Is AB-1346 The Beginning To The End Of The GARDEN TRACTOR?

[DonaldP]

In your original post you said 40 face cords.
In this post, you say 13 face cords, which is only 4 and 1/3 cords.

A cord is 4' wide by 4' tall by 8' long. A face cord is 1/3 of that.

Our house was built in 1921 and has no insulation in the walls either. We use 6 cords in a very cold winter, and the fire in the stove burned from October 1st through April 1st. It only went out 4 times. If I had to use 13 cords of wood, I'd be looking at updating the home. Now, with the winter being nowhere as cold as they used to be, we only use about 4 cords per year.

I’ll recalculate that for you… I was definately off!

 

[plowhog]

A cord is 4' wide by 4' tall by 8' long. A face cord is 1/3 of that.

I always thought a face cord was 1/2 cord. Just learned it can vary from 1/4 cord to 2/3 of a cord.

The front "face" being 4x8' but the depth controlling what percent of a cord it is ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_cord

 

[ultrarunner]

If you have the money to change everything in 2 or 3 years over to electric, god bless you!

I’m not lampooning you, and technology is always changing, but splitting 40 or more face cords of wood to heat my home can’t be effectively done via electric at this time or for any foreseeable future. Yes, were it by available when it’s time to replace my wood splitter and L3560 (that supports those activities from pulling logs out of the woods to helping to split and then moving the filled with prepped and dried IBC totes to within use proximity to the fireplaces) … well I just don’t see that as a viable electric option for a long time to come.

Now, having said that- I can say that for an average 1/2 acre home owner with an electric lawn mower, weed whacker, and hedge trimmer or broom/snow blower and tiller… well other than the possible $5000 or more cost to “upgrade” all of that to electric, there isn’t much of a negative.

But who determines who gets a free pass to use a 25 or 35 HP unit for their own property and for income on the side if they want?

Its a scary proposition to hand those choices all over to someone you may not know, that doesn’t know you….

You are missing the end game and that is no more wood heat...

It has been policy here for a long time in many California regions where new construction often forbids wood heat.

 

[ultrarunner]

Yes … I do… it’s an old home 1849 in fact.
folks look at reusability and sustainability. There is no question that this home, built in the 1840’s used NONE of the energy resources connected to oil or the types of fuel that today take first place in the carbon producing accolades.
Yes it takes 13 FACE cords, and some pellets too!

I suppose I could spend $100,000 to tear it down and rebuild it with high carbon footprint producing materials, but i’m thiking that would be taking a step backward no?

I can understand that there are those that may not understand that preserving an almost zero carbon footprint home over replacing it with a “modern day HIGH carbon footprint home would be taking a step backward.

It would be nice to see what the carbon footprint of a new 2400sq ft home would be over the cost of burning the 13 fave cords of wood per year (with pellets) over a 25 year period of time.

I suppose I could take down all the drywall, foam the exterior walls, replace the 2x4’s with 2x6’s and fill the rest with insulation, dig the basement to a 9ft depth over the 5.5ft current depth, and then replace the slanted roof to be a proper truss based roof that I can then properly insulate…. All at the cost, of course, of adding an additional carbon footprint that would have to be offset by the savings in the carbon footprint associated with burning the wood I do to heat it…

I could… and maybe I just will put together those numbers for personal gratification.

it’s an interesting thought.

It sounds like a This Old House project where the sky is the limit as to budget.

I lived in homes built in the 1950's and 60's with radiant heat from a wood fired boiler in the basement...

Very nice inside on the coldest winter days...

 

[DonaldP]

I’ll recalculate that for you… I was definately off!

The thing that sticks out the most to me in this post is that you need 13+ cords of wood to heat your house?

Ok … I have the specifics…

I fill IBC totes with firewood direct from the splitter. They are 3x3x4ft tall or 36 cubic feet. Discount for non fillable air space that’s estimated at 32 cubic feet.

a cord is:

In your original post you said 40 face cords.
In this post, you say 13 face cords, which is only 4 and 1/3 cords.

A cord is 4' wide by 4' tall by 8' long. A face cord is 1/3 of that.

Our house was built in 1921 and has no insulation in the walls either. We use 6 cords in a very cold winter, and the fire in the stove burned from October 1st through April 1st. It only went out 4 times. If I had to use 13 cords of wood, I'd be looking at updating the home. Now, with the winter being nowhere as cold as they used to be, we only use about 4 cords per year.

Ok … I have the specifics…

I fill IBC totes with firewood direct from the splitter. They are 3x3x4ft tall or 36 cubic feet. Discount for non fillable air space that’s estimated at 32 cubic feet per tote.
I have 23 totes filled.

23x32= 736 cubic feet. Or

a cord is 8x4x4 or 129 cubic Feet

So, if I burn all 23 totes, that’s 5.7 cords.

I also have a woof shed that’s 18’x8’x6’ high

That’s 864 cubic feet, or another 6.5 cords. that’s about 13 FULL cords prepped and ready to go if needed.

Thank you for pointing this out to me!!!

I would venture to say that I may burn through 70% of all of the wood prepped with a 30% buffer. it’s hard to say because there is the same variance of weather here in NY as there is in Indiana. So it’s not conducive to cut it close and then be short (and cold in March or April).

