Two Dog Nights: Cabin Heat In Winter

[AdriftAtSea]

Just be aware that alot of the kerosene type lamps can generate a fair amount of Carbon Monoxide...so a CO detector should be onboard...

I'd rather keep you guys alive to comment and advise in the future.  Also, some of them will deplete the cabin oxygen levels rather well, even if they're not creating CO...so leave a hatch or port cracked to let fresh air in. 

[Captain Smollett]

Just be aware that alot of the kerosene type lamps can generate a fair amount of Carbon Monoxide...so a CO detector should be onboard...

I'll not use a CO detector on board.

so leave a hatch or port cracked to let fresh air in. 

That's the ticket.

[Joe Pyrat]

I'll not use a CO detector on board.

Interesting, why not?

[Captain Smollett]

Interesting, why not?

Just another gadget - something that I would come to rely on and suffer for it it fails.  The real answer, to me, is to PREVENT O2 depletion and CO accumulation in the first place, not try to detect it once it is already there.  You kill both those birds with one stone by having proper ventilation, which is needed for other reasons as well (reducing condensation, for example).

Soooo, if you need proper ventilation for OTHER reasons, and can accomplish maintaining a proper breathable atmosphere with something you ALREADY have, what does having a failable gadget bring to the table?

It's a matter of personal preference and taste, I suppose, but for me, in this case, the gadget brings nothing.

[Joe Pyrat]

Isn't that kind of like saying a bilge pump makes me less stringent in maintaining my watertight integrity, so I will not have a bilge pump so I will not become lax with regard to my watertight integrity?

There are times you want to button up, heavy weather, extreme cold, etc.  At these times your ventilation is going to be necessarily limited and the CO detector can (could) act as a backup.  Gas detectors in general can alert you to the fact that you have a potential problem with some system, like a slow propane leak. They do not replace good maintenance procedures, they act as a second line of defense.   IMHO anyway.

[Captain Smollett]

Isn't that kind of like saying a bilge pump makes me less stringent in maintaining my watertight integrity, so I will not have a bilge pump so I will not become lax with regard to my watertight integrity?

Yes, it's exactly like saying that.  We all have choices to make about how far to push what lines we push in the decisions we make.  I would be more inclined to "indulge" in a bilge pump than a CO detector.  Given a finite amount of money with which to buy stuff and finite time and money to maintain it, and limited willingness to rely on things "not me," I may well have to make the choice between bilge pump OR CO detector.

There are times you want to button up, heavy weather, extreme cold, etc.  At these times your ventilation is going to be necessarily limited

Why necessarily?  Are not Dorades and similar 'waterproof' designs not adequate and seaworthy, even in heavy weather?  If you button up THAT tightly for an extended period of time, do you not run the risk of asphyxiation?

Also, is it 'necessary' to always run a heating device?  I've slept in a tent in -20, so I know from experience that there are other 'passive' tools (ie, non-CO producing) that can keep one warm when off-watch.

and the CO detector can (could) act as a backup.  Gas detectors in general can alert you to the fact that you have a potential problem with some system, like a slow propane leak. They do not replace good maintenance procedures, they act as a second line of defense.   IMHO anyway.

You make several good points, and with them I cannot really offer counterpoint.  It is up to each of us to find the trade-offs and compromises we want to make.

For me, and I speak for myself only, what you are describing is the beginning of a never ending cycle of over-outfitting.  This discussion began with CO detectors, and now we are up to CO detectors, propane detectors (won't have propane on my boat, either, btw) and bilge pumps.  The list of "must-haves" will always only grow, and this growth is, in part, fueled by the marine stores and punditry using our fear of getting hurt, sick or lost to sell us more stuff.  All of this leads to more cost, more maintenance, and more reliance on gear.

The old square riggers, and their crews, while often uncomfortable, sailed in atrocious weather and sometimes in the high latitudes to boot.  They did not have CO detectors.  I don't mean this to suggest that we should wholesale disregard technology because "the old way was good enough," but I use that comparison as my 'baseline.'  Did they do without a CO detector?  Yep.  Now, do I REALLY NEED one?

