Best fuel for getting the most heat from the fire?

Dr Strange

Deleted User wrote: »

I normally make the fire wider but my culchie said to start it off small and then build it from there, so it ended up the full width of the grate.

Seemed to work. My first successful all day fire built without a fire pack \o/

Well done! Now get yourself some proper coal/logs/turf for the next couple of days. Snow's covering the mountains!

Field east

falan wrote: »

<snip>.

Am very surprised that this post got through the Mod's filter. As 99. 99999999 % of us know that petrol is 100% extremely dangerous where naked flames exist. There is ' always one ' out there who will take up the advice - leading to , maybe , very serious injury an d burning the house down. A very irresponsible post IMO

G_R

Field east wrote: »

Am very surprised that this post got through the Mod's filter. As 99. 99999999 % of us know that petrol is 100% extremely dangerous where naked flames exist. There is ' always one ' out there who will take up the advice - leading to , maybe , very serious injury an d burning the house down. A very irresponsible post IMO

If you've an issue with a post, then report it. We don't/can't read each and every post that goes up!

Field east

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Been wondering about this lately since the fire's used most nights. I use coal and wood, couldn't get turf this year, and seem to find wood doesn't give as good heat as the coal, especially not when the coal has burned in to that orange glow state, that seems to be when the fire's the hottest?
What's the most effective/efficient fuel to use for fires?

I assume you are using an open fire as against a wood burning stove. The objective for all of us is to get as much heat as is possible from what we burn and to have as much of it used to heat the room/house.
What fuel one uses is influenced mainly by price , availability ,fuel preference storage capacity and amount of free time to organise fuel
Points to consider
(1) it is unbelievable how much more efficient a solid wood burner is when compared to an open fire. It provides four to five times more heat to the room than the open fire. The stove fitted onto the hearth is more efficient than if it is fitted into the fireplace proper. The reason is that in the open fire most of the heat goes up the chimney and the more the fire is blazing / lighting , the more of a draught there is. So unless you are sitting in a high backed chair, you will feel the draught around your shoulders - especially if there are doors/ windows at the other end of the room
(2) wet fuel is not energy efficient. This applies mainly to timber and turf. Also not good for the chimney. So if you have a shed /lean-to/ plastic cover and some space buy wood and store for year.
(3) the principal of slacking/slagging a fire is also an efficient way of using fuel as you get a better burn, keep the fire 'in' longer as it slows it down and may be an efficient way of using up the 'bits and pieces' in ones fuel shed - eg sawdust, wood chippings, coal dust , twigs .
(4) have heard that the design of fire backs have a part to play in diverting heat in to the room. The Bell back one - was made in Belfast- was saidto be of a good design

BD45

Field east wrote: »

Am very surprised that this post got through the Mod's filter. As 99. 99999999 % of us know that petrol is 100% extremely dangerous where naked flames exist. There is ' always one ' out there who will take up the advice - leading to , maybe , very serious injury an d burning the house down. A very irresponsible post IMO

Didn't a man burn himself to death a couple of years ago using petrol to start the fire? He was too lazy to go out and buy firelighters.