Ash trade off for higher btu and lower cost... thoughts?

[PinetreePellets]

Hey all.

So as we all know Ash is a bad word in the pellet world. But what if you were able to trade off higher btu and lower cost but in return have higher ash content, say 2-5% ash.

at $175/ton @ 9,500btu pellets, oil would have to be at $1.27gal to break even with pellets.

Just looking for thoughts, would you go with a lower priced higher btu pellet that had a higher ash content?

 

[Tonyray]

Hey all.

So as we all know Ash is a bad word in the pellet world. But what if you were able to trade off higher btu and lower cost but in return have higher ash content, say 2-5% ash.

at $175/ton @ 9,500btu pellets, oil would have to be at $1.27gal to break even with pellets.

Just looking for thoughts, would you go with a lower priced higher btu pellet that had a higher ash content?

Probably not since I am.running a Harman 61K BTU Beast which puts out a ton of heat no matter what pellets I burn.
after 3 yrs of dealing with lot of Hardwood ash I'm looking forward next year to certain low ash Softwoods...

 

[Former Farmer]

2-5% ash

Not at that amount of ash. A ton of pellets would equal 40 to 200 pounds of ash!

 

[Deezl Smoke]

Hey all.

So as we all know Ash is a bad word in the pellet world. But what if you were able to trade off higher btu and lower cost but in return have higher ash content, say 2-5% ash.

at $175/ton @ 9,500btu pellets, oil would have to be at $1.27gal to break even with pellets.

Just looking for thoughts, would you go with a lower priced higher btu pellet that had a higher ash content?

I might if it were actually true that I get more btu at a lower cost. I've got my stove cleaning to less than 5 minutes anyway, and the exhaust piping is so short, it has no ash build up issues.

But I would'nt be interested if the low cost pellet were to have a higher creosote content from chemical additives.

 

[PinetreePellets]

Not at that amount of ash. A ton of pellets would equal 40 to 200 pounds of ash!

200lbs of ash would equate to 10% ash content in a ton. I just used 2-5% ash as an example. Say it was 2% (40lbs per ton, just as an example) that would be 1.5% higher ash than say a decent pellet that has a btu of 8,300, but the btu would be higher at (example) 9,500btu a 12% increase in heat.

So in this example you get 12% increase in heat for say $175/ton and just 1.5% increase in ash. Even at 5%, or 100lbs of ash, your ash would be 4.5% higher than a .50% pellet, or 90lbs more, remember you still have 10lbs of ash with .50% pellets per ton as a baseline. At 9,500 btu you are still 7.5% higher and paying the equivalent to $1.29gal of #2 oil at $175 ton.

Just trying to get different opinions, as there is a big push to lower prices on pellets.

 

[PinetreePellets]

I might if it were actually true that I get more btu at a lower cost. I've got my stove cleaning to less than 5 minutes anyway, and the exhaust piping is so short, it has no ash build up issues.

But I wouldn't be interested if the low cost pellet were to have a higher creosote content from chemical additives.

Just different blends of biomass, no chemical additives or higher creosote. Just a big push for lower prices for "premium" wood pellets, well they are premium for a reason, hence the pricing associated with them. Its like going to a steakhouse for a burger compared to McDs, you still get a burgers at both but the steakhouse will probably be more cause it could be considered a premium burger.

Again just trying to get a read on the "premium" tag placed on the bag and its association to ash content. Thanks for the input Deez.

 

[Former Farmer]

200lbs of ash would equate to 10% ash content in a ton.

Sorry - typo.

If you clean every 40# bag, you would have @ 2% ash, 0.8# of ash as compared to @ 0.5% ash, 0.2# of ash. With the extra build up of ash on the heat tubes or heat exchanger, what would your losses in efficiency be? Another couple of percent?

 

[PinetreePellets]

With the extra build up of ash on the heat tubes or heat exchanger, what would your losses in efficiency be? Another couple of percent?

That's a very good question. I am just working on theory here. I have a Quad AE so ash is not a huge issue for me. But your question is valid.

 

[Deezl Smoke]

Sorry - typo.

If you clean every 40# bag, you would have @ 2% ash, 0.8# of ash as compared to @ 0.5% ash, 0.2# of ash. With the extra build up of ash on the heat tubes or heat exchanger, what would your losses in efficiency be? Another couple of percent?

IMO, it's not really linear math. It would also depend on your cleaning perimeters. If you clean on a input poundage vs. say calendar schedule, Then the efficiency losses would be different IMO.

