### Summary of Industry sponsored wood stove testing in Colville, December 14

- 16, 2011

Testing was conducted at Ben Myren’s lab using Quadra

- fire 3100
, non

- catalytic stoves. Those present included David Cole (EPA), John Crouch (HPBA), Dan Henry (Home and Hea rth Technologies), Robert Ferguson ( consultant) , Timothy Seaton (masonry heater manufacturer), Leah Hauer (NWHPBA Exec Dir ector ), and Ben Myren (owner/operator of Myren Test Lab).

Three demonstrations were conducted:

• Demonstration 1 : to show the diffe rence between EPA test fuel cribs and cord wood burns at th e low burn stop (stove setting),

• Demonstration 2 : to show the performance difference between cord burns at (a) the low stop setting and (b) a modified low stop that gives 15% more air
,

• Demonstratio n 3 : to show what happens to emissions when fuel moisture content is increased above the recommended 20% moisture level.

Observations Regarding demonstration 1 , the stove fueled with cordwood was able to successful ly complete the low stop burn but with c onsiderably greater difficulty than the stove fuel ed with standard cribs . It seems obvious that cordwood, the fuel used by consumers, is less able to quickly move from ignition to proper burning conditions than the test cribs. I’ve requested the test dat a to show the emission differences

. Regarding demonstration 2 , I agree with the industry reps that a slight increase in air supply at the low burn stop does greatly improve the burn for cordwood and reduce emissions. Please note : I learned from another source that industry has previously communicate d to EPA that they want to be allowed to raise this low burn stop (increase the air supply) for their emissions test but then be allowed to build the stoves with an even lower (reduced air su pply) burn stop. I strongly disagree with this option. Interestingly, that option was not discussed with David Cole or me . I can understand the pressure from consumers to have a burn that lasts through the night but industry need to innovate methods of providing a clean overnight burn. Testing should mirror how a device will be used by

consumers. Again, the test result data has been requested. Regarding demonstration 3 , we saw increased emissions from high moisture fuel. While this demonstration confirms the common op inion about fuel moisture content, no solution were discussed or demonstrated. Rather than blame the stove operator or propose that education will eliminate the issue of high moisture wood , industry failed to propose (a) improved stove technology that war ns the operator of incorrect fuel or shuts down with less than optimum fuel or (b) offer discussion of current catalytic technology that is far less sensitive to fuel moisture or operator error to reduce emissions. Catalytic technology does not rely as ex clusively on the elevated temperatures need by non

- catalytic stoves to reduce emission.

Two other items of interest were discussed after David had to leave: 1) the development of a wood cook stove test method
, with conversations to continue in Atlanta o n this topic and 2) a possible WA state requirement to place a metal liner inside masonry chimneys. This latter item would improve the draft and performance of wood stove inserts but also raises the cost to some consumers. I ndustry would back this measur e.

Rod Tinnemore