Wood pellet supplier survey

In order to characterize wood pellet feedstock suppliers and assess the perceived impact of supplying wood pellet feedstock on sustainability, harvesting costs, and overall logging business performance, we conducted a survey of wood pellet feedstock suppliers across the southeastern United States (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia). We defined “wood pellet feedstock suppliers” as logging businesses in the southeastern United States that harvested raw forest materials (wood chips, roundwood, and forest residues) to deliver to wood pellet mills. A list of suppliers was obtained by contacting regional wood pellet producing companies and requesting a list of suppliers with their contact information. This list was screened to eliminate companies that were no longer in business or did not harvest timber (e.g., sawmills). All suppliers (N = 218) that passed this initial screening were included in the survey.

The supplier questionnaire included 25 questions on the topics of operational characteristics (e.g., personnel, equipment) and perceived impact of supplying wood pellet feedstock on sustainability, harvesting costs, and overall logging business performance. The questionnaire included open-ended questions, closed-ended questions, and a series of 5-point Likert scale questions. The questionnaire was adapted from Barrett et al. (2014) and Garren et al. (2022a). The supplier survey was distributed online using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics 2024) with initial distribution in mid-February 2024. Suppliers received an initial e-mail with four follow-up e-mails sent weekly to nonrespondents, resulting in five total contacts, consistent with previous studies (Conrad et al. 2010, Grove et al. 2020). Nonrespondents to the e-mail survey were sent a questionnaire by mail in April 2024 in an attempt to increase the sample size.

Wood pellet producer survey

In order to document the raw material sourcing practices of wood pellet mills and compare the outlook of wood pellet feedstock suppliers and wood pellet producers, we conducted a survey of wood pellet producers (mills) operating within the southeastern United States. Pellet producers were represented by procurement managers that sourced raw forest materials for wood pellet mills in the southeastern United States with an annual pellet production capacity of at least 100,000 US tons. Procurement managers for pellet facilities that did not use raw forest materials (i.e., facilities that only used mill residuals for pellet production) were excluded from the survey. The procurement managers or other senior procurement representatives at all pellet mills with production capacity of more than 100,000 tons of pellets annually (N = 12) were included in the survey.

The pellet producer questionnaire contained 18 questions (categorical/continuous, 5-point Likert scale, and open-ended) regarding pellet mill production characteristics and pellet harvesting sustainability perspectives. Eleven 5-point Likert scale questions were common in both questionnaires to compare logging business owner and pellet mill procurement manager perspectives on sustainability and the impact of harvesting timber to produce wood pellets on logging business performance and harvesting costs. The pellet producer survey was conducted online using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics 2024). Pellet producer representatives (N = 12) received an initial e-mail in late-April 2024, with follow-up e-mails sent weekly for four weeks (five total contacts).

Both supplier and producer questionnaires were pretested by biomass procurement managers and authors of previous biomass survey studies prior to distribution to ensure usage of appropriate and consistent terminology. Definitions were provided within the questionnaires for important terms. Roundwood was defined as “pulpwood, logs, or other products sold without being processed by chipping or grinding.” Raw forest materials were defined as “products such as wood chips, roundwood, and forest residues that are delivered to pellet mills for the production of wood pellets.” Forest residues were defined as “tops, limbs, bark, foliage, and other nonmerchantable materials produced by conventional roundwood timber harvests.”

Both the supplier and producer survey protocols were evaluated by the University of Georgia’s Institutional Review Board. Neither survey met the federal definition of human subjects research, and both surveys were deemed exempt from a full human subjects research review.

Data analysis

For all 5-point Likert scale questions, the nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to analyze differences between responses, testing the null hypothesis that the mean response was equal to 3 (neutral response). Differences in mean responses from shared Likert scale questions between feedstock suppliers and pellet producers were evaluated using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test. For open-ended questions, responses were coded and grouped by specific subjects or themes mentioned within each response. Open-ended response themes were summarized by percentage of respondents that provided an answer corresponding to an individual theme.

