181,000 wood burning fireplaces and appliances sold last year?

[John Ackerly]

The Washington Post just made the classic rookie mistake of confusing the science behind pellets used for electricity and wood used for heat. They also say "Last year, 191,000 wood-burning fireplaces and appliances were sold in North America, according to the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association, an industry group. " Can anyone explain what is counted in this figure? How does anyone know how many fireplaces were built, assuming you are including masonry fireplaces, where the only thing purchased is masonry brick? I thought HPBA only counted wood and pellet stoves and inserts, but stopped sharing that data a few years ago. What gives? (I'm working on a letter to the editor and a call with the reporter.)

John

 

[stoveliker]

do you have a link to the piece?

 

[Burnin Since 1991]

The Washington Post just made the classic rookie mistake of confusing the science behind pellets used for electricity and wood used for heat. They also say "Last year, 191,000 wood-burning fireplaces and appliances were sold in North America, according to the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association, an industry group. " Can anyone explain what is counted in this figure? How does anyone know how many fireplaces were built, assuming you are including masonry fireplaces, where the only thing purchased is masonry brick? I thought HPBA only counted wood and pellet stoves and inserts, but stopped sharing that data a few years ago. What gives? (I'm working on a letter to the editor and a call with the reporter.)

John

I looked at WaPo and couldn't find it

 

[stoveliker]

I think it's this one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/12/23/fireplace-wood-gas-emissions-pollution/

paywalled (to me) of course.

 

[Burnin Since 1991]

I think it's this one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/12/23/fireplace-wood-gas-emissions-pollution/

paywalled (to me) of course.

I'm not paying...

 

[stoveliker]

me neither

 

[EatenByLimestone]

I imagine solo stoves, chimineas and fire pit kits count as wood burning appliances. For ease I assume it’d have to be a manufactured unit. I doubt they are counting Billy Bob recycling his washing machine drum or his cousin selling burn barrels for $20 on marketplace..

 

[John Ackerly]

Just found a non-paywall link: https://archive.md/pP1Ms.

 

[Burnin Since 1991]

more carbon neutral bs. If these people had their way, we'd all be huddled together in caves for warmth. It appears the only true options (to save the world) is to burn leaves and twigs...

“If you just literally stopped harvesting wood, our forests would massively regrow, and we’d have a lot more carbon” stored in forests, Searchinger said.

um ok.

I find it very hard to believe that 1-2% of the world burning wood for heat is going to have any impact compared to what is heating the 98-99% of the other homes.

Merry Christmas

 

[stoveliker]

To be honest, I am sensitive to pollution concerns. Natural gas burns much cleaner.

However, I believe it is basically the change from C-C and C-H bonds to stronger C-O bonds in combustion that provides most of the heat. I.e. (!) it is CO2 production that directly should correlate with BTU output. @Tron?

And therefore I don't understand the claim that burning wood emits more CO2 than burning nat gas or coal.

The reference says per MWh of electricity generated. But is the efficiency of that generation the same after combustion of wood vs nat gas?

The sequestration issue is correct, but I only burn trees that were cut down for other reasons (yard trees by tree companies)- and would end up in the landfill here, likely leading to methane emissions when they slowly rot. So I'm okay with my sourcing of wood .

And they don't compare to my boiler that runs on oil...

 

[Burnin Since 1991]

To be honest, I am sensitive to pollution concerns. Natural gas burns much cleaner.

However, I believe it is basically the change from C-C and C-H bonds to stronger C-O bonds in combustion that provides most of the heat. I.e. (!) it is CO2 production that directly should correlate with BTU output. @Tron?

And therefore I don't understand the claim that burning wood emits more CO2 than burning nat gas or coal.

The reference says per MWh of electricity generated. But is the efficiency of that generation the same after combustion of wood vs nat gas?

The sequestration issue is correct, but I only burn trees that were cut down from r other reasons - and would end up in the landfill here, likely leading to methane emissions when they slowly rot. So I'm okay with my sourcing of wood .

And they don't compare to my boiler that runs on oil...

My wood also comes from a tree company that "recycles" the unwanted wood to wood chips for landscaping and firewood. And if they didn't do that it would also only be left to rot. And they make money on firewood and chips and don't have to pay to dispose of the wood, though I imagine that some of the wood that isn't suitable for firewood or chips goes into the trash. (ie totally rotten)

And I agree, NG seems to be the cleanest and most affordable option in MA. I can tell you also that while heat pumps do a nice job heating and cooling, (our extended family vacation home uses a heat pump) our electric bill disagrees with how economical it is and who knows what is being used to create that power?

This year I plan to install an emergency NG powered whole house generator and also a a vented gas stove for a part of my house that uses electric baseboard heat. It's an open concept living room, open to the second floor and a small NG stove will look nice and heat for a fraction of what it costs me for the electric heat.

https://hpba.org/industrynews/ I don't see anything regarding this on the organization website cited in that article. Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[GG Woody]

I cut standing dead and windfall from up there in my picture.
It's better off me burning it!
Little too close of a call this summer. Our house is maybe 350yds behind the street light towards the fire.

