Heating. Propane vs Electric vs Wood Pellet

[CobyRupert]

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

Well......yes, no, maybe....what's more work? Lifting one 10lb piece of wood, or 2-5lb pieces of wood separately?

Isaac Newton might say it's the same...but he never was the same after getting hit on the head with that apple.
...then this discussion could get into efficiency, or which method are you more likely to strain your muscles, versus wear out your joints, etc....

 

[ovrszd]

Well......yes, no, maybe....what's more work? Lifting one 10lb piece of wood, or 2-5lb pieces of wood separately?

Isaac Newton might say it's the same...but he never was the same after getting hit on the head with that apple.
...then this discussion could get into efficiency, or which method are you more likely to strain your muscles, versus wear out your joints, etc....

I go for piece count. Less pieces = less work.

 

[chas0218]

Reading all this makes me happy I have fuel oil.

 

[ovrszd]

Reading all this makes me happy I have fuel oil.

I split a load of wood for my Sons yesterday. Enjoyed it for the first 2/3 of the load. Was totally out of the mood by the end.

Went back to my cozy floor heated shop and drank a couple beers to celebrate my divorce from wood heat!!!

 

[CobyRupert]

I go for piece count. Less pieces = less work.

I'm with you!
...it's why I sometimes climb the stairs two steps at a time....it's less "work"!

 

[shooterdon]

When I calculated the savings I used 20 million BTU's per cord. The stuff I just bought is a mix of soft and hard maple. According the chart soft maple will be 18.7 and hard maple 24. So I should be close with 20. (I assume "recoverable" factors in the efficiency of the stove/insert. That equates to 13 for soft and 16.8 in the chart above. My insert is rated at 65% but I used 60% {12 MBTU/cord} to be conservative. I checked a number of species in the chart and recoverable was 70% of raw BTU)

My mix is 2:1 soft to hard maple, so my average raw MBTU works out to 20.5 (recoverable 12.3). Thanks SB!!! Your chart confirms my original estimates.

For "giggles" I calculated my $50/cord maple mix has the equivalent value of Red Oak (24 MBTU) at $58.55 per cord. (17% less efficient) So I am satisfied I made a good buy on the "crap" maple.

 

[shooterdon]

Just want to add. I am a numbers guy, I am cheap and I am old. There is no better value in my neck of the woods than wood heat.

I can purchase logs, invest in IBC totes to store the splits, a pallet jack to move the totes in the garage.,rent a wood processor and be ahead. My savings over four years works out to $3000 and that assumes the cost of propane stays at $1.40/gal....highly unlikely. If propane goes to $2/gal, my savings jump to $6200.

I have been cutting and splitting wood for the last 7 years I have lived in the country, but I have decided to go with a rental processor. No more cutting wood, moving rounds, or splitting them manually. The tractor/grapple will feed logs to the processor, splits will get dumped into the bed of the pickup and taken to the IBC totes for stacking, and the tractor moves totes. My physical effort will be limited to stacking splits in IBC totes and carrying splits from the attached garage to the wood insert (up two steps). I can do that as I advance in age. Being 69 makes one think about what is practical and doable in the near future.

There is comfort in having a fixed cost for heat for the next four years and knowing the future cost of wood will never experience the wild fluctuations I have seen with other fuels. (Propane was $4/gal a few years ago)

It is not for everyone, but it works for me. Depending on your circumstances, it is possible to reduce the physical effort in wood heat. If you are planning for the future, placing a wood burner at a spot that requires minimal distance from where wood is stored and the least amount of vertical travel is paramount. If I had built my house, I would have done things differently but I am lucky that the layout is amenable to using wood. If I had to carry wood up or down a flight of stairs, or 25 yards from a shed, it would be unacceptable.

 

[ovrszd]

I am a numbers guy too. I include every number. Including labor cost.

Heat systems have improved dramatically over the past ten years. As they do it becomes harder to justify burning wood financially.

I love wood heat. I am physically able to cut all the wood I need. I have more timber than I could ever burn.

It's simply not practical for me to burn wood anymore. It doesn't work for me.

 

[shooterdon]

ovrszd,

The small processor I am renting will process 1.25 cords per hour. $450 for 16 hours so it will produce 20 cords in two days for $22.50 a cord. We can stack about one cord an hour in the totes, but it is not "hard" work. I suppose I could hire that work out for about $15/hr (per cord) if I got crippled up. I am lazy, but not too lazy to run the tractor. Fortunately, tractor work is still fun for me, but understand others may feel differently.

I sure wish you would share your numbers. It would be educational to learn how you can heat for less cost. Especially with your wood essentially free! I might be ignorant, but I hope I am not stupid. Always eager to learn a better way.

 

[ovrszd]

ovrszd,

The small processor I am renting will process 1.25 cords per hour. $450 for 16 hours so it will produce 20 cords in two days for $22.50 a cord. We can stack about one cord an hour in the totes, but it is not "hard" work. I suppose I could hire that work out for about $15/hr (per cord) if I got crippled up. I am lazy, but not too lazy to run the tractor. Fortunately, tractor work is still fun for me, but understand others may feel differently.

I sure wish you would share your numbers. It would be educational to learn how you can heat for less cost. Especially with your wood essentially free! I might be ignorant, but I hope I am not stupid. Always eager to learn a better way.

First, there's no guarantee that the processor will process 1.25 cords per hour. It's just a machine. It's totally dependent on all circumstances surrounding the operation. So you cannot quote expected production. Too many variables to do that.

By your information if the processor does meet your expectations you can't keep up stacking the wood. So, there's the first hinderance to the processor's production.

You are indicating that all you have to do is run the tractor to meet these production goals? Who's doing the stacking?

I have never said I can heat for less cost. I have always said wood heat is not efficient.

Let's say you are my neighbor. Let's say I stop by and talk to you about processing wood for me. Let's say I ask you what you would charge me to process a cord of wood. Standing tree to split pile. What would be your response?

That figure has to be added into the equation of what it costs me to burn wood. If that's included, my heating costs will be very, very competitive to burning wood.

The wood burners always say "but I enjoy doing it and it's good exercise". Agreed. I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about how much you would charge me to process a cord of wood?

That cost figure is never, ever included in the wood burner's cost figures.

I'm not condemning burning wood. I did it for 40 years. I'm simply trying to put it all into perspective.....