Presuming you've actually done this test, I think it must depend on your woodstove and how it is installed. We heat almost exclusively with wood, and have a modern EPA compliant wood stove connected to a continuous stainless steel liner that runs to the top of the chimney. We got an AQI meter based on comments on like this.
The AQI meter showed that there was no perceptible difference in air quality with the wood stove on versus off. Startup shows some smoke that decreases in an hour, but continuous operation shows no effect. Since we are in a cold climate, we burn essentially 24-7 for the entire winter, and thus startup effects can mostly be ignored.
You are right that there was a tremendous decrease in air quality when cooking, especially anything that was fried. So I agree that you might cut down on pancakes, but my evidence does not back your assertion you will "never use a woodstove again". To the contrary, using the meter tremendously reduced my worries about indoor air quality due to using the woodstove.
Did you actually do this test and find different results? What sort of system were you testing?
Yeah, comparing an old out of date stove/fireplace from peoples memory to modern high efficiency models seems rather disingenuous on the part of commenters.
Does the smoke magically disappear once it exists your chimney? Because your neighbors might get AQI results that aren't that great — or yours might deteriorate, too, if everybody around you starts heating with wood.
A modern wood stove doesn't emit much smoke at all. It recirculates smoke through the combustion chamber (and/or through a catalyst) which causes secondary combustion. This greatly increases the energy efficiency of the stove and gives you a much cleaner burn. Not only are you not polluting your house with wood smoke particles but you aren't polluting your neighbours either!
This. Mine has the recirculation thing with extra air channels and a big ol' soapstone wall interposed between the combustion chamber and the exhaust, and you can't just start it up full of wood, you have to fire it properly at which point it's hot enough to burn its own smoke, which you can see happening. And then once it's going, engage the catalyst, which also burns the smoke more, until there's basically nothing left.
No more 'nice cozy smell of neighborhood wood fires', but on every other possible metric, way way better.
In case he doesn't check this thread, and because my stove mostly matches his description, I'll mention that I'm happy with our Progress Hybrid by Woodstock Soapstone: https://www.woodstove.com/the-progress-hybrid-wood-stove
Looks good, thanks.
I'm somewhat constrained for space and room size, but might look for that or similar to replace the current one: https://www.agaliving.com/products/catalog/stoves/little-wen...
Stoves are useful in my area as there's a lot of wood around, often for free, though it does of course have to be dried.
I was responding to the specific claim that woodstoves cause measurable problems with indoor air quality in the houses where they are used. I'm willing to believe they can, but in my direct experience, mine didn't. I live in a rural enough area (less than 1 house per sq km) that my neighbors are unlikely to be affected by my woodburning, and I am not likely to be affected by theirs.
The question (and I agree it's open) is what effect dispersed burning has on the larger scale environment. My current belief is that local wood harvesting and burning in a modern efficient stove is better than the alternatives currently available to me. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it rather than just making blanket statements.
I still feel like there must be a difference in particulate matter from things like combustion products (which we know are very bad) and those from cooking - as long as nothing is getting hot enough to char and smoke… Still a good idea to have a good exhaust fan in your range hood (and pick induction over gas if possible) but still…
