United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Forest

Products

Laboratory

Research

Paper

FPL–RP–656

North America’s 

Wood Pellet 

Sector

Henry Spelter

Daniel Toth
August 2009

Corrected September 2009

Spelter, Henry; Toth, Daniel. 2009. North America’s wood pellet sector. 

Research Paper FPL-RP-656. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 21 p.

A limited number of free copies of this publication are available to the 

public from the Forest Products Laboratory, One Gifford Pinchot Drive, 

Madison, WI 53726–2398. This publication is also available online at 

www.fpl.fs.fed.us. Laboratory publications are sent to hundreds of libraries 

in the United States and elsewhere.

The Forest Products Laboratory is maintained in cooperation with the 

University of Wisconsin. This paper was funded by the University of Tennessee as part of the U.S. Endowment for Forestry study of wood energy 

sectors.

The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information 

and does not imply endorsement by the United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) of any product or service.

The USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, 

sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part 

of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. 

(Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities 

who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET 

Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250–9410, or call (800) 795–3272 

(voice) or (202) 720–6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider 

and employer.

Abstract

The North American wood pellet sector is profiled in this 

paper. A small pellet industry has existed since the 1930s, 

but its main growth occurred in the wake of the energy crisis 

in the 1970s. Its current spurt is even greater, growing from 

1.1 million metric tonnes in 2003 to 4.2 million 2008. It 

is set to reach 6.2 million in 2009. Most plants are small, 

relying on sawmill residues for fiber and thus are limited 

to 100,000 tonnes or less per year. A number of new mills 

have been built to process chipped roundwood and have 

capacities three to four times as large. Most pellets made in 

the United States are consumed domestically, but a growing 

offshore market is boosting exports. By contrast, most Canadian pellets are shipped overseas. The reliance on sawmill 

residues led to imbalances between supply and demand for 

fiber as the sawmilling sector retrenched in the 2008–2009 

recession. This has led mills to turn to roundwood or other 

non-sawmill sources of fiber. The wood pellet industry and 

use of wood pellets as energy are in their relative infancy 

in North America and the recent growth of both has been 

fueled by increases in the cost of fossil energy. However, 

policies aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the 

atmosphere could loom as bigger factors in the future. 

Keywords: Wood pellets, demand and supply, production 

capacity

Contents

Page

Background...........................................................................1

Wood Pelletization ................................................................1

Procedures.............................................................................2 

Industry Characteristics ........................................................2

 Plant Size ..........................................................................2

 Capacity and Production...................................................3

 Markets .............................................................................3

 Employment......................................................................3

 Fiber Supply Sources........................................................3

 Fiber Demand Sources......................................................4

 Fiber Demand and Supply Balances.................................5

 Other Sources of Pellet Demand.......................................6

 Fiber Costs........................................................................6

 Product Quality Standards ................................................7

Summary and Observations..................................................7

Literature Cited .....................................................................8

Appendix—Pellet Mill Locations...................................... 10

Conversion table

Unit

Conversion

factor Metric unit 

Square foot 0.0929 Square meter 

Board feet 

(hardwood lumber) 

0.00236 Cubic meter 

Inches 25.4 millimeter 

Short ton 0.907 Metric tonne 
Background

Wood has historically been the primary source of non-food 

energy for humans. Though its importance ebbed as more 

convenient alternatives were found, when market disruptions occasionally caused the costs of the alternatives to 

spike, interest in and use of wood as fuel was rekindled. 

The most recent surge in energy costs was no different. Additionally, a new impetus arose from the desire, particularly 

in Europe, to limit carbon dioxide emissions. In that context, 

the use of wood for energy is regarded as neutral because 

new tree growth recaptures carbon released from burning it.

To supplement fossil fuels with wood can take several 

pathways. In addition to being burned for heat, it can be 

processed into liquid fuels (ethanol through fermentation 

or hydrocarbons by the Fischer-Tropsch process, Niemantsverdriet 2007.) or burned in power plants to generate 

electricity. However, in the wood-to-liquid fuel conversion, 

up to half the embedded energy in the material is lost (Rakos 2008). When wood is burned to produce electricity, a 

similar loss occurs unless the waste heat is captured, which 

is seldom the case. Both of these options also involve substantial capital expense that constrains the economical use 

of these options under present circumstances. Burning wood 

directly for space heating, by contrast, is more energy efficient. Modern stoves use 85% to 95% of the energy for heat, 

and when the heating source being displaced is electric, the 

savings in fuel are magnified (Rakos 2008).

One way in which the market has responded to these changes has been to supply wood energy in pellet form. Wood in 

its raw state has low energy density, contains half its weight 

in water, and transporting and handling it is costly because 

of its low bulk density. Pelletization improves upon these 

handicaps. By densifying wood, the energy content per unit 

volume is increased to near that of coal. The moisture content is also lowered from around 50% to less than 10% (wet 

basis), enhancing its heating value by reducing the heat of 

vaporization and stack-gas losses. With less moisture, pellets burn hotter and more completely, thus reducing harmful 

particulate emissions. The dewatering and increased bulk 

density also makes hauling more economical. Lastly, material handling is simplified by virtue of the size reduction, 

enabling automated feeding of heating appliances rather 

than manual feeding as with firewood.

Pelletizing wood for stoker fuel in the United States may 

have begun in the 1930s, but its modern surge began in the 

1970s in the wake of the energy crisis (Peksa-Blanchard and 

others 2007). A product called Woodex made from sawmill 

residues was marketed as a waste-derived fuel that was 

interchangeable with coal, yet less polluting. Although that 

company failed, several others, mainly in the Pacific Northwest, continued to make pellets and sell them as fuel and 

animal bedding.

Since 2000, the costs of fossil fuels have risen steadily, leading to growing interest in alternatives. This was intensified 

in the wake of disruptions caused by Hurricane Katrina in 

2005. Pellet producers point to that event as the catalyst 

for the demand surge that elevated pellets as a serious alternative energy option (Harrison 2006). This interest was 

reinforced by a European Union target to supply 20% of its 

energy needs from renewable sources by 2020, an ambitious goal difficult to achieve from indigenous sources alone 

(Rakos 2008). Ensuing subsidies to promote wood fuels led 

to problems for existing wood users whose supply of fiber 

became more constrained (Anonymous 2006). To ease domestic pressures and expand supplies, European firms began 

to set their sights on North America as an alternate source of 

pellets.

These factors led to a wave of investment in pellet-producing facilities. Accordingly, the pellet industry in North 

America is relatively young, expanding rapidly, and occasionally experiencing growth pangs common to infant 

industries such as periodic shortages, hoarding, price volatility, and quality problems. In that context, a review of the 

industry’s current status, growth, and market evolution is 

timely. 

Wood Pelletization

In the pelletization process, raw wood is compacted into a 

homogeneous product with higher energy density and lower 

moisture content and made into uniformly sized cylindrical 

shapes, facilitating transportation, handling, and usage.

