Oil Heating & Oil Heat Cares

Steamhead (in transit)

was the quote that "just about every oil-fired boiler we have seen has been dirty". Well, it doesn't have to be that way..............

We just went to a house where we had earlier found one of these dirty boilers- an old National Heat Extractor. At that time (this past January) they weren't ready to replace it, so we cleaned everything up, replaced the old Esso burner with a Beckett AF that has valve-on delay, added some flueway baffles, replaced the rusted flue connector and tuned everything up. Also installed main vents on the one-pipe steam system and fine-tuned the radiator vents.

We went back there today to replace a mis-matched convector with a radiator, and check out the boiler. We opened it up and it was almost clean enough to eat off those flueway surfaces. The customer said his fuel consumption is down about 10% and the house now heats evenly. We down-fired the burner slightly- it was steaming almost too quickly and cycling too much on pressure- and got even better combustion numbers than last time.

If we can get results like this, why can't the oil company techs? We always seem to be "cleaning up" after them..... if they really don't have a lot of time for annual maintenance calls, proper burner setup goes a long way toward reducing the time needed to do it right next year!

<A HREF="http://www.heatinghelp.com/getListed.cfm?id=367&Step=30">To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"</A>

John R. Hall

Sharing spotlight with Dan

We are featuring a roundtable discussion of oil heat contractors (also known as Wallies) this week:

http://www.achrnews.com/CDA/Archives/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000205826

Dave_4

Nice...

Article!

I could not help noting the parallels from the days when coal was king and oil the "competitor." More accurately, those who sold coal quickly adopted oil as a second choice - which quickly became the replacement fuel.

To some extent, some fuel oil brokers also sell LP as a way to expand the markets they serve.

Someone I have the utmost trust in stated on CNBC the other day, "The future of US energy will be based on the following path of three primary energy resources: 'Nuclear will become our salvation, so reactors should be started now; NG will be the transportation fuel of the future so lets stop depending on crude and focus on cleaner burning NG; coal, when cleaned can be burned with zero polution - as we get scrubbers adequately designed, that'll be the last step - given the technology today - to true energy independence."

Nuke, gas and clean coal will do the job. I happen to believe that's the only solution as well.

What do you believe the solution is?

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

jackchips_2

Ken

would that have been Ben Stein?

I caught some of his conversation with Maria B. last night and he is one of the most common sense "rich guys" around.

Even if it wasn't him, his philosophy on investing is right on. He especially warned the 40% of baby boomers who do not have a retirement strategy that they are in trouble and better put a plan together now and stick to it.

As for what will "do the job", I am in agreement with Nuke and coal but do not know enough about the availability of gas.

We can conserve all we want but despite oil being around a long time, still, we do not have control over it, nor should we, and we should be looking to decrease our use of it NOW.

Jack

DanHolohan

Thanks for the ink, John.

I believe in the good work of Oil Heat Cares. Now more than ever.

Roland_4

Solutions

Of the energy sources mentioned, all are non-renewable and carry the unfortunate baggage of being polluting. The most misunderstood of these options is nuclear energy. While it doesn't directly create green-house gasses,Uranium has to be mined and refined which uses substantial amounts of conventionally produced energy. It's loaded into an expensive reactor and BURNED to release it's energy. In the process of this burning, the Uranium is transformed into many other dangerous materials including Plutonium, the most dangerous substance on the planet. The waste produced by nuclear fission will remain poisonous for thousands of years. Again, there is also the certainty that we will run out of Uranium ore eventually. Just like fossil fuels, the price of ore will rise as it becomes scarce.
We have ejoyed a standard of living in the USA that has been the envy of the rest of the world. This has only been possible because energy has been dirt cheap. Times are changing and we must compete with emerging economies for an ever shrinking piece of the energy pie.
I think there is no one solution. All I have heard so far from the OFFICIAL sources is Coal(with C02 sequestration), more Nuclear plants and digging up the planet to find the last of the crude. We need to concentrate our efforts on conservation and phase in renewable energy. What good is maintaing the status-quo while we go broke and foul our planet?