A fair price for firewood?

[difflock]

Regardless of production costs, but rather based on calorific(heating) value.

Did a bit of research just now, and from memory.

Parriffin/kero=heating oil has a calorific value of nominal 45MJ/Kg, at a density of 0.8kg/litre @ £0.53/litre (incl Vat)=66p/kg

Dry Timber=15MJ/Kg, or nominal 13.5MJ/Kg for my 15% stuff

So I need 3.333kg of timber to be the same heating value as 1kg of kero.

Which simplistically puts an equivalent value of £0.20/kg on my timber.

So my 0.5m3 billet bundle weighing 165kg @£.20 is worth £33.00.

Or 1.0 m3 = £66.00

Delivered and stacked (to be the same as del oil)

But what extra price %age is acceptable for the amenity value of firewood.

If any.

[bolthole]

Well... your firewood is from a renewable source and while it isn't necessarily carbon neutral it's a lot closer than fossil fuel.

 

So there's some of the additional cost 'justified'... the amenity value of the woodland is something that some might say can't have a price put on it, but I know there is a system for putting a price on the amenity value of trees in the built landscape. Can anyone comment about valuing woodland, considering all the benefits to man and the environment?

 

Might it be that it's not firewood that's too expensive.... maybe it's that fossil fuel is too cheap?

 

I realise that anyone who has to fuel a vehicle or piece of machinery is going to have something to say about that last comments... I'll get my coat.

[Ricbob]

Im not too sure there is much point in calculating a price point based on calorific value as the effective heat, that's what the consumer cares about, is dependent on the burners efficiency. So off the top of my head i would expect wood stoves to be less efficient than a comparable oil burner and so would lower the price of your wood even further.

[difflock]

:001_tongue:Hush:001_tongue:

I were aware o the possibility of lower stove efficiencies.

But a lot of oil boilers be lucky to be 80% efficient, plus the "transmission" losses in piping the hot water to the radiators.

And the heat lost to the boiler room or worse "dog house" outside.

And a modern high efficiency stove should be 75%, and immediately dumps the heat into the room:thumbup:

And a fire in a room "feels" warmer.

So I figgered, near enough "even stevens":001_tt2:

marcus

[wrsni]

Might it be that it's not firewood that's too expensive.... maybe it's that fossil fuel is too cheap?

 

Nail on the head, but it's a reality that nobody wants to face up to.

 

For as long as human life exists there can be timber available, it is a renewable energy source.

 

Fossil fuels however some day WILL run out (oil and gas relatively soon), and given that fact it is remarkable how wastefully they're being treated at present.

 

Or is it just that we know they will last for the lifetime of most of us and while we claim to care about our children and their children, we're actually much too short sighted and selfish to worry about the picture even further ahead.

[difflock]

Wrsni,

I seriously doubt wood fuel could replace the prodidious amount of hydrocarbons consumed worldwide.

A case in point, during my "calorific value for kerosene" search, the Wiki entry I read, from beginning to end, mentioned that that Indonesia (or perhaps India) heavily subsidized the price of Kero.

To prevent de-aforestation in their countries.

food for thought!

[openspaceman]

Parriffin/kero=heating oil has a calorific value of nominal 45MJ/Kg, at a density of 0.8kg/litre @ £0.53/litre (incl Vat)=66p/kg

 

I've just paid 65.75p for gasoil with similar cv

 

Dry Timber=15MJ/Kg, or nominal 13.5MJ/Kg for my 15% stuff

 

I think that is a bit low, hardwood oven dry is about 18.6MJ/kg and the additional losses from dumping the extra 15% moisture as vapour up the flue is only about 0.5MJ, bigger losses are likely from excess air.

 

But what extra price %age is acceptable for the amenity value of firewood.

If any.

 

Whatever your customers will stand, it is a luxury good and not a fuel

[woody3]

 

Fossil fuels however some day WILL run out (oil and gas relatively soon), and given that fact it is remarkable how wastefully they're being treated at present.

 

 

around 500 years for the oil that is known about...........

[wrsni]

Wrsni,

I seriously doubt wood fuel could replace the prodidious amount of hydrocarbons consumed worldwide.

 

With respect, while that's quite correct it's not really my point.

 

Fossil fuels ARE a finite resource, the timescale is hugely contentious of-course but eventually it'll happen and given our rapidly accelerating usage of oil and gas especially, easily extracted (and therefore cheap) supplies of these two things is most likely to be measured in decades.

 

Seems strange then that they energy they produce is valued lower than genuinely renewable sources, timber included. If nothing else it only facilitates waste and regarding oil and gas we as a species are being shockingly wasteful at present with something which will only last for a very short time and never ever be available again once exhausted.

Edited April 27, 2014 by wrsni