Analysis for nonresponse bias for the feedstock supplier survey was similarly conducted using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, which was used to evaluate potential differences in answers from early and late respondents. Responders to the mail survey were considered “late respondents,” and their responses were compared to responses received by e-mail from “early respondents” (Armstrong and Overton 1977). No nonresponse testing was conducted on producer survey data because of the small population size. All analyses were performed using JMP statistical software version 17.0 (SAS Institute, Inc. 2024) at α = 0.05.

Operational and business characteristics

Mean duration of ownership for pellet feedstock suppliers was 33 years (Table 1). These suppliers operated an average of 3.5 crews, with an average of 7.9 in-woods workers per crew. Fifty-six percent operated two or fewer crews, with 12 percent of businesses operating only one crew. These businesses employed a mean of 18 employees (including foremen, timber cruisers, mechanics, truck drivers, clerical workers, and owners), and a mean of 13 employees excluding truck drivers. Weekly production averaged 747 tons of roundwood per crew. Chipping crews produced a mean of 515 tons wk⁻¹ crew⁻¹ of chips. The average reported haul distance to wood pellet mills was 43 miles. Suppliers delivered raw material to an average of 1.4 pellet mills, with 58 percent delivering to a single pellet mill. Most (69%) respondents owned at least one whole-tree chipper, with a median of two chippers per operation and an average chipper age of 6 years. No respondent reported owning a horizontal or tub grinder. Sixty-two percent of respondents reported owning one or more chip van(s), with a median of five chip vans per company and an average age of 9 years.

Table 1.Characteristics of pellet feedstock logging businesses obtained from survey responses. Parameters describe material delivered to any type of wood product mill.

View Fullscreen

Suppliers reported delivering an average of 55 percent roundwood and 45 percent chips to pellet mills. Most suppliers (56%) delivered both roundwood and chips, while 32 percent delivered only roundwood, and 12 percent delivered only chips. Approximately half (52%) of all respondents indicated they harvested forest residues (tops, limbs, bark, and foliage), while 48 percent did not. All respondents that harvested forest residues utilized an integrated operation, with roundwood and forest residue harvesting occurring simultaneously. Seventy-eight percent of suppliers reported frequently leaving marketable residues on site to ensure proper forestry BMP implementation. Twenty percent of businesses reported not leaving marketable residues behind on any harvest sites, while 33 percent of businesses reported leaving marketable residues behind on 100 percent of harvest sites for BMP implementation. Suppliers harvested wood pellet feedstock from an average of 69 percent of all the tracts that their company harvested. Tracts harvested for wood pellet feedstock had an average area of 61 acres, with approximately two-thirds (69%) of these harvests being clearcuts and one-third (31%) being thinnings. Fifty-five percent of all feedstock harvests were reported to occur within pine (Pinus spp.) stands, with an average of 28 percent taking place within mixed stands and 17 percent in hardwood stands.

Wood pellet feedstock supplier perspectives

Most suppliers (79%) began delivering raw materials to wood pellet mills to diversify their business (p < 0.01; Table 2). Logging business owners disagreed with the statement that they began harvesting wood pellet feedstock because a mill they do business with encouraged them to do so (29% agreement; p = 0.04). Respondents were neutral on whether landowner satisfaction (59% agreement; p = 0.11) and competitiveness on purchasing timber sales (48% agreement; p = 0.17) were initial reasons for them to begin harvesting wood pellet feedstock.

Table 2.Responses from pellet feedstock logging business owners on their reasons to begin and continue harvesting wood pellet feedstock.

