intermittent ignition or standing pilot

Danny_2

Hello,
The intermittent ignition costs $225 but provides 3% more efficient and the standing pilot is basically maintenance free for life. Does it worth the investment? How reliable is it? Thanks for any comments

Danny

Unknown

Pilot or no Pilot?

First of all that is pretty cheap for a retrofit to intermittent pilot. Most of the kits are around $400 not including labor.

It should also be noted that standing pilots are not maintenance free.

That being said it is my opinion, others I am sure as usual will disagree we all have or humble opinions as to what is best. I recommend that if you have an existing standing pilot system in place and it is working fine leave it alone.

If you are looking to save energy invest the $400 to $600 dollars in insulation the return on your investment is much higher. Roughly the difference between standing pilot and intermittent is about 2 to 3% savings versus insulation which depending on what you install can be over 10%.

Nothing is maintenance free even the best of the new systems require cleaning and adjustments.

As far as dependability of one versus the other electric ignition tends to be more likely to have failure over a period of time as compared to standing pilot. Statistics prove that out by the way.

An old rule if it is working do not fix it.

Starch

Depends.......

....on your preference. Pros and cons for either.

I personally prefer itermittent ignition, be it spark or hot surface. It can eliminate nuisance pilot outages due to high winds and other factors, especially in a mobile home unit. I also like the idea of not burning gas when you don't need to.

On the other hand.............

There is good argument for standing pilot on an older furnace, particularly if the basement or other area it's located in can become damp. The pilot light can help to keep things "dry" inside the heat exchanger. Standing pilots also reduce the possibility of clogged pilot burner orifice due to long shut-down over the summer.

So, as is not unusual, "it depends........."

Starch

Danny_2

intermittent ignition or standing pilot

Thank you guys for quick responses. Actually, I'm replacing my old boiler with a new Peerless and an indirect water heater. The intermittent ignition is optional on the Peerless for $225. And, it would provide up to 3% more efficient than the standing pilot that could take as many as 10 years to pay off the investment. But, on the other hand I do like the idea of keeping the heat exchanger dry all seasons.

It may be standard on the Burnham but not sure...

Floyd

with the indirect

you will be keeping the boiler dry anyway.

Jim Eastman

Pilot vs. intermittent

In cases where pilot outtages will cause serious inconvenience or problems, go with the intermittent. I installed a new Buderus boiler for my radiant system with an indirect water heater, too. I specified a standing pilot because the expense of replacing the ignition modules and/or HSI devices can really wipe out any small fuel savings. By the way, the standing pilot isn't that extravagant in it's use of fuel since you are igniting the boiler year 'round to heat domestic hot water anyway. If you have a reliable heating contractor replace the defective module or ignition device, you will be investing a couple hundred dollars every time this happens. My service experience tells me that intermittent ignition systems are a good profit generator for the contractor who is servicing the systems to keep his/her customer warm, comfortable and with reliable domestic hot water. Thermocouples are inexpensive, normally easy to replace, and more reliable in most situations.

Just my humble opinion!

Jim Eastman

cubarch

question

Queston: if using a valve for intermittent replaceing a valve of standing, do you need the termhocople

Tim McElwain

For purposes

of economics a standing pilot uses about $100 to $150 worth of gas per year assuming it is running 24/7. A retrofit to spark ignition (intermittent pilot) parts plus labor can be near $800 to $1,000 depending on labor costs and the expertise of the installer. ROI 7 to 10 years give or take.



As noted hear all systems need maintenance however I have seen thermocouples last 10 and some 15 years. The pilot may need cleaned every so often depending on the environment.



My recommendation is stick with the thermocouple as part of the new equipment if it is available you will be better off. Does the new equipment have a vent damper? The vent damper gives a little more efficiency which can off set the cost of pilot operation. The fat that you have an indirect being installed means the system will be running year round so that will definitely extend the life of the boiler and keep it dry and working efficiently.



Intermittent pilot is a good cure for pilot outage caused by recirculation of pilot flue products which we experienced for years on roof top equipment.



Just one more thing sometimes when pilot operated equipment is removed from chimneys and the  new equipment is intermittent pilot the draft on the chimney is affected. Believe it or not that pilot running 24/7 adds some considerable heat to the chimney especially if there are two pilots one the heating the other the storage water heater.

Tim McElwain

cubarch you are removing the thermocouple

and replacing it with a spark igniter in the same pilot you took the thermocouple out of, therefore you no longer need the thermocouple. I am assuming you are talking about a 30 millivolt thermocouple not a 750 millivolt pilot generator.