Hard wood vs Softwood

[SESZOO]

First year burning pellets ,mostly Energex Golds and some regular ,they've been doing pretty good for us this year considering the temps here in upstate NY near Can. border, ,Was a good deal When I bought the stove in Nov. and figured when they said Hrdwd . they would give better heat.. But now getting on close to the time to order next years supply in another month or two , have seen a lot of people like burning softwood . Are they comparable in Heat output . After burning wood for ever always burnt seasoned Hardwood for best heat .and wondering if the pellets were different . Have to say love the stove ,even the upkeep every week .

 

[Papelletman]

Pellets are different that cord wood, soft pellets are generally hotter and less ash than hardwood.

 

[tomc585]

Pellets are different that cord wood, soft pellets are generally hotter and less ash than hardwood.

Less ash because its less dense?

 

[DMKNLD]

Here's a link to a good article on hardwood vs softwood pellets.

(broken link removed to http://allaboutwoodpellets.com/hardwood_softwood.php)

"Try before you buy" is the mantra - burn a few test bags prior to bulk purchasing so you don't get stuck with multiple tons of pellets that either don't burn well in your stove and / or produce more fly ash than you're willing to keep up with the cleaning on.

Been there..... done that.......

Unfortunately, any one particular pellet brands burn quality isn't always reflective of the next season's production quality, depending on the source product the manufacturer is using. So even high quality pellet brands can have poor seasonal production runs, which I found to be the case with this years LaCrete 100% softwood pellets that I'm burning.

 

[SXIPro]

I'll take softies any day over hardwood.

 

[Pete Zahria]

Good softwoods, any day.

Dan

 

[adam6979]

Yep I agree. I thought hardwood was better too based on wood stove science. I tried softwood pellets and would not go back. They put out my guess is 15% more heat and I find everything cleans up much easier, perhaps because of that higher heat. I'd also have to assume that you get more pellets in softwood ... as we all know softwood is lighter - but that is just assumption I have never actually compared weight to pellet count. Sounds like a start of a new thread...

 

[Wilbur Feral]

I have burned tons of each, and find that the article DMKNLD linked to above is a good explanation. If you avoid the sap / bark layer from the tree, both can be good pellets. I have become convinced that there are basically three tiers of pellets available to residential buyers: 1) The ultra low ash, that produces no more than 0.5 % ash. These are all excellent, but generally pricey. 2) High quality "box store" or typical dealer quality pellets that are rated at 1% ash and likely perform at that level. They produce at least twice as much ash as the first category, but the heat ouput is about the same. 3) Lower quality (I might say typical on some days) box stores pellets that are rated at 1% ash but seem to produce much more ash (perhaps 20-30% more than category 2), and which seem to produce less heat as well. I have long suspected that these simply have more bark in them.

Bottom line: it is not the hard or soft wood that is the major difference, but rather the ash produced. Tree species matters a bit, but the difference is modest at best. The parts of the tree (or whether scrap wood vs. sawdust are the raw material) seem to make a difference. Just my two cents...

 

[alternativeheat]

I have burned tons of each, and find that the article DMKNLD linked to above is a good explanation. If you avoid the sap / bark layer from the tree, both can be good pellets. I have become convinced that there are basically three tiers of pellets available to residential buyers: 1) The ultra low ash, that produces no more than 0.5 % ash. These are all excellent, but generally pricey. 2) High quality "box store" or typical dealer quality pellets that are rated at 1% ash and likely perform at that level. They produce at least twice as much ash as the first category, but the heat ouput is about the same. 3) Lower quality (I might say typical on some days) box stores pellets that are rated at 1% ash but seem to produce much more ash (perhaps 20-30% more than category 2), and which seem to produce less heat as well. I have long suspected that these simply have more bark in them.

Bottom line: it is not the hard or soft wood that is the major difference, but rather the ash produced. Tree species matters a bit, but the difference is modest at best. The parts of the tree (or whether scrap wood vs. sawdust are the raw material) seem to make a difference. Just my two cents...

