Pellet Making?

[half]

what about paper bricks ??

New Dawn Engineering - PAPER BRICK MAKER

This looks like an inexpnsive way to get fuel, I know people over here make them. just need a good newspaper source and a good long summer to dry them

 

[nvrs]

dont forget about pellet grills.... i love my traeger pellet grill... pellets are the easiest way to smoke meat out there...

 

[blades]

current costs to produce bio-mass pellets exceed conventional heating cost most places in the US. Bio-bricks are not much better. The very high initial start up costs coupled with reliable and inexpensive raw materials sources+ transport to market costs do not make for a great profit line. Additionally the on going maintenance of the production equipment is very high. even on a personal basis pelletizing bio-mass is not great for many of the same reasons. Bio-brick has a better chance on a personal setting as equipment costs can be much lower. The 2 main keys for either are moisture control and processing the bio-mass to 1/4"/6mm particles. Added heat is needed for self binding of the materials other wise you must add a binding agent of some sort which adds to your cost.
Bio-mass fuel is a lot like the ethanol rip off, energy input exceeds recoverd energy in a massmarket arena.

 

[KiwiBro]

From 2009:

According to the United States Department of Energy, the average cost of a cord of firewood or a ton of wood pellets is $190. But for a true comparison of the costs, you have to look at not just the price of the fuel but also the heating value of the fuel, also measured in BTU, and the efficiency of the heating appliance. Using averages for all three, the Energy Information Administration's Heating Fuel Comparison Calculator estimates it costs $15.15 to produce 1 million Btu using pellets and $9.09 using solid wood. Those figures are between the costs of coal ($9.06) and natural gas ($12.61) and are well below the costs of oil ($18.53), propane ($24.66), and electric furnaces, baseboards, and space heaters ($33.25).

So...pellets cost more than cordwood, coal, & natural gas; per unit of heat.

http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/techline/fuel_value_calculator.pdf

I just don't see them catching on until the other forms of heat go up in expense to the end user, because the cost of making them sure isn't going to go down much.

Cost is one factor, albeit the dominant one, in many buying decision. Do buyers consider the convenience, dependencies, environment, etc when deciding? some don't want to mess with conventional cordwood/firewood - bugs, messy, too much labour stacking, etc, etc. They may not like being dependant upon a limited pellet supply chain if that's all their heating device can handle, or electricity for that matter to feed the pellet fire. Perhaps their electricity is currently generated from coal fired stations and they are concerned about that enough to want wood heating rather than 'lecky? and if they do choose pellets on enviro grounds, are they buying them locally or are they buying the ones made in another state or even another hemisphere where transport and manufacture is not enviro-freindly? At least USA hasn't signed up to the BS carbon credit mirage. If it had, would carbon-neutral wood-fired heating suddenly become even more competitive?

Too many variables.

 

[blades]

The Carbon credit bull.... is only a ploy for a few to make money on nothing ( obamy is on the board along with a bunch of other DC big shots at the only exchange house in the US) As with a lot of EPA stuff it is a half cocked idea that as far as middle America is concerned will do nothing but inflate costs for every possible item. Like global warming at present and global cooling of the 50'-60's coupled with nuclear winter ect. It isn't all fiction but it is or has been blown out of proportion and significant details removed in order to promote another flim/flam on the public.

 

[pdqdl]

How many folks have experience with USING a pellet stove? I have some questions:

1. Do you prefer the pellet stoves for the convenience of the wood supply over firewood?
2. Do you like the pellet stoves as a "comfort/supplemental" heat source, or are you just trying to keep expenses down?
3. Is the volume of ash produced more important to you than the cost of the pellet?
4. Do the premium pellets burn any better, or is it just as simple as how much ash is produced?

I believe that if a lower quality of pellet was acceptable, perhaps in conjunction with a stove that was better adapted to using high ash pellets, that there would be a rapid expansion of the use of pellets as a heating alternative.

My perception right now, is that pellet stoves are luxury devices that are used to look attractive and make an area cozy some of the time by folks that like to burn, but that they are not generally used as a primary heat source. The real wood burners are willing to take the trouble to cut & split the wood, and haul off the ashes.

I also see pellet stoves as an efficient way to process wood waste, if only the quality requirements were a bit lower.

 

[dsell]

How many folks have experience with USING a pellet stove? I have some questions:

1. Do you prefer the pellet stoves for the convenience of the wood supply over firewood?
2. Do you like the pellet stoves as a "comfort/supplemental" heat source, or are you just trying to keep expenses down?
3. Is the volume of ash produced more important to you than the cost of the pellet?
4. Do the premium pellets burn any better, or is it just as simple as how much ash is produced?

I believe that if a lower quality of pellet was acceptable, perhaps in conjunction with a stove that was better adapted to using high ash pellets, that there would be a rapid expansion of the use of pellets as a heating alternative.

