Post by thread:[OT] oil heating

Mark E. Skeels wrote: > Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? > Can it be more economical than natural gas? I don't know how you inferred that oil heat is "prevalent" in the east from my single statement. However, it's certainly not uncommon. In my particular instance and that of many others all over the country, natural gas isn't a option since that requires utility infrastructure. The only utilities near my house are electrical (power, phone, internet, cable). There is no gas, water, or sewer to hook up to. This is quite common outside of "city" areas. Long ago I rented a apartment in Lowell, a nearby small city. There the heat was powered by natural gas. The gas company could profitably run a gas main down the street and hook up lots of customers. The houses were mostly multi-family and dense-packed onto 1/4 acre lots. The cost/benefit to the gas company is very different in rural areas. The minimum zoning (with various exceptions) in Groton is 2 acres, for example, and then there are lots of unbuilt areas too. ******************************************************************** Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

I spent 20 years in a rural Illinois area before moving into the city. We had a Charmaster Chalet combination oil/wood furnace for about 10 of those years. http://www.charmaster.com/ There was a sawmill in a nearby town where you could by slab wood (oak) for $20/ton. But near the end of that time, the quality of the heating oil available deteriorated (I can think of no other explanation) so that it was not able to operate reliably even after repeated service calls. It had a standard, modern Wayne cartridge-type oil burner. So we installed a high efficiency furnace that ran on propane. Almost everyone else in the area used propane as well; it was very common because farmers around here use propane-fueled dryers to remove moisture from their corn. I assumed from that experience that propane would always be more economical than oil. My assumption about widespread use of oil on the east coast comes from impressions I have gotten over the years. They may be in error. Mark On 5/6/2011 1:40 PM, Olin Lathrop wrote: {Quote hidden}> Mark E. Skeels wrote: >> Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? >> Can it be more economical than natural gas? > I don't know how you inferred that oil heat is "prevalent" in the east from > my single statement. However, it's certainly not uncommon. In my > particular instance and that of many others all over the country, natural > gas isn't a option since that requires utility infrastructure. The only > utilities near my house are electrical (power, phone, internet, cable). > There is no gas, water, or sewer to hook up to. This is quite common > outside of "city" areas. > > Long ago I rented a apartment in Lowell, a nearby small city. There the > heat was powered by natural gas. The gas company could profitably run a gas > main down the street and hook up lots of customers. The houses were mostly > multi-family and dense-packed onto 1/4 acre lots. > > The cost/benefit to the gas company is very different in rural areas. The > minimum zoning (with various exceptions) in Groton is 2 acres, for example, > and then there are lots of unbuilt areas too. > > > ******************************************************************** > Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products > (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:27 -0500, Mark E. Skeels wrote: > [SNIP] > > It's infrequent enough that I suspect it amounts to a very small > fraction of overall oil usage > > Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? I don't think you can infer that. It's simple: what do you do if you don't HAVE a natural gas feed? MANY areas, especially more rural ones don't have a natural gas feed. Your choices then pretty much become: propane, oil and leccy. Where I'm from propane is more popular, but oil is common enough. Propane has the issue of leaks can result in the house blowing up. Oil has the issue of leaks can result in your properly being labelled an environmental disaster. Most people avoid electricity because of the higher costs then burning propane or oil. > Can it be more economical than natural gas? Usually not, otherwise people with natural gas supplies would use it. The fact that a truck doesn't have to come to your location to refill your tank alone probably has something to do with the savings. TTYL

Here in semi-rural Northern Ohio, the gas mains out front are spotty, but there are several other alternatives to Electric, fuel oil, and propane: 1: 34 years ago we spent $8,000 to drill a 1000' natural gas well. Only money we have put into it since is 2 years ago, $4000 to slide a 120' of casing inside the casing that had a water leak. Well provides enough gas to heat, kitchen, dryer, hot water, and garage heat except for maybe once a year very cold weather we get $25 of backup electric heat. Today the well would cost probably $25,000 to drill. The 1000' deep well requires 100' radius of well owning the mineral rights, and 200' from a house per Ohio regulations. 2: There are numerous production natural gas wells, 1800' deep in the area. Usually 1 or 2 houses get free gas plus the royalty on the production gas. But it has happened when the production volume goes down (age), the well is capped, and the house is left with having to change to another source, frequently means a new furnace, etc. 3: Wood furnaces are not uncommon, there are numerous hardwood sawmills within and hour drive, and slab wood is readily available at good prices. 4: Our township service department garage is heated with used engine oil. They have collection during semi-annual recycling/rubbish collection, getting 1000 gallons per year which is about their usage. 5: For those with fuel oil furnaces, consider the Beckett high efficiency burners that can be retrofitted. They are local and have excellent products. http://www.beckettcorp.com/ On 05/06/2011 02:27 PM, Mark E. Skeels wrote: > [SNIP] > > It's infrequent enough that I suspect it amounts to a very small > fraction of overall oil usage > > Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? > > Can it be more economical than natural gas? > > ??

