Spruce

Hi all, I normally cut and split my own wood but am pretty much unable to do so this year through illness. I'm looking for somebody to come and process about one and a half artic loads of softwood (probably all roughly 3 metre lengths) into 19 inch lengths and split such that the measurement across the split end is around four to five inches. I may be able to organise somebody with a Loadall/telehandler type machine if required. I'm about 5 miles west of Banff (Aberdeenshire). I'd be grateful for an idea of cost and availability as well as the maximum diameter your processor can handle. Any interest is much appreciated. Spruce

You should have bought a Husky instead...

In view of recent 'which is best' threads: Dry softwood!

Yes, or if you're fitting the liner in a big old flue you can just pour vermiculite insulation beads in from the top. It's relatively cheap. I think insulation is well worth the effort - the chimney sweep always comments on how clean our flue is and I always wonder why we have it swept twice a year... We fitted a Brewer UFO MK11 chimney cowl from Plumbing Supplies | BES Gas & Plumbing Fittings which fixed occasional downdraught problems. In any case, I hate the sound of hail clattering down the liner.

No - but if I stacked it like that I wouldn't want to burn it. Ever.

There's a big difference between 'need' and 'the regulations say you should have one'. If there's already sufficient ventilation there isn't any point in adding more for any reason other than to satisfy the regulations.

Yes, I know, but the building regs are a 'one size fits all' nonsense. The reality is that you don't need a vent if the property is already well ventilated. What exactly do you mean by 'signing off'?

You only actually need an airvent if you live in a modern hermetically sealed house. If you've any concerns buy a carbon monoxide alarm. For a big boiler stove I'd recommend an Aarow Stratford TF70 or TF90, I wouldn't fancy taking a gamble on a no-name stove at that kind of money!

My experience has been that cutting and splitting the wood to the size you're going to use in the fire, stacking on pallets then covering the top (just the top!) with tarps in the autumn seems to get the wood ready to burn quickest. I haven't had any trouble with mould or rot doing this. I've never tried putting pallets on top of the stack, no doubt this would help a bit with airflow but I don't think it's essential. If you have a cord stack as well, yes, do tarp the top for the winter but don't expect a drying miracle...

I'm a bit worried that you might be on a hiding to nothing. Clearview have a warning that the back boiler will affect conbustion temperatures here: Clearview 650 Woodburning Stove Dimensions We have an Aarrow Stratford boiler stove which heats the flue to 250 deg C within 10 minutes of lighting and goes on to 500 C plus in a few minutes more if nobody notices and turns down the air. It heats a 4 bedroom house with underfloor heating which presents a similar load to a thermal store. It may be that you won't be able to fix this without using a proper boiler stove.

The problem is that to a layman a tonne bag of wood holds a tonne of wood. It may be that to those 'in the know' a tonne bag of wood is actually a bag of uncertain volume containing an uncertain volume of wood, and this may seem obvious to you, but to the layman it just seems like another con by those dodgy firewood merchants. I'm not stupid, but before I started reading Arbtalk I had no idea that a tonne bag of wood didn't actually weigh anything even vaguely in the ballpark of a tonne, because it had never occurred to me to question it. I just thought it was probably a bit short of a tonne and I was only being ripped off a little. Yes, I do understand water content, air space, density and volume but as a firewood customer I just hadn't thought about it. It's the perception that's the problem, and honestly, with the frequency this sort of thing is discussed I'm surprised to see one of you guys talking about tonne bags.

We've had quite a lot of this appearing on Scots pine in the woodshed this year. The dark blob in the photo is about an inch and a half square, when touched it disintegrates into a fine brown/black powder. Most of the pine has been infested with what I assume is Bark beetle and has both the white fungus that seems to start under the bark and the 'classic' blue/black/green staining through a lot of the sapwood. Are these blobs associated or something completely different?

That's a Really Useful Page. Nice work!

