SteamAway or RO

[TWhite]

Who has been using a SteamAway, I've heard that it is harder to make lighter syrup when using? Have you been happy with it? Does RO make more sense to increase capacity?
Planning for next year.

[Russell Lampron]

A steamaway increases your evap rate by about 75% while an RO machine increases it about 400%. I have heard but have no proof that a steamaway will make darker syrup on some evaporators and not on others depending on the size of the evaporator. I have an RO machine and love it. You will have to add alot of taps to make either one worth purchasing as 150 taps on a 2x6 isn't very many.

Russ

[sweetwoodmaple]

Yes, I've heard you want to avoid the smaller steamaways. Plus, not worth the extra cost vs. the price on the smaller units as well. I.E. for a 2 x 4 steamaway, you only gain 20 GPH for spending $2500. Yikes.

The only thing I have aginst and R.O. is syrup that is extra light (looks like white grape juice). I had some of the PA Farm Show prize winning light amber syrup on pancakes at our last maple meeting that was made via an R.O. early in the season. I'm sure this stuff is great for candy and cream, but not much good for eating. Guess you can always blend with the dark stuff, if you ever get any. :wink:

Seriously, can't argue with the $$ per GPH saved on an R.O. as long as you have a nice cozy room to keep it and have the help to run it as well.

[TWhite]

The 150 taps was not a problem on 2X6 this year. I expect we will be adding 500-700 in the woods above the sugarhouse before next spring.

[mapleman3]

I admit the #'s look awesome for using an RO especially for not having to increase in evap size... But somehow I am still too stuborn to give up my stand on RO Syrup being as tasty as UN-RO syrup... if someone can prove to me(bring me taste test?) of their syrup.. I may think about it for the future! but I would have to taste quite a few samples...

[Mike]

Jim What size samples are we talking....Gals........ :lol: :lol: :lol: ....

[WF MASON]

Anyone here use a filter press ??
'Oh, I think I can taste the filter aid','it changes the make up of the syrup.' I've heard that argument from people who don't use them two many times , same thing with the RO argument, Its crap. I've never met anyone who has ever used an RO say ' what a waste of money,give me my preheater back and take away six hours hours of sleep each boil.'
'My syrup was too light', wow, some people just have a hard life.

[sweetwoodmaple]

Nope, won't use a press cause I can taste the filter aid. :lol: :lol:

I think Jim just wants some more syrup to come his way.

Like everything, you trade $$ for labor savings. RO's are at the top of the list as far as $$ per hour of labor savings, that's for sure. But, it's still another machine to run and maintain.

I actually have a very good setup for using an RO since my house is only 200' from my sugarhouse. My basement could easily house it and it would be warm all the time. Might even teach the wife to run it during the day. :idea: :wink:

[mapleman3]

Send it all to.......PO BOX...... :wink:

It probably is crap... just wondering why so many Non-RO Guys say diferently?(probably cuz we don't know better)... I do want to come to someones sugarhouse that uses RO and see for myself and taste VS Mine.... I would love to increase in production through the years but cant see how I could boil more, and I really don't relish the idea of a bigger evap ... BUT if I got a deal on one(RO or bigger Evap)I may consider it one way or the other

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Doubt you could taste any difference between 6 to 8 percent sap, but 10+, I don't buy it and the people that run it that high are usually the big guys who don't care, just want the almighty $$$$$.

[Mike]

Hey Jim, Instead of making a gal an HR with a RO you could make 6,8 ???? an HR.......Less time boiling......less oil....I'm thinking about one....Theres a guy here at work who has a RO....3x12 no preheater hood....He makes 13-15 gals an HR............Looks like syrup making has gone to a higher level......No matter what ya still have to boil... 8) ....

[mapleman3]

Mike, I think it's the old ways Vs the new ways.. and the old ways are tough to give up... I bet guys were up in arms when some started using Oil 8O I'm not as opposed to it as much as I used to be... with so many using them and guys in our assotiation in Mass that swear by them.. I have to open my eyes up and listen and learn.... bottom line is if it still tastes as good and you can make more with less time and fuel.... it's a no brainer except for the cost and maint. My SH is close to the house and barn it would be easy to get a room setup.

