Jump to content
cessna

Have the definitive regulations regarding firewood?

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, jackpease said:

transporting

 

59 minutes ago, jackpease said:

. I now bonfire loads of huge trees as if they can't be sold for money, it is not worth transporting them out of the field. Where's the sense in that - apart from an entire bunch of jobs for Woodsure people

Hadn’t thought of it that way since I don’t sell but can certainly see where yome coming from!

 

Just as well burn it on site rather than shift it just for shifting it sake. 
 

The law of unintended consequence....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gdh said:

I think despite the issues cubic metres is the best way overall. You could charge per KW of heat produced but you would have to work it out for each customer. Someone with a biomass boiler is going to get a lot more energy from a load of logs than someone with a log burner or even an open fire.

I would think selling it by weight would be best. That is how coal was always sold, and that worked ok. Say you sell a cubic metre of logs, what happens when the customer stacks them neatly and then says it does not measure a metre square??

 

john..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, john87 said:

I would think selling it by weight would be best. That is how coal was always sold, and that worked ok. Say you sell a cubic metre of logs, what happens when the customer stacks them neatly and then says it does not measure a metre square??

 

john..

Yeah exactly my point earlier. I was not surprised but was still surprised by the loss in size if you see what I mean... I moved what I thought was a (Wood)shed load of logs. Turned out it was more like 2/3rds of a shed load.

The problem with weight sales is you need to factor in MC. Hence why a burn value would be better. It could be tweaked to account for MC such that it eliminates the variability of the weight through MC. Higher MC wood would have a lower rating, so it would cancel out the additional weight. Each species of wood could get its own variable rate of decline in its burn rating, such that it accounts for the amount of weight that species gains as it gets wet. Different species get different rating start points based on their output. It wouldn't be that complicated, a system to allow you to input the weight and wood mix, plus average MC, and out you get a burn rating.

Of course its still cheatable. But assuming woodfuel suppliers did it for themselves as a coop rather than via a 3rd party, it wouldn't cost too much to administer/certify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ben Pinnick said:

Yeah exactly my point earlier. I was not surprised but was still surprised by the loss in size if you see what I mean... I moved what I thought was a (Wood)shed load of logs. Turned out it was more like 2/3rds of a shed load.

The problem with weight sales is you need to factor in MC. Hence why a burn value would be better. It could be tweaked to account for MC such that it eliminates the variability of the weight through MC. Higher MC wood would have a lower rating, so it would cancel out the additional weight. Each species of wood could get its own variable rate of decline in its burn rating, such that it accounts for the amount of weight that species gains as it gets wet. Different species get different rating start points based on their output. It wouldn't be that complicated, a system to allow you to input the weight and wood mix, plus average MC, and out you get a burn rating.

Of course its still cheatable. But assuming woodfuel suppliers did it for themselves as a coop rather than via a 3rd party, it wouldn't cost too much to administer/certify.

Well, i dont think weight would be a problem. Take coal: there was all different sorts, some great, some not so great, some stoney imported shit, but you still bought it by weight. Calorific value did not really come into it. The customer bought the sort they bought and that was that.

 

Problem with going all scientific like you say, is that once the customer takes it home and gets it all wet, all the figures will be wrong anyway.. Same thing with coal.. You would think coal was coal, but any old person will tell you that "old coal" was not as good as fresh coal..

 

You would spend more time explaining it all to the customer than you would working on trees!!

 

john..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, john87 said:

Hmm, see what you mean.. Look lovely logs though!! What does a load of them cost?? They look really good!!

 

john..

Two of those buckets pictured is a loose load of 2.6 cubic metre. That's 269 plus delivery. They're mixed hardwood, seasoned for 2yr then kiln finished.

A loose load of mixed softwood would be 175.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, at the end of the day, you could all just ignore the rules..
 
What will happen?? Precisely nothing. Look at the "part "P" thing for electrical work. Half the councils admit they are not interested. Sure, if you want to get building regs signed off you will have to have the appropriate cert, but even building regs do not seem to matter much.. The people next door to me built a great big extension, it was permitted development, but they did not even bother with building regs, neither did the council. They sold the house and the new people took out insurance in case the council ever did turn up [they did not]
 
As for everything else, look at all the "electricians" on facebook and elsewhere. Most of them are not even qualified, never mind able to issue certs. Think the council even care..
 
The planning department here is only open a few days a week as they cannot afford enough staff. Even then it seems they are more concerned with pointless paperwork, "construction environment management plans" and that sort of nonsense, oh, and bats..
 
Take it from me, they have not got the time or money to worry about wood.
 
As for the wood being tested at the customers place, the conversation in court will go some thing like this.
 
The wood was dry when i sold it..
 
No it was not, and the inspector tested it and he said it was wet too
 
Counsel for the defence.. "Was the wood wet when you got it??"
 
no,
 
Can you prove that??
 
it is wet now, the inspector said
 
did it get wet after you bought it.
 
no
 
can you prove that??
 
it was wet it was wet!!!
 
Let me put it another way, is it POSSIBLE that it got wet [burden of proof and all that] that it got wet at your place??
 
It never it never!!!
 
Can you prove that..
 
case dismissed..
 
I would not even worry..
 
john...
I don't think the people making the rules have any idea just how many firewood sellers there are outside of London, it's a completely unmanageable system.

I think there should be a threshold limit on volume that requires you to register, say under 50cube. Personally I only sell about 10 a year, am I going to register at £500/year for that?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Doug Tait said:

Two of those buckets pictured is a loose load of 2.6 cubic metre. That's 269 plus delivery. They're mixed hardwood, seasoned for 2yr then kiln finished.

A loose load of mixed softwood would be 175.

That’ll be collect price Doug is it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, devonbrion1998 said:

when you say shut you down,had you gone through and paid for the woodsure process?

No - took the view that the cost (£500 a year) and the requirements (not entirely set but included snap inspections of my clamps) made it clear that the direct yearly cost and effectively the need to dry wood indoors or even kiln dry made it uneconomic.
   Yep trading standards have been hollowed out by austerity and covid but with Woodsure clearly keen to get their money, you can be sure that Woodsure will be doing the ferreting out of those not paying their £500 and dobbing them in it to trading standards - it's an offence so sanctions are non-trivial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Vedhoggar said:

That’ll be collect price Doug is it?

Yes, delivery is extra, cost depends on distance. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our work is 95 percent domestic arb. This means the timber produced is more effort to process into logs than a lorry load of forestry thinnings. We only process into logs for my own domestic use, and the few longstanding customers we still have; we do this when the weather is foul and unfit for climbing etc. I only sell unseasoned logs, and I have never been interested in delivering less than 2 cu m. More recently I have picked up a few customers who each year buy timber (in sizes one person can move) to log up themselves a year or two in advance. I feel the whole 💩Woodsure💩 thing is an utter farce, as clearly do the majority of us.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  •  

  • Featured Adverts

  • Tip site reviews

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.