Forum menu
Sounded judgy convert, didnae mean to tbh, just wondering out loud really.
No worries. It was definitely a lifestyle choice to be poorer! The biggest impact of my lifestyle choice to move north is the extra mileage we drive in fossil fuel burning cars. That is something that I feel bad about and need to address.
That’s exactly what I mean by sustainable, more carbon being layed down (ie. more planted/growth) than burned. I take your point on the timescale, there will be a lag if starting now, so needs a soft ramp up.
Sure, that's fine in the long term, but we need to be making deep cuts in carbon emissions right now. In my view, wood burning for most use cases takes us further away from that.
That's not just a rural thing though convert, my BIL lives in a large new housing estate (ironically very near richmtb up there^) which is near central Glasgow but of course none of them will use the peasant wagons, and as such 2 cars is a bare minimum, many have 3 or 4.
But then (in a Scottish centric way) I looked at the map of smoke control areas.
its handy that the majority of the major works at Grangemouth (refinery, petrochemicals etc) are neatly outside of the smokeless zone.
Environmental impact is a different conversation and definitely needs to be explored but the crazy thing is, as much as I hate the 2 SUVs on every drive trend in my neighbourhood (Your children might not enjoy a stable climate in the future but at least they will have happy memories of being taken to school in a Range Rover.) In terms of air pollution a wood burner is actually much worse than 2 SUVs.
They probably should be banned in urban settings and particle / smoke filtration should be mandatory elsewhere.
Tis a shame, a wood fire is lovely. But then leaded petrol used to make cars run really well and we did away with that.
I’m not clued up enough to say for sure but this might actually be the better option.
Cradle to grave of the two options I'll be very surprised.
(I have good visibility on both)
If your buying your artisanal kiln dried wood imported from Lithuania then I'll give you that oil may be better by economy of scale but for locally felled and processed timber I would be surprised.
.
we have used it a bit recently, but quite disappointed with the heat from it
I'd place a small wager that's entirely down to either your wood, or how you're driving the thing.
If that cubic metre of wood hasn't been drying long enough (12-18 months), it's very likely to be of little use for anything other than making smoke.
Don't believe the bullplop about 'kiln dried' or 'seasoned' when you buy, either.
In terms of air pollution a wood burner is actually much worse than 2 SUVs.
Absolutely, it wasn't meant as a direct comparison, or a 'your worserer than me' type whataboutery, merely an observation on what convert was saying.
In terms of overall environmental impact, I don't think your 2 SUV's would stack up as well though, there's many different ways to measure these things.
I think it's fairly obvious that a mix of energy sources is what's needed, blending the characteristics of each for the specific situation.
However it's also clear that insulation is essential. It should be free for everyone, shouldn't it?
presumably you have chosen to move into a draughty old house though rather than having owned it from new or forced at gunpoint 🤔 In which case the cost-efficiency is your problem to figure out rather than anyone else, sorry 😃If someone can point me in the direction of more efficient and cost effective ways of heating and insulating a two hundred year old stone house that’s not on the gas main, I’m all ears.
and no room is ever about 18degs and that’s the living room with big stove in it. The bedrooms and bathroom are only on when needed and then only to 16 degs.
A bit like the 1950’s council house we used to live in then, before the council put CH in?
The sustainable argument is pretty moot.
IF you were planting more trees than you felled to cover the carbon emitted in processing the wood etc.
THEN you could just as easily plant trees (or restore peat bog, or whatever else) to offset the oil/gas/electricity you burnt.
Also, the global impact of an individual woodburner on climate change would be negligible. The local impact of particulate polution is measurable. So I'd be amazed if you could justify it on a greater good basis as you'll kill more people locally than you'll save globally.
A bit like the 1950’s council house we used to live in then, before the council put CH in?
Pretty much! No ice on the inside of the windows though! I'm at home today doing 'indoor' jobs. It's 3 deg outside and 13 deg in the kitchen and living room without the stove running or heating on so positively balmy. It's amazing how you acclimatise. Dreading the inlaws arrival on Thursday from their well insulated bungalow in Hampshire. 3rd ever trip to Scotland and first one in the winter. Even with everything turned up to 11 they are going to freak! Covid might yet still save me from the complaints!
footflaps
Full MemberThe other problem with filters is you’d need to clean / change it regularly as it will just block up with soot. You’ve got a fire spewing out all sorts of large soot particles when being lit with that soot going straight into a sub 10 micron filter – never going to work well.
Its not like an industrial incinerator where the burn temp is controlled and the soot level minimised.
