According to these BTU charts Douglas Fir contains more potential BTUs than Eastern Red or White Oak.
Ain't that interesting.
California Energy Commission BTU rating charts
Ain't that interesting.
California Energy Commission BTU rating charts
Douglas Fir more BTUs than Oak ?
- Thread starter Lumber-Jack
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
Yeah - they have it rated with hickory (bitternut) and honey locust. Ahhh..ahhh.ahhh..bullsheet.
Everywhere else has doug fir around 18 mbtu not the 26.5 in that list.
Edit: I am gonna make up my own list and publish it on the interweb and once and for all prove that white pine is the best firewood in the world. :lol:
Everywhere else has doug fir around 18 mbtu not the 26.5 in that list.
Edit: I am gonna make up my own list and publish it on the interweb and once and for all prove that white pine is the best firewood in the world. :lol:
Wood Duck
Minister of Fire
Highbeam
Minister of Fire
Hmmm... I burn lots of Doug Fir. It's pretty good all around wood but alder or bigleaf maple seems to have a bit more energy.
Those numbers in the chart seem a little optimistic to say the least. Sugar pine has as almost as many BTU as Birch?
Those numbers in the chart seem a little optimistic to say the least. Sugar pine has as almost as many BTU as Birch?
I agree, that number seems high relative to most lists.
"Resins" have a higher BTU content than wood. Resins are something like 17,000 BTU per pound, which makes resinous wood like doug fir come in at about 8,500 BTU per dry pound with the bark being a bit higher (more resins). Low resin species have about 7,000 BTU to the dry pound. But...our typical low resin species are usually more dense and give more pounds per dry cord.
"Resins" have a higher BTU content than wood. Resins are something like 17,000 BTU per pound, which makes resinous wood like doug fir come in at about 8,500 BTU per dry pound with the bark being a bit higher (more resins). Low resin species have about 7,000 BTU to the dry pound. But...our typical low resin species are usually more dense and give more pounds per dry cord.
I would have to imagine they got the figures from somewhere... Maybe not, but I can think of where if they did.
Species of softwood grown at very high elevation will grow much slower than t low elevation, and the rings will be much more compact. doug fir from colorado is not doug fir from sea level. I can't speak for just how much variation, and I still definitely don't see any fir rivaling oak, but I don't know for sure.
Species of softwood grown at very high elevation will grow much slower than t low elevation, and the rings will be much more compact. doug fir from colorado is not doug fir from sea level. I can't speak for just how much variation, and I still definitely don't see any fir rivaling oak, but I don't know for sure.
daveswoodhauler
Minister of Fire
Its all that medical maryjane they have out there in CA......my vote is for cottonwood for the highest BTU's :cheese:
Edit: Just read the link...some folks that put this together must be smokin some serious crack......pine more btu's than oak and apple? Things must be really bad out there...maybe they just want all the forest to be cut down ?
Edit: Just read the link...some folks that put this together must be smokin some serious crack......pine more btu's than oak and apple? Things must be really bad out there...maybe they just want all the forest to be cut down ?
raybonz
Minister of Fire
You will not find wood with more heating power than some of the California hardwoods from the central valley (most productive farming area in the world). I burn almond and olive. Olive has a heating value of 39 million btu's per cord. The wood I purchase is about $400-425 per cord but worth it. I use lodgepole pine for kindling and less intense fires. The combination of the two is about as good as it gets. Burn on!
Actually I had a closer look at those charts and realized that the Western woods BTU charts are figures taken from the California Energy Commission, but if you look at the Eastern charts it says "Compiled from various sources. Consistency between charts will vary due to different laboratory variables."
I guess the California Energy Commission has a method of determining BTUs from wood that must be more efficient than other methods.
I'm sure that Cottonwood in the East is the same as the Cottonwood in the West, but if you look at the BTU rating of Cottonwood on the Western woods chart it has one rating, and the Eastern woods chart has another, much lower, rating, which I'm sure it isn't.
They are just using two different method of rating the same wood.
I guess the California Energy Commission has a method of determining BTUs from wood that must be more efficient than other methods.
I'm sure that Cottonwood in the East is the same as the Cottonwood in the West, but if you look at the BTU rating of Cottonwood on the Western woods chart it has one rating, and the Eastern woods chart has another, much lower, rating, which I'm sure it isn't.
They are just using two different method of rating the same wood.
btuser
Minister of Fire
- Status
Similar threads