My perception right now, is that pellet stoves are luxury devices that are used to look attractive and make an area cozy some of the time by folks that like to burn, but that they are not generally used as a primary heat source. The real wood burners are willing to take the trouble to cut & split the wood, and haul off the ashes.

I also see pellet stoves as an efficient way to process wood waste, if only the quality requirements were a bit lower.

My sister-in-law can't handle any smoke from a traditional wood stove. My brother uses a Quadra fire pellet stove and it doesn't bother her at all.

The pellets do make a lot of difference. Believe it or not, the best pellet he found around central Kansas is the Rocky Mountain Pellet and it is $212 a ton or $4.5 per 40# bag. This is not made from hard wood. He has less clinkers and ash and therefore less maintenance issues. The worst pellets he found came from Walmart.

I bought a Quadra fire pellet stove after him to put in my rental house. However, I never actually installed it because the cost of pellets are a lot more than the natural gas in our area. It is cost effective for my brother because his normal heating source is propane. So, I ended up selling him my stove for his rental house. His renters love it. He had an outside wood burning stove but the insurance company forced him to remove it. They dropped his homeowners coverage until it was gone. I grew up in the house he is renting and it took 400 gallons of propane a month to heat it during the coldest winter months, and we were still cold.

They are trying to make pellets out of switch grass. Perhaps someone will find a more economical pellet to compete with natural gas prices. For now, I prefer firewood because I control the price of the fuel and I need the excuse to have several chainsaws.

 

[blades]

One of the difficulties of pellets from switch grass and other materials is they will not self bind under heat and pressure like wood by products do. So the cost goes up as another material must be added. In some areas they have had good luck with banana peels ( added as a binding agent) to name one. A lot has to do with availability of raw materials in a particular region. In the vids of bio-bicks from ground up paper one must take care not to use glossy print or pages as these are coated with a clay like substance to achieve the gloss. With paper as a raw material no addition binder is needed most of the time. The real key to any of this is how to reduce the energy input to be equal or less than the recovered energy of the product. I do not believe that has been achieved for the mass market scale.

 

[Felman]

About the very best pellets have .3% ash.

A ton of wood would make about 6lbs of ash. Lower quality pellets will make more ash.

Indeck Energy: Ash Content Related to Wood Pellet Stove Configuration - MarketWatch

 

[7sleeper]

How many folks have experience with USING a pellet stove? I have some questions:

1. Do you prefer the pellet stoves for the convenience of the wood supply over firewood?
2. Do you like the pellet stoves as a "comfort/supplemental" heat source, or are you just trying to keep expenses down?
3. Is the volume of ash produced more important to you than the cost of the pellet?
4. Do the premium pellets burn any better, or is it just as simple as how much ash is produced?

I believe that if a lower quality of pellet was acceptable, perhaps in conjunction with a stove that was better adapted to using high ash pellets, that there would be a rapid expansion of the use of pellets as a heating alternative.

My perception right now, is that pellet stoves are luxury devices that are used to look attractive and make an area cozy some of the time by folks that like to burn, but that they are not generally used as a primary heat source. The real wood burners are willing to take the trouble to cut & split the wood, and haul off the ashes.

I also see pellet stoves as an efficient way to process wood waste, if only the quality requirements were a bit lower.

A friend of mine installed a pellet stove and pays for equal heat between natural gas and pellets 1/3 less in their apartment. She uses gas only for hot water now. Ash volume is very low! It is easy enough for her to refill the stove in the apartment. Refill is every 2-4 days.

7

 

[redprospector]

How many folks have experience with USING a pellet stove? I have some questions:

1. Do you prefer the pellet stoves for the convenience of the wood supply over firewood?
2. Do you like the pellet stoves as a "comfort/supplemental" heat source, or are you just trying to keep expenses down?
3. Is the volume of ash produced more important to you than the cost of the pellet?
4. Do the premium pellets burn any better, or is it just as simple as how much ash is produced?

I believe that if a lower quality of pellet was acceptable, perhaps in conjunction with a stove that was better adapted to using high ash pellets, that there would be a rapid expansion of the use of pellets as a heating alternative.

My perception right now, is that pellet stoves are luxury devices that are used to look attractive and make an area cozy some of the time by folks that like to burn, but that they are not generally used as a primary heat source. The real wood burners are willing to take the trouble to cut & split the wood, and haul off the ashes.

I also see pellet stoves as an efficient way to process wood waste, if only the quality requirements were a bit lower.

1. The convenience is nice. If it's not too cold a 40 lb. bag would last 24 hours, and you can pretty much infinatly controll your fire (kinda like a gas heater).

2. I used a pellet stove as my primary heat sorce. Comfort/supplimental??? I could run you out of the house with that thing if I wanted to.

