Did67 wrote:Sorry, I don't know how to quote properly. While waiting for an explanation, I continue in blue:
You just have to put in "quote" each quote, remembering to close ([/ quote]) the previous one before opening a new one. Edit one of your messages that I corrected and you will quickly understand.
Did67 wrote:- I'm talking about boilers and not stoves
I think there are far more stoves than boilers installed ... I speak in general. We can always do great things but at what price and reliability?
Did67 wrote:- I can send you the test report: the Okofen PESK 15 reaches 100,6%, 7% more than the same model without condensation (BLT Wieselburg - Austria tests); so here is the gain, verified by tests, with pellets at 8% humidity ... Do not forget that combustion gives off water - there is no water in the gas yet every high-performance gas boilers are condensing. It seems to me that you made an error of reasoning there.
Reasoning error ???
Well where would the water come from if it doesn't come from the moisture in the pellets or the humidity in the air? In fact we evaporate it to recondense it then? To my knowledge, wood only contains a maximum of 2% of hydrogen ...
Sorry I think that condensation on a wood boiler is not wise for 3 reasons: performance gain, additional cost and maintenance ...
This is in contrast to gas condensing boilers (strictly speaking fuel oil) where there is a real potential gain possible. And still a lot of professionals refuse to install this because it's more pain than other things.
Better to make a 110% return for 5 years or a 90% return for 30 years? Economically there is no photo !!
Did67 wrote:The heat of the condensation of the water contained in the pellets is "neutral" in the balance: it is consumed to evaporate the water from the pellets then recovered in the condenser; this is lost in non-condensing models ...
It's neutral, that's what I said above: so how do I get more than 100% return? Except for the H2 contained in the wood I don't see ...
Did67 wrote:- the additional cost, for this model, is € 2 excl. tax (half of which is reimbursed by the tax credit)
Ouch 2250 € for 15 points of return ... have you calculated the return on investment?
Did67 wrote:- I opted for condensation, but I admit: a) profitability, under current conditions, is questionable - but what will the prices be in the future? ; b) it is technically a risk - corrosion resistance of the condenser, etc ... I do not particularly encourage this option, even if by conviction I adopted it ("it is not because a resource is renewable that it must be wasted "!)
Well, that's all ...
Did67 wrote:I find you pessimistic about the technical aspects of pellets. I have been thinking for over a year - there is material. But I am optimistic. The proof: I "rocked" - but I do not claim to be necessarily right ... "See you in 10 years", as the song says?
It is not the techniques that worry me but the commercial aspect ...
Did67 wrote:If the data in the table that you have published concerns stoves and not boilers, I understand better. But I misunderstood then ...
This concerns boilers AND stoves but I will correct to put 80% efficiency on the boilers ...
Did67 wrote:Christophe wrote:c) Yes for the Air Air COP (although you have to be a scam to sell air air or it freezes strong)
It seems to me, however, that it sells more than pellet boilers in Alsace! The climate may warm up, I think we will still have frost !!!
It's a lamentable fact, but the nuclear lobby is more powerful than that of the pellet sellers and people are idiots: when it goes on TV, it must be "true" ... It's up to us to educate them. ..
ps:
last general remark, does anyone know how the boiler outputs are given for which operating range? It's probably like cars: ideal laboratory data over a very precise operating range.