 

[Ranger72]

Not a chance in hell. I'm done with anything labeled over .5% ash.

 

[TimfromMA]

No, especially with how cheap oil is right now.

 

[rich2500]

I would buy a ton to have on hand for the bitter cold nights ( single digits or colder ) other than that I would not burn them

 

[Hot Foot]

For myself, it would depend on pricing. I'm always looking for max btu output at the lowest price. Ash content is usually relative for the pellets I've purchased at the BBS. I just scrape out the burnpot and vacuum every other day. I've burned more expensive pellets. Less ash is nice but for me it's always been about the btu output.

 

[bogieb]

I already burn what some consider fairly high ash stuff on a regular basis. Does it irritate me? Sure. but does my wallet appreciate it? Yes it does.

Having two Harman's, I know I could still go at least a couple weeks between cleanings, so ashiness doesn't bother me. I think also part of it would be offset by the higher BTU - the stoves wouldn't need to run as much, or at as high of a level (although mine are not really taxed at most times). If the ash is light, so will shove off the burnpot lip, that would be great. Some brands I have used have such heavy ash it just backs into the pot and dang near smothers the flame after only 12 hours.

At $175, and higher BTU, I would seriously consider that sort of product. Of course, I would have to burn a few bags before commuting myself to tonnage

 

[Bioburner]

You all need to try and burn corn without a agitator. The kernels don't fall apart like pellets after burning but keeps it form and fill the ash bin fast but the weight is not there. Corn at under $120/T you bet I am going to screw as much as needed into the fire.
Gas prices went up 60 cents here over the last 2 weeks, don't know what fuel oil has done.

 

[bogieb]

You all need to try and burn corn without a agitator. The kernels don't fall apart like pellets after burning but keeps it form and fill the ash bin fast but the weight is not there. Corn at under $120/T you bet I am going to screw as much as needed into the fire.
Gas prices went up 60 cents here over the last 2 weeks, don't know what fuel oil has done.

This isn't corn country, so finding it is an issue (closest is at least 55 miles from my place). then the price - well, let's just say that I am good with pellets thank you.

Fuel corn, bulk at $315/ton

another place only has 2014 pricing on their website, when it was $245/ton-bulk ($345/ton if bought in 50 lb bags)

 

[Bioburner]

I was more commenting on the original thread of ash versus price. I have to empty the bin four time a month instead of once. I can do that for $60 or so Wouldn't you? Kind of like pumping your own gas for a savings of 30 cents a gallon. Probably don't matter on a couple gallon tank of a bike but a guzzling SUV can be enough to buy a cheap breakfast.

 

[PinetreePellets]

First off I always appreciate your input on these topics, you are the end consumer and your input is valuable.

We will be providing 100% clean fir/spruce softwood pellets once we are up and running, these will be "premium" pellets. But crude rose 9% last week so #2 oil pricing is not my point for the post. I guess I was looking to see how open people are to a lower cost biomass.

I see a trend that as long as heating oil is low, $250/ton for premium pellets is considered to high, but last few years $250/ton was the average price, and seemed to be ok for most, now seems like most won't touch it at this price. So from the few posts, i gather that lower cost, higher btu with higher ash is not something people seem to have any interest in.

I am always looking and playing with other sources, local here in Maine, to help reduce the cost to the end user, but only if there is a market for it.

 

[PinetreePellets]

No, especially with how cheap oil is right now.

I like the last line of your tag

 

[Bioburner]

No, especially with how cheap oil is right now

WAS, up another 2% this AM

 

[TimfromMA]

Alot of places near me are selling oil in the $1.40's

 

[PinetreePellets]

WAS, up another 2% this AM

WTI is trading like crazy this morning, since thursday been a frenzy. Did more volume Thurs and Friday then all of Oct and Nov of last year. The market sees the bottom and trying to get in on the frenzy.

 

[TimfromMA]

I like the last line of your tag

Edited.

 

[Bioburner]

Ash is not a bad word but can be almost choking on some stoves. A older Whit can run for a day without issue on a lower ash pellet but almost dead on some higher ash pellets after 8 hours. Ecoteck is the same way and may not even be able to relight after half bag of high ash stuff and several posts of the Wiseway pretty much a low ash unit period.

 

[Bioburner]

Edited.

Like the old song by Johnny Cash, bad news travels like wild fire