I have a similar take, however of the super low ash pellets, like down around .2-.25% ash then this seems to be the realm of softwoods. Douglas Fir generally is in this category. Additionally, how well the pellets are produced matters, like consistency of size and compressed pressure , as well as bark content already mentioned. In that .5% category of ash content I see no difference as long as they are really premium grade pellets, except the ash of the softwood may be more fluffy or fly away in nature than hardwood.

And that's my take.

 

[adam6979]

Certainly no bark is a much better pellet. But I disagree that ash content is what is important. If a pellet burns hotter - it makes more btu... that is species driven as well as quality of pellet.

 

[alternativeheat]

Certainly no bark is a much better pellet. But I disagree that ash content is what is important. If a pellet burns hotter - it makes more btu... that is species driven as well as quality of pellet.

I just try to buy pellets of 8500-8700 btu, of which I can hit that range in either hard or softwood or blends for that matter.. The 9200 of last year was last years Oakie DF, which this year they too are 8700 btu. Energex soft or hard fall in this category with more ash. AWF White pine are 8600 or 8700. LG soft is 8500 .6% ash. What can I say, I really like pellets that are under .5% personally but I burn them all the way up to and including 1%. I don't like pellets that are both ashy and down around 8000 or less BTU. Some box store brands are like that ( 7800 btu sometimes), to me pure junk..

 

[Arti]

A pound of wood has approx 8,500 btu's in it, Doesn't matter if it is hardwood or softwood.

Volume wise hardwood has more btu's simply because it weights more than softwood. It takes a bigger pile of softwood to make a ton, Pellets are sold/burned by the pound not by Volume so it ends up being what works for you and your setup. The volume/lb thing had me confused for a while until we figured out that burning pellets compared to a regular wood stove was a bit different.

 

[tjnamtiw]

 

[SXIPro]

View attachment 154255

If every subject were searched first this forum would consist of a dozen threads each about ten thousand posts long. What fun is that?

 

[tonyd]

yes. ask all you want here. All of this has been discussed before. Don't read it if you think it has been discussed already..

 

[Jason845845]

View attachment 154255

A search of your user name reveals that you need a better hobby than trying to be the forum police.

 

[SXIPro]

A search of your user name reveals that you need a better hobby than trying to be the forum police.

Well, he is from Georgia, so....…..

 

[tjnamtiw]

A search of your user name reveals that you need a better hobby than trying to be the forum police.

My four years of trying to help people seems like it was a serious waste of time, that's for sure, judging from the comments. All it really did was keep the web crawlers noticing this site and kept the hit count up so the owner of the site could sit back, smile, and make money at my expense. As for you guys, you're on your own. Yep, I'm in Georgia and I have two pellet stoves that I know how to troubleshoot and keep running the way they are supposed to. I also know how to use the search function CORRECTLY so I could get answers if needed. No more baby sitting those who should never have gotten a pellet stove in the first place. AMF

 

[tjnamtiw]

Well, he is from Georgia, so....…..

And you're from the land of make believe.

 

[tjnamtiw]

If every subject were searched first this forum would consist of a dozen threads each about ten thousand posts long. What fun is that?

If people actually knew how to think and used the search routine correctly, there would be much LESS traffic on here and we could have concentrated on those who truly had a NEW problem to solve, rather than time after time answering the same stupid questions.

 

[jtakeman]

tj, Don't let it get to ya bro. Seems every year the same questions get asked over and over. It is what it is.

 

[kniffin50]

really,knock it off

 

[OhioBurner©]

Simply put, for cordwood the denser hardwoods give more btu since, well, they are more dense. More of the stuff that burns packed into the same size chunk of wood.

But when you take the sawdust of these species, and compress them all to about the same density, then guess what? They are very similar in btu regardless of species. There could be nearly double the amount of pine sawdust compressed into the same pellet as oak pellets, so even though oak might have twice the btu now they are equal, just for example. Minor differences still, but much more minor. I've tried a couple different hardwood and two different pine pellets and can't tell much difference. Depends on your stove just as much as the pellets.

 

[tonyd]

For me, its a place to come hang out for a while. Not to get into a fist fight. Cut him off.

 

[muss]

Jtakeman has it right ! It is what it is & that's what makes the world go 'round . This forum saved me a lot of grief after I discovered it. Never read the proper etiquette to post & still don't know them by memory . Don't like the redundancy, don't read the post. Easy peasy !