Shreded paper briquettes

[olddawgsrule]

I did a search and see this has been discussed a few times now.

I'm giving it a go to see what I find with this.

I have no intention of using any of the 'junk mail' I recieve.
I have no idea of the inks nor do I like the glossly papers.
What I am using is the printed paper I use in my Home Office and the paper we print our Blueprints on.
I have control of ink and paper in both.
Believe this to be very important.

First test was with the light bond paper I use here at home.
Quick 1 day soak and press.
Nice log that in 2 days in front of the stove dried and burned like a nice little piece of charcoal.

Test 2 is underway with the heavier bonded paper (Blueprint goods)
Up to a 6 day soak and starting to make a rather nice log.
I make 1 a day to see what it looks like and set it out to dry to see how it will take.

The wet system I like.
The dry system, well, not so much.. See a lot of ash from this.

Curious if their are others that have gone further this.
Curious about updates from anyone that has.
Curious if anyone has interest in the thread.

Me,, I'm just a curious kinda fella and like experimenting!

 

[Backwoods Savage]

We played around with it many, many moons ago but found we could produce firewood much faster and easier too. Really did not like the paper either.

 

[Paulywalnut]

I remember my Dad used to have a contraption that rolled newspaper very tight. It was hard like a baseball
Bat when he was done. It burned in the fireplace for a long time. I was pretty young and don't know what ever happened to it. I guess he was kind of recycling his papers before we knew about that stuff.

 

[Soundchasm]

I know you said you're not using glossy paper, but as an aside, the reason that stuff won't burn is because they add clay to the paper to make it slick!

 

[olddawgsrule]

Thank you guys!

I agree they're not going to replace good dry hardwood by any means, yet as a supplement for my 'shoulder season', I'm kinda liking where this is going.
Well, I've only started into this, so time will tell if I stand by that statement a month from now..

Soundchasm, when you say they won't burn, do you mean; Like firewood? or Just won't burn?
So far I'm seeing a decent light blue flame, meaning they're burning and giving heat.
I never expected a flame like my wood burns.
Although that would have been exciting.. LOL!
I always expected nothing more than a charcoal type burn.

Paulywalnut; This is what I refer to as a 'Dry Pack".
It seems to create a lot of ash, greater flame yet not as hot.
I've also fallen into the belief that this style of pack requires greater air induction.
One gentleman I'm conversing with uses an aquarium type air pump to accomplish this.
He does create a very good flame!
I finally got him to admit to amount of ash build-up...

I know I could produce a better, hotter flame with air induction (forced), but that's not I want to see or do.
I have a pellet stove that does that very nicely!

It seems to me that I'm not looking to create a large pellet here.
Yet not attempting to make a loose 'bio-log'.

Day 7 log is made and recorded.
Denser, maybe too dense...
Again only time will tell.

Curious as to how you made yours and what recordings of the process were done.
Also if there's something in particular you'd like to see recorded.

That is of course if anyone's interested...

 

[peakbagger]

I used to work in a papermill for many years. Wood pulp is expensive and clay is far less expensive. Standard copy paper is about 1/2 wood pulp and 1/2 fillers. like clay (generally referred to as ash). If you burn paper, it will generate a lot of ash. If your stove has the right configuration the ash can sometimes build up in spots and turn into fired clay but that is normally only something found on industrial boilers.

 

[olddawgsrule]

You and I should talk sometime about this 4.7 Solar you have going!
Rather impressed!!
Would love to see your hook-up/circuitry!

Back on subject:
This is the type of info I've always seen from here, what I do not yet know.

I'm still in a testing phase, so no full pit burn as of yet.
With that said, this may be why I don't see the 'clunkers' you speak of (nor the ash).

So you understand Peak, this is not my 'First' burn and been burnin' for a while now..
I see less ash, per unit, than my dry pine or scavenged dry goods.
What I will say, is I see it burning quicker, yet hotter.. (have it about half the time of burn, numbers show better BTU, but it's how I value them..)

I used to work in a papermill for many years. Wood pulp is expensive and clay is far less expensive. Standard copy paper is about 1/2 wood pulp and 1/2 fillers. like clay (generally referred to as ash). If you burn paper, it will generate a lot of ash. If your stove has the right configuration the ash can sometimes build up in spots and turn into fired clay but that is normally only something found on industrial boilers.

 

[olddawgsrule]

I have 10 logs dried and preparing for the 'real' burn test.
Time to determine criteria of the test.

If there is something in particular you wish to see recorded, now is the time to speak.

My criteria:
1) Bio-log only
2) Clean stove
3) Ease of start
4) Flue temp and time to reach
5) Period of burn
6) Amount of ash

 

[peakbagger]

Newsprint is far lower filler content and card board boxes aren't bad.

 

[olddawgsrule]

That's a good start Peak!
paper content.

I need to research the bonding weight and content of the 'blueprint paper' I'm about to run the test on.
As is the ink used in our printing.
I've brought this up before, because the owner uses this paper for a bedding mix.

My main issue at this point is BTU rating.
I'm hoping to build a base line flue temp/time with my dry oak vs my Purchased bio-logs, then against these paper briquettes,
I'm not yet seeing another method..

 

[peakbagger]

Blue print paper is generally lightweight opaque basestock, its going to have lots of clay to make it white and opaque.

 

[olddawgsrule]

Step one in this process of learning is I believe complete.

Paper briquettes do burn
They do produce a very fine ash (close to, if not finer than drywall, or pellet dust).
BTU value seems to be just lower than 7,000 BTU per pound (or the potential value and what I believe to be true)
As a binding agent is yet to be explored
Does it hinder or help..

The next step is to add a local fuel substitute
Leaves

I can currently make a mash of paper, dry and burn the following day
Very nice density, burns like it meant to
If you have nothing else, it is a fuel of thought
I do believe there are better ways of using it then in the woodstove..

The new mash is of a 70% leaf and 30% paper mash.
Very loose and wet when made, but once it does through a day of 'my' drying, stays together rather well.
As a binder, seems to work.
The leaf additive is yet another discussion and needs a longer turn around before burn

This is a picture of my latest batch for experimineting

(broken image removed)

Camera lighting miss leads on far left, but the bricks on the right show the color I was hoping for.
Resin of the leaves bleeding into the paper
Lower level is the 1 day mix and no where near the color of above

Upper level is fresh and difficult to move
Lower level is drier (12-15%) is is holding together nicely (1 day dry, not ready to burn)

The question now becomes;
Should the leaves be mixed as dry to the mash
Or should they soak (and 'bleed' their goodness) to the balance
Then, of course, to what balance

My goal is not to prove anyone right or wrong
It's to understand and 'know' what the potentials are

My criteria of information list has changed a bit
Wish to add something, please do
Here's a sample of today's failure (sample dude's, was pretty discussed with today's run, material too wet..)

(broken image removed)

 

[olddawgsrule]

Seems I missed a step in the paper briquette experiment.
A pre-wash.
This was a suggestion from another forum that made some sense if the clay content is truely a major factor in heat production.

I have a few concerns with a pre-wash, but I haven't gone through that step and that's what I've been looking for..

Thoughts of what I'm missing in this little experiment of knowledge.