Which is better for the envoirnment?

Question

To heat a home: Using wood in a wood-burning fireplace, or using an oil furnace? Please choose only from these 2 options.

Answer 1

It depends on a few factors - the size of the dwelling, the kind of wood burning fireplace, and the efficiency of the oil furnace.

A regular open hearth fireplace is horrible for heating since it will suck all of the heat directly up the chimney. In order to use one for heating, you need to put a fireplace insert with a blower into it - you will be using a little bit of electric power to run the blower fan, but the benefit is unbelievable. You can even route ductwork off of the fan plenum to blow warm air throughout the house, keeping the room with the fireplace in it from being the only warm one.

Better than that is what I have in my downstairs/basement - it is a wood/coal burning stove that is inside of a box with a blower. It will heat the whole house with even a very small fire burning inside. I've got a gas central unit which I usually run at night though to keep from having to mess with the fire.

An efficient oil furnace can do as good of a job, if not better - and as long as it is regularly maintained, filters changed, and a reasonable temperature is set (getting a digital thermostat can make a huge difference).

ither way is going to cause a little damage to the environment, which is why you should try to make your house as energy efficient as possible. Replace old worn out windows with new double-pane ones - make sure all weatherstripping around windows and doors is in good repair - put additional insulation anyplace in the house where you might be losing heat. Heavy drapes, storm windows, or plastic sheeting can all help keep heat in and lower the amount of time that heat needs to be running.

You can also offset the damage you do a little bit by growing lots of plants to eliminate carbon monoxide. Constantly bug your local officials to set up 'green belts', parks, and other wooded areas to keep areas from becoming overdeveloped. Also push for clean energy solutions to upgrade and improve (or eliminate)power plants that are polluting the atmosphere.

Regardless of which side you take on the global warming debate, the fact is - we need to all do whatever we can to give the cleanest, healthiest earth we can to our children, and their children. The attitude that it's someone elses problem (or not a problem in the first place) is just plain retarted.

Answer 2

These are options for heating outside city grids where access to other resources is limited. I could not get fuel oil if I wanted it where I live.

To those touting coal-produced electric heating vs today's woodburner technology - put on your thinking cap. Don't omit renewable resource vs finite. Also don't forget the resources that go into the production of the equipment to produce power - even solar units. Be practical - those things didn't happen by magick.

Look into airtight double-walled woodburning stoves with catalytic converters and thermostats, warm but not hot to the touch on the radiant outside. Burn only hardwoods like oak to keep down creosote in the chimney which should be cleaned every year, or at least every 2nd year. They're wonderfully silent and cozy. My Earth Stove's a homely charmer.

I know less about oil furnaces but do know that modern ones take advantage of today's technology. No ashes to take out, no hand-feeding compared to woodstoves. Oilburner's fuel is finite, vs wood being a renewable resource.

Another thing about woodstoves is the difficulty turning down the heat sufficiently in the home during a warm day following a cold night - no problem in an oilburner.

Answer 3

I'm afraid this isn't has simple has it look.

Oil : the oil currently used is made for thousands of years...but some other resources of oil could be exploited. Corn is one of those.

Wood: True that theoretically the CO2 get re-absorb but on a global scale, it isn't so simple. A tree take between 10 to 30 years to grow to adulthood depending of the type...and those days few have time to reach middle age before they are cut down once more.

So which one is best...? What do you prefer: orange or apple ?

Answer 4

If we all started to heat our homes by burning wood the air would be filled with the carcinogens contained in wood smoke. During the winter the air in our cities would have a dirty yellow pall. Furthermore, the forests would quickly be gone. Dealing with the alkali laden wood ash would create an environmental nightmare as the potassium hydroxide and other salts leached into the ground.

Oil is considerably better for the environment. The fact that it is available in finite quantities only is not germane to your question.

Answer 5

Probably a newer oil furnace. They're efficient and relatively clean. Burning wood throws a huge amount of soot and particulate into the air and is not particularly efficient. Of course wood is renewable, where oil isn't, so there is a trade off.

Answer 6

Oil is a non-renewable resource. If we run out, it takes another million years to make more. It takes 5 years to grow a new tree. And they say that wood-burning is considered to make zero pollution because the CO2 that is given off is immediately reabsorbed by the trees around your house.