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Might be a no brainer, but for someone like Jim or myself, it would take 15 to 20 years to pay for it in what it would save in oil. By the time you were getting close to getting it paid for, it would be time to sink $ 1000 or $ 1500 or more in a new membrane. The biggest factor would be your time and what it is worth. :?

[gearpump]

I had people try the taste test with this years RO syrup, and last years non-RO syrup, and this years won every time. As far as the cost of an RO I figured it saved me about 90 hours of boiling time. That 270 gallons of fuel oil. At a cost of $2.49 for a gallon of oil thats a savings of $670. If you factor in your labor time,(which you need to do to run a buisness!)you get $900 at $10 an hour. A grand total of $1500 savings a year. Less then 5 years to pay off the investment I made.

Marty

[John Burton]

most producers large enough to purchase an r.o. are more than likley writing the cost off on taxes... or should be so when membrain replace ment becomes an issue its not that big of deal. a old guy once told me if you tur the dollars fast enough the taxes fly right off. second i am sure they had the tase debate whe the first continuing process evaporators were made.I can't taste better than my batch syrup made in this old cast kettle,I mean look at it its so much lighter . As for me I am not able to afford an r.o. at this point but I can see there value.TThe way i see it the genleman sugarmaker supportts the big 4 anyhow. the smaller you are the more you pay for equipment ... and to make a smaller ammont of syrup percentage wise . Id rather buy a used evaporator for two grand in exellent shape and take the extra two grand i saved and put it intoan ro almost half way there to that small one. i know im rambling here, its amazing when some want to justify sugaring its a buisness, when things cost too much its only a hobby.problem with most people is they arent controlling there growth all they can see is how much they can make in $$$ for me weve been in buisness for 36 years now i use sugaring to get away from that. I 've always said when my hobbies become jobs its time for new hobbies.

[Russell Lampron]

It seems that the only people that say RO syrup doesn't taste good are the people without RO machines. I have made some of the best tasting syrup that I ever have the last 2 seasons with an RO. I would like to get together with some of you guys to do a taste test.

As far as making light syrup goes I haven't made any more with the RO than I did before I had it. That was one of my fears when I bought it because most of my customers like dark syrup. I used to have small draw offs before the RO and thought that would continue but more frequently. It now takes just as long between draw offs but I get alot more syrup per draw off, enough so that I can float the hydrometer in the draw off pail to check density.

The addition of the RO helps me get larger tax refunds. The shorter boiling periods allows me to get more sleep and it gives more time for other things that need to get done. The savings in the amount of wood burned means fewer hours needed to harvest more wood.

The RO is easy to operate, change the pre filter, start it, let it stabilize and then readjust the pressures. It pumps the sap through while I am boiling and shuts off automaticly when the sap tank is empty. Clean up is easy too, just start the wash cycle and the machine shuts off when it is done.

I work on Volvos for a living so I am used to working with the latest technology. Adding the latest technology to my maple business has made it alot more fun.

Russ

[Russell Lampron]

Just read over this thread again and thought I would add something else. Lets take Brandons operation as an example, his numbers are easy to work with. He arrives at his sugarhouse at 7 am on saturday with 1000 gallons of sap to boil in. His evaporator does 50gph so if he boils until 5 pm he will have 500 gallons left to boil on sunday. A repeat of saturday will get it all done somewhere around 5 pm.

If he had an RO machine like the 300gph model that the Maple Guys have for $8800 he could show up at his sugarhouse at 7 am on saturday, start the RO machine, light the evaporator and be done boiling around 12 pm. That would leave him the rest of saturday for canning and cleaning and whatever. He would then have sunday to spend time with the family and for maintaining his tubing or whatever he wants to do. He will still make just as much great tasting syrup just alot faster and with much less fuel.