View Fullscreen

Most suppliers reported a positive view of their pellet feedstock harvesting operations. Eighty-two percent of respondents indicated that delivering raw material to wood pellet mills made their business stronger (p < 0.01). Logging business owners also indicated that they must be able to harvest logging residues to remain competitive when purchasing timber sales (p = 0.04). Most respondents indicated that deciding to harvest raw materials to deliver to wood pellet mills had been a good decision (74% agreement; p < 0.01). Logging business owners disagreed that they had plans to begin or increase their levels of forest residue harvesting (as opposed to pulpwood-sized roundwood harvesting) over the next 5 years (p = 0.04). This statement had the lowest overall rate of agreement from respondents, with only 18 percent of respondents indicating agreement or strong agreement. Respondents were significantly more likely to agree that delivering raw materials to pellet mills was a good decision or strengthened their business than they were to agree that they expected to harvest more forest residues in the near future.

Logging business owners were asked to compare the average cost of their pellet feedstock harvesting activities against the cost of their conventional logging activities (Table 3). On most questions, about half of all respondents (∼50%) viewed pellet feedstock harvesting activities as neither more nor less expensive than those of conventional harvesting operations. However, the remaining respondents strongly agreed that pellet feedstock harvesting operations were more expensive. When asked to report how frequently specific factors affected the decision to harvest wood pellet feedstock, logging business owners showed significant agreement that a tract’s distance to pellet mills, amount of merchantable material present on a site, and price for delivered feedstock material were all frequent considerations (p < 0.01). Distance to the pellet mill was the most commonly reported factor of influence (87%), followed by pellet mill delivered price (83%), and amount of merchantable raw forest materials present (65%).

Table 3.Feedstock logging business owners’ perspectives on the cost of conducting feedstock harvesting activities.

View Fullscreen

Suppliers strongly disagreed that harvesting wood pellet feedstock from a site made it more difficult to follow BMPs (75% disagreement; p < 0.01). Respondents also disagreed that pellet feedstock harvesting had a greater negative effect on water quality (62% disagreement; p < 0.01) or had a greater negative effect on soil quality than conventional operations (59% disagreement; p < 0.01). Suppliers largely agreed that pellet feedstock harvesting was a way to contribute to renewable energy production without degrading harvest site quality (71% agreement; p < 0.01). Most business owners (71%) also agreed that pellet feedstock harvesting resulted in a more aesthetically pleasing postharvest site than conventional harvests, though this response was not significantly different from neutral (p = 0.40).

Wood pellet feedstock supplier interactions with wood pellet mills

Suppliers agreed that wood pellet mills were concerned about BMP implementation (82% agreement; p < 0.01). Respondents offered mixed responses on whether there were reliable markets for wood pellet feedstock in their area (52% agreement; p = 0.32), and whether wood pellet mills had longer unloading times than other mills (50% agreement; p = 0.24). Suppliers disagreed that wood pellet mills offered more consistent wood orders than other types of mills to which they supplied materials (87% disagreement; p < 0.01). Suppliers reported being placed on a restrictive quota by pellet mills 61 percent of the year, compared to 46 percent of the year by sawmills and 65 percent of the year by pulp mills (p = 0.07).

Advantages and challenges related to pellet feedstock harvesting

Nineteen respondents provided answers to open-ended questions regarding the advantages and disadvantages of delivering raw forest materials to wood pellet mills. The most commonly cited advantages included greater use of raw material and improved aesthetics (49% of respondents provided a response related to either topic (Table 4). Other common answers included increased landowner satisfaction, access to additional markets and income, and easier facilitation of reforestation activities. Multiple respondents (16%) indicated that local wood pellet mills benefited their logging businesses by replacing dwindling local markets for pulpwood-sized roundwood. When asked about the greatest challenges to conducting profitable wood pellet feedstock harvesting activities, the most frequent response was the initial cost of purchasing and ongoing maintenance costs of operating an in-woods chipper (Table 4). Low prices for delivered material were another frequently reported challenge for pellet feedstock suppliers, as well as high costs of hauling feedstock, increasing fuel costs, inconsistent wood orders, and restrictive quotas from pellet mills.

Table 4.Feedstock logging business owners’ responses to the advantages and disadvantages of harvesting wood pellet feedstock to supply to pellet mills (n = 19).