I was just reading about one of the ones linked earlier in the thread; apparently the chimney sweep empties it. Would think most people will have a sweep regularly anyway, and if it blocks presumably you'd soon know about it!
In a previous house the accretions on the interior walls showed that even properly dried wood was still fouling the place up. Now have a multi-fuel burner where only anthracite gets (occasionally) burnt and ignited with a Grenadier so no wood at all.
Fossil fuel financed re'searchers blame wood. The Guardian really should have spent five minutes checking out:
Sur wood burners produce local pollution for a few months of the year but claiming they are worse that ICE vehicles is tenuous.
ICE vehicles have filters which mean their particulate emmisions are finer (but still very much there) than get picked up in most air quality montoring networks. That Guardian article is too thin on detail to know what was measured and whether or not comparable.
Perhaps the institue should look into 'clean' natural gas buring because the gas isn't all burned so that a source of hydrocarbons in the air.
Ther have been studies in France on th eArve valley which leads up to the Mont Blanc tunnel with local wood burners balming th etrucks for th eawful air qulity excess cancers etc. and th eoil lody blaming the wood burners. Neither are great but at least the wood burning is as near to carbon neutral heating as you'll get.
Environmental impact is a hugely broad term.
In terms ofcO2 production wood isn't worse than gas.
In terms of air quality and health it is far worse.
So go wild if you live rurally. If you do it in a town you shouldn't wait for the law to tell you to stop
In terms ofcO2 production wood isn’t worse than gas.
No, it's a hell of a lot better. My wood is local garden waste cut with an electric chain saw and picked up in a wheel barrow. The CO2 amounts to the embedded carbon in the cahin saw and the stove over theri respectivee life times. A a lot less than a central heating system anyhow before you even fire it up.
I wouldn't be surprised if we see an increased use of fireplaces and log burners especially in poorer areas. A 500% increase in wholesale gas prices is going to see people looking for cheaper options and some will be happy to burn any old shit if it's cheap/free.
Agreed. As I typed in my posts earlier the postie was delivering a letter with the excellent news that my lpg price has risen to 72p a litre. Happy days.
But yes, come April I foresee some seriously unhealthy 'fuels' going on fires, especially in poorer areas.
13 deg in the kitchen and living room
My missus would have a fit if I tried to put the CH thermostat even just below 20°
My missus would have a fit if I tried to put the CH thermostat even just below 20°
Need to toughen her up! Even with a bottomless budget I don't think I could get an internal temp of 20 degs in the house in the winter as it is currently setup. Last winter was a cracker from a snowy fun perspective. But we also didn't see outside daytime temps above zero for more than 6 straight weeks. The bedroom temp dropped below 8 deg on many nights, as has Mrs Cs working from home office. She's actually been really good about it and tolerates 15-16 degs as a working temp for her office which considering that's 8-9 hours a day of sitting at a desk is very tolerant. She does complain that she can't feel her fingers when she types sometimes mind!
I'm not sure what the answer here is, any use of any fuel has obvious pollution consequences.
I burn waste wood from local makers of house roof structures - surely this is quite environmentally friendly?
One man's waste is another man's heating fuel!
Despite making my living in the business, I'd happily see solid fuel burning banned in large urban settings.
It doesn't take many people burning wet wood or coal to make the atmosphere pretty unpleasant.
That said, the data (and the way the Guardian report it) is mostly a load of rubbish.
It does rankle a bit that the headline is always WOOODBURNERS!!!!! though.
A decent woodburner with decent fuel is extremely clean.
Why is the headline never open fires or bonfires? Some sort of weird class thing as stoves are seen as a bit bourgeois down South?
Even as I type this having my lunch on the Black Isle, I'm looking at a huge plume of smoke from muirburn on the hills above Cawdor. No mention of that in the article..
An education programme as done in Norway decades ago would be good, but it's the harder option so unlikely to happen.
8 °C?! My wife would have left me, or she'd be burning everything that isn't nailed down in an effort to keep warm. To be fair at 8 °C so would I 😀
We live in a very rural area (1km to the next house) and have a wood burner (sorry) we dont use it very often and its fuelled by fallen wood from nearby that i collect and season in the shed. But yeah, its still a wood burner so not great.
But i did object to being reprimanded for saying i was going to use it one evening by my boss who was due to fly out to the Caribbean for a weeks break the very next day.
IF you were planting more trees than you felled to cover the carbon emitted in processing the wood etc.
Burning wood just cycles carbon back to the atmosphere from whence it came only a few months or years ago. It's in complete contrast to fossil fuel combustion where 'dead' carbon (from millions of years ago) is forced into today's atmosphere.