My theoretical, spiritually "ideal boat:"

No electricity, at all, period
No engine, at all.
Single fuel capable - all lamps, lights and cooking, etc - probably kerosene
No GPS, no radio
No Dedicated Liferaft

I'll never realize this ideal and I know it.  First of all, I've made one compromise with my wife in that she won't go cruising on a boat with no engine.  But as I said, that is my 'baseline" that is used to weigh the need of anything that is considered a "must-have."

In other words, the SailFar KISS principle.

[Joe Pyrat]

Isn't that kind of like saying a bilge pump makes me less stringent in maintaining my watertight integrity, so I will not have a bilge pump so I will not become lax with regard to my watertight integrity?

Yes, it's exactly like saying that.  We all have choices to make about how far to push what lines we push in the decisions we make.  I would be more inclined to "indulge" in a bilge pump than a CO detector.  Given a finite amount of money with which to buy stuff and finite time and money to maintain it, and limited willingness to rely on things "not me," I may well have to make the choice between bilge pump OR CO detector.

Ok, I can understand the personal choice issue.  I can also understand the financial argument.  Doing a quick check on CO and explosive gas detectors and picking the most expensive ones I could find, puts the cost at around $400.  Literally a fraction of what I've got invested in the boat.  And that ignores the life threatening aspects of failure in one of these areas.  Also consider that a little research and a visit to Radio Shack could very likely cut this cost by 80% and give you a fun little project for a few of those non-sailing evenings.

There are times you want to button up, heavy weather, extreme cold, etc.  At these times your ventilation is going to be necessarily limited

Why necessarily?  Are not Dorades and similar 'waterproof' designs not adequate and seaworthy, even in heavy weather?  If you button up THAT tightly for an extended period of time, do you not run the risk of asphyxiation?

Also, is it 'necessary' to always run a heating device?  I've slept in a tent in -20, so I know from experience that there are other 'passive' tools (ie, non-CO producing) that can keep one warm when off-watch.

Yes necessarily.  Unless you run around with your bilges open, there are areas in the boat that are not well ventilated even considering you have all the hatches and ports open.  And these are the ares most likely to collect heavier than air gasses so even with the bilges open, the issue does not completely go away.

Is a heating device necessary?  Well probably not.  If you don't live aboard, or if you do and you don't mind freezing  your rear end off for extended periods of time, ok.  I too have been out in extreme cold.  I've had the frozen facial hair look.  It was fun, but there was always an end in sight.  If you are going to do the weekend cruising thing, this kind of setup is entirely workable, I did it for years.  Now that I'm moving onboard on a permanent basis, the parameters have changed.

and the CO detector can (could) act as a backup.  Gas detectors in general can alert you to the fact that you have a potential problem with some system, like a slow propane leak. They do not replace good maintenance procedures, they act as a second line of defense.   IMHO anyway.

You make several good points, and with them I cannot really offer counterpoint.  It is up to each of us to find the trade-offs and compromises we want to make.

For me, and I speak for myself only, what you are describing is the beginning of a never ending cycle of over-outfitting.  This discussion began with CO detectors, and now we are up to CO detectors, propane detectors (won't have propane on my boat, either, btw) and bilge pumps.  The list of "must-haves" will always only grow, and this growth is, in part, fueled by the marine stores and punditry using our fear of getting hurt, sick or lost to sell us more stuff.  All of this leads to more cost, more maintenance, and more reliance on gear.

The old square riggers, and their crews, while often uncomfortable, sailed in atrocious weather and sometimes in the high latitudes to boot.  They did not have CO detectors.  I don't mean this to suggest that we should wholesale disregard technology because "the old way was good enough," but I use that comparison as my 'baseline.'  Did they do without a CO detector?  Yep.  Now, do I REALLY NEED one?