Sheesh. You have your own natural gas well? I am surprised they let you do that. That is great. I want one. :-) Mark Skeels Engineer Competition Electronics, Inc. TEL: 815-874-8001 FAX: 815-874-8181 http://www.competitionelectronics.com On 5/6/2011 3:37 PM, Carl Denk wrote: {Quote hidden}> Here in semi-rural Northern Ohio, the gas mains out front are spotty, > but there are several other alternatives to Electric, fuel oil, and propane: > 1: 34 years ago we spent $8,000 to drill a 1000' natural gas well. Only > money we have put into it since is 2 years ago, $4000 to slide a 120' of > casing inside the casing that had a water leak. Well provides enough > gas to heat, kitchen, dryer, hot water, and garage heat except for maybe > once a year very cold weather we get $25 of backup electric heat. Today > the well would cost probably $25,000 to drill. The 1000' deep well > requires 100' radius of well owning the mineral rights, and 200' from a > house per Ohio regulations. > 2: There are numerous production natural gas wells, 1800' deep in the > area. Usually 1 or 2 houses get free gas plus the royalty on the > production gas. But it has happened when the production volume goes down > (age), the well is capped, and the house is left with having to change > to another source, frequently means a new furnace, etc. > 3: Wood furnaces are not uncommon, there are numerous hardwood sawmills > within and hour drive, and slab wood is readily available at good prices. > 4: Our township service department garage is heated with used engine > oil. They have collection during semi-annual recycling/rubbish > collection, getting 1000 gallons per year which is about their usage. > 5: For those with fuel oil furnaces, consider the Beckett high > efficiency burners that can be retrofitted. They are local and have > excellent products. > http://www.beckettcorp.com/ > > On 05/06/2011 02:27 PM, Mark E. Skeels wrote: >> [SNIP] >> >> It's infrequent enough that I suspect it amounts to a very small >> fraction of overall oil usage >> >> Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? >> >> Can it be more economical than natural gas? >> >> ??

I don't know, we tried 3 wells for water and there was none. we put in a 8000 gallon cistern and collect the roof water which along with buying trucked water was our water supply for 6 months, when city water came available. The well driller pointed to a half dozen gas wells in the area, and we contracted with him to take the last water hole down for gas. at 120' he broke through a rock layer, and gas came bubbling up through the salt water. Most states allow this type well, but you need a fairly large area for safety for the house, but the well is quite safe, where the highest pressure we see is 50 psi. Even if the top would blow off the well, it would take a very short time for the pressure to dissipate. A production well in the area can get to more than 1000 psi. The radius which gets bigger as you go deeper is so you don't steal the neighbor's gas. On 05/06/2011 04:42 PM, Mark E. Skeels wrote: {Quote hidden}> Sheesh. You have your own natural gas well? > > I am surprised they let you do that. > > That is great. > > I want one. :-) > > Mark Skeels > Engineer > Competition Electronics, Inc. > TEL: 815-874-8001 > FAX: 815-874-8181 > http://www.competitionelectronics.com > > On 5/6/2011 3:37 PM, Carl Denk wrote: >> Here in semi-rural Northern Ohio, the gas mains out front are spotty, >> but there are several other alternatives to Electric, fuel oil, and propane: >> 1: 34 years ago we spent $8,000 to drill a 1000' natural gas well. Only >> money we have put into it since is 2 years ago, $4000 to slide a 120' of >> casing inside the casing that had a water leak. Well provides enough >> gas to heat, kitchen, dryer, hot water, and garage heat except for maybe >> once a year very cold weather we get $25 of backup electric heat. Today >> the well would cost probably $25,000 to drill. The 1000' deep well >> requires 100' radius of well owning the mineral rights, and 200' from a >> house per Ohio regulations. >> 2: There are numerous production natural gas wells, 1800' deep in the >> area. Usually 1 or 2 houses get free gas plus the royalty on the >> production gas. But it has happened when the production volume goes down >> (age), the well is capped, and the house is left with having to change >> to another source, frequently means a new furnace, etc. >> 3: Wood furnaces are not uncommon, there are numerous hardwood sawmills >> within and hour drive, and slab wood is readily available at good prices.. >> 4: Our township service department garage is heated with used engine >> oil. They have collection during semi-annual recycling/rubbish >> collection, getting 1000 gallons per year which is about their usage. >> 5: For those with fuel oil furnaces, consider the Beckett high >> efficiency burners that can be retrofitted. They are local and have >> excellent products. >> http://www.beckettcorp.com/ >> >> On 05/06/2011 02:27 PM, Mark E. Skeels wrote: >>> [SNIP] >>> >>> It's infrequent enough that I suspect it amounts to a very small >>> fraction of overall oil usage >>> >>> Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? >>> >>> Can it be more economical than natural gas? >>> >>> ??

