Home Green Home
Is a Fireplace the Devil?
The mason showed up for the first time this week to go over the plan for building a Rumford.
I haven't told many people we're doing this. Well, I take that back. I've told a lot of people, and they're very excited. They think it's fabulous. Rumfords are my vote for ninth wonder of the world, right after my choice for eighth wonder, the backrub. Chum built a Rumford in his first house, Legare built two in his, and various other friends have them. You light your Rumford and sit down, preferably with an ounce of scotch in a glass, to ponder the hypnotic wall of fire before you.
For the uninitiated, the Rumford is a tall, shallow fireplace, developed in the late 1700s to throw more heat into a room and lose less heat up the chimney. The Rumford, named for its inventor Benjamin "Count Rumford" Thompson, became de rigueur in the early 1800s. (I love that there's a 2002 paper entitled "Contribution of Count Rumford to Domestic Life in Jane Austen's Time." Rumfords made a comeback in the 1970s thanks to a 1969 book by Vrest Orton, The Forgotten Art of Building a Good Fireplace, which both Chum and Legare used to build theirs.
For me, the question is not so much whether or not Orton misinterpreted the original Rumford design. For that, you can go to Rumford experts like Jim Buckley of Buckley Rumford Fireplaces.
Rather, it's why the green building movement attacks fireplaces as if they're the antichrist. I just don't mention mine when I'm talking to people in this field. The first time I tried to talk about our future Rumford with a rep from Energy Star, he said, "Oh, we're not too big on wood." I was at a great lecture on efficient building recently and during the discussion, the speaker described working with a client on her new house. "The only trouble is, she wanted a wood-burning fireplace. I tried and tried to explain things to her," he trailed off, shaking his head at his failure to convince her of her folly. Everyone in the hall sighed along with him.
Yeah, yeah, I know. Burning wood releases pollutants into the air and contributes to smog. Fireplaces are notoriously inefficient and can lose up to 90 percent of their heat up the chimney. Buckley maintains that a well-built Rumford operates at about 50 percent efficiency--though that's pretty bad compared to 92 percent for the new gas furnace we're getting.
Still, weighing these relative efficiencies seems a wrong-headed approach. Full disclosure: We also have a wood stove and frequently heat with it in the evenings. It may be less efficient than the furnace but when we use it, we keep the house cooler. "Rumfords" produce radiant heat. We can just sit closer to the stove and stay warm instead of heating up the whole space.
Besides, I think the green energy movement needs to take a more holistic view about what's really efficient. Here's a starter: I'll bet sitting in front of a blazing fire with a blanket over our legs is just as entertaining as watching a movie – but it uses a hell of a lot less energy than driving across town to the movie theater. © The Green Guide, 2008
Discuss this blog
posted by Danwhat on 2008-05-10 16:08:23
Kathy, No, a fireplace is not the devil. Oil consumption is the devil, unless it's olive oil, which is sent from angels. I put Count Rumford right up there in my pantheon of heroes with Count Chocula, who made it okay to eat the sweetened essence of the cacao bean. Dan
posted by Trurobob on 2008-05-10 18:00:42
Hi, Kathy! It was nice of you to email me and let me in on this site as well as your own pieces; happy to know about it. Having just read Adam Berbach's The birth of Blue, via Grist (I hope you subscribe to that; it's indispensable in my opinion), I am trying to mellow out a bit and not be so fiercely green that I antagonize people. Adam makes the point that if we are serious about making sustainability a mass movement, we can't be puritanical; and the social virtues of inclusiveness and encouraging people to have fun while they change their bad habits have a lot to be said for them. In that spirit, I salute your attitude: open fires are wonderful, watching them is not that distant from watching the natural green world. It connects us to ancient roots, which feeds the soul and gives a deep gratification I wouldn;t want to live without. So, sure, I built a fire this morning (raining, in the 40's F) to cheer up our breakfast guests. You and i can make up for it by being super-green in other ways.
-Bob
posted by patt on 2008-05-10 18:31:49
A fireplace is pleasant and cozy to be sure, but in a city the smoke is a real deal-killer! We'll be enjoying a summer evening with the windows open, and someone lights a stinky fire. It's a rush to shut all the windows, then the AC gets turned on. How is using a woodburner in a city different than smoking in a restaurant? If you live in the north woods, OK, but...
posted by Robert L. Wilkinson on 2008-05-12 10:26:32
Kathy,
Back in my building days when I was building post & beam reproductions colonial era homes I always included Rumford fireplaces as they were so much more efficient, and more attractive, than a typical deep fireplace. Great as fireplaces go but not nearly as efficient as a wood stove. A wood stove with a glass front is, I think, the best of both worlds as you can see the fire but not have the heat going up the chimney. I love a Rumford but wouldn't have one today.
Bob Wilkinson
posted by seastores on 2008-05-14 17:23:49
A wood stove in my basement heats 1100 square feet of one floor house at little or no cost.Why? Because I have my own wood lot and cut/split/carry to get warm three times before burning it. :-)
posted by sully23113 on 2008-05-29 02:38:35
Oh Kathy...I feel your renovation pain! We (mostly)love our 1924 money pit but you didn't hear me say that! Nothing compares to the crackle(and mess!)of a real fire which is why we opted for the "gas optional" version. The fake logs are in and ready to be turned on or taken out and replaced with wood when we want the real thing. How many times have we put in real logs these past 4 years, you ask? Zero. Not sure if we even used the fireplace at all this $$winter. Just so you know, when this is all done, uh...wait, who am I kidding - it will NEVER be all done! As I was saying, when the furniture is back in, you won't want to make another decision for at least a year!! We think we've hit girl heaven when "doing" a house but it's total decision overload!Our best decisions were the most researched ones and not the recommendations of our subs, who seemed behind the times, and stuck in "sub-division mode". In the Riviera of the Great Lakes (cleveland) change, especially if going green, is often met with scepticism. p.s. we chose Icynene insulation and put it wherever possible-but I would have (and still might if we ever recover from renovation $$ hell )put solar on our southern roof line, tankless water heaters-at least at the farthest bathroom-ours, and put in a system to catch all the cool water while we wait for the shower to get hot. I use buckets now but it's a pain. I love our richlite counters. p.s.s. We agree-going to the movies is way too pricey any way you look at it - netflix is 2nd only to a good book. Best Wishes!
The Green Guide To Go
FREE Weekly E-Newsletter
Special Advertising Sections
 |
PHOTO CONTEST |
 |
INTERACTIVE MAP |