Gas is out, and they want us all on electrical heating systems so they'll make all other forms illegal in order to force the populous to go electric.
Next up, Oil heaters and other fuels, be they bio or otherwise.
I don't give a ****. People have been using wood for millenium. I'll worry about my use when all the newer on essential crap is removed. Lets start by banning air travel, most road based commercial haulage, electrical generation to keep the huge amount of non essential electrical apparatus charged etc. The propblem isn't burningv wood, it's too many people.
Nasty selfish little people just going after an easy target.
But i did object to being reprimanded for saying i was going to use it one evening by my boss who was due to fly out to the Caribbean for a weeks break the very next day.
Lol! Simarly, some of the dissenting voices on here are all too happy to partake in a 'fun car' thread.
Bejaysus!.
Quite strongly put there @mattsccm. I do broadly agree though.
Someone mentioned Grangemouth further up the thread. I would also chuck Mosmorran in there too. Waste at the industrial scale is absolutely off the charts. Regular shutdown of a major chemical production facility that is coupled to the North sea gas supply over a pipeline. If the chemical plant doesn't run they just burn the gas as it can't be shut off. I've no idea how many houses could be heated by the wasted gas but it must be a significant percentage of Scotland. A shameful failure of regulation.
@yetidave and @robola. Such facilities are regulated under the PPC regs in Scotland. There's a lot of publically available info on specific sites should you care to look
https://www.sepa.org.uk/regulations/pollution-prevention-and-control/large-combustion-plant/
Much as I would love to believe that Sepa have our backs, they are pretty toothless.
Much as I would love to believe that Sepa have our backs, they are pretty toothless.
Seems that way. Sewage discharge in our river from sewage treatment plants all "not seen" by sepa.....well shit I'm sure if you inform them your coming they will turn it off.
No, it’s a hell of a lot better
In the long term. We need to cut carbon in the short term.
We have one, we live in the middle of nowhere, and it’s that or fire up the oil boiler when it’s cold in an afternoon.
If someone can point me in the direction of more efficient and cost effective ways of heating and insulating a two hundred year old stone house that’s not on the gas main, I’m all ears.
I don't think houses such as yours are the problem IHN. It's those that fit them to newer houses such as the dozen or so already installed into the 2 year old detached houses built near me. As somebody has already said its those that fit them for fashion reasons so they can claim a certain lifestyle that need to be regulated.
@robola they can enforce under different regulations. In some sectors they are far from toothless and you can see the impact. E.g.
ransos
Free MemberNo, it’s a hell of a lot better
In the long term. We need to cut carbon in the short term.
You've misunderstood, I'm saying wood is a hell of a lot better than gas in terms of CO2, not just a bit better.
To be fair, they certainly ain't toothless in terms of our industry, far from it.
But they dont seem to give a flying **** about farm run off and such 'small issues' locally.
@nobeerinthefridge what industry is that?
@tomd I'm well aware of that statement. Great that noise issues are being addressed.
But the nature of this facility is that if it needs to shut down it will. When it does they will burn the raw material.
"Next month’s £140m investment programme by ExxonMobil, the installation of noise reducing flare tip followed by a new enclosed ground flare in 2022 are major milestones to compliance which will mean less flaring and less impact on communities on the occasions flaring is required in the future."
A new ground flaring system just means it will be less audible and visible, not that they will burn less gas.
Our multi fuel stove was fitted 13 years ago to replace an open fire. Since then many houses on our estate have had them fitted. Being in a 'smokeless zone' our stove had to comply to Hetas regulations, however next door and other neighbours have not done this. On a very cold winter night it's not good waking around the area. We've decided to stop* using it, even though our wood is well seasoned and we know how to properly use the thing.
* Had to once a few weeks ago when the boiler broke and we had no heating.
Well this thread has gone as expected.
Being in a ‘smokeless zone’ our stove had to comply to Hetas regulations,
What are hetas regulations.
They are a regulatory body enforcing standards set by others.
For smokeless that will be defra approved
For fitting it'll be building standards (all stoves need to be fitted to those)
You’ve misunderstood, I’m saying wood is a hell of a lot better than gas in terms of CO2, not just a bit better.
No, I haven't misunderstood. It's better in the long term, which is problematic. I appreciate that it's easier to modify your beliefs to suit your behaviour.
It’s better in the long term
Gas or wood in your opinion? A simple answer not more riddles.
IMO renewed wood is better than gas in terms of CO2 whatever the time period. The greenhousing of the planet is happening now and not going away any time soon.