Baltic birch not what it used to be

[woodferret]

Picked up some BB/BB from a local supplier... looked nice.  Counted 13 ply at the store.  Then when working on it, noticed the face veneer sanded through rather quickly while solid edging.

Break out the jewelry loupe and I can see now that it's 15 ply, like Columbia Forest Europly.  Didn't ask who the mfg was, but I assume it was still a Baltic country - but very likely not that one who shall remain unnamed.

Anyone come across this lately?  Or has it been this way since it became popular in the designer crowd?

 

[Packard]

It is not “what it used to be” but “where it used to come from”.

What we know as “Baltic birch” mainly came from Russia.  All the lumber products from Russia and the Ukraine is now titled “conflict lumber” and cannot be imported to the USA.

The Europeans are facing more draconian regulations about “conflict lumber”. 

I’m afraid that there is not much you can do about it without further enhancing Russia’s financial situation. 
https://us.eia.org/report/20220930-russian-conflict-birch/

It appears that Menards has bypassed the embargo and has been getting conflict Lumber.  If you are willing to support Russia’s war effort and there is a Menards store near you, then you could possibly get some good-old-fashioned-Baltic-birch.
https://www.amloggers.com/news/revealed-russian-conflict-timber-worth-over-1bn-sold-in-the-us

 

[Peter Kelly]

What sized panel? 5x5?

 

[mino]

It is not “what it used to be” but “where it used to come from”.

What we know as “Baltic birch” mainly came from Russia.  All the lumber products from Russia and the Ukraine is now titled “conflict lumber” and cannot be imported to the USA.

...

Both is true. Different place means different wood means "not what it used to be".

Was "BB" trademarked, it would be NAINA by now. Instead what is now officially sold under the same moniker (also in Europe) is a different product, by different makers. From a (generally) lower strength wood.

The most common "Baltic birch" ply was actually not from the Baltic area but from "Baltic countries", in reality from interior Russia. Got its name because it was historically sold/distributed by traders from the Baltic countries/through the Baltic.

Birch wood from the continental climate area is of a higher average quality than Birch from the Baltic area with a more moderate climate. The more harsh central Russian climate means slower growth, hence better properties.

As for the sanctions, they do not apply to Ukraine products but to Russian and Belorussian ones. It would make no sense to sanction Ukraine while bankrolling them at the same time .. to put it mildly.

This causes seemingly absurd cases where it is not uncommon for Russian produce to be sold as "Ukrainian" in the EU. At a higher price, of course. It gets exported to Belarus, then from Belarus to western Ukraine, gets re-labeled and is re-exported further to the EU from there. Money speaks.

In EU a 5x5 sheet of 18mm is now $100 at the cheapest of places. It was $50 before the war. The middlemen need their cuts.

The only silver lining of all this is that alternate light ply like the Eucalyptus stuff started to be imported as a substitution which was not available previously over here.

-------------------
Either way, there is no way (sans a WW3) anyone will be able to dislodge the BB from its position long term. It cannot be made anywhere else at the quality and cost combination that Russians can make it thanks to their huge natural forests where forestry (costs) are pretty much zero. What will happen (happened ?) is it will be priced out of many use cases. That is a good thing. Wasting high quality wood on concrete works is sacrilige!

 

[woodferret]

What sized panel? 5x5?

4x8

 

[Packard]

It is not “what it used to be” but “where it used to come from”.

What we know as “Baltic birch” mainly came from Russia.  All the lumber products from Russia and the Ukraine is now titled “conflict lumber” and cannot be imported to the USA.

...

Both is true. Different place means different wood means "not what it used to be".

As for the sanctions, they do not apply to Ukraine products but to Russian and Belorussian ones. It would make no sense to sanction Ukraine while bankrolling them at the same time .. to put it mildly.

I got my information from the second article I linked:

Shortly after the invasion, the international timber certification bodies FSC and PEFC declared any timber emanating from Russia and Ukraine to be “conflict timber,” and suspended any certifications for the duration of the invasion.

I assumed that no lumber was being exported by the Ukraine (as we currently know it), and any lumber being shipped from the land grabbed in 2014 by Russia from the Ukraine would be actually Russian lumber. 

Or the two governing agencies were being careful not to take a position on who was the aggrieved party, Russia or the Ukraine.

I any case it ws not spelled out in the article. And for the sake of this discussion, probably not a consideration.

The question is, “Is Menard’s birch plywood (according to the article, a product of Russia) better than the other birch plywood?  Or is the overall shortage of birch forcing factories to use lower quality lumber than they would have in the past when birch was plentiful.

But I think we can agree that the Ukraine/Russia conflict (“war” is a more accurate term) is probably at the root of the lower quality Baltic birch plywood.

 

[woodferret]

Mino is right in that Finnish/Polish raw Birch isn't as dense/quality.  The producers have pivoted towards those sources and they're expected to barely meet domestic EU demand.  They're still obviously exporting so that explains the inflated cost...  My question was less about war gripes and more to see if anyone else has noticed any deviation in what's being marketed as Baltic Birch from a structural/ material perspective.

I only have one data point but I suspect there's just not enough BB veneer to make it worthwhile to include a full 1.3mm x2 worth on a board since most designers are just looking for the 13ply lamination 'look'.