My theoretical, spiritually "ideal boat:"

No electricity, at all, period
No engine, at all.
Single fuel capable - all lamps, lights and cooking, etc - probably kerosene
No GPS, no radio
No Dedicated Liferaft

I'll never realize this ideal and I know it.  First of all, I've made one compromise with my wife in that she won't go cruising on a boat with no engine.  But as I said, that is my 'baseline" that is used to weigh the need of anything that is considered a "must-have."

In other words, the SailFar KISS principle.

I always get a kick out of it when someone points to the old ships as an example of roughing it.  These things were, literally, the space shuttles of their day.  They incorporated the best technology that the human race could produce at the time.  Ships were always the leading edge of technology until flight became possible.  Just look at the advances, hull design, steam, ironclads, timing systems, navigation, etc.  Consider that the relative comfort level between a home and a ship, back in the day, is probably about the same as the difference between a modern home and a reasonably well equipped modern boat.  Also keep in mind we are talking naval or merchant vessels here, not yachts.  The comfort level for the owner and guests on a yacht was much better then it was for a common seaman, but people like, I suspect, most of us couldn't afford to buy a yacht back in those days, let alone pay for the crew necessary to sail it.

Until Capt. Slocum did his thing, there were no singlehanders.  50 people with scissors can replace one lawn mower (don't laugh, when I was in the Navy I saw something very similar actually occur) but what is ultimately less expensive?  Unless sailing with a large crew is in your budget, these types of devices can give you a 24/365 extra set of eyes and ears at a fraction of the cost of a single crew member, and that's presuming the person is not a paid crew. 

Your description of your perfect boat is very romantic, and yes, very appealing in the abstract, but, IMHO, when considered for extended periods, not quite so appealing.  When you consider months or years of living with these options, cold weather, etc, I tend to think my inner romantic would be more satisfied curled up in relative comfort with a good book while the sea rocks me to sleep, secure in the knowledge that I have systems aboard that will alert me the moment some life threatening event occurs.  Can I prepare for every such event?   No, but I can prepare for some of the more common ones.

All that said, far be it from me to dictate to you or anyone else how to setup their boat.  If you are comfortable with limited safety equipment, I'll fully support your right to do without it.  Am I over equipped?  Probably, maybe undoubtedly, but all this stuff is fun to play with (I'm a techie IRL) aside from providing capabilities I would not otherwise possess.  Is it expensive?  Yes, but I've got more into my canvas work than into the electronics (thanks to eBay and the gear for sale sections of forums like this).

FYI, Raytheon RL80C Radar (multifunction display), 4 GPS systems, electronic autopilot (all networked, hardwired), solar panel, two onboard computer systems, laptop and MicroATX box, wireless LAN.  Still looking at CO and explosive gas detectors and either SSB or HAM radio with email capability (the radio thing will probably push the tech cost beyond the cost of the canvas work :( ).

Also, FYI, I enjoy a good debate, so if you want me to put a cork in it, just let me know. ;)

[Captain Smollett]

Am I over equipped?

I'd answer that "no."  Would *I* feel overequipped with the YOUR stuff...perhaps.  "Overequipped is a subjective term - well mostly.  I think all of us on this site can agree that there ARE some truly overequipped boats out there.

Also, FYI, I enjoy a good debate, so if you want me to put a cork in it, just let me know. ;)

Not at all; this has been enlightening.  I enjoy your points - they are far more well-thought than simply "get it, you need it, you'd be foolish not to have it."  "It" being whatever - today a CO detector, tomorrow and EPIRB, etc.

To me, this has been a good discussion for this site, because I think this forum is a place to challenge the 'conventional wisdom' of what is really needed to go cruising and/or livaboard.  I presented one extreme point of view (as a theoretical philosophy, a beginning framework) and you've given some good counterpoints that JUSTIFY certain items - at the very least for YOUR boat. 

The whole point of the exercise, imo, is to draw attention to WHY we carry what we carry and be clear and honest with ourselves what the lines are and why we make these decisions.  So, it becomes less important whether or not boat X has a CO detector than the process by which that decision was made.

It's what I love about this site - for the most part, simpler is viewed as better, but for those exceptions, they are well-thought-out exceptions.