Pellets can be produced from roundwood but have mostly 

been made from cheaper waste residues of other woodprocessing activities, primarily sawdust and shavings from 

sawmills and furniture factories. If made from roundwood, 

the full range of steps involving debarking, chipping, drying, and hammermilling must be done. Residues require less 

preparation because they are already much reduced in size, 

are mostly bark free, and are drier. Either way, the moisture 

content is a critical variable and must be confined within a 

range of about 12% to 17% (wet basis) (Majiejewska 2006). 

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector

Henry Spelter, Economist

Daniel Toth, Economics Assistant

Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin
Research Paper FPL–RP–656

2

Otherwise, if too dry, the heat build-up induced by friction in the pelletizer burns the surfaces, but if too wet, the 

trapped steam pressure weakens internal bonds and reduces 

the mechanical properties, increasing breakage and dust during subsequent handling.

Once dried to specifications, particles are sorted by size and 

overly large pieces are hammermilled to gain further size 

reduction. Steam conditioning may be used to soften the 

lignin that binds the cellulose together to facilitate pellet formation during extrusion and shape consolidation thereafter. 

Finally, binding agents may be added to minimize breakage 

during transport, though for most uses that is not necessary 

because lignin acts as a binder. Some additives may also be 

applied to improve chemical characteristics, such as kaolin 

or calcium oxide to limit slagging (Majiejewska 2006).

Following these preparations, particles are extruded through 

dies and the emerging ribbons are cut to desired lengths. The 

hot pellets are cooled in a counter-flow cooler to allow the 

lignin to reset and form a hardened, compact unit. Finally, 

the finished product is bagged or shipped in bulk to market.

A variant of pelletization is the use of heat-treated wood 

called torrefied wood. Torrefaction is a somewhat slow 

(30 to 90 min) thermo-chemical treatment of biomass at 

a mild temperature range of between 200 and 300 °C 

(392 and 572 °F) in the absence of oxygen (Bergman and 

Kiel 2005). Torrefaction changes the properties of biomass: 

hemicellulose largely volatilizes and the remaining mass 

becomes hydrophobic, an important improvement from 

the viewpoint of transportation. Loss of hemicellulose also 

reduces the wood’s fibrous nature, improving its ability to 

be ground. The process volatilizes the organics in wood, 

losing some energy but increasing energy density of the 

remaining mass. However, most of the lignin is conserved, 

meaning that pelletization can proceed without the need for 

binder additives. The first torrefaction plant, a $12 million, 

150,000-tonne facility in Georgia, is being built and is expected to begin production in late 2009. In a study investigating costs of furnish to gasification plants, torrefied pellets 

were deemed the most economical (Zwart and others 2006). 

Procedures

This paper is based on a survey mailed to 111 pellet producers thought to operate or about to start in 2009. The onepage form focused on answering the following items:

•	Plant capacity and 2008 production volume

•	Employment

•	Fiber types used

•	Fiber costs

•	Market destinations

•	Production by grade

•	Mode of shipment

Thirty-five forms were returned in various degrees of completion. Our main concern was to determine if plants were, 

or are likely to be, operational in 2009. In follow-up phone 

calls and searches of news archives for non-respondents, we 

focused on establishing that fact and determined that three 

plants had closed. From these phone contacts and searches 

of news reports, we established the general capacities of 

operations that are listed in the Appendix and discussed in 

the report.

Relationships of employment and production to capacity were estimated from the sample data and information 

gleaned from public news sources. These relationships were 

used to extrapolate to the non-respondent population to arrive at the estimates discussed in the following sections.

Industry Characteristics

Plant Size

The salient characteristic of most North American pellet operations is their relatively small size in comparison 

with pulp, board, or power plants. This stems from a business model that has largely been based on the utilization 

of wastes of sawmills and other wood-processing plants. 

Proximity to such sources of fiber is important because the 

relatively low bulk densities and high moisture contents of 

those wastes make hauling over long distances prohibitive. 

Normally, sawdust is landfilled or incinerated if no pellet 

plants, pulp mills, or other suitable outlets are nearby 

(Stewart 2008).

In general, most sawmills and other woodworking plants 

process moderate amounts of wood and thus generate proportionally moderate volumes of residues. A typically sized 

southern U.S. sawmill produces 100 million board feet a 

year that yields only about 25,000 tonnes of sawdust and 

shavings (Spelter and others 2007). Accordingly, the available volume of residue within a feasible hauling radius 

(about 80 km (50 miles)) limits the size of plants relying 

on that source of fiber to below 100,000 tonnes per year 

(Fig. 1). Where the concentration of sawmills is high, as in 

some locations in interior British Columbia, this constraint 

eases and plants are bigger. A number of new mills have 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

<10 10–30 30–70 70–100 100–200 200–600

Pellet plants (number)

Capacity (×103 tonnes)

Figure 1—Distribution of pellet plants by capacity size in 

2009.
North America’s Wood Pellet Sector

3

been built to process chipped roundwood, and as they are 

not constrained by residue availability, have capacities three 

to four times as large as most of the residue-reliant facilities.

Capacity and Production

In 2008, total North American installed capacity was 

4.2 million metric tonnes; up from 1.1 million in 2003. 

Capacity is set to reach 6.2 million tonnes in 2009 if all announced plans to start mills reach fruition (Fig. 2). The Appendix contains histories and sizes of existing or prospective 

pellet plants as of June 2009.

Canadian firms were first to recognize the market potential 

of selling pellets to European power plants and established 

a significant industry on the basis of using the plentiful surplus waste fiber streams available from sawmills in British 

Columbia. These plants accounted for about one-half of the 

total North American capacity in the early 2000s. With the 

recent surge of U.S. capacity, that share has dropped to 37%, 

likely falling further to 28% in 2009. Within the United 

States, the South accounted for the largest share (46%), 

followed by the Northeast (24%), the West (16%), and the 

Midwest (14%).

Wood-pellet production in the United States in 2008 

amounted to 1.8 million tonnes, which was 66% of capacity. 

In Canada, the estimated production was 1.4 million tonnes, 

about 81% of capacity. The lower capacity utilization in the 

United States is a result of the more recent vintage of plants. 

Normal start-up problems limit output in the first quarters 

of an operation’s life, thus depressing capacity utilization. 

In both countries, limits on fiber availability because of reduced sawmill activity also constrained some operations in 

2008.

Markets

Over 80% of U.S. pellets in 2008 were shipped to incountry destinations (Fig. 3). Most of the rest was exported 

to Europe, a growing trend boosted further by the handful of 

large plants geared to exports (Fig. 4). By contrast, almost 

90% of Canadian shipments were exported, mainly to Europe. Reflecting this difference in markets, most U.S. pellets 

were placed in 18-kilogram- (40–pound-) sacks, whereas 

over 80% of Canadian volume was shipped in bulk. Bulk 

shipments usually require volumes of at least 10,000 tonnes, 

thus favoring larger firms in exporting activity.

Bagged pellets used for home heating are generally distributed through stores and dealerships and either brought home 

by the users themselves or delivered by truck. In Europe 

and a few places in North America, specialized trucks deliver pellets to users in bulk, pneumatically unloading them 

into chutes that lead to storage bins. This delivery system 

is analogous to fuel-oil delivery methods and simplifies the 

logistics for consumers.

Employment

Employment has grown rapidly in the pellet industry. Plants 

tend to run around the clock, but the process is relatively automated, so personnel requirements are not great per mill in 

comparison with other wood-processing activities. In 2009, 

we estimate 2,300 employees are, or will soon be, directly 

employed in pellet production (Table 1).

Fiber Supply Sources

Over two-thirds of the fiber used in pellet manufacturing 

was sawmill residues (Fig. 5). Other secondary wood 

Year

Capacity (×103 tonnes)

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Canada

North

Northeast

West

South

Figure 2—North American pellet capacity: 2003–2009.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

US Canada Europe Other

United States

Canada

Pellet shipments (%)

Destinations

Figure 3—Destinations of pellet shipments by region in 

2008.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2006 2007 2008

Exports (×103 tonnes)

Year

Figure 4—United States pellet and waste wood exports 

(U.S. International Trade Commission 2009).
4

manufacturing facilities, such as furniture and millwork 

factories, supplied 14% of fiber, reflecting the large share of 

pellet plants located in predominantly hardwood-growing 

regions where furniture activity is greatest. Sixteen percent 

was green material sourced from pulpwood or logging residues. Only about 1% came from urban or salvage wood. 

Agricultural residue use was negligible.

Wood-residue fiber comes from two major sources: primary woodworking plants such as sawmills and plywood 

mills and secondary woodworking plants like furniture and 

millwork factories. The first group generates the bulk of the 

waste fiber and its volume over the last decade is shown in 

Table 2 and Figure 6. On average, sawmills and plywood 

plants create 0.25 and 0.025 tonnes of sawdust, shavings, 

and sander dust per thousand board or square feet of production, respectively (Spelter and others 2007). Considerably 

more volumes of other chippable residues are also generated, but those are generally used by pulpmills for paper.

Those factors convert the production volumes to residue 

equivalents of about 21 million tonnes of fiber in a normal 

year. In 2008, the volume generated fell considerably below 

that as these industries curtailed in the face of the recession. 

The volumes generated in 2009 are apt to be even smaller at 

about 60% of normal volume (Fig. 6).

Fiber Demand Sources

The main demand for waste wood products has historically 

come from the particleboard, medium density fiberboard, 

and pulp sectors. Their consumption in the aggregate hovered around 12 million tonnes per year, dropping to about 

9 million tonnes in the recession-affected year of 2008 

(Fig. 7). However, aggregate waste fiber use declined less 

because of the growth of pellet production.

Fiber demand is derived from pellet demand, which in 

turn can be estimated from the inventory of installed pellet 

stoves (Table 2). These consist mostly of fireplace inserts 

or freestanding stoves as opposed to furnaces tied into a 

central heating system. As such, they primarily heat the 

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

Sawmill residue

Other residue

Chips/roundwood

Salvage wood

16%

14%

69%

1%

Figure 5—Fiber types used in the production of wood 

pellets in 2008.

0

5

10

15

20

25

Plywood

Hardwood lumber

Softwood lumber

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Year

Quantity (×106 metric tonnes)

Figure 6—Fine woody residue supply from three major 

sources.

Table 1—Pellet industry employment, 2008 

United States 

Northeast North South West Canada Total 

380 280 710 340 590 2,300 

0

5

10

15

Pellets

Pulp

MDF

Particleboard

Year

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Quantity (×106 metric tonnes)

Figure 7—Fine woody residue (sawdust, shavings) 

demand from four major end uses.
5

immediate area within a structure rather than distributing it 

evenly throughout the building. Consequently, pellet stoves 

are often used as an auxiliary heating device to permit the 

main fossil fuel furnace or electrical heater to be turned 

down or off.

To heat an average home for a winter season exclusively 

with pellets in a mid-northern U.S. climate zone requires 

about 4 tonnes of pellets (Harrison 2006), though in the 

coldest regions, estimates run as high as 7 tonnes (Portland 

Press Herald 2008). For the purposes of demand estimation, 

however, an average consumption per unit of 2 tonnes is 

more realistic. This is because of the above-noted auxiliary 

nature of most pellet stoves, as well as their use in milder 

climates, both of which decrease the average.

Pellet use for home heating is relatively new, and the 

Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association only began compiling 

data on pellet stove shipments in 1998. In those 10 years, 

735,000 pellet stoves were shipped. Estimates of underlying demand for pellets are obtained by multiplying the accumulating stock of stoves over the years by the two tonnes 

per stove factor (Fig. 8). Figure 8 also shows pellet production for 2007 and 2008 and installed capacity. The close 

correspondence between estimated demand and capacity 

through 2007 validates the two-tonne per stove assumption. 

However, a gap opens up between production and derived 

demand in 2008. This reflects the start-up of a handful of 

larger plants focused primarily on the bulk European export 

market. It may also indicate an expanding market into institutional heating and power generating where usage is not 

dependent on pellet stoves. These markets are likely to loom 

larger in coming years.

Fiber Demand and Supply Balances

Figure 9 summarizes the demand and supply balances for 

fine wood residues (sawdust, shavings, sander dust) over the 

past decade. The surplus of supply over consumption exaggerates the availability of residues because many mills use 

the residues themselves for process heat or co-generation 

activities. The more important feature of the chart is the narrowing of the gap in 2007–2009, which illustrates the drawback of the pellet industry’s reliance on residue fibers. The 

residue-generating industries are cyclical, whereas wood 

pellet demand for heat energy is more static. Mismatches 

can develop between residue availability on the one hand 

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector

Table 2. Supply and demand of wood residues in Canada and the United States 

Sources of supply 

Wood pellet 

stoves in 

used

(×103

)

Sources of demand (×106 tonnes) 

 Softwood 

lumbera

(×109

board feet) 

Softwood

plywoodb

(×109

 ft2)

Hardwood

lumberc

(×109

 board 

feet) 

