[Zipperfish]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Well Carbon dioxide and water are not a pollutants, of course.

But what I'm asking is what pollutants do you believe I with my traditional furnace am emitting that you with your "high efficiency furnace" are not? Any support for that?

I think with the high-efficiency furnace you are using less fuel over all for the same amount of heating.

[Zipperfish]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

You can get those here too, $5 for a 40kg bag of pellets. They are computer fed, and recycle their own exhaust so they emit very little pollution or heat. PVC is fine on the exhaust, because it doesn't get even as hot as a dryer vent. Older wood burners needed the extra heat in the flue to prevent the buildup of creosote, which is destroyed in the recycling of exhaust.

I'd rather a big crackling fireplace, if it weren't for the big hole in the roof that draws cold air inside all winter long.

good to know, thx

[martin14]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

martin14 martin14:

You can buy pellet stoves in Italy, where the intake and exhaust are basically
PVC, and they are installed within 2' of each other.

Always wondered just how safe that really is.

They make a lot of those pellets here in BC, I think.

ebay search, Canadian pellets everywhere.
3x the price the Doc quoted, natch.

http://www.ebay.it/sch/i.html?_odkw=pel ... e&_sacat=0



Can't get any fucking peanut butter, though.

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Well Carbon dioxide and water are not a pollutants, of course.

But what I'm asking is what pollutants do you believe I with my traditional furnace am emitting that you with your "high efficiency furnace" are not? Any support for that?

Ask the people in Harbin, China right now if they are pollutants or not.

I answered what furnaces are emitting, and what more efficient furnaces are not. The big one, as Zip points out, is money.

And I didn't say I had a high efficienct furnace.

[DrCaleb]

martin14 martin14:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

martin14 martin14:

You can buy pellet stoves in Italy, where the intake and exhaust are basically
PVC, and they are installed within 2' of each other.

Always wondered just how safe that really is.

They make a lot of those pellets here in BC, I think.

ebay search, Canadian pellets everywhere.
3x the price the Doc quoted, natch.


Can't get any fucking peanut butter, though.

http://www.lowes.ca/wood-pellets_15354.html

Right by the door when I walk in.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Ask the people in Harbin, China right now if they are pollutants or not.

I doubt that's necessary. The pollutants in smog are not carbon dioxide and water. Carbon dioxide is invisible and benign, even helpful and necessary for life on earth. Water is water. Neither are pollutants by the dictionary definition of the term. Yes there has been an effort to redefine the term. So what? Means nothing to me. Unless you can show me how water or CO2 are toxic in any kind of expected doses in the present or the future they are not pollutants.

$1:

I answered what furnaces are emitting, and what more efficient furnaces are not. The big one, as Zip points out, is money.

And I didn't say I had a high efficienct furnace.

Not exactly. You didn't show me what pollutants the new regulation furnaces burn that the ones mandated away don't. Specifically those chemicals not CO2 or H2O that can be classified as pollutants. And specifically how much. If I'm being called so irresponsible the government needs to mandate my right to choice away I want to know why.

Here's one though. I've been doing some searching too, and I am now officially bamboozled.

When Zip started talking about high efficiency furnaces, I just assumed he was talking about the new furnaces we were being mandated to purchase.

Now I'm not sure. I think I might actually have a high efficiency furnace. Did I get suckered? I'm not sure I have to search around and double check now.

This one's mine.

http://www.nordyne.com/literature/741c.pdf

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

$1:

I answered what furnaces are emitting, and what more efficient furnaces are not. The big one, as Zip points out, is money.

Not exactly. You didn't show me what pollutants the new regulation furnaces burn that the ones mandated away don't. Specifically those chemicals not CO2 or H2O that can be classified as pollutants. And specifically how much.

I did say what pollutants are the result of burning natural gas. I also said that a more efficient combustion can eliminate oxides in favour of dioxides, which pollute less. How much is available through a quick Google search.

The standards for high efficiency furnaces that I linked to don't include any standards for pollution emissions, only for converting natural gas to heat, so I'm still confused as to why you are asking for things that don't exist.

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Now I'm not sure. I think I might actually have a high efficiency furnace. Did I get suckered? I'm not sure I have to search around and double check now.

This one's mine.

http://www.nordyne.com/literature/741c.pdf

All I can say is; how many times does that document say "High Efficency Furnace"?

[N_Fiddledog]

OK, wait...we can stop talking about high efficiency furnaces right now. That's not what the 2010 mandate controls.

It's furnaces with 80% or under AFUE.

