Fireplace: Gas or Wood?

[John Connor]

Burn Time up to 30 hrs

What does it mean burn time up to 30 hours? Does that mean the logs will burn 30 hours, or you can only operate it for some reason up to 30 hours? Which would be dumb.

 

[Red Squirrel]

What does it mean burn time up to 30 hours? Does that mean the logs will burn 30 hours, or you can only operate it for some reason up to 30 hours? Which would be dumb.

Means it will burn a full load for 30 hours. These burn the wood at a very efficient rate so they squeeze a lot of energy out of it. I imagine this is also at the lowest damper setting, so it's a slow burn, as opposed to a fast high heat burn like a camp fire. Though some of these will even burn the smoke/gas produced by the wood so it still generates lot of heat while not consuming the wood fast. I think that's what catalytic means.

 

[Red Squirrel]

check out Regency Fireplace:

http://www.regency-fire.com/Products/Wood/Wood-Inserts.aspx

Yep been looking at those actually. We have a store here that sells them. I think I will eventually put one in the basement. I wont really get to enjoy the fire as much as if I put it upstairs, but basement just makes more sense space wise. I would also look into what it would take to use it to heat water so I could setup in floor heat for the rest of the house. They do make wood boilers for this purpose but you pay a LOT for those. I could probably heat water by having pipe coils passing very close to the stove though. Don't want the copper to touch it in case it starts to corrode the metal.

 

[Iron Woode]

What does it mean burn time up to 30 hours? Does that mean the logs will burn 30 hours, or you can only operate it for some reason up to 30 hours? Which would be dumb.

Flex Heating
Regency’s Pro-Series featuring Eco-Boost technology delivers consistent, controllable wood heat for up to an outstanding 30 hours. Whatever the size of your home you will get your choice: a roaring fire or a burning ember bed providing you with more or less heat for as long as you want it.

from the brochure:

http://www.regency-fire.com/Files/Brochures/Regency-ProSeries-brochure.aspx

 

[tortillasoup]

I would go with wood if offered the opportunity. Why? Because I know gas will cost a fortune. My sister and her fiance were using their gas fireplace and the bill was outrages.

If I did have wood I'd make it a Ben Franklin type. That way the heat goes in all directions and not straight up the chimney.

Gas is stupid cheap. If she spent a fortune with a gas fireplace, then that shows you how incredibly inefficient design fireplace they had...probably didn't even have a fireplace insert. Ben Franklin design is a gas insert and they probably didn't have one. Fireplaces are garbage.

 

[John Connor]

Wow! That Regency looks nice!

 

[evident]

this is my second house and second fireplace. my wood burning fireplaces are completely useless for heating up the house. all of the heat just goes right out the chimney. not sure if it's because it's a cheap builder grade one or what. my first townhouse had a fireplace that was drafty as shit. below the firebox was no insulation that basically brought draft in underneath the floor. this house doens't have that but unless you're standing right next to it, it's not doing much.

 

[sportage]

I would opt for gas.
Wood looks nice but they are messy and leave a lot of soot on walls, drapes, furniture.
You really don't realize it till you clean or wipe the walls or wash the drapes.
And wood is a pain to buy, store, burn.
We ended up going the lazy route using the duraflame logs for a fast burn.
Still, messy and a lot of soot to clean up.

If you are saving money and using a fireplace to actually heat the house or a room, probably a wood stove.
But if you just want a nice cozy clean fire on demand, can't beat gas.
Just a push of a button and you have the same real fire as with wood but without the mess or hassle or the need for storing wood.
Stored wood can get damp, buggy, and attract termites.
Ordering a cord of wood can be hit and miss.
Sometime you get good clean dry wood and other times they deliver damp wet crap.

In the end, bottom line, you will probably just want a nice looking, fast fire for the ambiance.
After all, fire is fire gas or wood.
But, with wood you have the crackle and the wood smell, however.

A wood burning stove can add the ambiance of either a cabin setting or European old world.
We once has a green ceramic wood burning stove, two latching front doors, glass doors btw, and it looked great and very cozy.
But then again, it used wood and was messy to maintain.

I now have two Cracker Barrel-like fireplaces, up and down stairs, and when we moved in a few years ago I transformed both from wood into gas. Thermostat controlled.
Or, consider a nice colored European style wood burning stove.

 

[boomerang]

Had a wood burning fireplace put in my place when I had it built. The builder tried to talk me into going gas but I wouldn't hear it. He talked about all the stuff highland145 touched on earlier but I was adamant.

The builder was right. A few years after moving in I converted it to gas but after NG became available. I don't use it at all now. Haven't fired it up in over 20 years. Now, it just serves as a fairly efficient means to funnel conditioned air out of the house. I keep meaning to get one of those block off plugs that go in from the inside of the house but it never gets to the top of my to-do list.

 

[Blain]

I'm building a home and have the choice of no fireplace, a gas fireplace or a wood fireplace. The wood fireplace costs about 60% more than a gas fireplace, but I really like the idea of a wood burning fireplace.

If I end up going with a fireplace (so that's it's covered under the 10-year structure warranty from the builder), should I go with gas or wood and why?

You're in Michigan for crying out loud... There should be no question.

> Wood <
Because you can fuel the thing yourself, taking care of your family, not dependent on any municipal syndicate for your every need.

 

[edro]

Gas

I've had both. I love the smell and sound of wood, but that's about the only benefit in my eyes.
Wood/ashes are dirty, you have to obtain it, carry it, pay for it, etc.
Wood is more dangerous and takes longer to start, so you are less likely to use it on a whim.

Gas is simple, clean, fast, cheap, safe, etc.
They even have a freaking remote control to turn them on.
I love my gas fireplace and the expense to run it is really quite low.
It's around $0.40/hour to operate.
They aren't meant to be a primary heat source.
We only use ours when we are in the living room, mainly in the evenings or on a lazy football Sunday.

If you're on Propane, it would cost double that though...

 

[echo4747]

I would go for the wood fireplace. Reason being if you change your mind it can easily/cost effectively be converted to gas ( all you need to convert is basically the gas insert and a drop in chimney liner)

 

[slightlyhuman]

i have a gas fireplace. as much was i was set on a wood burning fireplace i'm glad we have gas. way easier to manage but i do miss splitting wood and the physical part of it. that's what a fire pit outside can be for i suppose.

 

[slag]

Our previous house had a woodburning stove that didn't put out much heat. It was mainly for decoration. Our current house has a see through gas fireplace that you turn on with the flip of a switch. It really puts out a lot of heat also which is nice.

 

[slag]

I would go for the wood fireplace. Reason being if you change your mind it can easily/cost effectively be converted to gas ( all you need to convert is basically the gas insert and a drop in chimney liner)

yah, just drop it in.. Pretty much the same like you just "drop in" a turbo when want more power in your car.

In reality, its not that simple nor easy and can be very costly.

 

[NetWareHead]

Im a fan of fireplaces and their ability to set the mood fo me and fiance when settling in for the evening on a cold winter night. Fireplaces have to have a few elements. Discernable heat, visible flames, audible crackling/popping and smell of wood.

Gas fireplaces while are very easy to light, are lacking in several key features. Still better than nothing. If the idea of dealing with ashes, loading solid fuel and the hours long committment of tending a fire is too much to bear, then go with gas (many are remote controlled). It is cheap nowadays to run a gas fire place.

A fireplace will not really heat the structure due to the draft effect of heat escaping up the chimney. Actually running a fireplace will have a negative net effect on heating your home. if you want to heat your home, a sealed wood stove is the best choice. You also have to consider what is the primary heating system for the home. Those with high heating bills may want to consider supplementary heating with a stove.

I have seen it posted a few times in this thread; people claiming that wood is free or no work when really the opposite is true. Wood can be free as in gathering cut down trees or after storms. I actually keep an eye out when I see blown over trees, people looking to get rid of after storms or yard clearing or powerline tree trimming crews will leave logs in vicinity of their operations. Wood like that is "free" but the time/labor to process it into usable firewood shouldn't be ignored and "free" wood is not an intelligent reason to buy a stove/fireplace. Trees need to be cut down, sectioned & split. You need to dedicate the space to store it so it can dry for 1 to 2 seasons. You will probably move each piece of firewood a few times before it makes it into your stove. Your pickup truck, chainsaw & log splitter all need oil, gasoline and other maintenance. Operating a chainsaw is arguably one of the more dangerous tools for a homemowner (or professional)

 

[NetWareHead]

Gas. I've had wood, coal and gas. Gas fireplaces have a thermostat. Our Mendota has a remote with which you can turn the temp up or down, control the blower fan, adjust the flame size, and shut off one of the burners as needed. Wood and coal are a pita. They're dirty, and it's either full heat or none. Gas only comes on when you need it.

While you can "throttle down" a wood stove by restricting input oxygen, it's not recommended. Oxygen starved wood fire smolders instead of burns. When this smoke comes in contact with the cooler chimney, it condenses and leaves creosote deposits. Get enough creosote and you have a chimney fire. Wood fires should be burned as hot as possible for a cleaner more thorough burn. Coal (specificallly anthracite) is pure carbon with little volatiles and can be throttled down with no creosote dangers.

 

[PricklyPete]

I like gas fireplaces and wood fire pits outside. If our fireplace was wood...we would rarely use it.

 

[mizzou]

I'm in the same boat, I think I will go with a wood burning fireplace. Most inserts nowadays behave like wood burning stoves and are pretty darn efficient.

Just make sure that your flue is the right size and done properly, otherwise it won't be worth it.

Back when I was a kid, we used to use the wood fireplace all the time. There was something wonderful about the process of starting a real fire that brought the family together to enjoy it. The ambiance cannot be matched with a gas or electric heater.

That's right, I said heater. Unless you are burning wood, it's not a real fireplace!

 

[echo4747]

yah, just drop it in.. Pretty much the same like you just "drop in" a turbo when want more power in your car.

In reality, its not that simple nor easy and can be very costly.

I happened to convert a woodburning fireplace that was in my basement go a gas fireplace insert and it was quite easy. I happened to find the insert locally on Craigslist for a somewhere around $300 ( most new units are 1000-2500 depending on how fancy/features it has) At the local fireplace/wood/pellet stove store I bought I bought a 3"diax 25-30ft long gas flexible chinmey liner for around $75 and a raincap for said liner for less than $10. I was fortunate that a gas supply line was less than 10 ft away so pipe and fittings were less than $20.
I dropped a piece of rope down the clay flue from atop the roof which I had tied to the flex liner. My father was in the basement and as he pulled the rope I fed the liner from the rooftop.Probably took all of a half hour including setting up and putting away the ladder. The liner attaches to the insert with something that resembles a big hose clamp just need a srewdriver for that. As far as the gas line that probably was 2-3 hrs including drilling a hole thru the side of the existing brick fireplace in order to feed the gas supply line. I would say In almost all instances it should be no more than a 4-8hr job

 

[echo4747]

If I had my choice I like everything about this except for probably the cost: http://www.tulikivi.com/usa-can/products/Traditionally_for_cooking

 

[calahan]

If you have good stock of wood this is your option, but in general natural gas is much better option because of less CO, low maintenance, full control.

 

[Thump553]

IMO if you are going to go gas, you might as well break out a VCR with the tape of the yule log burning. Just about the same ambiance.

Wood or none. As others said, a fireplace insert or standalone wood stove is the best (a simple fireplace wastes more heat than it produces). I use a wood stove very similar to what sportage linked to above (#33) and it works fine for daily use all winter. Of course, then you have to have access to and store wood, etc. but that's a whole different thing. To me working at the wood in the summer makes the winter fire that much more enjoyable-and I don't have to pay to go to the gym.

 

[echo4747]

If you have good stock of wood this is your option, but in general natural gas is much better option because of less CO, low maintenance, full control.

Actually its not more CO by burning wood. If a piece of wood sits on the ground and rots, it gives off CO. by burning the same piece of wood it does give off the same amount of CO as the rotting piece just in a much much shorter period of time.

 

[tortillasoup]

Actually its not more CO by burning wood. If a piece of wood sits on the ground and rots, it gives off CO. by burning the same piece of wood it does give off the same amount of CO as the rotting piece just in a much much shorter period of time.

Rotting wood does not emit CO, it emits CO2. CO can only happen with incomplete combustion.