Sawdust,

shavings, and 

sander dust 

(×106 tonnes) Pellets MDFe

 Particleboard Pulp Total 

1998 63.2 19.8 14.7 20.0 114 0.3 2.5 7.5 1.4 11.7 

1999 65.6 20.0 15.2 20.7 132 0.4 2.8 8.1 1.5 12.8 

2000 67.4 19.7 14.6 21.0 163 0.5 2.8 8.0 1.8 13.1 

2001 64.9 17.4 13.7 20.1 217 0.8 2.7 7.1 1.5 12.1 

2002 68.7 17.7 14.2 21.2 251 0.9 3.0 7.7 1.2 12.8 

2003 69.0 17.2 14.4 21.3 299 1.1 2.9 7.1 1.0 12.1 

2004 73.8 17.3 15.7 22.8 367 1.3 3.3 7.5 1.2 13.2 

2005 74.9 17.0 15.4 23.0 486 1.6 3.4 7.2 1.1 13.2 

2006 72.3 16.0 14.9 22.2 619 2.0 3.4 6.8 1.1 13.3 

2007 65.1 14.6 13.8 20.1 673 2.1 3.4 6.0 1.1 12.6 

2008 52.8 12.2 12.2 16.6 814 2.3 3.0 5.4 1.0 11.7 

2009ef

 42.0 10.0 8.7 12.9 

Sources: 

a Statistics Canada (2009); Howard (in preparation). 

b American Plywood Association (2008); Howard (in preparation).

c Statistics Canada (2009); Howard (in preparation). 

d Hearth and Patio Barbeque Association (annual pellet stove shipments accumulated here to approximate the stock of stoves in service). 

e Medium-density fiberboard. 

f

Estimated. 

Year

Quantity (×103 metric tonnes)

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Capacity

Production 

Demand

Figure 8—Capacity, production, and domestic demand 

for wood pellets in the United States. Sources: Howard 

(in preparation) and the survey distributed for the 

present study.

Table 2. Supply and demand of wood residues in Canada and the United States 

Sources of supply 

Wood pellet 

stoves in 

used

(×103

)

Sources of demand (×106 tonnes) 

 Softwood 

lumbera

(×109

board feet) 

Softwood

plywoodb

(×109

 ft2)

Hardwood

lumberc

(×109

 board 

feet) 

Sawdust,

shavings, and 

sander dust 

(×106 tonnes) Pellets MDFe

 Particleboard Pulp Total 

1998 63.2 19.8 14.7 20.0 114 0.3 2.5 7.5 1.4 11.7 

1999 65.6 20.0 15.2 20.7 132 0.4 2.8 8.1 1.5 12.8 

2000 67.4 19.7 14.6 21.0 163 0.5 2.8 8.0 1.8 13.1 

2001 64.9 17.4 13.7 20.1 217 0.8 2.7 7.1 1.5 12.1 

2002 68.7 17.7 14.2 21.2 251 0.9 3.0 7.7 1.2 12.8 

2003 69.0 17.2 14.4 21.3 299 1.1 2.9 7.1 1.0 12.1 

2004 73.8 17.3 15.7 22.8 367 1.3 3.3 7.5 1.2 13.2 

2005 74.9 17.0 15.4 23.0 486 1.6 3.4 7.2 1.1 13.2 

2006 72.3 16.0 14.9 22.2 619 2.0 3.4 6.8 1.1 13.3 

2007 65.1 14.6 13.8 20.1 673 2.1 3.4 6.0 1.1 12.6 

2008 52.8 12.2 12.2 16.6 814 2.3 3.0 5.4 1.0 11.7 

2009ef

 42.0 10.0 8.7 12.9 

Sources: 

a Statistics Canada (2009); Howard (in preparation). 

b American Plywood Association (2008); Howard (in preparation).

c Statistics Canada (2009); Howard (in preparation). 

d Hearth and Patio Barbeque Association (annual pellet stove shipments accumulated here to approximate the stock of stoves in service). 

e Medium-density fiberboard. 

f

Estimated. 
6

and fiber needs for pellet making on the other. In 2008, 

this resulted in shortfalls that forced some plants to operate below their capability and at least one to cease operations because of the closure of a supplier. Others extended 

their procurement radii or installed equipment to process 

roundwood. Despite these measures, pellet shortages were 

reported, leading some users to hoard pellets (Ellen 2008; 

Langston 2008).

Future growth of pellet manufacturing will inevitably have 

to spread to alternative fibers, chiefly roundwood, as that 

resource is available in concentrated volume in compact areas. Because of widespread beetle epidemics in the western 

United States and British Columbia that render timber unsuitable for higher value uses such as lumber and plywood, 

this resource is increasingly becoming available at advantageous rates. Two plants in Colorado have recently been built 

to take advantage of this resource opportunity (Confluence 

Energy 2008; Shore 2009).

Other Sources of Pellet Demand

Another large source of pellet demand is as fuel in power 

generation. This poses both an opportunity and risk for 

wood pellet manufacturing.

Eighty electricity-generating facilities in 16 states use biomass as fuel (Biomass Power Association 2009). However, 

unless cheap biomass in the form of waste by-products from 

another activity is available nearby, power plants fueled 

entirely by wood have difficulty competing with coal- or 

gas-fired plants without tax subsidies or mandates. The drive 

to reduce carbon emissions, however, has created opportunities for biomass in general and wood in particular. Demonstrations and trials have shown that an effective, minimally 

disruptive way to use biomass in power plants is as an 

amendment to coal. Up to about 15% of the total energy 

input can be substituted without incurring major equipment 

or modification costs (Bain and Amos 2003). Woody biomass is most appropriate because of availability, costs, and 

operating parameters. Compared with agricultural biomass, 

the alkali and chlorine contents of bark-free wood are low, 

which minimizes slagging, fouling, and corrosion in boilers 

(Maciejeweska 2006).

In power plants, however, size of the biomass is critical. The 

criteria for four boiler types are shown in Table 3. Biomass 

that does not meet these specifications is likely to cause flow 

problems in the fuel-handling equipment or result in incomplete burn of the material.

Pulverized coal boilers, typical of larger power plants, 

require the smallest sized particles and offer the greatest 

potential for wood pellets. Dry pelletized wood works most 

seamlessly because it pulverizes easily in contrast with 

wood in its raw fibrous, non-friable state (Bergman and 

Kiel 2005). Such use of pellets has become widespread in 

Europe but is only beginning to emerge in North America. It 

is likely to accelerate in the future as governments establish 

Renewable Fuel Portfolio Standards for the use of renewable fuels in power generation.

The threat to pellet producers comes from the ability to use 

biomass in smaller, stoker-type boilers that tolerate larger 

sized pieces. In this application, chipped or chunked wood 

can be used, which costs less than pellets. The threat to 

pellet-making stems from the possibility that these types of 

users could bid away and divert fiber, including residues, 

from pellet manufacturers, making fiber more scarce and 

expensive.

The proposed conversion of a 312-megawatt power plant 

in Ohio to biofuels illustrates the potential impact of this 

shift. The particular facility would require 725,000 tonnes 

of biomass per year and, in this instance, wood briquettes 

made from dedicated fast-growing plantation trees are being 

considered to supply the plant (Downing 2009).