AFUE - "Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency: The AFUE is the most widely used measure of a boiler or furnace's heating efficiency. It measures the amount of heat actually delivered to your house compared to the amount of fuel that you must supply to the furnace. Thus, a furnace that has an 80% AFUE rating converts 80% of the fuel that you supply to heat -- the other 20% is lost out of the chimney."

http://www.furnacecompare.com/faq/definitions/afue.html

My High Efficiency Furnace offers 80+ AFUE so it just misses the mandate.

Here's the mandate...

$1:

After the New Year, gas furnaces manufactured for most Canadian residential applications must have a minimum fuel efficiency level of 90 percent AFUE.

This is a significant jump from the current Canadian minimum standard of 78 percent AFUE for gas furnaces, but the new regulation was not a surprise, as the government has discussed raising minimum furnace efficiency standards for more than 10 years. The reasons given for the new efficiency standard are to improve the environment and reduce greenhouse gases; in addition, the more efficient furnaces will reduce energy bills for consumers.

I don't know what they mean by "improve the environment". Improves what in the environment? Improve it how? With "reduce greenhouse gases", they can get stuffed if they thing that gives them the right to mandate choice away. As far as 'reducing energy bills for consumers" goes, that's my business. If the government wants to pay my bills, fine, but if they don't, they can mind their own damned business.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

All I can say is; how many times does that document say "High Efficency Furnace"?

I think it appears 3 times as a label but high efficiency appears in reference to furnaces of that series throughout.

And the specifics of how many claimed pollutants are being burned by the extra 10% are important if we who believe we are entitled to choice are being told we are so irresponsible the government must take controll of us, and deprive us of the right to choice. This is not Harbin China. You are not in any danger from our high efficiency 80+ AFUE gas furnaces.

And if the information as to how much actual pollution might be actually eliminated doesn't exist, why is it all of a sudden so vital to deprive Canadians of another chunk of freedom?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Ok, I'll bite. How is Suzuki a hypocrite?

Seriously? What do you call a person who fathered five children and then tells the rest of us we need to limit the number of children we produce.

I don't see the hipocracy between stating the obvious that if you can't feed 5 children that you shouldn't have 5 children; then having 5 children that are well fed, housed and clothed.

Unfortunately for your argument, he was referring to planetary sustainability, not whether you can actually afford 5 kids.

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

What do you call a person who owns a massive home on an island, on Native land he's proud to own but won't let any Natives live there, who tells the rest of us we need to live in smaller homes?

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Do you have natives living on your property?

Nope, but then again I've never publicly exclaimed how happy I was to be the proud owner of Native lands.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I can't say about the native issue as it's a new one for me, but isn't the island co-owned with an oil company?

Nah, that's Nelson Island.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And several people here have said they too own more than one home. Are they hypocrites too if they say the world needs less pollution?

Yep.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I've seen this home described as 100% sustainable; a cabin; a mansion. Are there any pictures of it? And if it makes no pollution, isn't it exactly in keeping with Dr. Suzuki's philosophy?

This particular house is on an island. The only way on or off is by 'copter or boat. UNless he's using a sailboat to go back and forth to and from the mainland, the answer to your last question is "no". I also question his "philosophy" regarding global warming as it seems strange that he'd own not one but at least THREE ocean front properties. He can't be too worried about rising sea levels.

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

What do you call a person who tells us to fly less while he jets around the globe spreading his "message"?

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The same guy who recently decided most of his appearances will be by video conference to reduce his travel costs and pollution emissions?

Wow, he's on a roll. He's got a one-fer going. I wonder if he'll be able to travel to his two OFF-continent homes via the internet.
See, here's my problem. According to him, if I fly to go to spend some time at my sea-side house in Scotland, I don't give a shit about the environment. Yet I wonder how he gets to his two off-continent properties.

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

In other words, what do you call a guy who lives by the creedo, "Do as I say, not as I do."?

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I think you mean "do as you think he should do, not what he thinks he should do".

No, I meant exactly what I said.

[fifeboy]

I find it interesting that you guys are still arguing about this guy. Kind of like rogue Senate pages, he must have more impact than anyone is willing to admit. Personally, I like his show. It's fun and informative in a grade 7 sort of way! Perhaps we should all be striving to regain our inner grade 7. Enjoy but ask questions!

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

martin14 martin14:

You can buy pellet stoves in Italy, where the intake and exhaust are basically
PVC, and they are installed within 2' of each other.

Always wondered just how safe that really is.

They make a lot of those pellets here in BC, I think.

Amazing the things you can do with irreplaceable hardwood forests these days!

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

martin14 martin14:

You can buy pellet stoves in Italy, where the intake and exhaust are basically
PVC, and they are installed within 2' of each other.

Always wondered just how safe that really is.

They make a lot of those pellets here in BC, I think.

Amazing the things you can do with irreplaceable hardwood forests these days!

[DrCaleb]

I always thought trees grew back too. Who knew?