Yeah, they pass the EPA test, but softwoods still gum up and destroy your catalytic converter over time. So they say.

@@johndoeboston123 Many years ago I did field testing on those stoves. It was interesting how much extra heat was in that smoke that got burnt, about a third more. We tracked wood use. The trick to prevent gumming up was to run hot enough when loading with wood for the catalyst to "light off" (about 500°F) which would burn off tars. If you just filled the stove with wood and let it smolder without initial cat heat-up, it wouldn't burn cleanly . The main issue we found was poor design of some stoves. They had undersized catalysts and/or did not protect them from flame impingement, causing catalytic converters to get over 1600°F and damage themselves. The better designs did not, at least over the years of the study. At some point, many would require catalyst replacement. I preferred the non-catalytic types and used one for a couple of decades. The main issue with those was that they had to run hot enough to keep a flame, reducing maximum burn time. If you like to look at flames, the smaller units generally did a better job of keeping the "glass" window clear without overheating the average room.

His oak number is wrong unless you are burning Live Oak(yea right), and Hickory(several species) by and large are higher than your average Red/White oak or even black etc oaks which come in around 22-->24Mbtu. I forget which hickory, but it is worse than red/white oak. As you would guess it is not used as hickory lumber

@@w8stral I wondered because of the thousands of trees I own many are shag bark and smooth bark hickory. And the dozen of so hurricanes iv been hit with since I was old enough to remember the hickory never gets knocked of these things are extremely strong.

@@SithLordmatthew I believe Shagbark is near the top of the top in terms of density and strength of wood. Just bought a couple new hickory handles for my axe otherwise I would ask for a couple branches. I'd pay shipping for shagbark just to play around with it.

Majority of these trees are NOT cut into lumber is why. And his numbers are way off. Live oak down south has his 29mBtu, but vast majority of oak never reaches 24Mbtu other than red/white oak. Majority of Doug Fir also burn at 24Mbtu or higher, not 20 unless you are burning christmas trees... Also his Maple number is WAY high as well as vast majority of maple species come in around 22-->24Mbtu. His list is pure Garbage.

Hi there! Just for reference, that graph was made with data from Utah State University. You can check it out yourself here: extension.usu.edu/forestry/resources/forest-products/wood-heating

Hey! Thanks for weighing in. You're right, of course - there are so many firewood species in the U.S. The idea of this list is to expose novice wood burners to the idea that different species burn differently. A regional list is definitely on our bucket list, though!

Thanks, will do!