Mark E. Skeels wrote: > Can it be more economical than natural gas? Like many answers, "it depends". Here in Michigan both natural gas and oil are fairly common. The price of natural gas dropped sharply a while back, causing many people using oil to switch. A couple years later it spiked and oil was cheaper. Even if you have a gas main out in the street, bringing the line into the house after the fact can be obscenely expensive. With high efficiency oil furnaces, even here in the frozen north it would take decades to recover the cost of conversion, even though natural gas is *currently* less expensive. And given the volatility, it would be a poor bet it will stay that way. --McD

On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Mark E. Skeels <spam_OUTmskeelsTakeThisOuTcompetitionelectronics.com> wrote: > Why is it that using oil for heat is prevalent in the east? It's a combination of cold winters and lack of alternatives. In the Northeast picture -10F at night and 20F above in the areas not immediately adjacent to the relatively temperate Atlantic coastline combined with few alternatives to oil and it's a recipe for craziness. In Maine we didn't even have a pipeline to bring gas into the area until 2000 -- let alone a distribution system in the few urban areas. My understanding is that we use the most heating oil per capita in the nation. While we have abundant and reasonably priced wood, many people don't want the maintenance hassle and those who don't mind sometimes have to deal with grief from neighbors and politicians about the pollution. My personal preference is a wood fired boiler or wood stove with oil backup but the upfront costs are expensive, it's high maintenance -- and it still involves oil. -Jef

I missed this thread, but to add OT to OT - Michael Bloomberg, mayor of NYC, recently announced the long-term phaseout of heating oil in new york, with various incentives and rebates and the like for building owners with oil heat. Apparently, the burning of heating oil #4 and #6 (no idea what the numbers mean) contribute more to air pollution than all the cars, buses, taxis and trucks *combined*. As a former nyc resident, this somewhat shocking factoid makes me wonder just what the heck took so long to address this. Fortunately, here in oh so chilly california, my house was built (many decades ago) with natural gas feed. Cheers all J .....mcdKILLspam@spam@is-sixsigma.com wrote: {Quote hidden}> Mark E. Skeels wrote: > >> Can it be more economical than natural gas? > > Like many answers, "it depends". > > Here in Michigan both natural gas and oil are fairly common. The price of > natural gas dropped sharply a while back, causing many people using oil to > switch. A couple years later it spiked and oil was cheaper. > > Even if you have a gas main out in the street, bringing the line into the > house after the fact can be obscenely expensive. With high efficiency oil > furnaces, even here in the frozen north it would take decades to recover > the cost of conversion, even though natural gas is *currently* less > expensive. And given the volatility, it would be a poor bet it will stay > that way. > > --McD >