3. Yes, the volume of ash is more important than price. The more ash content, and the lower the quality of the pellets, the more problems you have with the stove. Burn a good quality pellet and a good stove is as close to maintenance free as you can get and still be burning wood.

4. Depends on who's name is on the bag. Clinkers are generally caused by dirt. You can have an ultra low ash content, and still have clinkers reak havoc on your experience. From my experience, and contrary to popular belief, the "hardwood" pellets will produce way more ash than "softwood" pellets. But the "softwood" pellets will burn just as long as "oak" pellets. I believe this is because BTU's in wood are calculated by weight, and a 40 lb. bag is 40 lbs. reguardless the species you stuff it with. Also the more dense a wood is the longer it will burn, but to make a pellet you break down the wood and then compact it to the same density, reguardless of the species you are compacting. (Just my observation.)

Andy

 

[blades]

I have a friend with a pellet stove in his cabin. His findings concur with yours that the softwood pellets perform better than the hard wood variety. Funny that this is the opposite of bulk wood burning. Like others the pellet stove is less to support than the propane costs. For him it is his best option due to physical disabilities. For now I can still do the labor for cord wood burning. But who knows what the future might bring.

 

[logbutcher]

Fine discussion.

Butt: let's look closely at pellet stoves in actual heating operation. Then another close look at the COST of manufacturing the fuel.

Stoves and The Fuel:
1. Most stand alone wood burners are firewood. Pellet stoves are, even in N.H., a small % of burners.
2. Pellet stoves require power to operate: most in the Northeast have blackouts during storms.
3. The maintenance requirements are high and MTBR ( Mean Time Before Repair) are low. Cleaning, clinkers, motor ( high heat ), auger.
4. Apples to apples a pellet burner doesn't put out the same BTUs as a similar costing and size wood burner.
5. Noise. This is not a romantic evening in front of the fire.
6. Reliability of pellet supply: both volume, quality.
7. Pellets cost more than wood ( or nat'l gas ).
8. No zero energy cost: it takes power to manufacture pellets. The same cost to get raw material to a plant as wood, then energy to make, package, distribute.
and,
9. While "convenient" to burn ( Can grandad pick up and load a 40 lb sack into the stove ? ), the stoves do not have a reliability record compared to the common wood stove of any brand.

The marketing has been professional and alluring to those wanting a 'clean' burn. Before everyone gets too enthusiastic, get out and ask dealers and actual users who use pellet stoves for main heating for more than a season or two, how the stove has performed. How does lugging and storing and paying for those clean 40lb bags compare to firewood. Don't forget the many firewood sellers: loggers, arborists, the dreaded "weekend warrior" sellers.

In a larger scale for whole building pellet FURNACES it is an efficient fuel. e.g. Austrian pellet furnaces.

Andy: New Mexico is not Minnesota or Maine....yet.

 

[Fred Wright]

When we had the chimney installed, the contractor tried to talk up pellet stoves. How convenient and clean they are, etc. And you can buy pellets in bulk during summer when they're cheaper.

We had the wood burner already so it didn't make much nevermind to us anyhow. But it did get me curious about pellet burners. So I did a little local research. I wasn't impressed with what I found.

Pellets are, for all their advocates' hype, a manufactured commodity. They sell at market prices which can be volatile, depending on various conditions. And some pellet producers are using recycled corrugated board as an additive to reduce production costs.

Convenient, true. However, convenience always comes at a cost to the consumer. The burners cost more, the pellets cost more (than cordwood) and have to be stored somewhere. And, as was mentioned, the maintenance should be taken into account.

We're fine with our wood burner.

 

[stihly dan]

When it comes right down to it, wood can be gotten for free. When have you ever been driving along and found a container of #2 fuel, propane, nat gas, for free. I will admit the occasional free coal or bag of pellets. And when push comes to shove, your not going to be able to burn the kitchen chair for heat in a pellet stove if you have to.

 

[redprospector]

Hahaha. Ok, you guys remember this conversation and when you hear of my success in pellet manufacturing you can say; "I remember him when he was a lowly thinning contractor trying to figure out what the heck to do with all the wood he was accumulating."

Believe it or not, firewood is a manufactured commodity also. It also sells at market prices, which are not quite as volotile because of the "jack legs" out there willing to manufacture firewood for beer money.

Corrigated board won't reduce the cost of making pellets because you would have to add a bonding agent which would raise the cost of manufacturing.

All fuels have to be stored somewhere...even firewood.

Yes, convenience comes at a cost to the consumer. Always has, always will.

Maintenance should always be a consideration in any piece of equipment.....But seldom is.

Ok, the blackouts are a problem with pellet stoves. But they are with a refridgerator too. I bet you've got one of those.:msp_rolleyes:

In my experience, a pellet stove will produce as much or more BTU's as a wood burner, and has much better control over the amount of heat being put out, and fuel being used.

