Burning pine for firewood. Not a simple answer

As far as I know there's no relationship between poplar and birch. One is Betula, one is Populus-- individual species. Regardless, don't sell poplar short as it has its place in the firewood industry. As product to sell in bundles to campers, trembling aspen and large tooth aspen, when cured burns clean, gives off little smoke and usually burns with a snap and crackle that gives off sparks galore--something those tourist type campers soak up while sitting around their Winnybagles. And when dry, rings as clear as any hardwood when whacked together.

Generally I use the soft hard woods or softwood in the spring or fall when I don't need a hot fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

One thing I have never been able to find is good information on the BTU's per species of wood in Ontario 3 different ones and 3 different answer.

---

GW - the quick and dirty BTU calculation is based on the weight of the wood. If a chunk of poplar weighs half of what a chunk of oak the same size weighs, it has about half the BTU's. The one exception to that is gummy wood - it has more than you would think from the weight. A ton of oak and a ton of poplar should have about the same BTUs.

There's a pretty good BTU table. It shows poplar at about 2/3 of oak.
It does seem a bit odd elm falls halfway between the two. I'd think elm would be right up there with oak.

https://www.firewood-for-life.com/firewood-btu.html

I found this paragraph on another chart with similar values - more or less what I said above.

[COLOR=#1A1A1A]All firewood has about the same BTU per pound. Non resinous wood has around 8000 to 8500 BTU per pound, resinous wood has around 8600 to 9700 BTU per pound. Less dense softwoods have less BTU per cord than more dense hardwood but they also weigh less per cord. Resinous wood has more BTU per pound because the resins have more BTU per pound than wood fiber has

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 73hunter

I need to buy a chimney sweep, for those that have one....are they better to be nylon or steel ? I have a 6” Sentinel chimney

---

Selkirk recommends against using steel bristles in their chimneys. The little pamphlet said nylon or brass.

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk

Depends on what document you look at. I have 3 and all 3 are different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

GW - the quick and dirty BTU calculation is based on the weight of the wood. If a chunk of poplar weighs half of what a chunk of oak the same size weighs, it has about half the BTU's. The one exception to that is gummy wood - it has more than you would think from the weight. A ton of oak and a ton of poplar should have about the same BTUs.

There's a pretty good BTU table. It shows poplar at about 2/3 of oak.
It does seem a bit odd elm falls halfway between the two. I'd think elm would be right up there with oak.

https://www.firewood-for-life.com/firewood-btu.html

I found this paragraph on another chart with similar values - more or less what I said above.

[COLOR=#1A1A1A]All firewood has about the same BTU per pound. Non resinous wood has around 8000 to 8500 BTU per pound, resinous wood has around 8600 to 9700 BTU per pound. Less dense softwoods have less BTU per cord than more dense hardwood but they also weigh less per cord. Resinous wood has more BTU per pound because the resins have more BTU per pound than wood fiber has

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oaknut

Selkirk recommends against using steel bristles in their chimneys. The little pamphlet said nylon or brass.

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk

---

I haven't seen a wire brush for sale for many years, I assumed that was because the industry is dominated by Selkirk and that's what they recommend.

Also have to say...those nylon bristles are MORE than adequate to clean the chimney, nasty hard bristles Haha..

I have no problem selling the poplar that I cut to the cottage and camping crowd. They can't get enough of it. Makes nice bonfires for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

Depends on what document you look at. I have 3 and all 3 are different.

---

Are they significantly different? If so - some are obviously right and some are obviously wrong.
Red Oak should be around 24, white pine around 14. If you have a chart like that, it is probably reasonable.

Here's one from Ontario Woodlot. Red Oak is 27 and on this webpage Red Oak is 21

https://www.offroaders.com/tech/firewood-BTU.htm


Table: 2 – Heating Value of Ontario Tree
Species
Species Gross Heating Value
(million BTU) *
Rock Elm 32.0
Shagbark Hickory 30.6
White Oak 30.6
Sugar Maple 29.0
Beech 27.8
Red Oak 27.3
Yellow Birch 26.2
White Ash 25.0
White Elm 24.5
Red Maple 24.0
Tamarack 24.0
Black Cherry 23.5
White Birch 23.4
Hemlock 17.9
Trembling Aspen 17.7
White Pine 17.1
Basswood 17.0
White Cedar 16.3
White Spruce 16.2
Balsam Fir 15.5

It's not like it's a big deal the BTU'ss, but I find it interesting.
I generally burn what ever I get for free, which tends to be Ash, elm, poplar, maple.