[Joe Pyrat]

LOL, I use to work for a guy like that.  He'd come to lunch and throw out something to get everybody debating, then sit back and enjoy. 

EPIRBs and dedicated life rafts bring up the question of what do you do if you've lost the boat, but that probably needs it's own thread.  I'm more conflicted on this point.  ;)

[Norm]

Hello all:
Regarding kerosene (or propane) cabin heaters.

Has anyone got a winter's worth of experience and been able to track CO output?  Do we have any data?

What is the burn rate for kerosene and for propane?

My limited experience:  Our old Alden Yawl had a wood stove that filled the boat with smoke but not with heat.

Years ago, I worked in a boat yard.  The ofice was heated by a kero cabin heater that was poorly installed.  It did an OK job heating, seemed to burn about a gallon or so a work day, and stunk up the place.  I recall something about the heaters being most efficient if left running all the time.  On/off was claimed to be inefficient.

We chartered a boat in the Pacific North West that had a propane heater.  The charter company check out guy advised us against using it.  I did not probe.

Thanks, Norman

[Joe Pyrat]

Norm,

Your question regarding experience with kerosene or propane made me think it would be interesting to be able to data log CO build up over time in order to see which system produced the most gas.  Again, it's a techie thing, the result from entirely too much time around computers.  Unfortunately it seems any gas detector capable of doing so is in the > $1k range.  I did find a source of detectors in the $60 range though (http://www.smokesign.com/codetectors.html).  Another example of how the marine title on anything quadruples the price.

If no one can give you a definitive answer to your question, you might try getting one of these cheap detectors, installing it, then buttoning up and running your heater in order to determine if CO buildup ever becomes a problem and  how long it takes for dangerous levels to occur.  You could test the heater and cook stove individually, and when operating both at the same time.  I for one would be really interested in your findings, and it might make a good article for Good Old Boat or Living Aboard Magazine.

Regarding burn rate, some limited research on my part seems to indicate the answer is it varies depending on the device you are using to burn the fuel.  Interesting bunch of stuff popped up though, everything from burning kerosene on carpet to home made rocket engines (might have to go back and look at that one again, very interesting). Therefore, testing your individual systems would seem to be the best way to go for the individual application.

[Captain Smollett]

Your question regarding experience with kerosene or propane made me think it would be interesting to be able to data log CO build up over time in order to see which system produced the most gas.  Again, it's a techie thing, the result from entirely too much time around computers.  Unfortunately it seems any gas detector capable of doing so is in the > $1k range.

Could you use a simple, cheap, OTC CO detector, splice off the signal line going to the LCD and read that signal with a  BASIC Stamp?  There are cheaper solutions, but they are more complicated to set up than the STAMP (FPGA's of course, but then you need a PROM writer and to code in ASSEMBLY).

With the Stamp and a memory module, you could log one reading a minute for weeks - track dirunal trends, etc.  Not bad for a device that costs about $60 US.

But, I'm thinking this has all been done; my fuzzy memory seems to contain a node indicating having read about this.

As for burn rates, CO production rates, etc, that is a VERY complicated question.  O2 balance in the combustion reaction, flow rates into/out of the 'confined space,' etc are not easily modeled and picking 'average' values for them are frought with large error bars.  As a rule of thumb, a yellow flame is producing a higher CO concentration than a blue one, and that depends on the rate of O2 delivery to the flame.  Therefore, forced air burners would TEND to be 'safer.'

I would point out however, that we are in a way barking up the wrong tree.  The REAL issue is O2 dilution.  True, CO does have some toxic effects (O2 displacement in hemoglobin, for example), but does it really matter?  From IFSTA Fundamentals of Firefighting, 2nd Edition, a drop from normal O2 concentration (~21%) to 9% results in unconsciousness, and drop to 6% will result in death in a few minutes.  A drop as small as to 17% O2 can lead to measurable physical impairment.

