ReplyMy understanding is the higher efficiency is cheaper to run. If all the pvc is there why bother running new b vent for a less efficient furnace unless trying to make more from labor and less on equipment
Professional Member
An older unit has the gas vent pipe going outside with PVC pipe from the basement which is basically a high efficiency furnace and a fresh air intake.
The new unit will have standard double wall gas vent.
My question is.. could their be any specific reason originally they used the high efficiency furnace that is being overlooked.
Plans are to go back with a 13 seer 410A unit with 60,000 BTU Furnace where the PVC will not be needed.
Regular Guest
My understanding is the higher efficiency is cheaper to run. If all the pvc is there why bother running new b vent for a less efficient furnace unless trying to make more from labor and less on equipment
Professional Member
Higher efficiency, the ability to side wall vent with no need for a chimney or flue to the roof. Dont know of any furnaces that use double wall that can be side wall vented. But is has been years since I have installed or serviced residential equipment so I could be wrong.
Membership Chair/ARP Committee / Professional Member*
Why would they have Not used a high efficiency furnace?
And why would You take out a high efficiency furnace and install an 80%'er? What possible sense does that make? Besides the fact that they are now illegal.
PHM
--------
Originally Posted by MisterFixer
PHM
--------
When faced with the choice between changing one's mind, and proving that there is no need to do so, most tend to get busy on the proof.
Professional Member*
I would say that now, PVC vent is "standard". B-vent is hardly ever used in new installations around here, and this isn't a very cold climate. I have only seen 80% furnaces installed in some changeouts that already had b-vent runs..
God Speed, Jim. We'll miss you - 2-26-23
How cold does it get in your area, what is the gas rate in your area.
Might have used high efficiency to save money on the heating bill.
Professional Member*
I also agree that replacing a 90% with an 80% isn't the best move unless folks were hurtin for money....bad
But 80% aren't illegal PHM.....anywhere.....They are still ok to use
If you were speaking of Regional Energy Efficency rules.....That was set aside for the Northern Tier States
Membership Chair/ARP Committee / Professional Member*
The supply houses around here tell me that 80% heating units are NLA. "illegal to install now" was stated as their reason why.
Not true?
PHM
-------
PHM
--------
When faced with the choice between changing one's mind, and proving that there is no need to do so, most tend to get busy on the proof.
Professional Member*
Down here in the South, 80% furnaces are the norm and almost no one uses the high efficiency furnaces. I've only seen the PVC flue pipes a couple times. The heating season is too short go get an ROI on the high efficiency furnaces. I would think that PVC flue couldn't be used and B vent would be needed due to the high temperature of the flue gas. I would think PVC would melt but again, I'm not an expert on 93% furnaces.
Professional Member
Just had the 80% unit sent back to the supply house.
They MUST have a 90% (2 vent furnace) in this case.
I have not seen a 90% here in the mid-south until this instance, I have spent all of my time on apartment complexes and hotels and communications storage facilities.
It would be impossible (financially) to run B-Vent vertical through the roof from the basement,
So 90% is the only option because you can run horizontal PVC vent pipe.
Price difference was not bad between an 80% and 90%, I was worried the cost of the 90% was going to be much more and or delivery time would be too long.
Learned something here, so thats all that counts.
Professional Member*
who is telling you that??
we just installed an 80% yesterday HO didn't want to go for the 90+
Professional Member*
Regional Standards Update
As of May 1st, 2013, an emergency Motion to Stay was granted by a U.S. Court of Appeals in the ongoing Regional
Standards lawsuit. This motion legally forbids the Department of Energy (DOE) from enforcing the furnace standard in the Northern Region, which was to take effect May 1st, 2013, while legal efforts continue.
Previously, DOE had stated they would not enforce the standard on the effective date (May 1) via a policy statement, leaving open the slim possibility that DOE could change their minds and begin enforcing the standard. This Motion to Stay removes all doubt and should provide a greater level of certainty for distributors
as they continue to make decisions regarding their inventory. Additionally, the Motion states that if the Court were to decide that the standard should be upheld, there would be a six month delay before DOE
could begin enforcing the standard.
Read the Court’s decision online at: hardinet.org/sites/hardi/files/Advocacy/ DOE Stay5113.pdf
HARDI will continue to update membership as
developments occur.
Submitted by Vanessa Spates
May 1, 2013
Hardi Advocacy
hardinet.org/advocacy
Posting Permissions