Fiber Costs

Fiber forms a substantial part of the total costs of pellet 

manufacturing. In comparative studies of Austrian and 

Swedish conditions, for example, fiber represented 36% and 

50% of the production costs, respectively (Fig. 10). The next 

highest cost element was drying, a factor influenced by the 

moisture content of the material being used.

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

Demand

Supply

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Year

Quantity (×106 metric tonnes)

Figure 9—North American wood residue supply (from 

three main sources: softwood lumber, hardwood 

lumber, and plywood) and demand (from four main end 

uses: pellets, medium-density fiberboard, pulp, and 

particleboard).

Table 3—Biomass sizing requirements

Boiler type 

Maximum size 

(mm) (in.) 

Pulverized coal <6 <0.25 

Cyclone <13 <0.5 

Stoker <76 <3.0 

Fluidized bed <76 <3.0 
7

Shavings and sawdust from sawmills have been preferred 

because they have been the least expensive to procure and 

required the least amount of processing (drying and milling) 

to pass through the pelletizing dies (Balint 2008). In the first 

quarter of 2009, bark-free, in-wood pine chips, excluding 

transport costs, were quoted in the range of $31–$39 per 

green tonne ($28–$35 per green short ton (1 ton = 

0.907 tonne)) (Timber Mart-South 2009). 

Delivered residue fiber costs in 2008 among our respondents 

ranged from $56/tonne (green weight) in the U.S. West to 

$38/tonne in the U.S. Northeast (Table 4). We received too 

few Canadian responses to estimate fiber costs in Canada.

Responses on roundwood prices were also too few to generalize. Delivered pulpwood prices in the U.S. south in 2008 

averaged $30/green tonne (Timber Mart-South 2009) but, 

from the viewpoint of a pellet operation, costs for debarking, chipping, and drying would increase that amount.

Product Quality Standards

An issue facing nascent industries producing a fungible, interchangeable commodity is the establishment of grades and 

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector

ensuring that products consistently conform to those grades. 

Its absence can lead to quality inconsistencies, with the lowest quality producers potentially damaging the image of the 

whole industry. This is a particular point of vulnerability for 

a product made from wood, which exhibits great variability 

in properties. That variability is magnified when wood is 

sourced as residue from different producers who have subjected it to different degrees of processing.

In the mid-1990s, the Pellet Fuels Institute (PFI) developed 

a set of pelletized fuel standards to help bring consistency 

to the industry. The original standards defined criteria for 

premium and standard grade pellets and were quickly adopted by industry, PFI members, and non-members alike. 

However, over time, it became apparent that these standards 

lacked key components. The grades were too broad, test 

methods were not defined, there were no specified quality 

assurance or quality control (QA/QC) practices, and there 

was no enforcement. 

In 2008, PFI’s new standards defined criteria for four grades 

of pelletized fuel and identified standardized methodology 

for testing each parameter (Table 5). The PFI’s QA/QC program provides an industry-wide quality management system 

for demonstrating compliance with the standards. This program also includes product grading based on a year’s worth 

of testing data, quarterly data evaluation to verify continued 

compliance, and a proficiency testing program for thirdparty testing laboratories (PFI 2008).

In our survey, 79% of the volume was reported to be “premium” under the old standards. Only 5% was classed as 

“standard.” Two percent was reported to be below standard 

or “utility.” Interestingly, 14% of the volume was claimed 

to exceed “premium” grade standards (“super premium”). 

Generally, “premium” grade is required for most residential 

stoves whereas power plants can tolerate lower grades.

Summary and Observations

The wood pellet industry and the use of wood pellets as 

energy are in their relative infancy in North America. The 

recent growth of both has been fueled by increases in the 

cost of fossil energy and policies aimed at reducing carbon 

dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Whereas fossil energy costs have moderated and their future course is uncertain, 

policies on carbon mitigation are likely to become more 

stringent. Coal-fired plants produce over half the electricity 

in the United States, and coal burning is the primary target 

for carbon dioxide mitigation. This is likely to increase demand for biomass to be used alongside, or in lieu of, coal in 

power plants.

These changes in the market over the past five years have 

rewarded long-time producers of wood pellets and created 

opportunities for new entrepreneurial enterprises. As of June 

2009, we identified 110 American and Canadian wood pellet plants in operation or about to become operational. Most 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Austria Sweden

Other

Pelletization

Labor

Drying

Wood

Costs (%)

Figure 10—Wood pellet production cost shares in 

Austria and Sweden (Thek and Obernberger 2004).

Table 4—Delivered costs of woody residues

in United States 

Region 

Residue cost 

($/tonne) Sample 

West 56 5 

North 49 6 

South 42 3 

Northeast 38 6 
8

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

relied on relatively inexpensive waste fiber from primary 

wood processing plants and had relatively small capacities.

The outlook is positive for further expansion of demand. 

Only a small share of North American homes uses wood as 

their primary heating source. Electrical heating, one of the 

least energy-efficient means of space heating, is the primary 

source of heat in over 30 million homes in the United States 

(EIA 2005). Conventional firewood stoves, which also exceed pellet stoves in number, are another potential market 

area because firewood stoves are less convenient. They are 

also more polluting, and their use can be prohibited on days 

when atmospheric conditions are unfavorable. Because they 

burn hotter, pellets emit fewer particulates and can thus be 

used when firewood burning is banned.

As a result, the potential to heat homes with pellets has not 

been fully exploited. Pellet stoves are mostly used for local 

area heating. In more mature European markets, pelletfueled furnaces are commonly used as central heating units. 

Such an evolution in North America would be aided by improvements in pellet delivery logistics. Bulk home delivery 

in specialized trucks, similar to the delivery of heating oil, 

would simplify handling and improve convenience. 

Pellets represent an upgrading of wood as fuel but still have 

drawbacks typical of wood including moisture absorption, 

which requires care and expense in transportation and storage. A potential enhancement of pelletization technology 

is substituting torrefied in place of raw wood, particularly 

when the application is in a power plant.

Whether conventional or torrefied, the pellet industry faces 

a constraint on its growth from the limited availability of 

waste fiber. However, a switch to roundwood is likely to 

incur higher costs. Producers may need to consider expanding facility size to achieve economies of scale to offset the 

costs of potentially more expensive furnish. Such flexibility 

is also desirable from the viewpoint of fiber supply in light 

of the cyclical nature of waste-supplying industries.

The prospect of power plants requiring a substantial part 

of their fuel to come from biomass is a potential marketaltering event. The volumes involved are on a different scale 

of magnitude than current uses and would likely overwhelm 

existing supply capabilities and prevailing patterns of fiber 

use, as experienced in Europe. This represents an opportunity for pellet fuel producers but a threat to long-time waste 

users such as panel plants. 