It does not matter if this reduction in O2 concentration results from burning up the O2 or increasing other gases in the air (adding CO or CO2).  In perfect, O2 balanced combustion, you are both reducing O2 and adding CO2; in a O2 starved combustion, O2 is reduced and CO and CO2 are produced.  So, in either case, both the O2 reduction and COx production lower the overall O2 percentage.

IMO, what you really need to test is O2 level.  If you test for CO and you are combusting O2 balanced, you are producing CO2 and not much CO (if any, ideally).  Would a low CO reading on the gauge thus imply a "safe" breathable environment?  Not necessarily.  On the other hand, a dropping O2 level will indicate SOMETHING is displacing the O2 and making the air unsafe.  CO2 is "better" than CO, of course, but not really by all that much.  Again, from the IFSTA manual, a concentration of 10-12% of CO2 will cause death within a few minutes due to paralysis of the brain's respiratory center.  Increased levels of CO2 also cause increased respiration rates, which increases the inhalation of ANY toxic gas in the inhaled air.

Finally, I'd be happy to help design these experiments.  I have a BASIC Stamp and have written some programs for it and could share my experience with them as well.  It WOULD be interesting to test different heating techniques on different boats under different conditions.

[AdriftAtSea]

One thing that I've found works well in smaller spaces found on sailboats are the pressurized Aladdin-type kerosene lanterns.  They provide quite a bit of heat and light.  Also, because of the mantle setup, they are fairly low in CO emissions, relative to some other non-electric light/heat sources.   A friend of mine has used two of them as the primary heat sources on her Cape Dory 25 when she was living aboard for two years. 

The only real problem with them is that they produce a lot of light, so aren't good at night if you're trying to sleep. :D

[Joe Pyrat]

Captain Smollett, it's been a while since I did any microprocessor programming, but I'd be interested in working on this.  In fact, after looking at the site you linked to, I think it would be interesting to develop some kind kit or instruction set which sailors could use to build their own reasonably priced detector/monitor.

[Captain Smollett]

it would be interesting to develop some kind kit

If you really want to keep the cost down (less important for one-off since the programming time does not get recouped), we should look into a PIC or FPGA.  They are MUCH MUCH cheaper than BASIC Stamps - high initial cost in the PROM burner and engineering the code, but low cost to move en masse for volume).  Certainly, the BASIC Stamp would be the way to go for initial testing - get some numbers quick to see the lay of the land.  As I said, I have one around here somewhere - I'll see if I can find it

instruction set which sailors could use to build their own reasonably priced detector/monitor.

This would be nearly trivial with a BASIC Stamp, once we work out the details.  One could publish the code for download along with the instructions on how to connect the OTC detector to the unit.

Of course, if you think about it, why limit to just CO detector?  The microcontrollers have multiple inputs, so one could conceivably tie into bilge pump circuits, battery charging circuits, etc and look at a 'history' of how much your pump has run, say while you are gone from the boat.

The experiment I've been contemplating is getting/building some 6 DOF accelerometers and measuring the motion of the boat in various seas.  I have this half-baked threory that 'motion comfort' ratios neglect certain hull form parameters and would like to test it.  Of course, something like this gives me a 'business excuse' to go sailing, which is the real underlying purpose...

:)

[Frank]

Try this link. Some one posted it on the Montgomery site...looks very well made and super compact  http://www.scanmarineusa.com/Wallas_stove_800.pdf     PS...sit down and put on a seat belt when getting a price...but it sure is a nice tidy unit !

[Anton]

Appreciate the seatbelt advisory cause I hate messing around with Adobe or their pdf format when I don't have to.

[Bubba the Pirate]

I have been considering this despite the cost.  I am still enamored with the idea of only needing one fuel on board.  The heater option is intriguing as well as, once I get there, the boat will be home.   

TrT

[CapnK]

Frank -

I didn't see a price, but - do you know if that is the same stove that they use on the C-dory line of small stinkpot cabin cruisers? Looks and sounds like it!

[Frank]

Yep...like C-dory's..it is close to $1500 with the heater function and a few options.OUCH...but nice and very good reviews...note..I never did 'shop it' on line.Price info was a poster on another site so could be lower if shopped.