Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

edoubleu20 t1_j0lbanq wrote

When did a cord become 5x5x8?

11

Viceversa10 t1_j0lpm75 wrote

I thought we were supposed to go away from wood burning since its not green.

6

Likeapuma24 t1_j0ltrys wrote

I think the EPA came out some years ago & said burning firewood was carbon neutral.

I don't think it's carbon neutral, but if wood is harvested in a sustainable & responsible way, it's certainly not the worst way to heat a house

5

Synapse82 t1_j0m01ad wrote

Instructions unclear, I’m outside in my fire pit burning cords of wood.

7

drumcraze92 t1_j0mb1og wrote

I was under the impression that most fireplaces are a net-negative when it comes to heating a home as most of the heat escapes through the chimney when your flue is open… but guess we’re prepared to suggest anything that doesn’t impact the oil barons’ purses.

5

whateverusayboi t1_j0mdfjd wrote

The article forgot to mention a wood stove. yeah, fireplace will be a negative.
I light my stove once a year. October or November, then it goes out in late March. The article was written by someone who doesn't heat with wood.

10

NLCmanure t1_j0mewhk wrote

that is true for chimneys that cannot draw air from the outside. Chimney's will pull a vacuum especially with a good hot fire. My chimney has 2 vents on each side of the fireplace that can be opened to draw outside air into the fireplace which reduces significantly the vacuum on the inside but it isn't perfect either. If I get a rip-roaring fire going in the fireplace and maintain it, I can get a good portion of the house heated up quite well but the far end upstairs (separate heating zone) will suffer so there is some loss.

1

Phantastic_Elastic t1_j0mf2ra wrote

Sort of hilariously bad article, although the tip about getting wood from state land is smart. But then they talk about burning it in your fireplace, which is stupid.

6

Larrik t1_j0n3iij wrote

because it’s only releasing CO2 that was captured by the tree in the first place. In theory.

Maybe the same amount of CO2 comes out via natural rot vs burning?

7

1Enthusiast t1_j0o6kqi wrote

It’s not even that good. Its actually that a replacement tree can be planted and then absorb the carbon from the burnt tree. Thats a joke, but hey I also read its considered a renewable energy source so im headed to get a few pellet stoves 🥳

1

keepitupxxx t1_j0pakps wrote

Would burn every day if I could an had time

1

Joggingmusic t1_j0q6n34 wrote

Wood hustler signing in. Been running my wood stove on free wood for past two seasons. Doesn’t exclusively heat my house, still use the furnace but it lets me reduce run time. Gotta be willing to go out there and grab wood when the opportunity arises, or keep an eye out for landscapers who are trying to dump their wood. I managed to snag a couple cords for free from big maples that were dropped here in town, that’s carrying me pretty far this season. It can be a lot of work splitting and stacking but…it’s exercise and time outside I suppose.

1