Firewood Moisture Content

[Gav73]

The nutrition test is fine in theory, but doesn’t work in practice as the tolerance levels are massive. Fat for example can have a tolerance of 20% either way if the fat content is between 10-40g per 100g. That could be a big variation from what the label might say.

The problem with any test is the real world will always be different to laboratory conditions. Just think about how we use firewood, best practice is to bring in firewood a few days before it’s going to be used to - because it drops the moisture content a bit more and therefore burns better.

If kiln dried logs in a warehouse were tested against air seasoned logs kept in a barn, even if both are properly seasoned, the moisture levels will different because of the relative humidity.

There just needs to be an agreed method of calculation that is reasonable and simple. Overcomplicate it and everyone gets confused and won’t do it.

I agree with it being an average, there just needs to be a sensible way of calculating it.

[openspaceman]

1 hour ago, Justme said:

How else can it be fair? 

Well the debate arises because of a change in the law, judging lawfulness is not about being fair it is about being just.

 

Then we have to consider why it was thought necessary to change the law; it was driven by the requirement to reduce airborne particulates which are largely the result of combustion.

 

So what is the effect of water in a log that affects emission of PIC particulates?

 

I'd guess it mostly arises from low combustion temperatures and those are mostly influenced by the amount of water evaporating in the combustion chamber, if so then it will be an average amount of water that influences combustion conditions rather than if the outside is dry and the inside wet.

 

Without getting involved in the debate over kiln drying versus air drying I would expect a log air dried over a few months to have a fairly uniform moisture content. OTOH an astute kiln operator wishing to increase his throughput may go for a short hot cycle that removes the same amount of moisture but only from the outer layers of the log and then sets them aside to gradually reach an equilibrium throughout.

 

A charlatan operator might choose to bake the logs skin deep and put them on the market without removing any appreciable amount of moisture,  these logs may show zero moisture on the surface and 30% when split and sampled in the middle.

[Justme]

12 minutes ago, openspaceman said:

Well the debate arises because of a change in the law, judging lawfulness is not about being fair it is about being just.

 

 

So what is the effect of water in a log that affects emission of PIC particulates?

 

I'd guess it mostly arises from low combustion temperatures and those are mostly influenced by the amount of water evaporating in the combustion chamber, if so then it will be an average amount of water that influences combustion conditions rather than if the outside is dry and the inside wet.

To be just the law has to be applied fairly.

Is there any evidence that a log with 0% for 50% of its volume and 40% for the other half burns the same as one that is an even 20% all through? 

Bit like putting two good logs on with one bad one.

[Woodworks]

If the official top dog of testing is oven drying the average moisture content is all that will matter as far as I can see. Happy to sell logs that have got a touch wet on the ends from rain that are otherwise dry. Be a nightmare if every part of the log had to be below 20% 

[Justme]

22 hours ago, Woodworks said:

 Be a nightmare if every part of the log had to be below 20% 

Thats not my point.

 

Randomly testing a few places & averaging the numbers might not mean the totality of the log averages under 20%.

 

If 50% of the log is a 0% & 50% at 40% then the totality is 20%.

 

But the only way to know that is to test by the fully drying in an oven method or mincing the log, mixing well & then testing a smaller sample by oven drying. Quicker faster & cheaper test.

 

 

The worse bit is that the testing will happen on a customers log from their store not at your point of sale. 

 

As we all know they leave them on the drive for 3 days in the rain & then put them in the dark dank musty coal shed.

 

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by Justme

[Gav73]

 
The worse bit is that the testing will happen on a customers log from their store not at your point of sale. 
 

There’s no way the testing will happen at a customers place, for that to happen you’d have to disclose the customers details, that opens up a whole data protection issue. There would also be the issue of proving which bit of firewood you supplied.

Woodsure will have your details and the test will be on your firewood at your premises.

[Justme]

7 hours ago, Gav73 said:

 

There’s no way the testing will happen at a customers place, for that to happen you’d have to disclose the customers details, that opens up a whole data protection issue. There would also be the issue of proving which bit of firewood you supplied.

Woodsure will have your details and the test will be on your firewood at your premises.

 

Try reading the terms.

For enforcement they test the logs after delivery.

Customer complains, you get charged, they test his logs, if crap you get fined/ charged.

[Gav73]

Try reading the terms.
For enforcement they test the logs after delivery.
Customer complains, you get charged, they test his logs, if crap you get fined/ charged.

Why would the customer complain?

Only reasons I can think of is they’re pissed off with you or they’ve been sold a duff batch.

[Justme]

12 hours ago, Gav73 said:

 

Why would the customer complain?

Only reasons I can think of is they’re pissed off with you or they’ve been sold a duff batch.

 

From some of the post on Arbtalk, to wet, too dry, too big, too small, wrong day, did not stack, look funny, wife / hubby dont like, ect ect. Now they have an official way to complain. Or your competitors can dob you in knowing you will get a charge / fine no matter the result.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

So, 

 

...The Air Quality (Domestic Solid Fuels Standards) (England) Regulations 2020, UK Statutory Instruments 2020 No. 1095, will only apply to England and focuses on the prohibition of the sale of wood in units less than two cubic metres unless it is authorised and a person must not supply a relevant unit of wood if the wood is not authorised wood. The sale of wood for combustion in domestic properties must include the relevant information and the ‘Ready to Burn’ mark as identified in the regulations. This part of the Regulations identifies the prohibited level means a moisture content of more than 20%. ... and ...enforcement of breaches of these Regulations [will be] by a local authority.

 

Has anyone told the LA [presumably trading standards] that they will be doing this?

 

Has there been a sudden surge of firewood suppliers rushing to register and subscribe to this 'system'?