Pellet "quality assurance"

  • 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
Not open for further replies.

SwineFlue

Minister of Fire
Nov 3, 2012
604
NE Pa
  • Like
Reactions: DexterDay
Good read, I liked there methods, the durability test is interesting.
 
more rules, more tests, more money passed onto consumers.
it is good to have some controls in place however the consumer will weed out the bad ones by not buying them anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lousyweather
Wouldn't that be the case anyway since compliance with the program is voluntary?
 
Wouldn't that be the case anyway since compliance with the program is voluntary?


voluntary until everyone in the industry does testing then you have to do it to be like everyone else and justify your product to consumers. then when everyone meets the standard they ratchet it down some more creating need for new equipment putting the smaller guys out of business. Think EPA / Goverment here
 
Pledging better quality is designed to allow the consumer to make informed choices. It does not interfere with the free market and free choice, because in this case it is voluntary.

There is a fundamental difference between what the PFI is implementing and government regulation. Govt. regulation is the law; while a voluntary program challenges manufacturers to increase quality and still retain the value of the free market. If the small guys cannot keep up, it won’t be because of the government, it will simply be the result of the free market. The voluntary standard merely is a challenge to the manufacturers to step up their game. The power still remains with the consumer as to how they choose to value this testing.

If anything, this voluntary program is good for the industry because it negates the need for government regulation. I would argue that the industry is doing this primarily to keep such standards in house and “keep the govt. out of it”. If anything, consumers should welcome such a change
 
Pledging better quality is designed to allow the consumer to make informed choices. It does not interfere with the free market and free choice, because in this case it is voluntary.

There is a fundamental difference between what the PFI is implementing and government regulation. Govt. regulation is the law; while a voluntary program challenges manufacturers to increase quality and still retain the value of the free market. If the small guys cannot keep up, it won’t be because of the government, it will simply be the result of the free market. The voluntary standard merely is a challenge to the manufacturers to step up their game. The power still remains with the consumer as to how they choose to value this testing.

If anything, this voluntary program is good for the industry because it negates the need for government regulation. I would argue that the industry is doing this primarily to keep such standards in house and “keep the govt. out of it”. If anything, consumers should welcome such a change

Don't take this the wrong way, but the government always decides to stick their nose in everything because they think they know better than the rest of us. There is no such thing as negating the need for government intervention - at least not with this government. There has never been a government project that came in under budget, on time or didn't end up screwing the tax payer in the long run.
 
Don't take this the wrong way, but the government always decides to stick their nose in everything because they think they know better than the rest of us. There is no such thing as negating the need for government intervention - at least not with this government. There has never been a government project that came in under budget, on time or didn't end up screwing the tax payer in the long run.
I'm not trying to turn the issue political, politics has nothing to do with the discussion here. My response was meant to highlight the difference between law and free market.
 
Don't take this the wrong way, but the government always decides to stick their nose in everything because they think they know better than the rest of us. There is no such thing as negating the need for government intervention - at least not with this government. There has never been a government project that came in under budget, on time or didn't end up screwing the tax payer in the long run.
yup, and it sure is working well in Stockton, CA, isnt it?
 
And to think i thought it was a aprils fool day joke

The fact that it's NEWP is why I posted it on April Fools Day, but sadly it's true. I really expected more comments along those lines...
 
Pledging better quality is designed to allow the consumer to make informed choices. It does not interfere with the free market and free choice, because in this case it is voluntary.

There is a fundamental difference between what the PFI is implementing and government regulation. Govt. regulation is the law; while a voluntary program challenges manufacturers to increase quality and still retain the value of the free market. If the small guys cannot keep up, it won’t be because of the government, it will simply be the result of the free market. The voluntary standard merely is a challenge to the manufacturers to step up their game. The power still remains with the consumer as to how they choose to value this testing.

If anything, this voluntary program is good for the industry because it negates the need for government regulation. I would argue that the industry is doing this primarily to keep such standards in house and “keep the govt. out of it”. If anything, consumers should welcome such a change

...But seriously, this is at least partly gov't regulation. The EPA is updating the old 1988(?) standards for wood stoves. This time, they are including pellet stoves and outdoor wood boilers. They need certified "standard" pellets to certify the pellet stoves with. (Or, the stoves will be guaranteed to meet their standards if they are fed "standard" pellets.

At some point, pellets will not be able to include a PFI logo unless they are certified to the new standard.
 
So new bags may read super premium , premium, better,good, and newp brands is what Ur saying
 
The hilarious part is that right now, NEWP is the only one that can claim to be Premium. And the Super Premium grade has been eliminated.
 
Doesn't matter what NEWP claims, as long as consumers don't like them, they won't sell too well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slvrblkk
Keep in mind, some pellet companies have opted out of PFI altogether, Greene Team being one of them. I'd burn their pellets over NEWP even if they aren't labeled premium.
 
I burned 4 bags of greene team this year and I gotta say I liked them too. They also came to 3.18 a bag with a coupon I had to lowes.
 
According to the PFI the new categories are: premium, standard and utility.

So looking at that, Premium means absolutely nothing. Most if not all pellets made today can meet those standards. It seems to me it made more sense when the Super Premium grade was being utilized. Now based on labeling NEWP, Inferno's, etc are just as good as Okies, Vts. Hamer, etc. based on the Premium label. So in my opinion, we just went backwards.
 
Don't forget this weekend is Made In NH expo and NEWP will be there :) we get to vent our 2 cents to the quality issue <>
 
So looking at that, Premium means absolutely nothing. Most if not all pellets made today can meet those standards. It seems to me it made more sense when the Super Premium grade was being utilized. Now based on labeling NEWP, Inferno's, etc are just as good as Okies, Vts. Hamer, etc. based on the Premium label. So in my opinion, we just went backwards.
From the spec sheets, yes, it appears the term premium has relaxed.
 
Yeah, I think the bar is a bit lower, but now the pellets are tested by a certified lab to prove they meet the specifications. Before, it was only the manufacturer's word...
 
From what was proposed they were supposed to use a new bar graph system and the ash/BTU/chloride content was supposed to be plotted. So a pellet that tested at say 0.7% would have its bar lower on the graph of say a pellet that was tested at 0.4%. The lower ash content gets a higher rating. Its supposed to take the guess work out of it. Will it work? Maybe, We'll have to wait and see.

What would prove PFI's worth is if they actually removed product from the market that is deemed out of spec! But because the spec is so broad it probably won't happen. Maybe for excessive long pellets in the mix? Something I have seen many times and most mills don't think its all that big a deal to have long pellets. But just ask the guy who's stove keeps stopping due to bridging or auger jams!

IMHO, Our word is probably the best ranking a pellet mill could ask for. Until PFI uses its rating seriously and puts it thumb on the mills that try to push inferior goods. But from what I have heard. All that will happen is the mill will just loose the right to use the label.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SwineFlue
The hilarious part is that right now, NEWP is the only one that can claim to be Premium. And the Super Premium grade has been eliminated.


Super premium eliminated, freedom fuel is screwed!
Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: slvrblkk
Status
Not open for further replies.