It is always nice to have a helper around but all of this can be done by one person.

Russ

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Russ,

I totally agree with you and no arguments here. People down here wouldn't definitely know the difference in taste if there was any and I don't think there is. If you are doubling RO'ing the sap, then I think there would have to be a difference. It may come to that for me too in the future especially if something would happen to my help. Either that or a larger evap. I think you and Marty made great choices. :D :D :D

I love technology and anything that will make my job easier, I won't balk it. When referring to taste, I was referring to running it up to 13 to 15 percent and then boiling it. I can't believe there wouldn't be some difference. :?

With babying a membrane, how many years do you think you can get 100% performance out of it??

[Russell Lampron]

Brandon,

I'm not sure how many years I will get out of my membrane. It is still producing like a new one now after 2 seasons of use and I was told to expect a large drop off after the first year with smaller decreases after that. It is a filter and will some day get clogged to the point that it will need to be replaced but I can write that off on my taxes.

Russ

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Russ,

I have an accounting degree and understand the tax thing. I am still curious to see how long these things last.

Is anyone sending theirs to Lapierre to have the cleaning done after season??

[Fred Henderson]

I do not own either but if I had my choice it would be an RO.

[John Burton]

I imagine you could ask bruce bascom hoy many years of life you could expect to get with maintence costs etc... , as he has probably used one as long as anyone else has.Remember though when you are talking about the savings this machine is going to gain for you in labor you have to factor in yearly operating costs ie repair. into the equasion or you are just using fuzzy math

[Sugarmaker]

OK you guys are the R.O experts.
If I was to consider a R.O. here is where I am at. The question would be what size machine for our small operation.
Would be nice to boil less hours and use less wood!
Currently at 400 buckets. IF we ever did expand it would not be more than 1000 taps. And would probably be some tubing without vacuum. Consider the 400 taps for now.
For 2006 we gathered 5300 gallons of sap and boiled 13 or 14 times. made about 125-130 gallons of syrup.
Biggest run was 826 gallons of sap, smallest was 100 gal (dumping ice).
Our old King evaporator boils at about 90-100 gallons per hour with hoods and preheater.
I still work full time so we usually get started in the early afternoon on a good run day. We try to boil it all the same day unless the run is Hugh.

So would I need a R.O. that did 100 to 200 + GPH?

Yes, I could write this off on the taxes also.

Chris

[Russell Lampron]

Chris,

If you want to run your RO and boil at the same time you want one that will produce as much or more than your evaporation rate. Your evaporator does 100gph now multiply that by 4 and a 400gph machine would be the minimum size you would want. It is a good idea to get one a little bigger because they lose some of their efficiency as they age. 600gph machines are popular and you may be able to find a used one at a good price, just be aware that you may need to replace the membrane before you can use it.

Russ

[Russell Lampron]

John,

The operating cost of an RO is relatively inexpensive with the only cost other than electricity being for pre filter cartridges and soap to clean the membrane. Membranes last 15 years or longer and with proper draining and storeage you shouldn't have any problems with the pumps.

Russ

[Sugarmaker]

Russ,
Thanks, I will look at the 600 gph machines.
Chris

[mountainvan]

chris, I've processed 20,000 gals sap with my 250/hr ro, actually does 300-350. My rig does 90/hr when boiling hot, I slow down with the concentrate. electricity cost is about $120 so far and filters were $$125. I would have boiled for 222.22222 hrs, or 9.259 days, or 1.322 weeks without the ro. yep, ro's the way to go.

[sapman]

Mountainvan,

Do you know what % you're concentrating to? I thought a 250gph RO would be the right size for me, too. But if you really want to multiply your evap. rate by 4, then I should be looking at a 500gph model. Considering 4X evap. rate, what % would that be concentrating to? I assume with a 250 I'd only be concentrating to about 5 or 6% to keep up with the evaporator.

