We'll respond to your email within 24 hours and help get you a replacement part or product.Īll orders cancelled after 24 hours are subject to a $20 administration fee, whether or not your order has shipped. Images of the damages to packaging or items.If your item(s) do arrived damaged, please send an email to and include the following information so we can process a claim on your behalf: Please inspect the packaging of your item(s) when they arrive, if you notice any damage you should make note of it when signing for delivery. We'll respond to your email within 24 hours, and set up your return or replacement as soon as possible. To initiate a return, just send an email to and include the following information: Customer is responsible for the cost of return shipping. I would have liked to know how the stove performed in a lower burn scenario if that is even possible as all the other stoves did in their testing.Īs an note I have found anecdotally that when people compare results for their rocket stoves they usually use as a benchmark really poor examples of woodburners that they replaced with their Rocket stoves making direct comparisons difficult to quantify.Returns are FREE within 30 days of purchase (no restocking or processing fees), as long as the product is in "As new" condition, and can be returned in it's original packaging as it was sent to you. The liberator would not match a pellet stove but I wouldnt expect it to as its a freestanding non electric unit so again apples to apples. The Liberator was tested with pellets, the catalytic stoves and standard woodstoves cordwood so that is a grey area for me I would have liked to see its cordwood results to compare apples to apples. My synopsis would be the liberator would be comparable efficiency wise and emisions wise to the better of the catalytic european stoves. I sampled a link to testing on a Jotul catalytic which is almost identical to the liberator results wise. A link to pacific energy which I've used and liked. The non catalytic ones were soso as I would expect. I sampled a selection of better north american stoves. Its performance and emissions would "beat" the Liberator but at the cost of a blower fan an auger and much electronics. So I found one here for a newer pellet stove done to the newer testing parameters. It would be overkill in my house but a great looking unit. I must say its test results look very impressive. I think it would give a good comparison as the tests were run on pellets. Safety precautions to undertake in the heater's operation and installation.( bold mine)īeau Davidson wrote:Specifically, I'm looking for concrete data on EPA certification for air quality as measured by particulate.īeau one thing I would like to see myself would be a side by side lab report on an auger fed pellet stove and the Liberator. This owners manual will assist you in the proper use, maintenance, installation, and Independent testing from Aprovecho Research and PFS Teco, the heat output range varies from 27,000 BTU’s The tests were conducted by PFS Teco using pellet fuel in accordance with ASTMĮ2779 with Liberator RMH2 ATM single burn rate pellet heaters dated EPA OAQPS. As such, this heater is compliant to EPAĢ020 NSPS standards. Grams per minute of CO, and combustion efficiency of up to 99.5%. As you may already know, the RocketHeater is among the cleanest burning stoves available in the North American market, possessing a HHV rangingįrom 68.5% to 79.7%, an emissions output of 0.38 to 1.66 grams per hour of solid particulate, 0.02 to 0.37 Thank you for your purchase of the Liberator Rocket Heater. I think this is the specific bit of data I would like to be able to succinctly back up (from p99): Specifically, I'm looking for concrete data on EPA certification for air quality as measured by particulate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |