No More Coal !
Discussion
CrutyRammers said:
The consultation paper suggests that things like heritage railways won't need an exemption as the intention is only to ban coal for domestic use, and replace it with manufactured alternatives. Not sure where that leaves my hobby blacksmithing. Can I buy it as long as I say it's not for heating? Or can I not buy it unless I have some proof that I'm using it professionally? I expect there will be lots of unintended consequences here. But only for the edge cases, so they won't care. Or will everyone switch to coke?
With regards to kiln dried woods etc, that just adds more pollution as you have to spend the energy to dry the wood. We source most of ours wet and choo and season it ourselves, so is that now going to be banned or do we have to prove that we season it?
Wood drying kilns are normally heated by chipping and burning all of the bits that are not suitable for selling, so it is not problematic. This is bits that would otherwise be left to rot and release their carbon that way.With regards to kiln dried woods etc, that just adds more pollution as you have to spend the energy to dry the wood. We source most of ours wet and choo and season it ourselves, so is that now going to be banned or do we have to prove that we season it?
Personally I have always preferred to buy wet wood in late winter and season it myself. It’s cheap to buy then and can be left piled at the end of the garden until the following winter, by which time it will be burnable.
oyster said:
Actually I think the public are in favour.
Look at polls on this.
Look at how private companies are making carbon-neutral statements. They wouldn't do that unless they felt they had the weight of public opinion on their side.
It's the likes of you and I who are in the minority I'm afraid.
Familar with the story of the emperor's new clothes?Look at polls on this.
Look at how private companies are making carbon-neutral statements. They wouldn't do that unless they felt they had the weight of public opinion on their side.
It's the likes of you and I who are in the minority I'm afraid.
Ironically, I know of some people who are fully sold on anthropomorphic global warming and as their contribution to solving the problem, deliberately switched to wood and log burning. The logic they gave was that burning such fuels, which come from sustainable and replaceable CURRENT carbon resources (i.e. forests), is preferable to burning coal, peat, natural gas and other oil based products. The argument is that releasing old, previously fossilised, carbon into the atmosphere (that has been underground for up to 400 million years) is much worse then releasing carbon from current or recent plant life.
It looks to me now that burning ANYTHING is not going to be allowed.
It looks to me now that burning ANYTHING is not going to be allowed.
I’m working on a project for a London Borough on this very subject….so let me correct a few of the misunderstandings and opinions here.
Most major towns and cities and many other places have been smokeless zones for decades. It is illegal to generate smoke from burning solid fuel – fines of £1,000 can be and are issued. At present, it is not against the law to sell or buy fuel that generates smoke, just that you can’t use it. All this policy is doing is removing the legality of buying something that is illegal to use. So in the future, all that you will be legally able to buy is smokeless coal, dry wood, pellets or pre-formed fuel blocks.
And there’s nothing wrong with that whatsoever – and should have been done ages ago.
In rural areas and the less dense suburban areas, wood burning and open fires are not a problem (provided the correct type of fuel is used). One of the reasons for the rise in popularity in wood burning stoves is that they are more environmentally sound. Wood is good fuel as it’s sustainable and the process of replacing it increases carbon capture.
The problem is in cities where the concentration of pollutants is a massive issue. The borough I’m working in has 50 deaths annually directly attributable to PM2.5 from fires and stoves and many other health impacts that cost the local NHS £30m a year. And this is one of the smaller London Boroughs. London would be one of the cleanest cities in the world were it not for this type of pollution.
I know it’s easy to pour scorn on the motives of these sorts of policies but you really can’t on this. It’s long overdue and I suspect at some point, the burning of all solid fuel will be banned in cities.
Most major towns and cities and many other places have been smokeless zones for decades. It is illegal to generate smoke from burning solid fuel – fines of £1,000 can be and are issued. At present, it is not against the law to sell or buy fuel that generates smoke, just that you can’t use it. All this policy is doing is removing the legality of buying something that is illegal to use. So in the future, all that you will be legally able to buy is smokeless coal, dry wood, pellets or pre-formed fuel blocks.
