The Electric Chainsaw and the Climate Abundant Life

Anatomy of a Decision

Photo by Sven Brandsma on Unsplash

Editor’s Note: Links to products in this piece are affiliate links and if you use them and make a purchase, Climate Abundant Life will receive an affiliate fee. Whatever way you go, we’ll appreciate your use of the link to help fund this publication, but it is totally up to you.

Although we don't realize it, outdoor power tools like lawnmowers, gas-powered leaf blowers, and chainsaws emit a ton of emissions for the gasoline burned in them. According to the California Air Resources Board: “Currently, a new gas-powered mower running for 1 hour produces similar emissions to the average car driving for 100 miles.” That’s a lot of emissions for cutting the lawn. Granted, we don’t cut the lawn twice a day like we use our cars for a commute, but nonetheless, the emissions are real.

These considerations were on my mind when my local electric cooperative recently transformed my front yard by removing trees to protect the power line. At first, I was abhorred by the idea, but then he showed me where the power lines were burning the trees and told me that if I leaned on the trees when the wind was blowing, there was a good chance I would get shocked. Not that I had much choice, but it did make me realize this was probably necessary.

They took them down, trimmed the branches, threw them into the chipper, and then left the trunks for me to make firewood. This is where I got into the chainsaw question. I needed to cut that wood and stack it for firewood. I am planning to purchase a wood-burning stove for heat and with a saw I can cut wood on my property. I would do this for the wood, but also to enhance the carbon-capturing capacity of my small slice of forest. So, I'll need a saw anyway. Here’s how I assessed the choices in front of me.

First, the tool. My research showed that I had three options for a chainsaw—traditional gas-powered, corded electric, and cordless electric. I've used traditional gas-powered chainsaws before and enjoyed absolutely nothing about them. They are noisy, they smell, and you have to mix the gas and maintain them. True, they can cut nonstop for hours and are reasonably priced. On the other hand, they are unpleasant and make emissions along the lines of other small gas engines.

There were also the corded electric saws. While I imagine these saws would work well in a very stable, controlled environment, there's no way to take one into the woods because you would be limited by the length of the cord. Besides, I immediately conjured visions of hitting that cord with the running saw—sparks, twist-ups, broken saw. As a friend of mine used to say, that's a stupid way to die.

Finally, there are cordless, battery-powered electric chainsaws. I already had a very small one of these—hand-sized with a six-inch bar. I loved this little tool, but it was too small for the job of cutting up larger logs. I didn't know they had larger battery-powered saws, but they do. I liked the idea of the low noise, no fumes, no mess saw for my purposes—cutting occasional wood to use for my homestead.

 Before making the decision, I wanted to put this through my criteria. How does it compare on cost, time savings, enjoyment of use, and carbon emissions?

Investment Cost

The investment cost of the electric saw was roughly the same as that for a gas-powered saw, though some gas-powered saws are substantially less expensive to purchase. These are difficult to compare, however. Gas-powered saws vary from $140 to $350 and are measured in engine size (e.g., 40 cc) and horsepower (e.g. 2.2HP). The gas-powered Husqvarna 435 with a 16-inch bar and 40cc engine is $329 on Amazon. But there is a similarly described gas-powered chainsaw for $140. Electric saws are measured in volts so without a lot of conversion work, you can't compare their power rating to a gas-powered saw. CAT offers a 60V 16-inch saw for about $280, while DeWalt has a similar saw for about $360. In other words, on the money side, there is some additional initial cost for the cordless electric chainsaw.

Operating Cost

As I learned in creating the spreadsheet for comparing costs between EVs and gas-powered cars, the fluctuating price of gasoline plays a big part in the comparison of operating costs. Plus, if there is an advantage one way or the other, it is magnified or reduced based on the amount of usage you have. A car, which is used every day for most people, may produce a significant difference in cost every month, one way or the other.

On the other hand, a chainsaw for most people is an occasional use tool. It would be unusual to go through a five-gallon can of gas for most people, and it would be unusual for the electricity needed for a chainsaw to even register on your electric bill. Hence, for my purposes, I consider this a wash. I figured there is no discernible difference in operating cost for the two kinds of chainsaws—at least in my use case.

