Pellet reviewing

Not a bad idea. Nice looking site. We can always use additional resources as online resources for the pellet industry seem to be scarce. I am not sure what you will be basing your findings on though. Since each stove burns differently( due to venting configuration, user settings, etc) not everyone will have the same results as yourself.

But hey, you gotta start somewhere. The site has potential to be very useful.

GSCREELY,

Great idea and a nice looking site.

With many vendors currently purchasing pellets where ever they can obtain them, your site will be a very useful consumer research tool.

Hope it continues to expand and remain up to date.

Have added the site to my favorites.

Thanks!

if you want ill provide some reviews, i have burnt 3 kinds over the years

gscreely

You are right one pellet can work well in one stove but not and other. It is certainly not a totally conclusive site, but is a starting point. Some pellet are just total junk not matter what stove you have, and other are so good they world well in all most all applications. I also hope for comments to add a broader perspective on a certain pellet.
I think my two main challenges are
1. pellets work differently in different stoves
2. Pellets can vary dramatically from batch to batch

Click to expand...

Thats great! I think you will get a ton of feedback on pellets form everyone. I have my own reviews on a few brands so just let us know how to get the feedback to you!

i`m all for it.

gscreely said:

I welcome feedback, and comments on the blog. Thanks ! Gary

Click to expand...

Nice looking site so far. My thought was maybe you can incorporate a rating scale for each different pellet that users can go in and add their experience. User could indicate what brand stove, then a 1----> 10 scale on Fines, ash, heat output, and would you buy these again (y/n).

Just my 2 cents.

I think the site is a great idea. If I may... as the above has said, I think it will only truly succeed if it's user driven.

Having it as a blog gives the impression that it's only 1 person's opinion. Opening it up to user submissions would allow the site to take a life of it's own (I know I'd post with each ton).

Also, the more feedback from users, the less we'd need to be concerned about your top 2 challenges. If 20 people have a positive experience with a brand, and 1 has a negative, it would be safe to say that the brand is reliable.

As for batch variants, you could ask users to submit where and when they purchased the pellets. If 10 people from southern Maine purchased brand X during May-August and got lots of fines... then I'd stay away from that brand if I lived in southern Maine.

Like I said, I think the site is a great idea and the possibilities are endless! It really has the potential to be a GREAT resource

Nice concept. However if you set some basic test standards for the reviews your site can have some meaningful impact.

http://woodpelletsguide.com/tag/quality/ The simple handful of pellets in a glass of water test is quite effective.

I will never purchase a ton of pellets again without performing this simple test.

The pictures I have posted show two types of pellet that I placed in water.

One type Greene Team completely dissolved within three minutes and when the moisture was squeezed out with the aid of a paper towel. The consistency was comparable to fine corn meal.

The Greene Team bag has the PFI label and it appears they have complied.

These burn very well in my Quad Santa Fe producing no clinkers or any cleaning issues.

The other type is called Future Fuel II. These pellets did not completely dissolve even after twenty minutes in water. Whole pellets, large chunks and bits of multicolored wood and what I suspect is corn are among the mix.

Given the fact that after twenty minutes some pellets did not even dissolve means that there is some sort of additive within them. I would speculate that the stuff was really intended to be animal bedding
and got repackaged as fuel. Big profit there

These did not burn very well at all. I burned three and a half bags. The last half bag I burned produced a clinker the size of my fist. Created a pellet bridge in the drop shoot and there was a piece pf paper jammed in my auger at the top of the drop shoot. (the paper was at tag that said "whole corn 50 pounds). One of the bags also had a piece of plastic that I pulled out of the auger.

The stove was setup at that point for a hopper fire.

I returned these pellets to Home Depot and exchanged them for Penningtons Natures Heat brand. The manager knocked the price down to 256. a ton.

He then put my returned pellets back on the floor to sell. Even though I showed him all the pictures, clinkers and the results of my water tests. I did tell him that these were not premium pellets. Even thought the bag has a small line that "meets or exceeds premium fuel standards". He said some stoves will be able to burn them. He might be right. I am thinking industrial stoves or automatic burner with self cleaning function. They still should not be sold as premium.

Before I unloaded the replacement ton from the truck I did the water test on the penningtons. They dissolved with two minutes and were of a little courser texture and lighter in color than the greene team.

They are burning just fine.

So back to the concept of reviewing pellets.

Without some basic testing most of what people post about pellets is quite meaningless.

After doing the water test on three types of pellets.

I have hopefully related a pretty good idea why the future fuel makes clinkers and the other brands do not.

So what is a good review? Perhaps a review that uses the 5ws of reporting. Who, what, when, where, and why.

If I had water tested the first ton those pellets never would have made it off the truck.

Good luck with your blog.

Additional Reading:

http://www.biomassmagazine.com/article.jsp?article_id=1734

This is good one has some advanced simple tests http://www.sei.ie/Grants/GreenerHomes/Wood_Pellet_Fuel_Information/