Non-binding, voluntary standards for product grading and 

classification are a weak link in an industry’s marketing. In 

difficult procurement environments, producers desperate to 

meet contractual obligations can be tempted to use whatever 

source of fiber is available, such as waste wood with bark 

content. This can lead to inconsistency in performance and 

hamper consumer acceptance. Mature industries producing 

a minimally undifferentiated commodity typically submit 

to third party inspection and verification to assure buyers of 

their product’s quality and consistency.

The possibility of a big increase in use by power plants also 

looms as a major challenge for pellet manufacturing. Power 

plants are capital-intensive enterprises that require longterm, assured flows of fuel. Reliance on a cyclical wood 

industry for residues is a potential drawback for meeting 

power plant needs for an assured and consistent flow of supply. Long-term growth of wood as fuel ultimately means the 

need to use roundwood, potentially pitting the wood energy 

sector against long-time traditional wood-using industries, 

elevating pellet fiber costs to those paid by those established 

users, and shifting the debate to sustainability of biomass 

supplies for the expanding uses.

Literature Cited

Anonymous. 2006. Ruf nach Brüssel: Subventionen für Hol- für Holzenergie stoppen. Holz-Zentralblatt 132(43). October 27.

APA. APA Engineered Wood Statistics. 2008. Fourth Quarter. Tacoma, WA: American Plywood Association.

Bain, R.L.; Amos, W.A. 2003. Highlights of biopower 

technical assessment: state of the industry and technology. 

NREL/TP-510-33502. Golden, CO: National Renewable 

Energy Laboratory. 47 p.

Balint, S. 2008. The role of wood pellets in the wood to 

energy market. Unpublished draft on file with the Policy 

Analysis Staff. Washington, DC: U.S. Forest Service. 

Table 5—Pellet Fuel Institutea 2008 fuel grade standards 

Property Super premium Premium Standard Utility 

Bulk density (kg/m3) 533–613 533–613 506–613 506–613 

Diameter (mm) 6.35–7.25 6.35–7.25 6.35–7.25 6.35–7.25 

Durability > 97.5 > 97.5 > 95.0 > 95.0 

Fines (%) < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 

Inorganic ash < 0.5 < 1.0 < 2.0 < 6.0 

Moisture (%) < 6.0 < 8.0 < 8.0 < 10.0 

Chloride (ppm) < 300 < 300 < 300 < 300 a

 PFI 2008. 
9

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector

Bergman, P.; Kiel, J. 2005. Torrefaction for biomass upgrading. In 14th European biomass conference. Paris, France. 

October 2005. ETA Renewable Energies, (Florence, Italy) 

and WIP Renewable Energies (Munich, Germany). pp. 1–8.

Biomass Power Association. 2009. http://www.usabiomass.

org/pages/about.php. 

Confluence Energy. 2008. Confluence energy expands pellet 

facility. News release of Confluence Energy, LLC. June 3, 

2008.

Downing, R. 2009. Special briquettes made of grains, 

wood chips would be used at plant. Akron Beacon Journal. 

April 2. Akron, OH.

Ellen, M. 2008. Fuel pellets selling like hotcakes in upstate 

New York. Watertown Daily Times. October 25. Watertown, 

NY.

EIA. 2005. 2005 residential energy consumption survey. 

Washington, DC: Energy Information Agency. http://www.

eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2005/hc2005_tables/detailed_tables2005.html. 

Harrison, M. 2006. Pellet fuel potential: the resurgence of 

wood as a heating source. Pallet Enterprise. Ashland, VA: 

Industrial Reporting, Inc. http://www.palletenterprise.com/

articledatabase/print_view.asp?ArticleID=1952&Page=1. 

Accessed August 6, 2008.

Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association. Arlington, VA. 

http://www.hpba.org 

Howard, James L. In preparation. U.S. timber production, 

trade, consumption, and price statistics 1965 to 2008. Research Paper. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 

Langston, P. 2008. Worried homeowners hunt for wood pellets: Building downturn cuts supply of cheap fuel. Canwest 

News Service. November 29. http://www.househunting.ca/

homes-and-gardens/timescolonist/story.html?id=ff9184bc4ad7-4cbe-b2a5-f18bda38c75a

Majiejewska, A.; Veringa, H.; Danders, J.; Peteves, S.D. 

2006. Co-firing biomass with coal: constraints and role of 

biomass pretreatment. Petten, The Netherlands: Institute for 

Energy. 113 p.

Niemantsverdriet, J.V. 2007. Modeling Fischer Tropsch 

synthesis using density functional theory. Department of 

Chemical Engineering and Chemistry. Technical University 

of Eindhoven, The Netherlands. http://www.onderzoekinformatie.nl/en/oi/nod/onderzoek/OND1315127/

Peksa-Blanchard, M.; Dolzan, P.; Grassi, A.; Heinimö, J.; 

Junginger, M.; Ranta, T.; Walter, A. 2007. Global wood pellet markets and industry: policy drivers, market status and 

raw material potential. IEA Bionenergy Task 40. International Energy Agency. November 7. 120 p.

Pellet Fuels Institute. 2008. Standards and Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program. http://www.pelletheat.org/2/

quality.html. Arlington, VA: Pellet Fuels Institute. 

Portland Press Herald. 2008. Former ski resort exec launches wood-pellet venture. Associated Press. Portland Press 

Herald, Portland, Maine. http://www.pressherald.com

Rakos, C. 2008. The heat market—key to the transformation 

of our energy system. ProPellets Austria. Wolfsgraben, Austria. http://www.propellets.at/cms/cms.php?pageName=50. 

Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). Pew Center on Global Climate Change. Arlington, VA. 

Shore, S. 2009. Pine beetle infestation in Colorado increases 

interest in wood pellet production. Associated Press. 

January 8.

Spelter, H.; McKeever, D.; Alderman, M. 2007. Profile 

2007: Softwood Sawmills in the United States and Canada. 

Res. Pap. FPL–RP–644. Madison, WI: U.S. Forest Service, 

Forest Products Laboratory. 69 p.

Statistics Canada. 2009. April Catalogue No. 35-003, 

63(4): 1–9.

Stewart, N. 2008. Opasatika’s biomass attracts two energy 

companies. Northern Ontario Business. September 29.

Swaan, J., Melin, S. Wood pellet export: history, opportunities, challenges. PowerPoint presentation for SmallWood 

2008 Conference. May 13, 2008, Madison, WI. Madison, 

WI: Forest Products Society. http://www.forestprod.org/

smallwood08swaan.pdf

Thek, G.; Obernberger, I. 2004. Wood pellet production 

costs under Austrian and in comparison to Swedish framework conditions. Biomass and Bioenergy 27: 671–693. 

Timber Mart South. 2009. The Journal of Southern Timber 

Prices, Warnell School of Forestry, University of Georgia, 

Athens, GA. 34(2).

U.S. International Trade Commission. 2009. Interactive tariff and trade data web. http://dataweb.usitc.gov/.

