Hello
After some research on the fumes that could emit my pellet stove, I found systems that can filter the particles
So I share this info with you:
At poujou: Poujou electro filter filtration
- Top Clean is a direct current generator which aims to ionize the dust contained in the fumes. These are projected towards the walls of the flue to be easily evacuated each year when the installation is swept. -
At Oekosolve Oeko
- Thanks to the installation of an electrostatic precipitator, you contribute to the improvement of the air quality at the local level, for you and your neighbors. -
Can we imagine making it "home"?
Filter the smoke from the chimney
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
very very few fine particles on a pellet stove.
the electro-filters are rather intended for stoves with open logs and chimneys.
they are even compulsory in certain Swiss cantons.
Given the high voltage they generate, I will not have fun making one unless I know exactly what it is.
the electro-filters are rather intended for stoves with open logs and chimneys.
they are even compulsory in certain Swiss cantons.
Given the high voltage they generate, I will not have fun making one unless I know exactly what it is.
0 x
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
They are also common on wafer boilers, which, due to the humidity of the materials, sometimes go through "locomotive" phases (dark plume) ... We often have "medium powers" (from 500 kW on collective / public establishments), which makes the filtration system profitable (often a combination of centrifugation followed by electrostatic filtration).
0 x
- Grelinette
- Econologue expert
- posts: 2007
- Registration: 27/08/08, 15:42
- Location: Provence
- x 272
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
On the same subject, I was surprised to learn, during a conference on urban pollution organized last Friday, the comparison of the volumes of fine particles (PF) produced by an open fire, a chimney with an open hearth, a closed hearth stove and a car with an internal combustion engine.
60 hours combustion in a open hearth stove produce as many FPs as:
- 9 hours in a "EPA" certified stove ("Environmental Protection Agency")
- 18000 kms traveled with a gasoline car average.
(Source: https://www.picbleu.fr/page/les-emissio ... uent-l-air)
50 kg of wood burned in his garden would produce as much FP as traveling 6000 km in a diesel car,
and in the PACA region, 45% of FP would come from the burning of green waste!
(Source: http://www.airpaca.org/article/mes-dechets-verts)
60 hours combustion in a open hearth stove produce as many FPs as:
- 9 hours in a "EPA" certified stove ("Environmental Protection Agency")
- 18000 kms traveled with a gasoline car average.
(Source: https://www.picbleu.fr/page/les-emissio ... uent-l-air)
50 kg of wood burned in his garden would produce as much FP as traveling 6000 km in a diesel car,
and in the PACA region, 45% of FP would come from the burning of green waste!
(Source: http://www.airpaca.org/article/mes-dechets-verts)
0 x
Project of the horse-drawn-hybrid - The project econology
"The search for progress does not exclude the love of tradition"
"The search for progress does not exclude the love of tradition"
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
Not that surprising. A year ago, my neighbor burned a big pile of branches. The whole neighborhood was smoky. And by that I mean the "acrid" smell was taking your throat. Even next to a highway, you breathe better.
The problem is the combustion of humid wood, at low temperature, without controlling the air flow ...
Ditto when in a house, we warm ourselves with logs. Look at the little cloud of "blue smoke" that forms and invades the space. When I go down to the valley, in the early morning, at the entrance to my village, I smell the smoke. These are the fires that we light ... We do not feel the traffic like this!
Certainly, the "smells" or the "throat catch" are a few molecules ... We cannot compare everything. But all the same, I would be amazed if it was good - otherwise it would smell nice, right?
The problem is the combustion of humid wood, at low temperature, without controlling the air flow ...
Ditto when in a house, we warm ourselves with logs. Look at the little cloud of "blue smoke" that forms and invades the space. When I go down to the valley, in the early morning, at the entrance to my village, I smell the smoke. These are the fires that we light ... We do not feel the traffic like this!
Certainly, the "smells" or the "throat catch" are a few molecules ... We cannot compare everything. But all the same, I would be amazed if it was good - otherwise it would smell nice, right?
0 x
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
Not so sure that perception is the right criterion for judging the harmfulness of pollutants ...
Chemical irritants are very disturbing, but their action may be only temporary compared to odorless but permanently harmful gases or VOCs, mainly in the lungs. I believe that what happens without our knowledge is potentially more dangerous than what is visible, since it does not encourage protection.
When I was younger in town, in winter, the street below was permanently overcome by a yellowish smog that resulted from the slow combustion of coal stoves fed with balls (coal dust agglomerated with products tar).
Chemical irritants are very disturbing, but their action may be only temporary compared to odorless but permanently harmful gases or VOCs, mainly in the lungs. I believe that what happens without our knowledge is potentially more dangerous than what is visible, since it does not encourage protection.
When I was younger in town, in winter, the street below was permanently overcome by a yellowish smog that resulted from the slow combustion of coal stoves fed with balls (coal dust agglomerated with products tar).