Oil heat is very common in New England due to the fact that much if the housing there is older and natural gas was not available. Oil used to be very cheap. Once you get outside of the major metro areas in the USA there is not much availability of natural gas. Sent from my iPhone On May 8, 2011, at 4:46 AM, Jesse Lackey <jsl-mlKILLspamcelestialaudio.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> I missed this thread, but to add OT to OT - Michael Bloomberg, mayor of > NYC, recently announced the long-term phaseout of heating oil in new > york, with various incentives and rebates and the like for building > owners with oil heat. Apparently, the burning of heating oil #4 and #6 > (no idea what the numbers mean) contribute more to air pollution than > all the cars, buses, taxis and trucks *combined*. > > As a former nyc resident, this somewhat shocking factoid makes me wonder > just what the heck took so long to address this. > > Fortunately, here in oh so chilly california, my house was built (many > decades ago) with natural gas feed. > > Cheers all > J > > > > > > .....mcdKILLspam.....is-sixsigma.com wrote: >> Mark E. Skeels wrote: >> >>> Can it be more economical than natural gas? >> >> Like many answers, "it depends". >> >> Here in Michigan both natural gas and oil are fairly common. The price of >> natural gas dropped sharply a while back, causing many people using oil to >> switch. A couple years later it spiked and oil was cheaper. >> >> Even if you have a gas main out in the street, bringing the line into the >> house after the fact can be obscenely expensive. With high efficiency oil >> furnaces, even here in the frozen north it would take decades to recover >> the cost of conversion, even though natural gas is *currently* less >> expensive. And given the volatility, it would be a poor bet it will stay >> that way. >> >> --McD >> >> > -

Jesse Lackey wrote: {Quote hidden}> I missed this thread, but to add OT to OT - Michael Bloomberg, mayor of > NYC, recently announced the long-term phaseout of heating oil in new > york, with various incentives and rebates and the like for building > owners with oil heat. Apparently, the burning of heating oil #4 and #6 > (no idea what the numbers mean) contribute more to air pollution than > all the cars, buses, taxis and trucks *combined*. > One thing to bear in mind is that to declare somthing as producing more poloution you have to assign "damage values" to each polloutant. This means that afaict you can manapulate the numbers to say pretty much whatever you want. You can also focus on just one pollutant and hope that people who repeat your message forget that you did that. > As a former nyc resident, this somewhat shocking factoid makes me wonder > just what the heck took so long to address this. > > Fortunately, here in oh so chilly california, my house was built (many > decades ago) with natural gas feed. > > Cheers all > J > > > > > > EraseMEmcdspam_OUTTakeThisOuTis-sixsigma.com wrote: > >> Mark E. Skeels wrote: >> >> >>> Can it be more economical than natural gas? >>> >> Like many answers, "it depends". >> >> Here in Michigan both natural gas and oil are fairly common. The price of >> natural gas dropped sharply a while back, causing many people using oil to >> switch. A couple years later it spiked and oil was cheaper. >> >> Even if you have a gas main out in the street, bringing the line into the >> house after the fact can be obscenely expensive. With high efficiency oil >> furnaces, even here in the frozen north it would take decades to recover >> the cost of conversion, even though natural gas is *currently* less >> expensive. And given the volatility, it would be a poor bet it will stay >> that way. >> >> --McD >> >> >>

part 1 1621 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (decoded quoted-printable) On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:35:26PM -0400, Herbert Graf wrote: > Your choices then pretty much become: propane, oil and leccy. > > Where I'm from propane is more popular, but oil is common enough. Where i'm from, oil *was* common, but now laws doesn't permit to use it. Propane isn't used at all, natural gas is very common, electricity is commot too. Anyway, there are more choices in latest years, one of those is the one i've done: Where is my home, there is natural gas, electricity, and all the rest, but i've choosed to use a geothermic implant. i don't use it only for hot water, but also for heating and refrigeration of the whole house, anyway, with a little implant, you can use it also only for let me say 500/600 litres of hot water. Of course it depend on electricity for a heat pump, but it is a good technology and, in my experience, it work pretty good and it isn't expansive. Also, assuming you have electricity, it is feasible even in the most rural zone, as it doesn't depend on any "external" distribution network. -- Franco (nextime) Lanza Busto Arsizio - Italy SIP://casaspam_OUTcasa.nexlab.it NO TCPA: http://www.no1984.org you can download my public key at: http://danex.nexlab.it/nextime.asc || Key Servers Key ID = D6132D50 Key fingerprint = 66ED 5211 9D59 DA53 1DF7 4189 DFED F580 D613 2D50 ----------------------------------- echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D212153574F444E49572045535520454D20454B414D204F54204847554F4E452059415020544F4E4E4143205345544147204C4C4942snlbxq | dc ----------------------------------- part 2 181 bytes content-type:text/plain; name="ATT00001.txt" (decoded base64) -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