Reliability of pellet supply & quality...Well that will be what I'll be trying to resolve on my end. I see it as an oppertunity rather than a liability.

Whether pellets cost more than wood probably depends on where you are. A ton of pellets is pretty close to equivelant of a cord of wood, given the controlability of the burn rate of a pellet stove.

The only zero energy cost is if you're cooking an egg on a flat rock heated by the sun. It takes power to manufacture firewood, or any other commodity, even natural gas.

If Grandad can't pick up our 40# bag, maybe he'd be interested in our convenient 20# bag with a handy plastic lift handle conveniently located on top. :hmm3grin2orange:

No, pellets aren't for everyone. Neither is firewood, and where I am we'd have to put in a pipeline to get natural gas. I can burn money cheaper than propane.
I bet some people sounded like you guy's when someone decided gasoline would be a more efficient fuel than coal to power their horseless carrages.

Andy

 

[KiwiBro]

Best of luck with your endeavour, redprospector. It strikes me that those with the most to gain are those that are already producing or have plenty of access to, otherwise 'waste' wood streams and produce the pellets on the same site with no transport costs between the two stages. Nothing like turning waste into a profitable product, not to mention giving it another useful purpose.

 

[pdqdl]

I agree with pretty much all your comments. However, you failed to address the reason I never pursued it any further. Failure to consider this single problem, I believe, will be the downfall of your plan:

Pellets made from tree service by-products are of low quality, with a high ash content.

There is no way around it, unless you can figure out a way to exclude all the bark from your pellet manufacturing process.

Several reasons that this is a problem:

1. The market in the US is not saturated with buyers, so the marketability of lower quality products is not too good.
2. It costs as much in manufacturing expense to make a cheap pellet as it does to make a high quality one. The equipment is mostly all the same, and it takes as much energy.
3. The companies currently making pellets have lined up their market niche and are filling it with a wood product that is low cost to them. I don't recall finding any big producers of wood pellets that were using low quality wood as their primary product. Instead, they use the low quality product to liquidate the wood products that are left over after they have used up the higher quality materials. So...if you don't have a high end product to help pay for your operation, your bottom of the barrel product will be equal in quality but higher in price than theirs.

Now if you are starting with a wood product that lends itself to making a high quality, low ash pellet, then you should have no problems.

 

[redprospector]

Best of luck with your endeavour, redprospector. It strikes me that those with the most to gain are those that are already producing or have plenty of access to, otherwise 'waste' wood streams and produce the pellets on the same site with no transport costs between the two stages. Nothing like turning waste into a profitable product, not to mention giving it another useful purpose.

Thanks, it sounds like I'm going to need all the luck I can get.

Andy

 

[redprospector]

I agree with pretty much all your comments. However, you failed to address the reason I never pursued it any further. Failure to consider this single problem, I believe, will be the downfall of your plan:

Pellets made from tree service by-products are of low quality, with a high ash content.

There is no way around it, unless you can figure out a way to exclude all the bark from your pellet manufacturing process.

Several reasons that this is a problem:

1. The market in the US is not saturated with buyers, so the marketability of lower quality products is not too good.
2. It costs as much in manufacturing expense to make a cheap pellet as it does to make a high quality one. The equipment is mostly all the same, and it takes as much energy.
3. The companies currently making pellets have lined up their market niche and are filling it with a wood product that is low cost to them. I don't recall finding any big producers of wood pellets that were using low quality wood as their primary product. Instead, they use the low quality product to liquidate the wood products that are left over after they have used up the higher quality materials. So...if you don't have a high end product to help pay for your operation, your bottom of the barrel product will be equal in quality but higher in price than theirs.

Now if you are starting with a wood product that lends itself to making a high quality, low ash pellet, then you should have no problems.

I have no interest in making anything other than the highest quality product, regardless if it's pellets, logs, lumber, firewood, or furniture. I stated earlier that I have already purchased a pole peeler so that the pellets would be free of bark and dirt. I intend to fire my dryer with the bark from the poles.
I'm not planning on starting out with a huge plant, if I can take care of my own wood and test the waters, I'll know a little more about how to make this fly.
The job I did last year I would call a guy to haul off the wood. It averaged 13 log truck loads (14 or 15 cords a load) every time I called. I did this 4 times before I decided I needed to do something other than give away my wood. I processed firewood, and sold all I could, but the market is so brutal around here I came out of the winter with (I figure) about 45 cords not sold.
I make my money thinning forested property, part of the thinning process is removing or grinding up the wood. So for the small operation I intend to start with, maybe, just maybe, I can manage to turn out a quality product that can be sold locally (regionally) and turn a modest profit, and get rid of the wood I accumulate at my "day job".

Andy