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
Yes, that's what my last sentence meant, a little convoluted ... It remains that these spicy "molecules", aldehydes, dioxins, and others, are not natural vanilla perfume!
That said, for bad combustion, damp wood, wood heating regulated by the draft, the numbers, on certain elements (CO, particles), we have them. And they are indeed catastrophic. I must have talked about it half a dozen years ago, on other threads. And I had been set on fire, going against the hype which said that heating with wood was "ecological". At the time, the "single thought" highlighted the CO balance sheet2. And hard to say that everything was not as white without being lit ... [set fire, light: I do it on purpose!]
This is almost only true for pellet boilers (dry fuel; less than 10% humidity, generally around 5%) and electronic control with permanent metering of air and pellets (control of the supply of pellets and the air fan by an automatic machine). And true enough for high performance boilers, also with controlled combustion, fed by logs also dried in the rules of the art ...
See pages 7 and 8 of the following document: http://www.appa.asso.fr/_docs/7/fckedit ... erysyn.pdf
That said, for bad combustion, damp wood, wood heating regulated by the draft, the numbers, on certain elements (CO, particles), we have them. And they are indeed catastrophic. I must have talked about it half a dozen years ago, on other threads. And I had been set on fire, going against the hype which said that heating with wood was "ecological". At the time, the "single thought" highlighted the CO balance sheet2. And hard to say that everything was not as white without being lit ... [set fire, light: I do it on purpose!]
This is almost only true for pellet boilers (dry fuel; less than 10% humidity, generally around 5%) and electronic control with permanent metering of air and pellets (control of the supply of pellets and the air fan by an automatic machine). And true enough for high performance boilers, also with controlled combustion, fed by logs also dried in the rules of the art ...
See pages 7 and 8 of the following document: http://www.appa.asso.fr/_docs/7/fckedit ... erysyn.pdf
0 x
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
There must be an error in these figures:
The EPA stove would pollute almost 7 times more than the open fireplace
Edit: Based the cited document, it's the contrary.
Grelinette wrote:60 hours combustion in a open hearth stove produce as many FPs as:
- 9 hours in a "EPA" certified stove ("Environmental Protection Agency")
The EPA stove would pollute almost 7 times more than the open fireplace
Edit: Based the cited document, it's the contrary.
0 x
- Grelinette
- Econologue expert
- posts: 2007
- Registration: 27/08/08, 15:42
- Location: Provence
- x 272
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
Gaston wrote:There must be an error in these figures:Grelinette wrote:60 hours combustion in a open hearth stove produce as many FPs as:
- 9 hours in a "EPA" certified stove ("Environmental Protection Agency")
The EPA stove would pollute almost 7 times more than the open fireplace
Edit: Based the cited document, it's the contrary.
Right, I unfortunately reversed the values of FP produced!
I think you've all corrected the error, but I'm rewriting the corrected equation!
By volume of fine particles produced:
9 hours combustion in a open hearth stove = 60 hours in a "EPA" certified stove
0 x
Project of the horse-drawn-hybrid - The project econology
"The search for progress does not exclude the love of tradition"
"The search for progress does not exclude the love of tradition"
- chatelot16
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6960
- Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
- Location: Angouleme
- x 264
Re: Filter the smoke from the chimney
the solution exists: cyclones like in Dyson vacuum cleaners!
the smaller a cyclone the more it can retain fine particles: the proof, in the PM2,5 measurement systems, it is a cyclone which separates particles larger or smaller than 2.5µ
do not be fooled by the figures given for multi-cyclones for industrial boilers: they may be multiple but they are too big like 30 to 50cm in diameter
cyclones at Dyson it is about 2 cm in diameter ... and it would be possible to make it even smaller
it only remains to make a large enough number in parallel to accept the flow of the hearth
these cyclones are not an additional scrap expense because they can be part of the heat exchange surface: exterior of the cyclone in water
we could therefore build a cyclone heat recovery unit: double benefit by mounting it on any boiler: recover more heat, and stop all smoke
the efficiency of the cyclones decreases if the flow is too reliable but it is easy to close a certain cyclone name to adapt to the flow
the smaller a cyclone the more it can retain fine particles: the proof, in the PM2,5 measurement systems, it is a cyclone which separates particles larger or smaller than 2.5µ
do not be fooled by the figures given for multi-cyclones for industrial boilers: they may be multiple but they are too big like 30 to 50cm in diameter
cyclones at Dyson it is about 2 cm in diameter ... and it would be possible to make it even smaller
it only remains to make a large enough number in parallel to accept the flow of the hearth
these cyclones are not an additional scrap expense because they can be part of the heat exchange surface: exterior of the cyclone in water
we could therefore build a cyclone heat recovery unit: double benefit by mounting it on any boiler: recover more heat, and stop all smoke
the efficiency of the cyclones decreases if the flow is too reliable but it is easy to close a certain cyclone name to adapt to the flow
0 x
Back to "Air Pollution and solutions against air pollution"
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 46 guests