Converting heating boiler from oil to gas. Any experience?

[SwampYankee]

Back in 2000 we replaced our fullsize van-sized, asbestos-laden boiler with a Smith Cast Iron Boiler 28A which is closer in size to a large refridgerator laying on it's side (and more BTU's). It currently has an oil burner and we burn about 60 gals. of HHO a day in the winter supplying steam for heat.

Our fuel oil tanks are due for replacement (or removal) within the next couple of years. Our options are somewhat limited since we're in a historic district. Above ground on a containment pad would be the preferred choice but it would never fly so it would have to be another inground tank.

We got to thinking, since we have gas service already for the hot water heater, is it possible to replace the oil burner on the boiler with a gas burner? I can't think of any reason it couldn't. Doing so has a lot of advantages for us. 1) Takes the tank out of the equation all together, just have to pay to get the old one removed. 2) Easier to budget out the heating fuel expenses since it would be metered over a given period of time vs. whenever the oil company got around to delivering it (often to empty the no so clean stuff out of their own storage tank before refilling), sometimes twice a week. 3) Eliminates the possibilty of running out of fuel (which has happened during especially cold stretches. 4)The gas company offers full energy audits for their customers which might point us towards some significant energy savings across the board.

With the price of HHO and natural gas fluctuating all over the place, it's probably a wash over the long run. Even if it does cost more, the savings from not replacing the tank gives us a head start. The fuel cost is secondary anyway, we don't mind paying a bit more for a cleaner burning fuel that eliminates some of the headaches of HHO. And I won't even go into the politics of NG and HHO.

Anybody do it commercially or residentially? My brother placed a call to CNG to have a rep. come out but hasn't gotten an appointment yet.

[Mister Byrnzoil]

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

It currently has an oil burner and we burn about 60 gals. of HHO a day in the winter supplying steam for heat.

you burn $200 a day for 4-5 months?

[Mike D]

Check with the boiler manufacturer or company which installed the unit. My experience with any of the conversions has been a dismal experience at best. They tend to use different technologies considering the different heating properties of the fuels (oil heat is considered a "slow" expanding type of flame to heat a broad surface whereas NG is used to "spot heat" an area and conduction is used to spread the heat) and usually the firebox has to be remade.

This is old experience (40 years ago) so depending on the age of your boiler it may not be applicable.

I'd go for the conversion because you can easily convert it to propane with a simple orifice change down the road.

[SwampYankee]

Originally Posted by Mike D

Check with the boiler manufacturer or company which installed the unit. My experience with any of the conversions has been a dismal experience at best. They tend to use different technologies considering the different heating properties of the fuels (oil heat is considered a "slow" expanding type of flame to heat a broad surface whereas NG is used to "spot heat" an area and conduction is used to spread the heat) and usually the firebox has to be remade.

This is old experience (40 years ago) so depending on the age of your boiler it may not be applicable.

I'd go for the conversion because you can easily convert it to propane with a simple orifice change down the road.

Thanks Mike. At some point a CNG rep should be stopping by to let us know what's doable and what's not. I'd like to think a "newer" boiler would be capatible, or at least convertible, with multiple fuel burners but I don't know.

[SwampYankee]

Originally Posted by Mister Byrnzoil

you burn $200 a day for 4-5 months?

Yep, depending on the cost of fuel. I think our total bill last year was $34K, which includes the tapering in and out on either side of the winter months.

[raymr]

I take it this is for a large building. Has anyone done a heat loss calculation on the building to make sure your boiler is sized properly?

There are gas burners that basically replace the oil unit. They are called power gas burners, and operate on the same air tube principle. As long as your Smith boiler is certified to run with gas, it shouldn't be a problem at all. But if the boiler is oversized it becomes inefficient.

[SwampYankee]

Originally Posted by raymr

I take it this is for a large building. Has anyone done a heat loss calculation on the building to make sure your boiler is sized properly?

There are gas burners that basically replace the oil unit. They are called power gas burners, and operate on the same air tube principle. As long as your Smith boiler is certified to run with gas, it shouldn't be a problem at all. But if the boiler is oversized it becomes inefficient.

Roughly 40K sq.ft. of fairly inefficient (old woodframe single pane windows, wood overhead doors on the loading dock, no interior roof insulation-does have a layer of foam over the corrugated metal and under the rubber roof) warehouse. When we replaced the old boiler they did take everything into consideration (as far as we know) to determine the proper size.

I did manage to find the Smith website and they list the 28A as being Light Oil, Gas and Light Oil/Gas (uses one as backup?)capable. Would that make it a safe assumption that it might be as simple as a burner swap?

We're planning on addressing the inefficiencies we already know of (windows, doors and insulation) as well as the ones they discover during the energy audit. The windows on the south side of the building were replaced about 10 years ago with double pane vinyl, but that side isn't visible from the street. Street-side we might need to go with a storm window of some sort depending on what options the HD determines appropriate.

[raymr]

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

Roughly 40K sq.ft. of fairly inefficient (old woodframe single pane windows, wood overhead doors on the loading dock, no interior roof insulation-does have a layer of foam over the corrugated metal and under the rubber roof) warehouse. When we replaced the old boiler they did take everything into consideration (as far as we know) to determine the proper size.

I did manage to find the Smith website and they list the 28A as being Light Oil, Gas and Light Oil/Gas (uses one as backup?)capable. Would that make it a safe assumption that it might be as simple as a burner swap?