 

[mino]

I got my information from the second article I linked:

Shortly after the invasion, the international timber certification bodies FSC and PEFC declared any timber emanating from Russia and Ukraine to be “conflict timber,” and suspended any certifications for the duration of the invasion.

I assumed that no lumber was being exported by the Ukraine (as we currently know it), and any lumber being shipped from the land grabbed in 2014 by Russia from the Ukraine would be actually Russian lumber. 

Or the two governing agencies were being careful not to take a position on who was the aggrieved party, Russia or the Ukraine.

I any case it ws not spelled out in the article. And for the sake of this discussion, probably not a consideration.

The question is, “Is Menard’s birch plywood (according to the article, a product of Russia) better than the other birch plywood?  Or is the overall shortage of birch forcing factories to use lower quality lumber than they would have in the past when birch was plentiful.
...

Ah, thought you meant actual sanctions/import restrictions with legal power to them.

Context:
There are legally binding restrictions/sanctions on Russian timber product imports into the EU while any FSC label is pretty much arbitrary*) and is non-binding to boot. No one breaks any law ignoring it.

Ref. Ukraine, they export quite a lot of lumber to/through the EU, mostly raw but also processed. They do not do not grow much Birch though. Too hot a climate for it.

*) them being fair, all US, French, British /can continue the list/ timber should be "conflict timber" .. the whole concept of punishing countries for being impacted by war is vile virtue signalling to me .. so I very much ignore that whole "thing". Actual sanctions are a completely different matter.

...
I only have one data point but I suspect there's just not enough BB veneer to make it worthwhile to include a full 1.3mm x2 worth on a board since most designers are just looking for the 13ply lamination 'look'.

Yep, that is the most likely scenario. The BB ply is exceptionally good quality simply because the raw materials are so high a quality it makes no sense to go lower for the manufacturers. Earning it the reputation for quality/cost.

It is still possible to gray-import high quality BB veneer for the EU makers, but then one wants to be sparing with it. Veneer-class wood is priced a lot higher when sold standalone ..

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Maybe you guys who are physically closer, thus more likely to have been using it longer (and more aware than the usual American) will know, Why is the standard for BB set at 5 x 5?
As far as I understand it, the UK guys use the same size we do here, they just refer to it by metric dimensions of 1220 x 2440

In the cabinet shop, we have access to much larger sizes of other sheet goods, but ply is pretty much stuck at 4 x 8 unless special ordered. Up to 10' is fairly easy to get, but it will always be some kind of veneer faced stuff, rather that the usual shop-grade stuff. (Radiata pine, Elliotis Pine, etc)
Beyond that, it has to come from a specialty veneer company.

 

[makpacman]

Europe isn't responding so I'll take a stab.

Essentially GOST 3916.1-96 is the Russian standard for plywoods. If you look that up the sizes(in mm of course) range from approx 4'x4' to 6'x8'. The reason I heard 5'x5' became the international standard for baltic birch "supposedly" had to do with a logistical constraint when shipping west. Not sure if it was the trucks, trains, or containers but something made it more practical to ship plywood in 1525mm x 1525mm to Europe.

Looking into it a bit further it seems interior width of containers is 2350mm so 2440(8ft) stacks wouldn't fit sideways and 1525 wastes less space than setting 4x8 sheets in lengthwise where only 1220mm of 2350 would be used). Perhaps that's it?

 

[mino]

Europe isn't responding so I'll take a stab.

Essentially GOST 3916.1-96 is the Russian standard for plywoods. If you look that up the sizes(in mm of course) range from approx 4'x4' to 6'x8'. The reason I heard 5'x5' became the international standard for baltic birch "supposedly" had to do with a logistical constraint when shipping west. Not sure if it was the trucks, trains, or containers but something made it more practical to ship plywood in 1525mm x 1525mm to Europe.

Looking into it a bit further it seems interior width of containers is 2350mm so 2440(8ft) stacks wouldn't fit sideways and 1525 wastes less space than setting 4x8 sheets in lengthwise where only 1220mm of 2350 would be used). Perhaps that's it?

Yes, it is a GOST standard, but not by mandate. It, however *was* a "company standard" as in country-wide as the whole of USSR operated effectively like a single huuge corporation.

Remember, when this became mass produced, there was the Soviet Union and that entity was ALL IN on full-lifecycle efficiency *). So EVERYTHING was taken into account, from raw material properties, up to the ability to process at the end point.

Considering birch is not a very big tree by any stretch, I would not be surprised if 60" (roudned to 1525) was chosen the "optimal balance between quality/waste ratio, equipment cost and utility. Secondly, a square size was chosen for uniformity - this type of a ply is meant for furniture and is expected to have same properties in any direction, hence there was little point in increasing the cost and/or decreasing (average) quality to get a rectangle.

*) They rarely got there, but it was the ideology that drove everything - the buyer/customer demand very much NOT considered - "customer" was expected to align oneself with the state decision instead of vice versa in a market ecomony. in addition, in the USSR there were literally not privately-owned small trucks or vans. This meant that the 4" sheets width fitting inside was not a consideration whatsoever while this drove the preferred sizes in the Western markets.

Ref. containers ... the 60x60 size precedes the whole contrainer "thing" by a good couple decades, so I would skip that thought.