I do have oil… as an emergency hedge, two 250gal tanks in the basement. As I said I also have a pellet stove that I start up in Oct., gently pulls me into full use of the stoves into November/December.

I took a survey from our eld tric supplier here in NY. At the end they badically said it would b
be cheaper to tear down your my house than to mitigate it (for enery use calculations only).

For those thinking that its always better to rebuild for energy conservation, I will submit this…

The EPA Declared That Burning Wood Is Carbon Neutral. It's Actually a Lot More Complicated

Here are five things to know about the controversial change

www.smithsonianmag.com

Carbon wise, according to this EPA determination, tearing down and replacing the home would not make carbon sense. It might save energy costs to the occupants, buy it eould not positively impact the carbon footprint.

Now getting back on track … its important for this couple to be able to maintain the use of a 35hp tractor, chainsaw, and the various other gas powered equipment in order to prevent using non renewable sources like oil for heating.

 

[DonaldP]

You are missing the end game and that is no more wood heat...

It has been policy here for a long time in many California regions where new construction often forbids wood heat.

I hear you.

That’s why I’m talking about carbon footprint for rebuilding Vs burning a carbon neutral resource like wood (according to the EPA).

Additionally, Natural gas (non renewable) is not available in my area…..

 

[MossRoad]

I always thought a face cord was 1/2 cord. Just learned it can vary from 1/4 cord to 2/3 of a cord.

The front "face" being 4x8' but the depth controlling what percent of a cord it is ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_cord

All a face cord means is on one end it's 4' by 8'. No legal definition as to how wide it is. Some states specify that firewood can only be sold by the cord 4' x 4' x 8' for this very reason.

Anyhow. You should see my face after I cut a cord of wood.

 

[plowhog]

It has been policy here for a long time in many California regions where new construction often forbids wood heat.

That thinking is creeping out of CA.

When I built my new home in NV, I was restricted to one wood burning fireplace. It had to be an EPA rated fireplace, which I presumed meant it would suck. But it turns out to be a good design that pumps out a lot of heat with little smoke residue. But I wish I had a wood burner in the master bedroom as well.

 

[ultrarunner]

Ok … I have the specifics…

I fill IBC totes with firewood direct from the splitter. They are 3x3x4ft tall or 36 cubic feet. Discount for non fillable air space that’s estimated at 32 cubic feet.

a cord is:

Ok … I have the specifics…

I fill IBC totes with firewood direct from the splitter. They are 3x3x4ft tall or 36 cubic feet. Discount for non fillable air space that’s estimated at 32 cubic feet per tote.
I have 23 totes filled.

23x32= 736 cubic feet. Or

a cord is 8x4x4 or 129 cubic Feet

So, if I burn all 23 totes, that’s 5.7 cords.

I also have a woof shed that’s 18’x8’x6’ high

That’s 864 cubic feet, or another 6.5 cords. that’s about 13 FULL cords prepped and ready to go if needed.

Thank you for pointing this out to me!!!

I would venture to say that I may burn through 70% of all of the wood prepped with a 30% buffer. it’s hard to say because there is the same variance of weather here in NY as there is in Indiana. So it’s not conducive to cut it close and then be short (and cold in March or April).

I do have oil… as an emergency hedge, two 250gal tanks in the basement. As I said I also have a pellet stove that I start up in Oct., gently pulls me into full use of the stoves into November/December.

I took a survey from our eld tric supplier here in NY. At the end they badically said it would b
be cheaper to tear down your my house than to mitigate it (for enery use calculations only).

For those thinking that its always better to rebuild for energy conservation, I will submit this…

The EPA Declared That Burning Wood Is Carbon Neutral. It's Actually a Lot More Complicated

Here are five things to know about the controversial change

www.smithsonianmag.com

Carbon wise, according to this EPA determination, tearing down and replacing the home would not make carbon sense. It might save energy costs to the occupants, buy it eould not positively impact the carbon footprint.

Now getting back on track … its important for this couple to be able to maintain the use of a 35hp tractor, chainsaw, and the various other gas powered equipment in order to prevent using non renewable sources like oil for heating.

Yep... pellet technology is growing in Europe and can be fully automated.

My last visit I commented on all the new pellet installs in residential homes... some hundreds of years old.

One 80 test old widow who had lived all her life in her home converted the single car masonry block garage to a pellet crib... with a vacuum mechanism to transport pellets from the detached garage to to house basement for auto feeding...

She bought by the truckload when prices were low

I did point out what happens when the power goes out and she said I get cold but the radiant heat buffer tank means it happens over a few days gradually.

 

[ultrarunner]

That thinking is creeping out of CA.

When I built my new home in NV, I was restricted to one wood burning fireplace. It had to be an EPA rated fireplace, which I presumed meant it would suck. But it turns out to be a good design that pumps out a lot of heat with little smoke residue. But I wish I had a wood burner in the master bedroom as well.

Yep... i was one that attended the Bay Area Air Quality Management forums on wood burning which basically rubber stamped the pending ordinances.

When I pointed out EPA CAT stoves using properly seasoned wood are not the problem the reply was yes, but we don't have the resources to put inspectors in every neighborhood to know who is clean burning and not so a blanket ban is the result with a bounty paid for removing stoves/fireplaces and anonymous hotlines to report suspected violators.