Heating. Propane vs Electric vs Wood Pellet

[ovrszd]

When I was young, foolish and cutting back hedgerows and selling firewood this is how Maple worked.

Green, green, green, rotten.

I was gonna say that. Green it won't burn. Dried burns like paper with little heat.

 

[5030]

Curiously, how does that outdoor furnace work out? I've heard they consume quite a lot of wood compared to a woodstove, and take quite a while to heat up. Of course, you don't have to worry about ashes, dust, etc. inside the house.



A bit too hot for my taste. Usually keep my house 65-68.

When you get to be my age, 70 is cold......lol

 

[goeduck]

When I was young, foolish and cutting back hedgerows and selling firewood this is how Maple worked.

Green, green, green, rotten.

The maple we have out here is not too bad, but I have noticed it does get punk after a few years. The bark does not come off which is part of the problem. If split, it can dry out okay. Different maple than you have though.

 

[buckeyefarmer]

Sugar maple is great firewood. Soft maple isn’t.

 

[shooterdon]

We burn maple here. Our experience is not as bad as some of you report. Not sure if we just do not know any better (ignorance is bliss?), or our maple (northern MI) is better. The 12 cords of maple will be burned in the first 1-2 years. The other 20 cords delivered this past fall are mostly oak and will not be seasoned enough for next year anyway...the maple seemed like a good fit for my needs at the price.

 

[fruitcakesa]

Agreed about soft maple being poor firewood but I have acres of the stuff so it makes up a good percentage of my supply.
I try and use it during the shoulder seasons and save the oak, beech and hard maple for winter but the soft maple does burn and gets used along with the better stuff.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

SR

 

[ovrszd]

Thanks for the chart Rob. Good stuff.

I have access to Hickory, White Oak, Red Oak and White Ash.

 

[CobyRupert]

SR

Interesting.
Doing a quick sample (Qty:4), it seems a lot of these wood types deliver 6400 BTU/lb.

This agrees with what I've always heard: That wood, no matter the type, has the same BTU's.......per pound (or ton, etc...).
It's just that it takes more pieces of some wood to equal that ton.
(...and drying to an equal moisture content will be different too, etc... )

...so you still have to lift, split and carry the same ton of wood to get the same BTU's. But with "lesser" "junk" wood, it's just more pieces, more splitting, more cords, more volume, etc....
but technically: it's the same "work".

....anyone believe this? ...and shouldn't wood be sold by the ton instead of by volume? (...but who has scales? ...and you'd need a moisture meter to factor/de-rate the load to some accepted standard...yeah...that might get complicated...but would be "truer" measure of BTU's purchased)

That being said: I like to burn the hardwood hickory, oaks, maples, beech, etc...

 

[ovrszd]

With lesser wood there's more work (physical labor).