View Fullscreen

Wood pellet producers

Ten of 12 procurement managers responded to the survey, yielding a response rate of 83 percent. Wood pellet mills represented by procurement manager respondents had been in operation for an average of 11 years (Table 5). These facilities produced a median of 600,000 tons of wood pellets per year, ranging from 65,000 tons to 1 million tons per year. Pellet mills consumed an average of over 1 million tons of raw forest materials per year, with a minimum of 105,000 tons and a maximum of 2 million tons per year. Pellet mills relied on an average of 48 suppliers per facility. Average reported harvest size among their suppliers was 100 acres. Approximately 57 percent of these harvests were clear-cuts, and 43 percent were thinnings. The average pellet facility procurement radius was 75 miles, with an average haul distance of 49 miles. Mill residues were the most common feedstock used by wood pellet mills (Fig. 1), comprising an average of 39 percent of all feedstock consumed. Pulpwood-sized roundwood was the next most common feedstock type (32%), followed by in-woods chips (29%). Only one facility used any proportion of in-woods clean chips (i.e., chips containing no bark).

View Figure

• Download as Powerpoint
• Download Figure

Table 5.Operational characteristics of wood pellet mills obtained from survey responses (n = 10).

View Fullscreen

Procurement manager perspectives

Most pellet mill procurement manager responses were neutral regarding whether their own facility would increase its use of raw forest materials going forward (40% agreement; p = 0.12; Table 6). However, most procurement managers believed that the pellet industry would increase its use of raw forest materials over the next 5 years (70% agreement; p < 0.01). This could indicate an increasing proportion of raw material procured from in-woods sources, capacity expansions of existing mills, or the construction of new facilities. Procurement managers also believed that wood pellet feedstock harvesting made logging businesses stronger. Managers agreed that harvesting raw materials made a logging business more competitive (80% agreement; p <0.01), and that mill prices allowed suppliers to make a profit (90% agreement; p <0.01). All but one procurement manager (providing a neutral response) reported having strong relationships with their logging business suppliers, and all procurement managers stated that their feedstock suppliers did a good job implementing forestry water-quality BMPs.

Table 6.Perspectives of wood pellet mill procurement managers regarding the current pellet market and their pellet feedstock suppliers in the southeastern United States.

View Fullscreen

When asked about their perspectives on the environmental sustainability of harvesting raw forest materials for wood pellet production, procurement managers showed similar agreement with the perspectives of pellet feedstock logging business owners. Procurement managers disagreed that pellet feedstock harvesting makes it more difficult to follow BMPs (p < 0.01), has a greater negative effect on water quality than conventional harvesting operations (p < 0.01), or has a greater negative effect on soil quality than conventional harvesting operations (p < 0.01). All but one procurement manager disagreed that pellet feedstock harvesting negatively affects postharvest site aesthetics, and all procurement managers agreed that pellet feedstock harvesting represents a way to contribute to renewable energy production without adversely affecting harvest site quality (p < 0.01).

Pellet producer and supplier responses related to the effects of feedstock harvesting on site water quality and aesthetics were found to be significantly different from one another (p = 0.02; p = 0.01), with procurement managers more likely to disagree that feedstock harvesting was detrimental to these factors. Pellet producer and feedstock supplier responses did not differ significantly for questions related to the effects of feedstock harvesting on BMP implementation (p = 0.81) or site soil quality (p = 0.29), however. Despite these statistical differences in responses related to water quality and aesthetics, both procurement manager and logging business owner responses still showed significant agreement that feedstock harvesting does not negatively affect harvest sites compared to conventional logging operations.

When asked about their facility’s greatest challenges to sustainable wood pellet production, five procurement managers reported that few to no significant challenges existed. Three of these procurement managers reported that sustainable sourcing guidelines restricted raw material supply by preventing sourcing from certain forest types (e.g., hardwood swamps, longleaf pine [Pinus palustris Mill.] stands). Three other respondents mentioned pellet production being limited by mill size and fixed operational costs such as transportation and labor.

