My woodstove came with a list of the various hardwoods and softwoods and
their BTU's. It showed a good difference between the oaks (highest BTU's)
and the softwoods. Just a fact I thought I'd state from the Osburn woodstove
site.
Courtney

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Always be yourself, because the people that matter don't mind,
and the ones who mind, don't matter.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob" <becida@COMCAST.NET>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: Vanagon Winter Survival Kit Question

> At  11/1/2009 03:23 AM,Mike S wrote:
>>At 01:01 AM 11/1/2009, Rob wrote...
>>>Extra heat? That is the wood burning in addition to the wax.
>>
>>Hey, just like an artificial log! But, wax holds much more heat
>>energy than wood, so your claim doesn't make sense, since the one
>>could just use more wax in place of the wood. (paraffin ~= 20,000
>>BTU/lb, wood ~= 6,000)
>
> Try it and see or just bad mouth it?
>
>
>
>>I know what you mean. If you don't study or research things, and
>>just believe "old wive's tales," then you don't always make good
>>choices. Don't you wish you had found out sooner that aspen holds
>>14.7M BTU/cord, weighs 2290 lbs/cord, and produces 6419 BTU/lb,
>>while white oak holds 25.7M BTU/cord, and weighs 4012 lbs/cord,
>>which is 6405 BTU/lb? So, the difference is a full 0.2% in energy
>>per pound. The US Forest Service ranks pine at the top.
>
>
> The problem here is you are mixing volumes (a cord) with weight.
> A cord of hardwood has more energy in it than a cord of softwood, a
> lot more (this is a volume measurement), and it weighs more. You put
> the same measure (volume) of sawdust in a can and there is more heat
> in the hardwood saw dust. Putting saw dust in a coffee can is a volume
> thing.
>
> I don't know anything about presto-logs but I have talked to one
> person who used one of these survival candles.
>
> My "claim" is that I talked to someone who used one, it is easy to
> make and would store well in the back of a Vanagon and if you ever
> really needed it it might help. What are you claiming on all this? Do
> you have a point to this? Why are we wasting bandwidth on this?  What
> is your point?
>
> Add something useful or stir the pot, <shrug>. I'm tired of dealing
> with your stirring but will jump back in if you add something useful to
> this.
>
>
>
>
> Rob
> becida@comcast.net