Zwart, R.; Boerrigter, H.; Van der Drift, A. 2006. The impact of biomass pretreatment on the feasibility of overseas 

biomass conversion to Fischer-Tropsch products. Energy & 

Fuels (20): 2192–2197.
10

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

Appendix—Pellet Mill Locations

3

6

9

1 2

8 4

7

5

13

14 16

11

17

22

18

10

21

20

19

15

12

23

Northern U.S. Pellet Mills by Capacity

Capacity (×103 Tonnes)

0 - 1112 - 3536 - 7576 - 145146 - 500
11

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector U.S. North Mill Company Former Name or ID Name DBA Town State 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Comments Operating mills 9 Pike Pellets Griggsville IL mostly ag 20 Koetter and Smith Borden IN 1 1 1 1 19 Fiber By- Prod White Pigeon MI 41 41 41 41 Kirtland Products Boyne city MI 14 opened in 2009 21 Maeder Brothers Weidman MI 23 23 23 22 Mich Wood Pellet Grayling MI 45 45 45 opened in 2007 18 Mich Wood Pellet Fuel Woodstone USAHolland MI 23 45 45 opened in 2007

17 Renewafuels Marquette MI 136 opens in 200916 Vulcan Wood Prod Kingsford MI 23 45 45 45 since 2007

3 Valley Forest Prod Marcell MN 9 9 54 54 Opened in 2005 & 2007

2 Ozark Hardwood Prod Seymour MO 5 18 18 18 18 23 68 started in 2003

1 Pennington Seed Greenfield MO 9 14 14 14 at least since 2007

23 American Wood Fibers Circleville OH 23 23 23 23 23 started 2005

12 Badgerland Pellets Sheboygan Falls WI 2 5 5

15 Bay Lakes Cos Oconto Falls WI 18 high ash pellets

5 Elkhorn Industries Superior WI 33 33 high ash content

7 Great Lakes Renewable Energy Hayward WI 5 33 $6 million investment4 High Quality Shavings Centuria WI opens 2010? No financing yet

8 Indeck Ladysmith BioFuel Center Ladysmith WI 36 90K tons/yr, July 2009

10 Marth Wood Shaving Supply Marathon WI 7 7 9 68 68 68 6811 Risley Pellet Solutions Monticello WI 45 burned down 2/6/07

6 Superior Wood Prod Superior WI started permitting

14 Wisconsin Wood Energy Goodman WI permits applied for 

13 Wood Residue Solutions Montelo WI plant under construction

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Capacity 12 25 59 183 357 424 702Estimated 2008 Production 329

Capacity (×103 tonnes)
12

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

21

9

8 7

6

5

4

3

2

1

32

31

30

25

27

29 2624

22

28

21

23

20

18

19

17

16

15

14

12

13

11

10

Southern U.S. Pellet Mills by Capacity

Capacity (×103 Tonnes)

0 - 1011 - 3536 - 7576 - 145146 - 500
13

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector U.S. South Mill Company Former Name or ID Name DBA Town State 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Comments Closed Mills FutureFuel Chemical Co Batesville AR 27 36 36 Open in 2005, now down Operating mills 14 Lee Energy Solutions Crossville AL 2009 or 10, 75K tons 10 Nature's Earth Pellet Energy Reform AL 5 5 6 6 100 tons/week in 2006 12 New Gas Concepts Jackson AL 2010? Eventually 600 stons 13 New Gas Concepts Selma AL 45 454 eventually 500 stons 5 Barnes Bros Hardwood Flooring Hamburg AR 9 9 9

6 Fiber Resources Pine Bluff AR 67 67 67 90 90 112 112

15 Green Circle BioEnergy Cottondale FL 227 454 Open May 200822 Big Heat Wood Pellets Equustock Sylvania GA 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 since 2001

23 Fram Renewable Fuels Baxley GA 42 132 started plant 3/2008

19 Rock Wood Prod The Rock GA 14 18 1820 Woodlands Alternative Fuels Meigs GA 68 June 2009, 300 in 2010

17 Anderson Hardwood Pellets Louisville KY 18 18 18 started in 200616 S Kentucky Hardwood Flooring Gamaliel KY 18 18 18 18 available in 2006

18 Somerset Pellet Fuel Somerset KY 46 46 46 46

4 Bayou Wood Pellets West Monroe LA 54 54 started Jan 089 CKS Energy Amory MS 23 44 45 45 since 2007

7 Indeck Magnolia BioFuel Center Magnolia MS 2010?

8 Piney Woods Pellets Wiggins MS 19 up in july 2009, 50K tons

21 Carolina Wood Pellets Franklin NC 62 expected start Q1 2009

11 Hassell & Hughes Lumber Collinwood TN 18 18 18 started Jan 2007

2 Good Times Wood Prod Rusk TX 9 23 23 23 231 Northcutt Woodworks Christopher Lum Co Crockett TX 14 14 14 14 since 2006

3 Patterson Wood Prod Nacogdoches TX 18 18 18 At least since 2007

24 American Wood Fibers Marion VA plant will start in 200930 Big Heat Wood Pellets/Equustock Chester VA 9 9 9 9 9 9 929 Lignetics Lunenburg VA 45 4531 O'Malley Lum Co Tappahannock VA 32 32 since Sep 200832 Potomac Supply Kinsale VA 18 started 2/09

26 Turman Hardwood Flooring Galax VA 14 14 14 started in 200525 Hamer Pellet Fuel Kenova WV 36 41 41 41

28 Hamer Pellet Fuel Garden Grounds WV 41 41 4127 Lignetics Glenville WV 36 36 36 36 36 59 59

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Capacity 122 122 158 344 502 964 1855Estimated 2008 Production 592

Capacity (×103 tonnes)
14

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

4

5

2

1

3

9

7

8

6

14

17

10

16

15

13

11

12

Western U.S. Pellet Mills by Capacity

Capacity (×103 Tonnes)

0 - 1011 - 3536 - 7576 - 145146 - 500
15

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector U.S. West Mill Company Former Name ID Name or DBA Town Town 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Comments Closed mills Rocky Mountain Forest Prod Laramie WY 18 18 9 millwork producer, bankrupt 9/07, closed CNZ Corporation Sheridan WY 9 9 9 5 5 2 sawmill closed 12/15/08 Operating mills 12 Forest Energy Corp Show Low AZ 45 45 45 45 Using USFS roundwood 11 Southwest Forest Prod Phoenix AZ 23 started making wood fuel in 2007 13 Sunizona Greenhouses Wilcox AZ 2 2 2 primarily for own use 15 Confluence Energy Kremmling CO 63 63 beetle killed wood ground up. 16 Rocky Mountain Pellet Co Walden CO 27 73 Summer 2008, 150,000 tons possible

6 Lignetics Sandpoint ID 45 45 45 63 63 68 68 started in 1983, also fire logs7 Treasure Valley For Prod Mt Home ID 9 18 18 33

8 North Idaho Energy Logs Moyie Springs ID 7 7

10 Eureka Pellet Mills Missoula MT 36 45 45 54 54 54 54 started 1987

9 Eureka Pellet Mills Superior MT 18 27 27 30 30 50 50 opened in 2003

17 Enchantment Biomass Prod Ruidoso Downs NM 14 14 14

3 Bear Mountain Forest Prod Brownsville OR 91 100 104 104 104 104 104 founded in 19771 Roseburg For Prod Dillard OR 2 20 startup in 2008-09 heating season

Dailey Wood Products Reedsport OR 2010 ?

