traditional fuels: peat vs. wood vs. coal?

Question

I'm not at all sure how to categorize this question, so I'll post it in multiple places nd hope someone has some experience in the matter.

Comparatively speaking, what sort of temperature (general feel, not specific numbers), amount of flame (not just glowing embers), length and efficiency of burn, and amount/appearance of ash can be expected when burning blocks of peat, lengths of hardwood, and chunks of anthracite coal? I'm trying to gather info for novel-writing in lower-technology settings, so I'm more interested in sensory input and daily usage (smell, warmth, appearance, practical efficiency) than in scientific figures, though I'll be thankful for any info at all.... :-)

Answer 1

Each of the 3 fuels you listed vary considerably in quality. Peat is at the low end of the scale in terms of heat production, but will produce the most ash. It is susceptible to huge differences in quality depending on its water content and degree of compression.



Wood is the most variable, as it is prone to moisture differences. Also, density difference between the hardwoods and softwoods is considerable. Well seasoned wood produces a moderate amount of ash and a moderate amount of heat. It is the most attractive in terms of flame and smoke (if smoke could be thought of as attractive).



Coal is the most condensed of these heat sources, and will produce a large amount of heat per volume, and consequently not as much ash. However, no one would think the smell of a coal fire is nice or attractive, it stinks.



In terms of combustion, the hottest part of the flame occurs when all the volatile chemicals are burned or evaporated off. Driving these off takes heat, and not all of them are flammable. Consequently, the flame stage of a fire is relatively cool, often less than 800F. After the volatiles burn off, most of what is left is carbon and ash. The carbon burns very hot, more than 1000F, and it burns relatively slow. When it is completely combusted, nothing but the ash remains.

Answer 2

Wood Vs Coal

Answer 3

First of all, which 3 peat Bulls team are you talking about, because there were two. Second of all, all the Bulls teams were great teams with a lot of great players. Horace Grant was an elite power foward, Dennis Rodman was an elite power forward. BJ Armstrong was an All Star. John Paxon went to the All Star game twice. The Bulls were built to stop big men, becuase they had tons of 7 footers to throw at them. Oh yeah, here is a little secret, the Bulls played Shaq several times and whooped him up good while he was in Orlando with Penny. Either Bulls team would sweep the floor with the Lakers. Kobe wouldn't be a threat because Pippen would stick him, Shaq would get frustrated by the constent fouling and abuse he would take from Will Perdue, Bill Wennington, Horace Grant, Luke Longley, Bill Cartwright, or even Dennis Rodman, you can pick. Rodman was the original Ben Wallace, and he would give all the Lakers nightmares. This is not a good match up for the Bulls. How about you say Bulls versus the repeat Rockets, because that would have been an awsome match up.