When asked about the greatest challenges faced by logging business suppliers to conduct profitable feedstock harvesting operations, four procurement managers discussed limited local markets for pulpwood, a lack of nearby pellet facilities, or restrictive quotas. One procurement manager reported that their facility was “simply too small to take all residuals processed by local sawmills,” and that local feedstock logging businesses would soon be at the point of “leaving residual topwood (pulpwood-sized material) in the woods” because their facility was unable to accommodate the increase in wood utilization provided by local thinning operations. Another procurement manager suggested that logger attrition is likely to become a significant issue in the near future. Two respondents mentioned high costs of chippers and logging equipment as a significant obstacle to feedstock harvesting operations, and another two respondents mentioned rising costs of transportation and competition for labor.

Operational characteristics of pellet feedstock logging businesses

Pellet feedstock suppliers had similar productivity to other biomass and conventional logging operations in the southeastern United States. The 2,751 tons per week production level reported by pellet feedstock suppliers was consistent with the median production levels of 2,495 tons per week for biomass logging crews in Virginia’s Coastal Plain (Garren et al. 2022a). This level of productivity is also consistent with production levels for all logging businesses in Georgia (2,619 tons wk⁻¹) and Florida (1,956 tons wk⁻¹) (Conrad et al. 2024). Pellet feedstock logging businesses also reported crew counts and sizes consistent with biomass harvesting operations in Alabama (Bowman et al. 2023), the Virginia Coastal Plain (Garren et al. 2022a), and the Coastal Plains of Georgia and Florida (Conrad et al. 2024). Most pellet feedstock logging businesses (65%) owned at least one in-woods chipper, similar to findings reported by Barrett et al. (2014) and Garren et al. (2022a). Mean age of in-woods chippers in this study (6 years) was similar to the average reported by Garren et al. (2022a) of 7 years for Virginia Coastal Plain logging operations and significantly less than the 14-year average age reported by both Barrett et al. (2014) and Garren et al. (2022a) for the Virginia Piedmont. Chipping crews in the Virginia Coastal Plain may achieve higher chipping production levels, larger chip orders, and higher utilization, making it feasible to operate newer chippers than crews located in the Virginia Piedmont, where more challenging terrain, smaller tract sizes, and limited markets exist in some areas.

Perspectives of pellet feedstock logging businesses

Perspectives of wood pellet feedstock suppliers were consistent with those of biomass logging businesses surveyed by previous studies (Barrett et al. 2014, Garren et al. 2022a, Louis et al. 2024, Parajuli et al. 2024). Suppliers harvested and delivered timber to pellet mills to diversify their business, improve landowner satisfaction, and make the business more competitive when purchasing timber sales, not because pellet feedstock harvests are a large profit center. This is logical as pellet feedstock is the least valuable material harvested from a site. Overall, the percentage of logging business owners who reported making a profit on delivered wood pellet feedstock (55%) was similar to the 50 to 60 percent statistics for bioenergy logging businesses reported by Barrett et al. (2014) and Garren et al. (2022a), suggesting that feedstock logging businesses are similarly profitable to other types of biomass harvesting businesses in the southeastern United States. In 2022, around 26 percent of percent of logging businesses in Georgia and 50 percent of logging businesses in Florida reported profitability of their operations as “good” or “excellent,” with the remainder reporting break-even or worse profitability (Conrad et al. 2024). Our study suggests that, on average, pellet feedstock logging business owners report higher perceived rates of profitability on pellet feedstock harvests than southeastern logging businesses report from their business’s operations overall.

Obstacles for conventional and biomass logging operations, such as high equipment costs, inconsistent mill orders, quotas, and rising hauling and labor costs, have been observed by numerous other studies (Conrad et al. 2011, 2018b, 2024; Saunders et al. 2012; Barrett et al. 2014; Hanzelka et al. 2016; Garren et al. 2022a; Louis et al. 2024) and also serve as significant issues for pellet feedstock suppliers. Responses from this pellet producer survey suggest that procurement managers for wood pellet mills are largely aware of these issues. Several procurement managers reported that their facility’s operations were not large enough to consume the available supply of raw forest materials within their region. Whether pellet mills can replace diminishing local markets for pulpwood (as suggested by several logging business respondents) will be dependent upon whether pellet mills are able to expand in both production capacity and abundance throughout the southeastern United States.