On residential systems, it is as simple as a burner swap, provided it is hooked up by a qualified technician. In fact some people keep both burners in case one fuel has a supply/price problem - then they just swap in the burner of choice. But then you would need to keep those oil tanks around.

Are you drawing outside air for burner combustion?

[SwampYankee]

Originally Posted by raymr

On residential systems, it is as simple as a burner swap, provided it is hooked up by a qualified technician. In fact some people keep both burners in case one fuel has a supply/price problem - then they just swap in the burner of choice. But then you would need to keep those oil tanks around.

Are you drawing outside air for burner combustion?

The price of each source is so up and down we'd probably just bite the bullet and go strictly gas so that we could remove the environmental liability issue of the tanks all together. We certainly wouldn't be tackling it ourselves, it'd be left to a tech.

And yes.

[pawoSD]

With costs that high to heat the place wouldn't it make sense to do some efficiency upgrades (windows....doors....more insulation) to the building??) !!

Now we all know why diesel is so expensive! Its all flowing into your tanks!

[dynalow]

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

The price of each source is so up and down we'd probably just bite the bullet and go strictly gas so that we could remove the environmental liability issue of the tanks all together. We certainly wouldn't be tackling it ourselves, it'd be left to a tech.

And yes.

My advice is to get the tank out of the ground pronto. Found this (old) article which may interest you in CT.
Is this your home or business we're talking about?
$200 a day to heat a house? Must be Windsor Castle, huh?

Removal of Underground Storage Tanks
By Daniel E. Kleinman of Levy & Droney P.C.

The scenario is becoming commonplace...

Sellers list their residence for sale. Buyers submit an offer conditioned upon the removal of a 25-year-old underground storage tank (UST) which is to be replaced with one or more new indoor tanks. Sellers have never had any problems with their UST. It will cost approximately $2,500.00 to remove and replace the UST. What is Seller's statutory, as opposed to contractual, obligation regarding the removal of the UST?

Three bodies of law regulate USTs: Federal, State and Municipal. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended in particular by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), establishes a federal regulatory program for USTs. Under the Act, an "underground storage tank" is defined as "any one or combination of tanks (including underground pipes connected thereto) which is used to contain an accumulation of regulated substances, and the volume of which [is]ten percent (10%) or more beneath the surface of the ground" Heating oil is defined as a "regulated substance" under the Act. However, USTs which are used to store heating oil to be consumed on the premises where stored are not included under the definition of a UST. Therefore, the typical residential closing involving a UST would fall outside the scope of Federal regulations.

While Connecticut environmental regulations deal with USTs, they only apply to a "facility which serves any commercial, industrial, institutional, public or other building, including but not limited to hotels and motels, boarding houses, hospitals, nursing homes and correctional institutions, but not including residential buildings." (See Section 22A-449(d)-1(a)(2)). However, Connecticut Regulations do apply to a UST in excess of 2,100 gallons where the structure is not used solely as a dwelling. Again, the typical residential closing involving a UST would fall outside the scope of the State regulations. Finally, some municipalities in Connecticut have stepped into the void and created their own ordinances dealing with USTs. The Town of Simsbury, for example, has enacted regulations (Chapter 139, Simsbury Code) controlling the modification, installation, maintenance and removal of USTs in connection with residential buildings of three units or less.

According to Simsbury Selectman Joel Mandell, a Levy & Droney Real Estate Partner, "The regulations have worked well. We've caused a lot of old, potentially problem tanks to be removed." Other towns are studying the need for similar regulations. However, according to Mark D. Vasington of the Connecticut Attorney Title Insurance Company, "such detailed local regulations are to date more the exception than the rule." He indicates that data compiled by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection shows that less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the local governments in the State have enacted specific ordinances governing the use and removal of USTs.

Even if no ordinance or regulation exists for the mandatory removal of a UST in your community, Sellers should be aware of specific permitting requirements which may exist in connection with the voluntary removal of their UST. For instance, the local fire marshal must be notified and be present when the tank is removed to check for possible contamination. If contamination is found, the owner will be required to remove and clean up the contamination. Homeowners should use a licensed contracting company to remove the UST. The company should provide a detailed fee quote in writing as to the nature and extent of the services to be rendered including any additional costs of potential cleanup. The company should also provide a written report regarding removal of the tank, whether any contamination was present, and disposition of the tank and contaminated soil.

At a minimum, Sellers should also be sure to make full disclosure of the existence of a UST as required by the Department of Consumer Protection in the Residential Property Condition Disclosure Report delivered to prospective Buyers. Should you have any questions, members of our real estate practice group will be happy to advise and assist you.

As a society, we have become much more environmentally sensitive over the years. It is likely, therefore, that the trend at all levels of government will be toward greater regulation of residential USTs in the future.

In summary, remember these important points:

Federal and state laws do not govern typical residential USTs no matter how large.


Local ordinances may apply. Check the Town code in which the property is located for references to USTs.


As stricter laws are enacted, the costs of removal will increase. It may be less expensive to consider voluntary removal of the UST now as it may turn out to be more costly in the future.


Replacement of an old UST with a new in-ground tank may not be in your long-term interests if laws governing USTs become more restrictive.


As a Seller, protect yourself in the Sales Agreement against excessive removal and cleanup costs by allowing Seller to terminate the contract if those costs exceed a predetermined amount.

© 1998 Levy & Droney P.C.