And there’s nothing wrong with that whatsoever – and should have been done ages ago.
Dont Panic said:
Think I might just start burning old tyres on the open fire at night, just to be antigreen.
Im quite fed up of all this virtuousness being openly displayed by the empty heads.
Quite tiresome indeed.
Nothing to do with being ‘green’.Im quite fed up of all this virtuousness being openly displayed by the empty heads.
Quite tiresome indeed.
In rural areas and the less dense suburban areas, wood burning and open fires are not a problem (provided the correct type of fuel is used). One of the reasons for the rise in popularity in wood burning stoves is that they are more environmentally sound. Wood is good fuel as it’s sustainable and the process of replacing it increases carbon capture.
The problem is in cities where the concentration of pollutants is a massive issue. The borough I’m working in has 50 deaths annually directly attributable to PM2.5 from fires and stoves and many other health impacts that cost the local NHS £30m a year. And this is one of the smaller London Boroughs. London would be one of the cleanest cities in the world were it not for this type of pollution.
I know it’s easy to pour scorn on the motives of these sorts of policies but you really can’t on this. It’s long overdue and I suspect at some point, the burning of all solid fuel will be banned in cities.
Eric Mc said:
Ironically, I know of some people who are fully sold on anthropomorphic global warming and as their contribution to solving the problem, deliberately switched to wood and log burning. The logic they gave was that burning such fuels, which come from sustainable and replaceable CURRENT carbon resources (i.e. forests), is preferable to burning coal, peat, natural gas and other oil based products. The argument is that releasing old, previously fossilised, carbon into the atmosphere (that has been underground for up to 400 million years) is much worse then releasing carbon from current or recent plant life.
.
The issue here is air quality not CO2. They are quite able to still burn wood that has been dried or seasoned. .
StevieBee said:
One of the reasons for the rise in popularity in wood burning stoves is that they are more environmentally sound.
A small part I can imagineMost middle class women I know have either recently put in a wood burning stove or would if they could and it has little to do with environmental soundness it is just the fashionable thing, just as Agas once were.
Who burns wet wood? Any I get sits in the dry shed for weeks, with 2-4 sacks inside drying out further and about 3-4 of the small bags chopped on the wood pile shelf, again drying out. The local B&M, petrol station, garden center store the wood outside, so you have to dry it out...
It's hard to chop anything thats been outside.
It's hard to chop anything thats been outside.
chow pan toon said:
Agammemnon said:
chow pan toon said:
3 years to get some central heating sorted I guess.
The gas central heating that will shortly be phased out?Thin end of the wedge, but it's coming.
Lotobear said:
more government virtue signalling.
a lignite power station in Germany probably belts out more harmful emissions in one day, 365 days of the year, than all of the coal fires and stoves in Britain do in one heating season.
We don't have any say in environmental policies for Germany though. a lignite power station in Germany probably belts out more harmful emissions in one day, 365 days of the year, than all of the coal fires and stoves in Britain do in one heating season.
SpeckledJim said:
chow pan toon said:
Agammemnon said:
chow pan toon said:
3 years to get some central heating sorted I guess.
The gas central heating that will shortly be phased out?Thin end of the wedge, but it's coming.
Lotobear said:
more government virtue signalling.
a lignite power station in Germany probably belts out more harmful emissions in one day, 365 days of the year, than all of the coal fires and stoves in Britain do in one heating season.
And that's Germany's problem. Not ours. Just because you can't do it all doesn't mean you should stop doing some.a lignite power station in Germany probably belts out more harmful emissions in one day, 365 days of the year, than all of the coal fires and stoves in Britain do in one heating season.
And if trying to prevent 50 deaths a year in one London Borough alone as direct result of PM2.5 pollution from solid fuel burning is someway virtue signalling then I don't see the issue.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff