About: Heating with coal in 2017
I have done some research and calculations and my burning the coal myself for heat actually only uses about 30% of the actual tonnage of coal that the electric companies would burn. I am actually doing the environment and the world a favor in burning coal to heat my home!
$50 a month? How much do you buy at a time? And what state is this?
COAL IS BY FAR THE BEST!
Im only 34 and i remember gathering driftwood and coal for my buddies gram, about a half hour 2 ten year old kids could gather enough stuff for a day i mean they burned everything . We would hustle somebody a few bucks or food stamps to get rid of something unwanted drag it down the street bust it up with a meat clever and in the furnace it went ,chairs floor model tvs , lumber scraps couches whatever. Coal furnace is a true multifuel
NOTHING produces more BTUs of heat for less money than
Residential coal fired furnaces are a multi billion dollar business that is being overlooked.
Ground to a powder, coal can easily outperform gas and if you keep the combustion temperature high, it burns very clean.
Your “little secret” at the end of this video about powerplants didn’t make sense. Going from sulfur barring coal to nuclear? Huh? Haha! I think the burning of all that coal has you poisoned from Murcury; Chernobyl is in the Ukrainian bro, not Russia. Jesus.
Have you thought about using an automatic stocker to keep your furnace running?
I like the idea of heating a house with coal but you are wrong on nuclear, nuclear has killed fewer people in 70 years than coal has in one year. In fact outside of chernobyl no one has died from radiation at a nuclear power plant. The areas affected are all still habitable, chernobyl units 1,2 and 4 were operation until the early 2000's, three mile island unit 1 is still in operation. If I could have a nuclear reactor to heat my home instead of a coal stove I would do that in a heartbeat. 24 hours on a bucket of coal is good but a bucket of uranium could heat a city for years, gigantic aircraft carries sail for decades on reactor full of fuel, what other fuel can do that?!?!
I'm not a disagreeable sort but you say wood fires smoke constantly.....woa!!!! Not through the entire cycle of fire. I grew up with a combo wood and coal hand fired furnace....get a wood fire good and hot....the right amount of fuel and air you WILL have no smoke!!!!!!!! I agree with coal you will not have to tend as much....more btu per firing. Coal the same right fuel-air mix ratio...no smoke. Well that's my 2 cents.
Im with you man. Why do people think nucular power is better for the environment ? One mishap and its disaster. people die and the enviroment they were trying to save dies as well And the effects last for decades.
coal is radioactive too of thats something you actually worry about
Coal is great because of the slow constant burning but Wood can be better than coal for a quick heat output . We use maple trees in Québec and when it's minus 20*c ...-4 *f we use some big chunks of wood in a big cast iron stove. I use coal for the night and it's ready to start with wood again in the morning. No fan https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pn9rwwM3gYONTI4tXy_iAqKOt05gV1gp/view?usp=sharing
I burned coal and it cost more than propane. I set it up in my basement and had an intake into my stove and outtake going right through my vents already existing in my house. It was supposed to produce 170,000 BTU and it could not even heat my house on a cold day. I might try again if I can get the stove on the first floor. Most the heat it produced was from the stove itself and it was wasted in my basement where we don't live.
Personally, I love both coal and nuclear, keep in mind that every time something goes wrong in an industry, it gets a little bit safer, coal has had its fair share of problems in the past, grant it most of them probably didn't occur while making electricity but there have been many boiler explosions in the past, not that many occur anymore because we got better at making and using them. If you ever have any free time, you should look up LFTR reactors which are astronomically safer and more efficient than current reactors, meltdown can't occur because the thorium,( these reactors run off thorium) are already in a liquid state and can easily be siphoned off into a holding tank to cool down in case of an emergency.
back to basic ... way of survival...
Coal kills a lot more people than nuclear does. Chernobyl was caused by a poor reactor design and dangerous experiment. That being said, ~56 people died from ARS and the W.H.O. expects ~4,000 cases of thyroid cancer (which is very easily treatable). The other Fukushima nuclear power plant (Fukushima Daini) was hit by the earthquake and tsunami and survived. No one has died from radiation from Fukushima, but from fear. Of course, Ohio is too far inland and in some places too high to be hit by a tsunami. Coal-fired plants emit more radiation than nuclear power plants because coal contains uranium, thorium, and radium. Coal plants also emit lead, arsenic, chromium, mercury, formaldehyde, xylene, toluene, benzene, particulates, and acid gases. The particulates cause hundreds of thousands of cardiorespiratory ailments per year. By comparison, the biggest emission from a nuclear plant is water vapor. It's said nuclear kills when things go wrong and coal kills when things go right. Coal comes with other lovely things like coal mine fires, collapses, and explosions. Strip mining for coal worsens erosion and flooding as well. At 2% extraction, Ohio's enhanced geothermal power resource equals 16,538 megawatts. At 20% extraction, it equals 165,376 megawatts.
Just as an FYI you forgot Three Mile Island.
Power Cos burn bit coal, which is dirty, but cheap. Anthracite is the cleanest solid fuel out there, and blows wood away for that, and burn times. I heat with an antique coal stove, and love it. But your furnace is the best for efficiency. Keep at it, and thanks for sharing.