English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

5 answers

I raised five kids and used a wood stove for over thirty years on the Minnesota/Canadian border.
Yes, you save a lot of money in one way but, it cost money to run chain saws, the maintenance on them, skidders and crawlers, tractors and trucks.
It may sound "cool" to go out into the wilderness and cut your own firewood but, think of this. Forty degrees below zero and it's still dark out. You have to wait until the swamps freeze over to get into the woods in most places.
You equipment doesn't always work in this weather or, you've got problems with it. You have so many clothes on you can't move fast.
You also have a job to go to so, you need sleep. This is like a part time job that's full time.
Sometimes you sick with the flu, a cold, pneumonia, etc, you can't get out so, you get behind in your wood cutting.

I could go on and on with the problems ensued with getting wood. It can be more trouble then it's worth.

2007-07-03 23:48:37 · answer #1 · answered by cowboydoc 7 · 0 0

Wood burner takes lot of work cutting the wood & a dry place to store it without rodents and/or bugs setting up housekeeping it your supply. I have heard several people mention how happy they were with their corn burner, again you need a dry storage place that you can keep rodents, bugs & mold from setting in.

Wood burner is a nice secondary warmth, but I would not want to use it as the only heat source - - woodburning fireplaces and stoves are thee biggest source of indoor pollutants for people to breathe and huge on the suspicion list as possible cause for sudden infant death. The particulants are microsopic barbs that get into the lungs and never ever go away. That price is too high for me to use these burners as my primary heat; backup heat = OK.

2007-07-03 20:28:05 · answer #2 · answered by Carole Q 6 · 0 0

Well, it depends what you burn in the wood burner. Even though wood is the main burning source (and efficient) you will find nice, plump kittens to burn more efficiently. Rule of thumb is a standard log for an average size stove has the same burning efficiency as .45 month old kittens. So it would take a little more than two standard logs to get the same burning efficiency as a month old kitten. Now, you will save roughly 50% of your heating bill if you use wood, but if you can find a good source of kittens, it will mean much more savings.

2007-07-03 19:04:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

I presume it was an efficient stove. Other points are that the wood would have needed transportation to landfill and would have anaerobicly rotted down releasing methane (20 times worse than C02). Another positive is the fine example you set to all those who saw you. What has been you r best find while skip diving? mine was a £400 Hi-Fi rack which only needed some glass shelves (I had some glass anyway). Actually, see my relevant question.

2016-05-17 22:35:35 · answer #4 · answered by odell 3 · 0 0

it depends on if you buy the wood or cut your own. you can contact the forestry service and they will allow you to go on to gov. land and cut your own wood with in the parameters they set for you, for a fee. or you can buy precut. i'll warn you ahead of time, it is very time consuming to maintain a wood stove, yes it is some what cheaper than gas, just be ready to do a lot of work to stay warm.

2007-07-03 19:19:50 · answer #5 · answered by rlstaehle 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers