Banning coal and wood

[Born Hunter 17,763]

28 minutes ago, timmytree said:

Fires that don't burn clean are the problem. The intended ban is nothing to do with climate change, it's about carcinogenic particulates. Looking at the figures it shows that a logburner on coal or wet wood for just one hour produces the same amount of particulates as an HGV running non stop for 13 hours. Most of those fires are in dense residential areas.

The point that everyone seems to have missed.

[WILF 46,811]

Why don’t they disconnect everyone’s central heating, that would have more impact on climate change than banning wood.

See, when I had gas central heating it was on almost all the time.

When I moved, I had the oil boiler scrapped and now I use nothing but peat.

When I get up, it’s gone out and I may not light it until the late afternoon depending.

In the summer, it’s never in at all.

”Banning” anything is bad.....always bad......no ifs and no buts.

It always starts off with a reasonable explanation and then once you have give them an inch they will take a f***ing mile.

Its all bullshit and you buy into this nonsense at your peril......as has been said, there’s millions of containers coming from China every week, why don’t they stop them and make this stuff at home ?

If they were serious about the climate they would, but they ain’t so they don’t, it’s all about forcing normal people down a pre planned route to rinse them for something or make them reliant on some energy company or other 

[Arry 21,824]

I have a wood burner and a thermostat on the flue, burning at the right temperature is essential IMO. My neighbour try's to make a log last three days I think and it bloody stinks the smoke gets so cold its seems to sort of falls off the roof. I've dropped hints like you have to give them a blast to no avail she it tight as a tick mind and you can't educate pork.

Cheers Arry

[WILF 46,811]

1 hour ago, timmytree said:

Exactly.

Personally I would like to see log burners and open fires needing some kind of cleaning/scrubber system. Some people burn any old crap like plastic, MDF, painted wood. I know one farmer who uses any old wood with a few lumps of old tyre to make it burn. The amount of crap that comes out of his chimney each autumn is unbelievable, just imagine how much goes to atmosphere?

Look at the descriptions of Victorian Britain, town housing black with soot and people dying in their thousands of lung disease, the resurgence of open fires and burners is threatening to take us back that way.

Fires done properly with the right fuel and reaching the right temperature aren't much of a problem but there are too many people who only have a fire because it looks good.

I've had 2 log burners but no more! It's a dirty and polluting way of heating apart from the hassle of chopping and storing wood to make it fit to burn. Very few households have a fire as a sole means of heating and cooking so why make work for yourself?

Genuine question mate, you say it’s polluting, but is it more polluting than a power station ? 
 

 

[WILF 46,811]

I just think we have been burning wood for hundreds of thousands of years......it’s only since the industrial revolution that air quality has deteriorated.

So, I recon that a massive clue right there !

Nobody wants to be realistic because it don’t suit them, they can continue to buy shit from China, go to f***ing Tesco, have central heating, live in new build housing as long as you stop Fred Blogs having his open fire because that makes it all OK !

Its complete f***ing nonsense lads......round my old way they are going to build 30,000 new houses and a massive f***ing crossing across the Thames plus a new motorway to link it and to offset all that concrete and loss of habitat ?.......they are going to fortnightly green bin collections !!, I kid you f***ing not !! 
 

Banning a bloke burning timber and calling it about climate change sounds absolutely as rediculous as it is ! 

Edited February 22, 2020 by WILF

[neil82 1,080]

21 minutes ago, timmytree said:

Yes. Power stations like Drax using wood pellets or those in Europe using brown coal are forced to fit filters and scrubbers which take out the majority of emissions and nearly all particulates. Power stations are producing power for everything from heating, to lighting, charging, industry. Most log burners are just there for a visual effect, most houses with log burners have far more efficient heating systems as a primary source. Log burners chuck most of their crap into the atmosphere for people to breathe in and die from.

Our cars have to be fuel efficient and clean burning so why not heating systems?

We resisted changes to make cars more efficient but look at the benefits we have now, some petrol cars in polluted cities actually put out emissions cleaner than what they sucked in. If we want clean air and healthy kids then log burners and open fires should be under scrutiny. I'll repeat what I stated earlier, 1 hour of a log burner produces the same cancer causing particulates as 13 hours of a big HGV.

1.5 million logburners in this country burning for 4 hours in one day is equivalent to 78 million HGV driving hours. Is that fair for such a tiny proportion of the population? 

          Drax is burning wood pellets imported from Canada in a big dirty oil burning ship, how f***ing green is that. One very simple basic fact is we are being conned over all this green/recycling crap, how many vans/lorries drive all over the place collecting  material, stock pile it, load it onto bigger lorries burning even more fuel to transport it to docks to put on ships to send to the other side of the world to get sorted and maybe recycled then get sent back here as wood pulp to get turned into shitpaper, priorities are wrong but dickheads with degree`s and no braincells seem to decide the rules

 

[WILF 46,811]

45 minutes ago, timmytree said:

Yes. Power stations like Drax using wood pellets or those in Europe using brown coal are forced to fit filters and scrubbers which take out the majority of emissions and nearly all particulates. Power stations are producing power for everything from heating, to lighting, charging, industry. Most log burners are just there for a visual effect, most houses with log burners have far more efficient heating systems as a primary source. Log burners chuck most of their crap into the atmosphere for people to breathe in and die from.

Our cars have to be fuel efficient and clean burning so why not heating systems?

We resisted changes to make cars more efficient but look at the benefits we have now, some petrol cars in polluted cities actually put out emissions cleaner than what they sucked in. If we want clean air and healthy kids then log burners and open fires should be under scrutiny. I'll repeat what I stated earlier, 1 hour of a log burner produces the same cancer causing particulates as 13 hours of a big HGV.

1.5 million logburners in this country burning for 4 hours in one day is equivalent to 78 million HGV driving hours. Is that fair for such a tiny proportion of the population? 

Fair is telling another bloke what he can and can’t do when you are doing everything yourself mate.

I still can’t get to grips with how forcing a bloke to sacrifice his log fire helps when nobody is sacrificing their central heating or Imported goods or factory meat.

Fair is everyone giving up their carcinogenic particle generating things if they expect the other bloke to give up his fire........it’s easy to “do something” when it’s at someone else’s expense.

 

[WILF 46,811]

Chernobyl is poisoned for the next 25,000 years with clean energy.

Never mind some blokes log burner, stop eating anything with palm oil so that they stop cutting down the lungs of the planet.....or is it easier to just stop the bloke using his log burner?

stop using your car so that asbestos particles don’t come off the break pads any more......

You know, the list is endless......

Picking on a small minority of people to make everyone feel better and f**k doing anything about the big inconvenient things that may affect “us”

Nonsense I’m afraid chaps 

[WILF 46,811]

1 hour ago, timmytree said:

I suggest you check facts before you quote. Asbestos brake pads were out before 1997. They have been illegal for years. 

It's not one mans logburner, the massive rise in population means a huge rise in open fires and flues full of particulates, in the 3rd world it's people burning everything they can. 

So if someone is going to die of lung cancer from sooty particulates it's ok because it's from someones logburner, is that what you're saying? It doesn't matter because it's everyones right to spread cancer causing chemicals over their neighbourhood just because they want to sit in front of a pretty fire?

Mate, I burn peat where I live now.

Its my one and only fuel for my central heating and it also provides my hot water.

I dig my own bit of land to get it, haul it 2 mile up the road to my house......and that’s it.

 No oil rigs, no tankers (sea or road), no fights for oil & gas workers or executives, no nuclear waste.

My heating at a guess is having less impact than your heating......so should we ban mine or yours ? 
 

You know, I’m all for doing something about these things but if we are going to do something then let’s do it on the real major, big things.......puffing our chest out because we hurt a million people in a country of 70 million isn’t doing something, it’s propaganda and nothing more.

As I said before, man has burnt wood for a hundred thousand years and amazingly enough there is 7 billion of us now!........I think there could be other, more pressing factors at play don’t you ? 

Edited February 23, 2020 by WILF

[Nicepix 5,650]

4 hours ago, timmytree said:

If you burn peat for all your energy needs, fair enough. How do you haul it? on your back? Donkey? Or do you use a truck? Most people burn wood for looks, just because they want to sit by a pretty fire, they don't actually need it.

The other issue is there are now too many humans. A thousand years ago our wood fires made no difference. Now there are more fires than there were humans.

If we can't reduce the human population then we have to reduce the impact, if that means not burning dirty coal and wet wood then I'm all for it.

I presume you don't use electric or mains water, have no access to gas, don't use diesel or petrol and never use public transport either?

You said: "Most people burn wood for looks, just because they want to sit by a pretty fire, they don't actually need it." 

Would you care to expand on that statement? Where have you got the information to be able to determine who 'most people' are? A few links to your sources of information would be helpful. Unless of course you know everybody in the world and what fuel they use and why.

[DIDO.1 22,824]

Nobody is banning wood fires or log burners. If you go to the expense of buying wood then surely you want to get the most heat per £1 from it? Drying it correctly will only help you. Having it dry will give more heat, safer chimneys, longer flu lives and the kids in the street a safer environment. 

If you really go to to effort of cutting and carting your own wood or peat then it won't effect you but equally it is hard work so advice should be given how you get the very best from it 

[DIDO.1 22,824]

Nobody is banning wood fires or log burners. If you go to the expense of buying wood then surely you want to get the most heat per £1 from it? Drying it correctly will only help you. Having it dry will give more heat, safer chimneys, longer flu lives and the kids in the street a safer environment. 

If you really go to to effort of cutting and carting your own wood or peat then it won't effect you but equally it is hard work so advice should be given how you get the very best from it 

[Greyman 28,440]

14 hours ago, Born Hunter said:

The point that everyone seems to have missed.

You should no better  than  to believe stats mate he that pays for the report or survey usually gets the outcome he wants, a wood burner runs around90% more efficiently than an open fire yet they are pooling the stats from both to prove there case, the dock opposite my house are importing 1000s of tons of cheap sulphur laden coal to be crushed into dust and fired into power stations and make green energy for electric cars it’s all just smoke and mirrors and the end results will be it will cost you more and you will be able to do less about it, simples

[king 11,972]

15 minutes ago, timmytree said:

Quite simple. How many log burner owners also have central heating?

So you drive an electric car 

[Arry 21,824]

When a lot of us was young we didn't have central heating in fact never hot water unless the boiler (a early Muti fuel burner) in the kitchen was lit. Every house on the estate have two fires one in the front room one in the kitchen all burning coal. There where nearly all or nearly all coal powered power stations less traffic of all kinds. 

We never seemed to have the problems we have today.

The difference IMO is every body has one two or three cars HGV's every where, flying from one side of the world to the other at the drop of a hat. My personal view is Flying has a lot to do with Climate change and I might be wrong but I think its about 90 TONS of CO2 is given of every hour by a long haul flight. 

Cheers Arry