2 West Oregon Wood Prod Columbia City OR 45 45 68 68 68 68 685 Woodgrain Millwork Prineville OR 27 27 "Nature's pellets", 100% wood4 Bear Mountain Forest Prod Cascade Locks OR 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 founded in 1982

Heartland Pellet Spearfish SD 24 24 0 24 Insolvent sawmill bought by Neiman 

14 South & Jones Timber Co Evanston WY 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Capacity 281 308 354 458 473 589 711Estimated 2008 Production 473

Capacity (×103 tonnes)
16

Research Paper FPL–RP–656 4

7

9 1

8 5 3

2

6

22

13

10

11

12

20

16

15

17 14

18

21

19

25

23 24

Northeastern U.S. Pellet Mills by Capacity

Capacity (×103 Tonnes)

0 - 1011 - 3536 - 7576 - 145146 - 500
17

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector U.S. Northeast Mill Company Former Name or ID Name DBA Town State 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Comments Closed mills Narragansett Pellet Rumford RI 73 ph disconnected Finger Lakes Pellet Geneva NY ph disconnected Operating mills 24 Corinth Wood Pellets Corinth ME 54 165 272 Opened April 07 Geneva Wood Fuels Strong ME 23 Opened 2nd quarter 2009 23 Maine Woods Pellet Fulghum Fibre Athens ME 45 165 Opened May 08 25 Northeast Pellets Ashland ME 23 23 23 23 23 Opened in 2005 21 Greenovia Woodstone USA Berlin NH 2010?

22 Lakes Regions Pellets Barnstead NH 9 June 2009,bedding first 18 New England Wood Pellet Jaffrey NH 63 63 63 63 63 63 6319 Presby Environmental Whitefield NH 50 May 2009?

15 Associated Harvest LaFargeville NY 9 9 9 9 916 Curran Renewable Energy Massena NY 9 Target cap 100K tons

6 Dry Creek Prod Arcade NY 23 23 23 23

14 New England Wood Pellet Schuyler NY 82 82 Opened 1/2008

17 Woodstone USA Moreau NY 2010?

9 AJ Stoves & Pellets Marion PA no permit yet2 Allegheny Pellet Youngsville PA 2 2 7 7 15 15 685 Bald Eagle Pellet Tyrone PA 5 6 opened in 2008

11 Barefoot Pellet Troy PA 23 24 27 30 ~ 35 K cap

8 Energex Pellet Fuel Mifflintown PA 45 45 45 45 45 45 54 Opened 2000, cap doubled in QIII 093 First Nation Wood Pellet Cambria Co PA possibly 2010

1 Greene Team Pellet Fuel Garards Fort PA 22 22 22 opened in 20077 PA Pellets Ulysses PA 27 33 33 33 started 2006

10 Penn Wood Prod East Berlin PA 4 4 4 4 4 4 small, local

12 Treecycle Nazareth PA 73 Opening Spring 2009

4 Wood Pellets Summerhill PA 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 Started in 1992

20 Vermont Pellet Fuel Island Pond VT 11 Apr-09

13 Treecycle Glen Gardner NJ 2009

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Capacity 140 143 180 253 416 589 1056Estimated 2008 Production 435

Capacity (×103 tonnes)
18

Research Paper FPL–RP–656

3 6

4 7

1

5

2

8

9

10

11

Capacity (×103 Tonnes)

0 - 1112 - 3536 - 7576 - 145146 - 500

Eastern Canada Pellet Mills by Capacity
19

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector Canada East of the Rockies Mill Company Former Name or ID Name DBA Town Town 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Comments Closed mills Fulghum Fibrefuels McTara Upper Musquodoboit NS 50 80 80 bought by Enligna Operating mills 8 Marwood Ltd Fredericton NB 6 6 10 10 9 Shaw Resources Belledeune NB 70 75 10 Enligna Upper Musquodoboit NS 80 80 plan to expand to 100K 11 Shaw Resources Shubenacadie NS 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 2 Atikokan Renewable Atikokan ON possibly in 2009

5 Canadian Biopellet Ingleside ON possibly in 2009, 500K1 Lakewood Industries Ear Falls ON 6 6 6 6 6 6 67 Energex Pellet Fuel Lac-Meganic QC 60 60 60 60 60 120 120 began in 19933 Fabrication EcoFlamme Temiscaming QC 304 Lauzon Papineauville QC 40 40 40 40 40 40 406 Lauzon St Paulin QC 20 20 20 20 20 20 30 rebuild 4/2008

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Capacity 146 146 196 232 232 366 411Estimated 2008 Production 276

Capacity (×103 tonnes)
20

Research Paper FPL–RP–656 8 7

2

6

5

4

1

9

3

10

12

11

13

Western Canada Pellet Mills by Capacity

Capacity (×103 Tonnes)

0 - 1011 - 3536 - 7576 - 145146 - 500
21

North America’s Wood Pellet Sector British Columbia & Alberta Mill Company Former Name or Capacity (×103 tonnes) ID Name DBA Town Prov 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Comments 13 Dansons Group Edmonton AB 80 80 80 80 80 10 Foothills For Prod Grand Cache AB 10 20 20 20 planning to upgrade to 120K 11 LaCrete Sawmills LaCrete AB 20 30 35 35 35 35 35 12 Vanderwell Contr Slave Lake AB 60 60 60 60 60 60 1 Houston Pellet Pinnacle Pellet Houston BC 100 113 150 60% canfor, 40% pinnacle 3 Pacific BioEnergy Prince George BC 130 130 130 140 140 188 188 9 Pinnacle Pellet Armstrong Pellet Armstrong BC 30 50 50 50 50 50 4 Pinnacle Pellet Quesnel BC 60 60 60 100 100 100 100

5 Pinnacle Pellet Strathnaver BC 100 150

6 Pinnacle Pellet Williams Lake BC 65 65 110 170 1707 Princeton Co-Generation Princeton BC 60 60 60 104 104 104 1042 Premium Pellet Vanderhoof BC 120 120 180 180 190 200 2008 Westwood Fiber Prod Westbank BC 50 50 50 50 50 50

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Estimated Capacity 390 540 770 874 1039 1270 1357Estimated 2008 Production 1142