I just noticed on the woodpellets.com site they are referring to their LG pellets as being Super Premium ash level. I did not realize that you could make up new categories for wood pellets.
Woodpellets.com and their Super Premium ash level
- Thread starter pelletdude
- Start date
-
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. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
How are their pellets? I thinking of getting them this year becuase they are cheaper than the local stores. HD wants 6 bag for penningtons other hardware stores are selling brands I have not burned for 285 a ton. I am also tring to find Lignetics in my area, which are my favorite pellet so far. How do the compare to Lignetics?
New category still doesn't convince me to buy in bulk without trying a few bags out first.
There are too many variables with premium pellets with or without the PFI stamps on them.
I do not like some of the "better" brands while others love em.
There are too many variables with premium pellets with or without the PFI stamps on them.
I do not like some of the "better" brands while others love em.
BTU said:
Forget it BTU...she's here with me now, and said she'd never go on a date w/ a pellet dealer. ;-P
I'm sure it is just a marketing tactic but I have to say,
all the pellets I got from them were premium and I
ordered from them three years in a row. Ymmv.
all the pellets I got from them were premium and I
ordered from them three years in a row. Ymmv.
BTU said:
I agree w/ BTU. I've seen "Premium" stamped on pellets that I knew were "poor".
BTU, what is the PFI's "requirement" for a company to be able to put that on their bags? Or is it just that they belong to the PFI, and then they get to use that? Does the pellet manufacturer have to submit pellets to PFI to get tested before receiving the grade?
BTU said:
What I meant was, imo all the pellets I got from them performed
like I'd a expect from a premium pellet - wasn't referring to how they were labeled.
I guess originally, I should have written that all the pellets I've
purchased from them were top notch pellets.
IMO The generic term for premium pellets should be pointed at the
PFI standards regardless if the mfr is a member or not.
If the ash is <=1% and there is no bark, they are all considered premium.
This is a broad percentage range.
New super premium category <=.5% should help narrow down the field a bit.
PFI standards regardless if the mfr is a member or not.
If the ash is <=1% and there is no bark, they are all considered premium.
This is a broad percentage range.
New super premium category <=.5% should help narrow down the field a bit.
BTU said:
This is true, they should focus on more specifications but, the general public needs to do their own homework
to find their favorites. The hottest pellet out there shouldn't be the only criteria either.
My stove is very tolerant of any pellet I have burned in it, but I am not so tolerant.
High heat, low ash, low sodium is what I look for.
I have tried a few reputable brands in the past few years that burn really hot but the mess they made
was not worth it to me.
From their website I think that they a pretty clear on this one.
What do we mean by ‘Qualifies as Super Premium’
When we confirm that the ash content of a fuel supplied by one of our sources routinely meets the ash content requirements of the planned “Super Premium” grade, we indicate it ‘qualifies as super premium.’ For clarity, no fuel in the country is yet certified by PFI as meeting the grade, and we are not yet independently certifying these fuels to a super-premium grade designation"
What do we mean by ‘Qualifies as Super Premium’
When we confirm that the ash content of a fuel supplied by one of our sources routinely meets the ash content requirements of the planned “Super Premium” grade, we indicate it ‘qualifies as super premium.’ For clarity, no fuel in the country is yet certified by PFI as meeting the grade, and we are not yet independently certifying these fuels to a super-premium grade designation"
BTU said:
False advertising is pretty much everywhere nowadays.
I'm not much for reading labels unless it's food and I'm buying for someone with allergies.
I try a product. If it does what I expect, I will buy it again. If I find another product
that does the same thing and it costs less, I'll buy that one instead. Has worked for me so far.
I think for the most part...these premium pellets do qualify under the PFI premium standards. We have just come to expect more out of a premium product. Which is exactly why these standards need to be changed to reflect new and better standards.
I agree with you BTU, I don't feel woodpellets.com is trying to pull a fast one over on us. I think they are trying to help us make an eduacated decision, but the system is flawed as you say.
Hi BTU, I think it's clear that having a BTU rating on pellets would be immensely helpful, and it's understandable why you are so strongly advocating it. Yet, as you also point out that due to seasonal variations in fiber sourcing not just from pellet producer to producer, but also from season to season with the same producer, then how on earth would PFI be able to develop such a rating?? Seems that you are saying both that they really ought to do it (which I agree would be great), but that it would be impossible to do! (Which I also agree that it would be a near impossibility... unless they were to re-test every producers pellets for BTUs every year.)
A classic Catch-22!
A classic Catch-22!
I get you completely, and you are 100% correct - testing in a controlled environment would certainly yield a useful standard. And all you'd need to have on the rating label is a little disclaimer... *individual results may vary! Though I don't think it would require every mill to submit to testing every how-ever-often to make it work, because the ones who did would be the only ones that could label their pellets as such, and can then use that as a marketing device. In a competitive marketplace, access to a good marketing angle would often be incentive enough to submit one's product for 3rd party evaluation. But in the current pellet marketplace, it seems, there is just no incentive at all to submit to standards, testing, etc., when demand outstrips supply like it does and producers of the best pellets can get the higher prices they require. (Would be different if you, or Lignetics, etc., were sitting with tons of inventory come April or May... but that doesn't appear to be very likely this season, or any season too soon.)
Cheers! And thanks for all the great contributions you make to the forum.
Hearth.com rocks!
Cheers! And thanks for all the great contributions you make to the forum.
Hearth.com rocks!
BTU your BTU argument is a misleading fallacy. A spruce pellet from company A with a moisture content of 3% and compressed to "X" will have the exact (well + or -) BTU's as a spruce pellet from company B with a moisture content of 3% and compressed to "X". All wood species of the same type and moisture will have the same number of BTU's.
Couple that with softwoods having higher BTU's then hardwoods, your angle gets clearer.
Since BTU's vary so greatly between wood species, moisture content, and to some degree how much the pellets are compressed ~ it would be impossible to adequately use BTU's a point of reference in labeling.
Couple that with softwoods having higher BTU's then hardwoods, your angle gets clearer.
Since BTU's vary so greatly between wood species, moisture content, and to some degree how much the pellets are compressed ~ it would be impossible to adequately use BTU's a point of reference in labeling.
- Status
Similar threads