Time Savings

Regarding time, it depends on your priorities. The gas-powered saw allows one to work longer since there is no break for charging the battery. On the other hand, the gas-powered saw requires maintenance, gas-oil mixing, the mess of refueling, and changing fuel if you don't use it for a long time. None of those are requirements for the electric saw. You just take the battery out, put it on the charger, and in an hour or two, it is ready to go again. For me, the time savings around avoiding engine maintenance is significant because I am not good at it. In fact, I am so not good at it that I often don’t do it, and in the process, ruin my tools. In exchange for the maintenance of the gas-powered saw, I have to remove the battery during the winter and keep it inside to promote longer battery life. But this is easy and takes only a second to do.

Carbon Emissions Reduction

As mentioned previously, the electric saw emits no emissions at all because it burns no fossil fuels. Like an EV, it takes electricity which has a mix of sources including fossil fuels, but due to the inefficiency and high emissions production of the small gas engine, the electric chainsaw always calculates better than the small gas engine, even if all the electricity comes from coal.  In addition, as the mix of electricity sources moves more toward renewable, every time it does your carbon savings increase.

Quality of Life and Pleasantness

Finally, there is the pleasantness of using the saw. The electric saw is quiet and light. I use eye protection but don’t need anything on my ears. My coat and clothes don’t become saturated with the exhaust smell, and the saw itself doesn’t smell so I can keep it inside, even though I don’t.  It is fun to use—that’s something I never thought I would say about a chainsaw!

On the Criteria

The criteria to measure a decision for a climate abundant life are money savings, time savings, carbon emissions reduction, and improvement in life. The electric chainsaw is a bit more expensive than gas-powered saws, although if you count the gas can and oil, it will offset part of that. The electric saw is about even on time savings, although it eliminates a maintenance chore that I hate. It is a winner on carbon emissions reduction and I know I will enjoy using it much more. Summarized together, I lean toward the electric saw as being more abundant for me, even though it has that slightly higher cost. But then there is one more thing that tips the whole thing over—what the saw enables me to do.

The Big Picture

Most homeowners considering power tools purchases will probably stop at the previous paragraph. Rank how the tool choice works on the criteria and then decide on your lawn mower, leaf blower, trimmer, etc. As necessary as those things are for modern homeowners, they won't make a radical shift like the one I am going to share now; hence, you'll need to make your decision on those criteria we just reviewed.

For me, a chainsaw enables something completely different. Although there is some debate and controversy about this, heating with wood is considered a carbon-neutral method of heating. I live on ten acres in the woods, so it is quite possible to heat this way with wood from my land, and doing so has multiple benefits. First, the wood is free and it therefore eliminates a significant annual cost of roughly $2,000 per year. Second, I can manage my woodland for biodiversity, production of wood, and carbon capture. A small lot properly managed can increase the carbon capture capability while eliminating the need to burn fossil fuels. That is a double win on emissions and carbon. Third, it keeps me outdoors and working physically, which is sometimes a challenge for a 61-year-old guy who would rather be at his desk writing. In other words, heating with wood makes me more healthy and fit.

Knowing myself, I can say that I am unlikely to do that work if I dislike it, and I have always hated gas-powered chainsaws. My small electric chainsaw is such a joy to use that I actually look forward to it and go looking for projects to use it on. If that same thing transfers to my larger electric chainsaw, I will enable profitable enjoyment by obtaining the electric cordless saw. So, I save $2,000 a year, improve biodiversity and carbon capture, improve woodland productivity, and get healthy enjoyment out of the activity. All this happens for an investment of $350, or about a 10-50% premium on the price of a gas-powered saw.

It is probably no surprise—I bought the DeWalt electric chainsaw, and I couldn’t be happier with the decision.

Final Word

As I said, the wood lot enablement only applies in a very specific situation. Most readers won’t have that advantage, but you may have others and you should always include those in your consideration. For me, even if I were not moving to heat with wood from my woodlot, I would choose a cordless electric chainsaw over a gas-powered model. The price is in the right range and even though it is higher, the net extra money is worth it to me so I can eliminate my emissions from using the saw and gain further emissions benefits as my utility makes the eventual shift to renewables. I would say the real winner for me is that I like it quiet. I live where I live to enjoy the silence of the forest, and my few neighbors probably do, too. For any extra money I may spend, the gains in pleasantness are well worth it to me.

That said, each reader will make their own decisions. If you are so motivated, I would love to hear about your considerations and how you might come down on a similar decision.

Anthony Signorelli