policies should lead in the change preventing profit and scarcity hurting people’s social and cultural development. Living costs should be decreasing, not increasing. Health should be improving, not worsening. People should be given greater opportunities not less. People in general are creative, full of ideas and enjoy solving problems. The opportunities given to actualise and turn these ideas into practical solutions need support so all can benefit.

How does it work?

One of the issues is a flue being cylindrical in shape. Heat goes up as a much larger area of colder air falls downward. It doesn’t matter what fancy twirly thing you put on top, the heat in this case will end up losing the battle. So the inventor is going to trap that heat in a cubic chamber surrounding the flue outlet. He’s going to have the heavy colder air fall downward via the four corners as well as it surrounding the outside – like a cage built from an endless supply of colder air. Heat then travels up the flue, is forced to fan outward, is trapped, gases compress, combust and keep that flue tip hot. This is essential. In the same process the flue length to length is protected and stays in a constant vacuum. Your fire burns so clean you wont need to clean the glass door. Your wood will burn to charcoal, burning longer, allowing your wood supply to last longer. You wont have trouble lighting or getting smoke inside the living space anymore either.

Testing

Neville D’Herville has over 40 years experience as an electrical engineer and is respected and admired in the Nelson community. He’s practical, thorough, safety conscious and inventive. He has little time for bullshit, like many who solve problems practically in the real world. His FlueCube has been trialled in the field, in winter conditions for three consecutive years. Customer testimonials have been 100% positive. Authorities asked for testing so we looked into it. The National Environment Standard allows for a range of chimney cowls designed for different conditions and it is only individualised council bylaws that may use methods to protect the scheme from any consumer beneficial technology not already included in it – challenging their reasons for the need of changeouts and new consents. There is no testing apparatus available in the government standards that uses real life conditions. The only testing standard is the Condar Dilution Tunnel test (see link). This will test emissions from inside the fire box but not from above it. It is lab based and does not incorporate winter conditions. Since the USA EPA accepted Condar’s test in the 1990s bigger manufacturers who can afford the compliance fees in turn have designed their wood stoves to be effective for it. Smaller manufacturers have dropped out of the market. The technicians at the New Zealand Ministry for the Environment said it would cost $40 – 50,000 to adapt the US$100,000 test for the new cowl (see link). This was unsatifactory as it did not place the cowl in the environment for which it is intended and in addition an extraction fan would be used to suck emissions through it. The very exercise proved to us that the public were being mislead. You can’t claim a ‘clean burning’ appliance without it proved to be ‘clean burning’ in the field in the conditions it is intended to be used. The only way testing for claims of clean air can be accurate and fair on the consumer is if emissions recording equipment can be used above the chimney in typical winter weather conditions. Councils will continue to get data from their recording stations placed around towns and cities but these results include those who have been attracted away to less self sufficient, grid based and fossil fuel heating appliances. It says nothing about the new USA EPA influenced wood heater technology. With confidence in the success the FlueCube is having, the lack of academic data and statistics doesn’t bother us and shouldn’t bother anyone else. We are talking about immediate effects and consistent positive results in the real world environment – outside the offices where data, statistics and pollution policy is generated.

Now is tested and complies to UK/ Europe standards BS 715:1993 (Specification for metal flue pipes, fittings, terminals and accessories for gas-fired appliances with a rated input not exceeding 60 kW) and BS EN1856-1:2009 (Class1 prefabricated metal chimney)

Eugene, Oregon: the model for woodburner certification

Background on Oregon’s Woodstove Program (deq.state.or.us)

Eugene, Oregon, 1978: City Inspector Accused (Eugene Register Guard)

“OMNI Consulting Services and its sister companies, OMNI Environmental Services and OMNI-Test Laboratories, have been in the wood stove testing and research business since 1979” (‘A Green Label for Wood Stoves’, omni-test.com)

Spokane, Washington, 1984: Lets Clear Away the Smoke… (The Spokesman-Review)

Bend, Oregon, 1988: Wood Stove Test Results Won’t Touch Bend (The Bulletin)

Omni Course, 1991 – The Masonry Heater Association of North America

Omni Environmental Services, 1995: Design and Operating Factors Which Affect Emissions from Residential Wood-Fired Heaters: Review and Update

Omni Environmental Services, 1998: Residential Wood Combustion Technology Review. Volume 1. Technical Report

2001: Wood Stove Industry Retreats Gradually from Eugene, Oregon Area (High Beam Research)

Selling a home with wood heat? Oregon DEQ wants your old wood stove destroyed after August, 2010. (examiner.com)

The legislation has been expensive and damaging to the woodstove industry yet all along most of the damage as far as pollution is concerned could have been corrected at the top of the chimney.