Biofuel fires

[Mike1958]

I have seen and read a few articles about Biofuel fires stating that as they produce no smoke or gas that they do not need a chimney. I have a chimney that I cant use because there is a crack high up that seems too difficult to fix (too narrow for a tube) and was wondering if a Biofuel fire would be my answer. This is not the sole heating as we have full central heating, it would be more for ambiance.

1. Does anyone have any experience of these fires and what they are like (pros and con's)

2. Does anyone know where they can be purchased (we are in dept 31 in the mountains)

3. How easy is it to buy the fuel

Many thanks,

Mike

[Callie]

I saw some of these at a Salon d'Habitat recently in Angers (49). They really chucked out the heat and have no smell, nor do they need a chimney/flue.

They vary hugely in price - some of the really smart designs will set you back 2000€. There are much cheaper models at the Brico places, but I haven't seen them working.

A litre of biofuel, made from beetroot, costs about the same as a litre of diesel fioul at the moment, but is a lot more economical, particularly if you only want one heater. It is available inmost brico shops.

Your best bet is to look on internet because there is a huge choice now. The you will obviously need to see thyem in action ! We are looking at the possibility ourselves as we have a room with no possibility for a flue. It's down to cost now.... But the advantage is that you can move it around - and take it with you one day should you decide to move !

[Jonzjob]

This could put you in the right direction?

http://www.ecosmartfire.com/FRA/FR/Home

Fialing that google biofuel fires, there's loads of sites there!!

[jondeau]

Although I know nothing whatsoever about these appliances, I can't help feeling that it doesn't sound quite right that it can burn a liquid fuel with an open flame and give off no noxious fumes.

 

 

[Chancer]

CO2 not being noxious, only fatal.

So when you die of asphixiation you wont have a bitter taste in your mouth [6]

Second thoughts, given the cost of these things that do no more than would burning the liquid in a saucer......... [;-)] 

And you still have to light them with a match [:@]

Still what the hell, they (allegedly) look cool and contemporary, and the muppets that buy them wont have seen them (yet) in any of their friends houses, only in lifestyle magazines and TV programs so a must have for a certain section of society.

[Dave&Olive]

[quote user="jondeau"]

Although I know nothing whatsoever about these appliances, I can't help feeling that it doesn't sound quite right that it can burn a liquid fuel with an open flame and give off no noxious fumes.

 

 

[/quote]

      hi OK

              Must be  quote by  G W Bush       never heard of a paraffin heater   ??? or an   LPG  fire ??

                          Dave

                               

[jondeau]

Yes I have, both of these appliances are capable of emiting carbon monoxide gas (CO) amongst other things.

[Me0wp00]

I've seen them on Ebay from a german supplier for very good prices, exactly the same in Leroy merlin but double the price,

Im having one in my new barn conversion as a feature but not sure about smell on lighting

[Jonzjob]

A friend of mine has one and when he showed it to me it didn't smell when he lit it...

I was under the impression that carbon monoxide was only released from mobile gas heaters if they were not burning correctly?

[jondeau]

Combustion it must be said, is a complicated subject......so this is the short version.

All fossil fuels require oxygen in order to burn, most appliances will extract oxygen from the air around them this is done in two ways firstly by injecting 'primary air' into the fuel before it reaches the burner (mostly gas appliances) and by picking up 'secondary air' as the fuel issues from the burner (gas and oil appliances)

A good supply of air to the fuel means that a process known as 'complete combustion' can take place and this ensures that CO production is either zero or negligable.

However many things can interupt the process of complete combustion......draughts, a lack of oxygen in the room due insufficient ventilation, or any foreign body impinging on the burner.

Incomplete combustion will result in CO being produced.

 

As far as I am aware, all fossil fuels are capable of producing CO and looking at the flame on the biofuel fire it is obvious that no primary air is injected and that complete combustion is not taking place.

It may well be that the burner is so small that it will be OK to use in a large well ventilated room.....

 

Personally I would want to see some independant certification that it is safe before I would use one.

However, this is my opinion only.

 

 

[dr orloff]

I wouldn't have any concerns about noxious gases - if you buy the correctly refined fuel then it is a chemical impossibility.

The fuel though is currently very expensive.  Per Kw of heat generated I think it works out at four of five times the cost of electric heating.

 

[Pierre ZFP]

Lots of misleading and just plain wrong info given on the website given by Jonzjob.

They don't seem to know their ethanol from their methanol and there is a huge difference in heat output between the two.  I suppose it doesn't really matter as both burn with a cool flame and is pretty useless as a heating device, it looks good though.

I like they way they imply that because the ethanol is sourced from veg, that it is 'Bio' and 'Eco'.  If you look at the overall carbon footprint (including fertiliser, manufacturing and distilling) it is at best equal and probably worse than sourcing from oil.  It takes land out of food production too.

 Apart from all the water going into the air (I forget now but something like 1.5 litres water for every litre fuel) it is perfectly possible to get noxious gasses.  You will get CO from incomplete burning (no forced O2 remember) and CO binds with heamoglobin (sp) and does not let go like CO2 and so creeps up and kills you.  The fuel is denatured, probably by the addition of pyrenes so you will get dioxins released as well and small amouts of those are not good over time.

I think I'll pass on these

[The Riff-Raff Element]

[quote user="Pierre ZFP"]

 I suppose it doesn't really matter as both burn with a cool flame and is pretty useless as a heating device, it looks good though.

[/quote]

No. Ethanol (according to my well-thumbed copy of Kuo's "Priciples of Combustion") has practically the same flame temperature as LPG or natural gas. And alcohol is easier to transport in some situations, which is why spirit stoves are so popular with some sections of the hiking community and yachting types.

Any appliance designed for burning inside without a flue (paraffin heaters for example, or a humble gas stove stove for that matter) will have a NF accreditation and should be perfectly safe provided the instructions are followed, including those apertaining to what kinds of fuel should be used.

As for " If you look at the overall carbon

footprint (including fertiliser, manufacturing and distilling) it is at

best equal and probably worse than sourcing from oil," I'd love to see some sober figures on this 'cos frankly I doubt that it's correct, but in any case I agree with you that taking land out of food production to make fuel is not a good thing. Forestry and taking advantage of byproducts from agriculture is one thing, but I don't see taking grain for large-scale production of fuel ethanol as being sensible at the moment. But that's a personal view.