Most respondents from the feedstock supplier survey reported similar costs between their conventional and feedstock harvesting activities, though all respondents who did not report similar costs indicated that feedstock harvesting activities were more expensive than conventional operations. Previous studies support this notion, as biomass chips and grindings require more processing than roundwood (Barrett et al. 2014). Feller-bunchers and skidders may also be less productive while handling smaller-diameter stems (Garren et al. 2022b), and increased utilization of on-site raw forest materials may require more skidder passes (Vance et al. 2018). One respondent to the pellet feedstock supplier survey specifically indicated that skidding distance and number of cycles to collect small stems for the pellet market represented a significant challenge. Situations with high fuel prices and low mill delivered prices may further exacerbate these challenges and reduce viability of harvesting low-margin forest residues.

Utilization of roundwood

Roundwood was the most prevalent type of raw forest material (not including mill residues) consumed across all surveyed pellet mill facilities, making up an average of 32 percent of all feedstock consumed, consistent with previous studies (Brandeis and Abt 2019; Kittler et al. 2020). Results of the feedstock supplier and pellet producer surveys support the notion that pulpwood-sized roundwood is the most significant raw forest material feedstock component for wood pellets in the southeastern United States, rather than wood chips or other harvested residuals. About one-third of respondents to the feedstock supplier survey reported harvesting only roundwood to deliver to wood pellet mills. Logging businesses also overwhelmingly reported no intention to increase or expand their use of forest residues over the next 5 years, suggesting that harvesting of pulpwood-sized roundwood, rather than residues, may represent a more profitable endeavor to these operations.

Sustainability of pellet feedstock harvesting operations

Despite concerns noted in the literature regarding the sustainability of forest residue harvesting operations (Vance et al. 2018), wood pellet feedstock suppliers did not view feedstock harvests as damaging to water or soil quality as compared to conventional harvests, a sentiment shared by pellet mill procurement managers. Both groups also disagreed that harvesting raw material to deliver to pellet mills made it more difficult to implement forestry BMPs. Responses from the feedstock supplier and pellet producer surveys indicated that proper BMP implementation was viewed as important by logging businesses and pellet mills alike. Seventy-eight percent of supplier survey respondents reported leaving some merchantable forest residues behind to better implement BMPs, which is slightly higher than the 64 percent and 73 percent statistics reported by Barrett et al. (2014) and Garren et al. (2022a), respectively. All 10 procurement managers reported prioritizing trained logging operations (i.e., Sustainable Forestry Initiative logger training programs; Sustainable Forestry Initiative 2025) as suppliers of wood pellet feedstock. Feedstock suppliers agreed overwhelmingly with the statement that mills they supplied were concerned about proper BMP implementation. As adherence to BMPs is a requirement for participation in certification programs, such as SBP (and is verified by these programs through the use of audits), it is logical that pellet mills wish to ensure BMPs are being properly implemented by the logging businesses that supply them with raw forest materials.

It is important to note that survey respondents were all inherently engaged in the biomass sector, which may have shaped their perspectives regarding the sustainability and economic viability of feedstock harvesting practices. Understanding these perspectives, however, is critical for gaining insight into the motivations, challenges, and business strategies of key stakeholders within the pellet feedstock harvesting and pellet production industries. Surveying stakeholders directly involved within the market for wood pellet production and feedstock harvesting ensures that findings are accurate to the experiences and operational realities of those participating in the market system. Results of this study align with perspectives observed by previous evaluations of biomass feedstock producers and consumers (Barrett et al. 2014, Garren et al. 2022a, Louis et al. 2024, Parajuli et al. 2024), which further reinforces the robustness of these findings.