 

[EbS-P]

Context. This a not well referenced opinion piece. I’m not going to bother looking at carbon cycle numbers. Let’s just look at top line numbers. 181,000 wood burning appliances. Some fraction are replacing a solid fuel appliances. 1.4 million housing units built in the same time period.

I’m burning less wood using the heat pump more. Renewable electricity for the win. I don’t think residential heating has 1/10th the impact as does the industrial pellet export market. Let’s be clear. There is now justification for clear cutting southern forests to then ship the pellets by boat across the Atlantic. That market will correct itself soon and the impact to rural southern states will be noticeable. Not to mention what will happen the new pellet terminal in our port.

 

[Woodsplitter67]

My wood also comes from a tree company that "recycles" the unwanted wood to wood chips for landscaping and firewood. And if they didn't do that it would also only be left to rot. And they make money on firewood and chips and don't have to pay to dispose of the wood, though I imagine that some of the wood that isn't suitable for firewood or chips goes into the trash. (ie totally rotten)

And I agree, NG seems to be the cleanest and most affordable option in MA. I can tell you also that while heat pumps do a nice job heating and cooling, (our extended family vacation home uses a heat pump) our electric bill disagrees with how economical it is and who knows what is being used to create that power?

This year I plan to install an emergency NG powered whole house generator and also a a vented gas stove for a part of my house that uses electric baseboard heat. It's an open concept living room, open to the second floor and a small NG stove will look nice and heat for a fraction of what it costs me for the electric heat.

https://hpba.org/industrynews/ I don't see anything regarding this on the organization website cited in that article. Maybe I'm missing something.

Your looking for something like this. I have 2 gas fireplaces one in the living room and one in the living room in the basement. This things are awesome. The fireplace on the main floor is on a programmable thermostat. On the warmer days like yesterday I can let the stove go out and just run the fireplace. The cost.is soooo little for what you get to run it. My floor plan is open so it will heat the entire house

 

[Tron]

However, I believe it is basically the change from C-C and C-H bonds to stronger C-O bonds in combustion that provides most of the heat. I.e. (!) it is CO2 production that directly should correlate with BTU output.

Basically yes, but the production of H20, which is also a very strong bond (i.e., a low-energy molecule) contributes as well.
Comparisons are difficult because of that, and because energy densities are mostly measured in energy per mass. The non-combustible parts of the wood (resulting in ash) also play into that.

But as with any energy source, the chemical reaction from a high-energy to a low-energy compound releases that bonded energy.

 

[stoveliker]

So, does "2.5 times more CO2 per BTU for wood as compared to nat gas" look like it's possible?

 

[Tron]

I can tell you also that while heat pumps do a nice job heating and cooling, (our extended family vacation home uses a heat pump) our electric bill disagrees with how economical it is and who knows what is being used to create that power?

Heat pumps are ok in terms of energy efficiency. The power plant generates electricity from heat at an efficiency of 30-40%. If your heat pump runs at a factor of 3 (3kWh thermal energy transferred per kWh electricity used), you're about even. If your electricity is sourced from natural gas, as it is in wide parts of the US, you could as well run a gas furnace and have the same result.

Resistive electric heating is the worst, since the power plant uses 3kWh thermal energy to create 1kWh of electricity, and you only get that one kWh of heat out of the resistive heaters (like baseboard heaters, space heaters or even the aux heat strips in your heat pump).

 

[Tron]

So, does "2.5 times more CO2 per BTU for wood as compared to nat gas" look like it's possible?

I don't want to dive into the whole CO2 discussion, but methane is about as perfect as it gets regarding hydrocarbon combustion. That's why wood (with more complex molecules, mostly cellulose) releases less energy per CO2 equivalent emitted. A good contributor for that is residual moisture, which takes energy to evaporate.
Even other more complex hydrocarbons such as oil and gasoline are "worse" than methane.

Of course, that absolutely disregards the renewable aspect of burning wood.

 

[John Lehet]

The dark side of natural gas: my son lives in Pennsyltucky, where there is a fracking rig everywhere you look. Just down the hill from his house is a wet-gas pumping station that is really loud and frequently vents wet gas (containing mercury etc) in big bursts, which they are allowed to do if it is “emergency regulation” of their pressure. Groundwater — they put it through carbon, but I guess eventually all the ground water in that state is going to have to be RO filtered.

 

[begreen]

Yes, the upstream and downstream effects of fossil fuels are mostly ignored in the article. At times the author also bounces back and forth between open fire burning (fireplace) and the controlled combustion in a stove. The pellet issue is equally murky. I don't disagree that harvesting them here and then shipping them overseas has it's own negative footprint, but locally, pellets are made from sawdust from the lumber industry.