Mine is definitely made in China, and they look identical even down to the health and safety label. The Sheppach must be made in China - there's no way stuff this cheap is made in Europe.

I've had this for six years and split an artic load of wood with it every year: Buy Axminster LS5T 5-ton Electric Hydraulic Log Splitter from Axminster, fast delivery for the UK It's £198.50 at the moment. The only fault has been a failed weld on the splitting wedge last year which was repaired by the local shipyard for a few quid. I process 19" logs with it so there's very little ram travel before the split, if you're doing stuff that's much shorter you need to stick something between the ram and the log to speed things up.

There's something wrong with your stove, your wheelbarrow or your drying. We heat a 4 bedroom house exclusively with Sitka and/or Scots pine, the living areas are usually around 20-21 degrees and the worst case is one barrow a day. You will burn a larger volume of softwood than hardwood, but provided the wood is dry the weight should be about the same.

If the subsidies disappear in 25-30 years time the biomass generating plant will go as well. It seems likely that the 'fracking' for gas and carbon capture will be viable by then, so there will be no need for it.

Lucky b*****d!

I *think* that briquettes made in a proper briquette press don't have anything added, the lignin in the wood sticks it all together. The need for additives comes when the press doesn't apply enough pressure.

If you mean the resin you don't need to worry about it. There are myths on the go about it tarring up the flue or whatever, it's all rubbish. Wood dries quickest if it has a good airflow. Stacked outside and covered with a tarp is about as quick as it gets.

Martin, I was in a similar position to you about 4 years ago. I wound up buying a Husqvarna 345e with a 15" bar (the 'e' range is, or was, their 'semi-professional range'), by sheer chance it's turned out to be exactly right for what I use it for. I cut up about an artic load of wood a year - anything up to 20" diameter without ever feeling the saw is underpowered, and I've never had any problems with the saw. I have the 15" 1.3mm bar with full chisel chain and it belts through the wood provided it is sharp. I really doubt you would get any significant benefit from a larger saw than mine - it would be heavier and use more fuel, I think these disadvantages would outweigh any advantages. Unless you're dealing with massive timber I'd suggest sticking with a 15" bar to get the best cutting speed. The thing that will make the most difference to how fast and enjoyable your 'cutting experience' is will be learning to sharpen the chain well. I struggled with this for a long time, eventually I found someone who actually knew how to do it and after a 5 minute lesson I was off. I still don't make a perfect job of it every time, especially if I haven't been using the saw for a few months. The key is to stop and sharpen whenever you start to find cutting feels like hard work. Don't think 'I'll just finish these lengths then stop' - just stop and sharpen.

Sell the 25 acres as standing timber, stick with the oil and put your feet up.

The subsidies for renewables etc are for the benefit of the man selling, not the man buying. These subsidies make electricity and taxation more expensive for you and I, not cheaper.

Yes, and I apologise to Nick. I'm immensely frustrated by the absurdities of the carbon reduction subsidy system and I clicked 'post' before thinking instead of after.

Ok, yes, I'm sure you're right that the renewable heat subsidy comes from central taxation, and yes, we do pay for the government. The difference, though, is more than semantic. The FITs for solar pv and wind push up the price of electricity which hits people on low incomes hardest. If all the FITs were paid from central taxation then the bulk of the subsidy burden would fall on the wealthy, which seems to me to be fairer. It's absolute madness to try and meet our 'renewable obligation' by encouraging a huge number of tiny but very expensive and unreliable generators. We won't meet the target (if it is measured by carbon emission reduction, at least), and we'll have a huge 20 year plus cost burden to deal with. The only low carbon options that are realistic are tidal and shale gas with carbon capture, wind/solar etc that rely on the weather are of virtually no benefit. Aside from anything else the grid infrastructure was designed to distribute power from a small number of large generators, we have already passed the point where the grid can't absorb all the wind power generated in disparate locations and at times the wind generators are paid roughly 10 times what they would have 'earned' from their electricity to turn their turbines off.