The "Woodsure Ready To Burn Scheme"????

[cessna]

Are any of you members  of the Hetas  , "Woodsure Ready to Burn Scheme" ,or were you a member but found it difficult to comply with the schemes  requirements.

Please send me a message  rather than posting on here if you have had some issues with the scheme. Many thanks

I ask as considering applying to be a member of the scheme, but in all honesty  think some of my fire wood will not meet the schemes criteria if they come and have a "spot check" out of the blue!!!!!  

[Alycidon]

Nope, max moisture level of 20% is far to high. I told Helen that at the Arb show when they launched the scheme back in 2014/2015 time.    

 

A

[Woodworks]

26 minutes ago, Alycidon said:

Nope, max moisture level of 20% is far to high. I told Helen that at the Arb show when they launched the scheme back in 2014/2015 time.    

 

A

Now you're just trolling ? 

 

I have never used a stove that wasn't perfect with logs at 20% . Do you sell ones that dont work at these moisture levels? 

[openspaceman]

1 hour ago, Alycidon said:

Nope, max moisture level of 20% is far to high.

I'd need to see some figures for particulates per MJ of heat at various power settings released before I'd accept there were benefits in wood this dry.

 

From what I remember wood at 12% mc wwb can be burned the cleanest but it's not BATNEEC

[Alycidon]

You just burn some 20% external hardwood,  and see how it goes compared to something at 16% or lower,  it will burn yes but not very well;  20% softwood will on the other hand burn fairly well.

 

Recent research by one of the UK s largest stove manufacturers agrees that 10% - 12% is best for lowest emissions.

 

A

[Alycidon]

On 22/02/2020 at 17:22, Woodworks said:

Now you're just trolling ? 

 

I have never used a stove that wasn't perfect with logs at 20% . Do you sell ones that dont work at these moisture levels? 

Dont do that,  not enough life and spent a year or two modding a board that was full on trolls.   

 

A

[Woodworks]

30 minutes ago, Alycidon said:

You just burn some 20% external hardwood,  and see how it goes compared to something at 16% or lower,  it will burn yes but not very well;  20% softwood will on the other hand burn fairly well.

 

Recent research by one of the UK s largest stove manufacturers agrees that 10% - 12% is best for lowest emissions.

 

A

Not my experience but I must admit we have never burnt wood as low as 16% unless we run the stove in the summer as background humidity it too high for them to get that low.

 

The last study I saw which I thought you posted had this graph attached which shows how wet wood is bad for particulates but once you get below 20%-25% there is not much in it

[doobin]

6 hours ago, Alycidon said:

You just burn some 20% external hardwood,  and see how it goes compared to something at 16% or lower,  it will burn yes but not very well;  20% softwood will on the other hand burn fairly well.

 

Recent research by one of the UK s largest stove manufacturers agrees that 10% - 12% is best for lowest emissions.

 

A

So what do you propose? A sealed box with a dehumidifier to be compulsory before the purchase of logs?

Fuck me mate, even the ducks have been wearing wellies these last three months!

[Stere]

Quote

The last study I saw which I thought you posted had this graph attached which shows how wet wood is bad for particulates but once you get below 20%-25% there is not much in it

Gets worse if too dry  is kinda interesting. Also remember noticing the same before from other studies

[openspaceman]

9 hours ago, Woodworks said:

Not my experience but I must admit we have never burnt wood as low as 16% unless we run the stove in the summer as background humidity it too high for them to get that low.

 

The last study I saw which I thought you posted had this graph attached which shows how wet wood is bad for particulates but once you get below 20%-25% there is not much in it

Graphs like that don't tell me much without a bit more context. Even so the green band of the curve seems to have been selected arbitrarily and doesn't indicate much reduction below 25%.

 

 

When Tom Reed told me that 12% was optimum  it made no sense to me, after all petrol and diesel have insignificant water content  and burn with low particulates, alcohol burns with low particulates and it is partially oxygenated like wood.

 

I'd love access to a lab to investigate stuff like this but I do have a few observations from my own fire. One is that if the fire is hot but turned down fairly low with a bed of hot char and I reload it with a couple of big medium sized logs without altering the air control after a few minutes the inverted flame from the air bleed at the rear middle of the fire quickly fill the firebox. I can go outside and see a faint dark haze from the fire. This I know to be because the secondary burn is too rich. The solution is to close the  air control till the bleed air can "catch up" with the offgas being produced as the hot firebox pyrolyses the logs. The evolution of pyrolysis offgas has exceeded the ability of the air supply to completely burn it. I can also crack the door open to allow a supply of secondary air but this simultaneously supplies more primary air and causes the power to shoot up.This does not happen with damper logs because the energy needed to evaporate the water damps down the pyrolysis.

 

I can see exactly the same if I put a piece of birch on in the same conditions, it's like throwing a plastic wrapper on, the air supply cannot keep up with the evolution of gases from the oily bark for a short while.

 

In practice it's not a problem because it means the stove is already producing 4kW and doens't need reloading yet and then only a piece at a time.