Tim

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Russ,

I could go with a 3x12 evap like Brookledge and get close to the same results as if I had an RO. Guess it is whatever works best for each individual. One thing about a complete stainless evap, there are no membranes to buy and very little maintenance, so it is a matter of preference. :D

[sweetwoodmaple]

What do you do with a small 100 gallon run at the beginning of the season on a 3 x 12? Guess you could only fill the front pan, but would be a waste of fuel.

To the Small Evaporator/RO's defense, it is easier to process small runs. Just leave the RO out of the loop until you get enough sap.

I ended up dumping about 50 gallons of sap at the beginning because it wasn't enough to fill my evaporator. Had the same issue at the end when runs were small.

Ended up buying a 2 x 4 flat pan propane rig from Matt to help with these small runs. Not realy cost effective, but I hate dumping sap.

[mountainvan]

tim, I usually go to 8% with 1200 gals sap = 186 gal concentrate, sap starting at 1.6% this year. went up to 10% when I had more sap and down to 6% this afternoon. 400 gal sap 1.6% to 100gal concentrate at 6%. you can change the concentrate % by pressure and flow with my ro and probably most others. I don't think about keeping up with my evaporator, I run my ro while I collect and the ro is done when I'm ready to boil.

[brookledge]

If you are using a small evaporator like a 2X6 and you want to expand to be able to boil more. I would say you are better off looking for a larger evaporator like a 3X8 or what ever would boil the GPH your looking for. Usually you can find decent used 3X8 for $2000-3000 whereas a RO $8000-10000.
There are definately reasons where RO is the way to go though.
For some when they want to expand there is no room for a larger evaporator and its easier to make a heated room to house it.
For the midsized and the large producer when the cost of evaporators start to get into 15,000 and up then I say put the money into a small evaporator and a large RO You could get a decent 3X8 for 2000-3000 and spend 10000-12000 on the RO and spend the same amount of money had you just bought a new 5X14.
That is why I say as long as you are able to sell yor current evaporator and only spend a 1000 or so more on a larger one that is the way to go.
Keith

[sapman]

I thought about trying to trade-up my whole outfit a couple years ago to a basic 3 or 4 X 12, then build up from there. But I think I'm glad I kept my 30"X8', and if expansion is in my future, go with the RO. I like the idea of having less "sweet" to sit in the pans between runs.

Van, which brand of RO do you have?

Tim

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Brian,

Maybe so, but throw some ice in it and keep it a week or two, especially in the early season. I don't like dumping sap either, but I am not going to buy a second rig to boil a little bit. :?

[sweetwoodmaple]

Yeah, I probably should have let it freeze instead of dumping.

Having the smaller rig makes the end of the season easier since I can finish the sweet there instead of trying to fire the evaporator.

Plus, Matt gave me a good deal for $250, so it wasn't that much extra investment.

Whatever works, I guess. :D

[brookledge]

I have been told that once you run the sap through an Ro it should be boiled asap. Those that have ROs can add to this. I believe that with the higher sugar content the bacteria will grow alot faster. I'm not sure if there is anyone who runs the sap through the RO and then keeps it to boil once a week. Does anyone do that?
Keith

[gearpump]

I was told a story of a guy that processed his sap all week thru an RO into a 1200 gallon tank so he could boil on the weekend, and by the weekend he was in the tank with hip waders and a snow shovel slinging the jelly like goop out of the tank!

Marty

[brookledge]

Guess that answers my question. So for any one who is looking for a way to save time by only boiling once or twice a week then I'd say go with a larger evaporator or a steam a way
Keith

[Russell Lampron]

It is true that you want to boil in your concentrated sap as soon as possible if you use an RO. The bacteria grows alot faster with all of that sugar to feed on. If you are only going to boil on weekends you would want to store your sap raw like you do now and run it thru the RO as you boil. With the RO you might even be able to boil during the week because it saves that much time. I boil all of mine the day it is collected and the latest finish time was around 9 pm. Some days I had over 500 gallons of sap, started boiling around 4:30 and was done by a few minutes after nine. After shut down and clean up was in bed by 10pm.

Russ