arboriculturist

I have been offered various Softwood species recently apart from the regular species and I am trying to determine which species come out on top for the Fastest to air dry and the species that generally burn best when air dried. Here are my findings for the - TOP 5: DRYING Larch Douglas Monterey Cypress Leyland Cypress (Lleylandii) Hemlock BURNING Douglas Larch Monterey Hemlock Leyland PLEASE COPY AND PASTE YOURS.

So what are the several advantages of kiln dried over say air dried firewood at 16% MC, as I am struggling to find them ? I can honestly say I have never had woodworm larvae in any of our firewood logs. So how do you assess the MC of the Kiln dried and the air dried you sell - by Titration testing or wet basis moisture meter?

The only research I would trust is direct from a University who have no vested interest in the conclusions. We all know that leading stove manufacturers have been telling consumers to only burn kiln dried Hardwood for years, none of which is sustainable. Most stove retailers promote only kiln dried hardwood as that is what they sell. Basically it is common knowledge the fastest way to dry timber is with airflow, heat ideally the 2 combined. The poster needs to basically mirror a polytunnel - solar gain from the sun and very good airflow with the prevailing wind blowing through the stack. Worst scenario possibly is wrap in plastic.

For doing what the man is asking, yours is the most sensible estimate. Loading the log deck takes minutes so the poster may as well do that himself which basically cuts out all the skilled element of the vacancy. I would trial a few for a day each on firewood production guaging their productivity and that will soon sort the wheat from the chaff.

Yes, many people who are not linked to bureaucracy know that circa. 25% MC is perfect to burn and when compared to the 'scientists' graphs, shows only a marginal difference in kWh produced compared to 20% MC. After factoring in forced drying etc. to achieve the required sub 20% MC, in reality particulate emissions are no less when burning wood at 20% MC. Stubby, all our noise is falling upon deaf ears, we've just got to lap it up or some make just keep their fingers crossed - it's a simplistic as that.

In their eyes what do you see the difference as?

As Woodworks posted above in his excerpt: The requirement for wood sold in volumes under 2m3 to be dry (less than 20% moisture) will apply from 1 May 2021. We recognise that small wood producers may struggle to meet the requirements straight away. Given this, small suppliers will have an extra year to comply (until 1 May 2022). " or does one have to prove it via (say) yearly audits from industry assessors " The powers that be can turn up unannounced at any time or following a complaint from a customer with a moisture meter who claims the Firewood sold to them as ready to burn is not below 20% MC. Don't you just love legislation - Grrrrr

'agencies all work in collaboration, so for a start you have the eyes and ears of the Police, LPA's, Environment Agency, DEFFRA and Customs and Excise to name some.'

I take your point, however this is related to the Firewood Industry, that is what the legislation applies to that is now regulated by Woodsure. The sawmilling supply chain is another matter with different legislation. I didn't draft the legislation, I am merely reiteration the information I have been given, right or wrong that is for the individual to decide and challenge if they so wish. Perhaps you have had meeting and have more current information than myself, as the last meeting I had was nearly 2 weeks ago. The feeling I got was the matter is not up for discussion and the legislation is coming into force at the current documented timescales.

Double standards it may be, but to gain the Certification, which by the way, is now planned to cover all firewood sales, basically you will have to follow their rules. The "Industry" said that 20% MC was an ill founded MC level and 25% MC achieved the same level of PM emissions as 20% MC when forced drying, additional infrastructure, additional transportation etc. are factored in. Unfortunately the 'Industry' is 10's of thousands of small scale producers who have not the time, money or energy to contest the legislation. There is know Industry body I know of who are interested in taking the Government to task. Remember the 'discussions' that informed the legislators were held between DEFFRA and the big players who all force dry their timber. I fully support the original HETAS 25% MC threshold, that is a sensible level that we all can attain, but I am powerless to influence the legislators decision of a maximum 20% MC.

After a lifetime of work it's great to hear you can still do what you want and protect those crops. 😀

Deffra, with Woodsure came up with ever tighter regulations that they propose all Firewood merchants will adhere to before to long. It has been decided whereas although a felling licence demonstrated that timber is legally felled, it does not demonstrate that it has been harvested sustainably, which is why now to meet their criteria they insist on evidence on woodland management plans for the sites where timber sourced. This is one reason they are not keen on Arb. arinsings and Firewood merchants who accept them from various tree surgeons. Their proposals are to tighten up the whole shooting match - period. 'Got you over a barrel' comes to mind.

The regs for Woodsure go far further than just a felling licence. Needs to be management plans, and true sustainability, they even look at soil management and flora and fauna.

I'm not a fan of steel, leads to more wounded even 2 shot sizes larger.

I am just annoyed that we are all being railroaded to follow another raft of regulations and we just have to tow the line. I actually think i will benefit as I can meet all the criteria, albeit with investment and effort. More annoyed it will kill off a lot of good small rural businesses.