So you're saying 73.8% of all statistics are made up? :) point taken. J peter green wrote: {Quote hidden}> Jesse Lackey wrote: >> I missed this thread, but to add OT to OT - Michael Bloomberg, mayor of >> NYC, recently announced the long-term phaseout of heating oil in new >> york, with various incentives and rebates and the like for building >> owners with oil heat. Apparently, the burning of heating oil #4 and #6 >> (no idea what the numbers mean) contribute more to air pollution than >> all the cars, buses, taxis and trucks *combined*. >> > One thing to bear in mind is that to declare somthing as producing more > poloution you have to assign "damage values" to each polloutant. This > means that afaict you can manapulate the numbers to say pretty much > whatever you want. You can also focus on just one pollutant and hope > that people who repeat your message forget that you did that. >> As a former nyc resident, this somewhat shocking factoid makes me wonder >> just what the heck took so long to address this. >> >> Fortunately, here in oh so chilly california, my house was built (many >> decades ago) with natural gas feed. >> >> Cheers all >> J >> >> >> >> >> >> @spam@mcdKILLspamis-sixsigma.com wrote: >> >>> Mark E. Skeels wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Can it be more economical than natural gas? >>>> >>> Like many answers, "it depends". >>> >>> Here in Michigan both natural gas and oil are fairly common. The price of >>> natural gas dropped sharply a while back, causing many people using oil to >>> switch. A couple years later it spiked and oil was cheaper. >>> >>> Even if you have a gas main out in the street, bringing the line into the >>> house after the fact can be obscenely expensive. With high efficiency oil >>> furnaces, even here in the frozen north it would take decades to recover >>> the cost of conversion, even though natural gas is *currently* less >>> expensive. And given the volatility, it would be a poor bet it will stay >>> that way. >>> >>> --McD >>> >>> >>>

On May 6, 2011, at 12:06 PM, Bob Blick wrote: > Towns and cities that were built before too much thought was paid to > infrastructure, or any way to supply it. It'd be nice if places continued to pay attention to such infrastructure after it was built. I don't know how much national attention it got, but last year a 30inch natural gas pipeline not far from where I live exploded, killing 8 people and destroying 38 homes. While I have my doubts about the demands now being placed on the operator (PG&E), it seems hard to claim anything better than negligence. Apparently a weld failed in a section of pipe where the records indicated that the pipe was not welded, and PG&E was unable to produced records of testing of other pipelines which were subsequently requested... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion Damned if you do, damned if you don't. BillW

Along the same lines: I saw a great bumper sticker a few weeks ago. It said "People who use hyperbole should be shot." :) Sean On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Jesse Lackey <KILLspamjsl-mlKILLspamcelestialaudio.com> wrote: {Quote hidden}> So you're saying 73.8% of all statistics are made up? > :) > > point taken. > J > > > peter green wrote: >> Jesse Lackey wrote: >>> I missed this thread, but to add OT to OT - Michael Bloomberg, mayor of >>> NYC, recently announced the long-term phaseout of heating oil in new >>> york, with various incentives and rebates and the like for building >>> owners with oil heat. Apparently, the burning of heating oil #4 and #6 >>> (no idea what the numbers mean) contribute more to air pollution than >>> all the cars, buses, taxis and trucks *combined*. >>> >> One thing to bear in mind is that to declare somthing as producing more >> poloution you have to assign "damage values" to each polloutant. This >> means that afaict you can manapulate the numbers to say pretty much >> whatever you want. You can also focus on just one pollutant and hope >> that people who repeat your message forget that you did that. >>> As a former nyc resident, this somewhat shocking factoid makes me wonder >>> just what the heck took so long to address this. >>> >>> Fortunately, here in oh so chilly california, my house was built (many >>> decades ago) with natural gas feed. >>> >>> Cheers all >>> J >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> RemoveMEmcdTakeThisOuTis-sixsigma.com wrote: >>> >>>> Mark E. Skeels wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Can it be more economical than natural gas? >>>>> >>>> Like many answers, "it depends". >>>> >>>> Here in Michigan both natural gas and oil are fairly common. The price of >>>> natural gas dropped sharply a while back, causing many people using oil to >>>> switch. A couple years later it spiked and oil was cheaper. >>>> >>>> Even if you have a gas main out in the street, bringing the line into the >>>> house after the fact can be obscenely expensive. With high efficiency oil >>>> furnaces, even here in the frozen north it would take decades to recover >>>> the cost of conversion, even though natural gas is *currently* less >>>> expensive. And given the volatility, it would be a poor bet it will stay >>>> that way. >>>> >>>> --McD >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >