Hello,
we are currently planning the renovation of a masonry barn that has long been used as a wood storage and workshop, and earlier partly as a livestock stable and grain storage. With all the opinions from various building professionals around me, my head is starting to spin; so I hope to get some independent opinions here :-)
We have basically finalized the floor plan with our architect; but now the question came up as to why we are planning to place our wood stove in the living room with a flue pipe running outside along the house wall, instead of designing an internal flue pipe.
So far, I have only seen an advantage in having an external chimney because it supposedly prevents thermal bridges to the roof and is probably less expensive.
Am I missing something? Would an internal chimney flue actually be more advisable, even in our case? And if so – for what reasons?
The stove is basically meant to just make the living room cozier (visually and, of course, thermally in winter) and is not intended to heat the entire apartment in any way.
Here are some basic details about the building project in case relevant:
Floor area approximately 230 sqm (2,475 sq ft)
If you need more information beforehand, feel free to ask... Thanks in advance 🙂 🙂
we are currently planning the renovation of a masonry barn that has long been used as a wood storage and workshop, and earlier partly as a livestock stable and grain storage. With all the opinions from various building professionals around me, my head is starting to spin; so I hope to get some independent opinions here :-)
We have basically finalized the floor plan with our architect; but now the question came up as to why we are planning to place our wood stove in the living room with a flue pipe running outside along the house wall, instead of designing an internal flue pipe.
So far, I have only seen an advantage in having an external chimney because it supposedly prevents thermal bridges to the roof and is probably less expensive.
Am I missing something? Would an internal chimney flue actually be more advisable, even in our case? And if so – for what reasons?
The stove is basically meant to just make the living room cozier (visually and, of course, thermally in winter) and is not intended to heat the entire apartment in any way.
Here are some basic details about the building project in case relevant:
Floor area approximately 230 sqm (2,475 sq ft)
- 2 floors: ground floor = basement (already existing), living area on the 1st floor (slab already in place)
- Roof will be torn down and rebuilt, but without usable attic space, i.e. probably as a cold roof with nail-plated trusses and metal roofing; insulation will then be in the ceiling towards the living area. An alternative of a sandwich roof was also discussed. This will be clarified in the next few days.
- Heating: gas heating or heat pump (probably the latter), with solar thermal and photovoltaics
If you need more information beforehand, feel free to ask... Thanks in advance 🙂 🙂
A small mistake on my part, I included heat carriers even though it was only about the electricity mix.
The correct information is that renewable energies make up 29% of the electricity mix, with 39% of that coming from photovoltaics, which is 6% of the overall electricity mix. Data from 2015.
The correct information is that renewable energies make up 29% of the electricity mix, with 39% of that coming from photovoltaics, which is 6% of the overall electricity mix. Data from 2015.
B
Bauexperte18 Nov 2016 13:12Hello Andreas,
However, with this statement you point a finger at heat pump users: "And then they happily waste electricity generated from environmentally friendly lignite coal or the equally eco-friendly nuclear power from France..." It’s unwise to throw stones when you yourself are in a glass house. 😉
Regards, Bauexperte
andimann schrieb:Not literally.
I never claimed the latter either.
However, with this statement you point a finger at heat pump users: "And then they happily waste electricity generated from environmentally friendly lignite coal or the equally eco-friendly nuclear power from France..." It’s unwise to throw stones when you yourself are in a glass house. 😉
Regards, Bauexperte
Electricity is a sensitive topic.
Whether it comes from a lignite (brown coal) or nuclear power plant, or is generated by solar, wind, or hydropower, we cannot directly influence it.
- Wind energy critics complain that electricity from northern Germany does not reach the major urban areas.
- The German solar inverter manufacturer is laying off staff and criticizes the removal of subsidies.
- Nuclear power producers argue that policymakers cannot simply shut down power plants.
- Lignite coal relies on political measures and must keep lobbyists in government ministries satisfied.
- Hydropower operators complain that, due to renewable energy, their plants operate with poor efficiency during ramp-up and ramp-down phases, and the turbines’ performance maps are not designed for this.
- Consumers complain that the green energy transition is quite expensive.
To maintain the country’s renewable core expertise, wind priority areas are being sought away from coastal regions, and solar installations are being promoted in northern areas.
To prevent the power grid from collapsing, a coal-fired power plant is being built in Greece with "support from the German government," where wind and solar energy are used.
If the goal is to become independent from an Eastern European neighbor (in terms of energy supply) and to avoid strengthening that country’s economy through foreign currency, electricity must be made green.
Whether it comes from a lignite (brown coal) or nuclear power plant, or is generated by solar, wind, or hydropower, we cannot directly influence it.
- Wind energy critics complain that electricity from northern Germany does not reach the major urban areas.
- The German solar inverter manufacturer is laying off staff and criticizes the removal of subsidies.
- Nuclear power producers argue that policymakers cannot simply shut down power plants.
- Lignite coal relies on political measures and must keep lobbyists in government ministries satisfied.
- Hydropower operators complain that, due to renewable energy, their plants operate with poor efficiency during ramp-up and ramp-down phases, and the turbines’ performance maps are not designed for this.
- Consumers complain that the green energy transition is quite expensive.
To maintain the country’s renewable core expertise, wind priority areas are being sought away from coastal regions, and solar installations are being promoted in northern areas.
To prevent the power grid from collapsing, a coal-fired power plant is being built in Greece with "support from the German government," where wind and solar energy are used.
If the goal is to become independent from an Eastern European neighbor (in terms of energy supply) and to avoid strengthening that country’s economy through foreign currency, electricity must be made green.
K
Knallkörper21 Nov 2016 01:04AOLNCM schrieb:
If you want to become independent from an Eastern European neighbor (in terms of energy supply) and avoid strengthening their economy with foreign currency, you have to make electricity green.I believe you can also label "nuclear power" as green and promote it that way. I would support that. It's a pity that we gave up our technological leadership in this field to the environmentalists many years ago.
Alex85 schrieb:
The share of renewable energies in the German electricity mix is about 35%. Photovoltaics account for 10% and solar thermal energy for 2% of this 35%, which corresponds to 3.5% and 0.7% of the total electricity mix, respectively.This is clearly highly rounded up and fabricated. The tricks are so blatant that the politicians should actually be behind bars. Your so-called green electricity is actually imported power from Norwegian waterfalls. Our coal and nuclear power is then sold to Norway. But since the electricity never actually travels up and down half of Europe’s grid, what you get here from your outlets is coal and nuclear power. Basically, electricity is sold as a single commodity.
You cannot reliably cover a grid with just wind, heat, or solar energy. I would support a green electricity meter. Every time the grid doesn’t have enough power from wind or solar, the power shuts off for everyone with green electricity (technically, this is unfortunately not so easy to implement). The environmental supporters would also have to cover damages caused by power fluctuations, as well as consequential damage like frozen houses in winter when there is no wind and the sun simply doesn’t appear. Naturally, people with green electricity should also not be allowed to watch major events during windless conditions (for example, the European Championship), since power consumption is especially high then and can only be balanced by coal power plants. In return, they should get electricity at half price.
Instead of spending so much effort on green energy, we should focus on finding a solution to store electricity properly. Currently, renewable energy is produced only to be converted back into kinetic energy with partly ridiculous efficiencies, and then reconverted into electricity later with even lower efficiency. One example is water reservoirs with a pre-installed turbine. Water is pumped up into the reservoir using green electricity so that on demand the turbine can generate power again from the water. Although the overall efficiency is decent, it is still a loss of energy.