New regs to make furnace replacement more expensive

Page 7 of 8  



There is significant variation between manufacturers and even models But 3 elbows and Something like 65' or so. 8 elbows may only get you down to 40" not 35 The install manuals I've read cover using existing unused chimney as a option


it very well specific as in Horizontal runs of vent/flue piping must be supported also "The vent can also be run through an existing unused chimney; however, it must extend a minimum of 12 inches above the top of the chimney. The space between the vent pipe and the chimney must be closed with a weather-tight, corrosion-resistant flashing" Not the best choice But yes it can be done but it's a lot trickier to get right
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Link for where that came from?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://www.goodmanmfg.com/Portals/0/pdf/M-Info/IOs/IO-GKS9.pdf
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thanks for the info. Goodman is a lot more lenient in their reqts than Rheem. The Rheem manual I have limits vent pipe runs to probably half of what Goodman allows. And there is no mention by Rheem of using an existing unused chimney. I still wonder what an inspector would say about such a long run of unsupported PVC vertical pipe. I guess if you properly secure it at the top and bottom, it would be OK. The biggest road block is probably a remaining gas water heater that could be venting through the same chimney. I guess you could potentially replace that with a power vent type and if the run is within limits and it will all fit, use the chimney to run that too. There is also the issue that for the allowed run lengths, you'd have to stay at or below 70,000 btu to use 2" PVC. Above that you'd have to use 3" to make it to chimney length. And getting two of those in there could be a challenge in some cases.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/25/2012 1:06 PM, spud42 wrote:

I have seen a few chimneys with two PVC pipes protruding. One is a few houses away and I took a better look earlier and can see a stainless cap fitted.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 16:44:01 +0000, DA

for the vent as well as the intake pipes. On some of the smaller furnaces all you need is a 2" PVC pipe for each. I imagine in most cases you can still find a shorter way to an outside wall but if completely stuck - there's still your old chimney right there.

are already spending a considerable amount of money. Why would you not spend perhaps less than 10% more (if even that) to install a much more efficient furnace that creates the same amount of heat using less gas? Makes no sense to me to object to a good thing only because "the government mandated it". Even with gas prices falling right now, I believe it's still worth getting a more efficient furnace - never know where the price is going to be in the future. And regardless, even after the 40%+ fall this year, it's still far from being free. Hopefully the NEW 95%+ furnaces last longer than the ones sold as little as 7 or 8 years ago. I went for the highest efficiency non condensing furnace I could buy when I replaced mine 9 years ago after my brother replaced his new condensing furnace after less than 2 years due to repetative expensive failures.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
First of all, leaving it up to 'the market' isn't going to reduce pollution nor do much for energy efficiency. People aren't 100% logical and tend not to look at the long-run costs of things- whether it's gas mileage, home energy consumption (heating, A/C, electricity usage in appliances) or even insurance costs (how many people, when deciding between two cars, call their ins co and ask the difference?).
And the more energy you use, the more it costs all of us. That's why the gov't is making these rules.
I put in a 90% efficient heating unit two years ago and it's made a world of difference in heating costs. It wasn't that big a deal to run a pipe across ten feet of basement and put it through a wall to vent to the outside.
And in my case I didn't need the flue anymore so I tore it out and got myself another couple of square feet of usable floor space on two floors.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Nov 24, 11:46am, snipped-for-privacy@brainchampagne.com wrote:

Spoken like a true superior liberal who thinks the rest of us are just too stupid to act logical. As I've said, I know a few people who have replaced furnaces in the last few years. Not one of them has installed less than a 90%. I went out for quotes myself two years ago and of 4 companies, not one quoted or mentioned anything less than 90%. In other words, this is the perfect example of a non-existent problem that the govt is "fixing".


Yes, and why stop there? The more of most things we all use, the higher the price. Actually, the one thing that I am worried about the cost of is govt. That has gone up by 40% since Obama took office. Funny, I see no interest from you libs in controlling that cost.


My, must be wonderful to be a real intellectual like you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/24/2012 12:22 PM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

nor do much for energy efficiency. People aren't 100% logical and tend not to look at the long-run costs of things- whether it's gas mileage, home energy consumption (heating, A/C, electricity usage in appliances) or even insurance costs (how many people, when deciding between two cars, call their ins co and ask the difference?).

Name calling only makes people look really silly.
Reality is that his observation is correct. Unfortunately a significant portion of the population need someone else to think for them.

difference in heating costs. It wasn't that big a deal to run a pipe across ten feet of basement and put it through a wall to vent to the outside.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Reality is that you're one of the people that likes to have govt force things on them, even when it's based on lies and fixes non-existent problems. Or do you actually believe the EPA BS that this new rule is going to save 20% of the total heating energy used in the USA? You believe so many people are installing new 80% furnaces today in cold climates that it's an urgent problem that needs more govt regulation?
Again, I live in NJ and I don't know anyone who has installed less than a 90% furnace for years. I went out for quotes two years ago and not one of 4 companies quoted or mentioned anything less than a 90% furnace. So, yeah, I generally associate folks who buy into this govt is the solution to non-existent problems as liberals. Sorry if the truth offends.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/26/2012 8:37 AM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

nor do much for energy efficiency. People aren't 100% logical and tend not to look at the long-run costs of things- whether it's gas mileage, home energy consumption (heating, A/C, electricity usage in appliances) or even insurance costs (how many people, when deciding between two cars, call their ins co and ask the difference?).

of difference in heating costs. It wasn't that big a deal to run a pipe across ten feet of basement and put it through a wall to vent to the outside.

Reality is I am in 1 sigma (69% of the population that don't see everything in only black and white.)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@brainchampagne.com wrote:

Or, it could be they have more provident uses for their meager sums - such as food.

Arrant nonsense. The higher the demand, the lower the price. That is if the government stays out of the way.

Bully! How would you feel if the government, in its infinite wisdom, PROHIBITED you from a more efficient system?
It's exactly the same concept. Exactly the same.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Right. Up is down, Mr. Orwell.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, that is utter nonsense and violates the law of supply & demand. The higher the SUPPLY, with a constant demand, the LOWER the price.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SRN wrote:

You're right - I phrased that inelegantly.
I should have said "The higher the demand, the greater the supply which will drive down prices.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 8:53:25 AM UTC-5, HeyBub wrote:

Still totally wrong. Especially with something like energy which has limited supply and extracting more from the ground drives prices way up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@brainchampagne.com wrote:

Giggle.
From mid-2008 until the end of 2010, the price for natural gas has shrunk from about $11.00/Mcf to $4.00 for the same amount.
Further, what make you, or anyone else, think there is a "limited supply" of energy? As a practical matter, that is simply not true.
We have, just in the U.S., several hundred years of coal available and we're discovering and mining natural gas faster than we use it. Heck, we're even EXPORTING significant amounts of NG.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/26/2012 11:15 AM, HeyBub wrote:

I think one of my brothers was involved with coal field and landfill gas recovery. As long as we have landfills filled with garbage, I believe we'll have a source of gas for heating homes and running power plants. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Unless the supply is limitted - either naturally or artificially.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

You are absolutely correct. While there is no practical natural limit on the supply of U.S. energy, there is an artificial limit.
It's called the Obama administration.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.