Air Quality - wood stoves - vehicles - farming

[WILF 44,182]

2 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

These are two different things though mate. The main argument against fossil fuels is regarding their impact on the climate. There is health arguments too of course but my understanding is that from a public health angle pollutants are most concentrated close to the source, hence why studies have shown that living right by a road is a greater health risk than away from the main road or even just having a hedge between you. My point being that we aren't running cars through our living room or gardens, but we are burning wood. The effects of these sources of pollution (on outside air) seem to be significant in urban areas, logically due to proximity and density of polluting sources.

Mate, I always respect your opinions because you are an educated chap but honestly, I’m not buying that having the fire on for a few hours is worse than 9000 cars driving past your window every day.......just not buying it mate.

In my old area, I’d have been exposed to probably the best part of a MILLION traffic movements within a 7 mile radius EVERY single day (that’s without the oil refinery or any other industry down the road).....nobody is going to tell me that a well ventilated open or enclosed hardwood or peat fire is worse than that.

 

[MickC 1,825]

Everybody was advised back in the day to get rid of smelly coal fires and start using clean cheap easy gas/electric. Coal fires died a death and then the powers that be gradually ramped the prices up on gas/electric so now its come full circle and people are going back to coal/log burner/stoves. Suprise surprise now they are wanting to ban stoves,lol so predictable the powers that be. As for ozone damage and clean air it's all another excuse to force higher/more taxation us .

The mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991 released more harmful gas/smoke/toxic chemicals as well as 15-30 million tons of Sulfur Dioxide (turns to Sulphuric Acid  when mixed with moisture) into the atmosphere in 9 hours than every fire combined since the dawn of time and still the planet was able to repair itself.I will try and find the link.

Edited May 22, 2018 by MickC

[TRUEBRIT66 1,176]

6 hours ago, Greyman said:

I have several woodburners I,m in a smokeless zone yet I live just outside of avonmouth, my kids went to school in one of the 20 worst air quality schools in the country and most blokes  round here die of the big C early the air is full of fly,s when the sun comes out ,I have 2 of those blue light fly zapper things in my kitchen all summer and fly screens on the door, several power stations and an Astra zenika chemical plant, that would leave a crater if it ever caught fire and I,m not allowed to burn wood, I respect your understanding of the sciences etc but I see it as no more than a government closing  another means of people staying warm without lining there pockets personaly

I work in Avonmouth flies are fookin massive but then I do work on a sewage treatment plant , its going to get worse round that area with the new incinerator due to start burning does make worrying about a few wood burning stoves a bit stupid       

[Born Hunter 17,622]

1 minute ago, WILF said:

Mate, I always respect your opinions because you are an educated chap but honestly, I’m not buying that having the fire on for a few hours is worse than 9000 cars driving past your window every day.......just not buying it mate.

In my old area, I’d have been exposed to probably the best part of a MILLION traffic movements within a 7 mile radius EVERY single day (that’s without the oil refinery or any other industry down the road).....nobody is going to tell me that a well ventilated open or enclosed hardwood or peat fire is worse than that.

 

I couldn't say whether or not it's worse mate, I'm just saying I've seen enough to find it plausible that it's significant. From what I have seen proximity plays significant part in pollution levels. By that I mean that the air pollution levels are not pretty much the same all through a town but increase as you get near a road or chimney and other sources. So for instance in your house ventilation will probably help to 'dilute' pollution levels with clean but cold outside air. Obviously in urban areas with a lot of sources of pollution that 'diluting' effect will be reduced because the air is much more polluted on average anyway. Which really is the main concern on this topic.

I think, that because the contribution of wood burning to urban air pollution is probably significant (though not necessarily the greatest cause), that is why 'they' are going after it. Their is policy on sources from transport too of course but that's got to be harder to tackle as it's so critical to society and the economy. Be much easier to regulate home owners away from log burners and coal fires than to regulate them away from the internal combustion engine.

Mate i went through a similar series of emotions when I first read about all this too.  

[ChrisJones 7,973]

19 minutes ago, WILF said:

Mate, I always respect your opinions because you are an educated chap but honestly, I’m not buying that having the fire on for a few hours is worse than 9000 cars driving past your window every day.......just not buying it mate.

In my old area, I’d have been exposed to probably the best part of a MILLION traffic movements within a 7 mile radius EVERY single day (that’s without the oil refinery or any other industry down the road).....nobody is going to tell me that a well ventilated open or enclosed hardwood or peat fire is worse than that.

 

I don't think the issue would be so bad if it were simply having the fire on for a few hours. It's the fire plus the other factors. Notice also how these problems are exacerbated around the city?

The data is damning but until you can provide me with an alternative that I can I actually afford to use then I don't have much of a choice. I don't burn a lot. I'm pretty keen on insulation across the board from house to person but until we have a legitimate reliable alternative that's the way it'll have to be.

[ChrisJones 7,973]

Just to add to this. I've had a quote to have solar installed. Where I live we're in almost a perfect area for it. $30,000 which equates to £22365 on the current exchange rate.

A cord of firewood is $200 which is just shy of £150.

Now I know there are political shenanigans involved with prices but until the former becomes as viable the latter I'll have to stick with a different kind of renewable.

[Greyman 25,151]

32 minutes ago, TRUEBRIT66 said:

I work in Avonmouth flies are fookin massive but then I do work on a sewage treatment plant , its going to get worse round that area with the new incinerator due to start burning does make worrying about a few wood burning stoves a bit stupid       

I take it that's the sewage plant with the 50lb common swimming in the lagoon alongside the old incinerator ? ?   

[stop.end 4,079]

1 hour ago, Born Hunter said:

I don't know the details of this subject intimately enough to be an authority on this. But I have seen enough to be left uncomfortable by it.

Here's a quick google find on particulate pollution by the Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/12175306/Is-my-wood-burning-stove-really-killing-me-What-happened-when-I-monitored-my-exposure-to-pollution.html

 

 

Another with a bit more information. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/01/pollutionwatch-wood-burning-worsening-uk-air-quality

 

What a tool.

[TRUEBRIT66 1,176]

24 minutes ago, Greyman said:

I take it that's the sewage plant with the 50lb common swimming in the lagoon alongside the old incinerator ? ?   

Not that plant but funny enough I do run the syndicate for the lagoons 

[Greyman 25,151]

29 minutes ago, TRUEBRIT66 said:

Not that plant but funny enough I do run the syndicate for the lagoons 

 

29 minutes ago, TRUEBRIT66 said:

Not that plant but funny enough I do run the syndicate for the lagoons 

Then we have probably met on a curry night out with the boys from veils in the past 

[ChrisJones 7,973]

Thoughts over coffee...

Could I balance the savings made by investing in renewables, by using the savings to buy more guns?

Like some kind of hippy-leftist offset program?

[twobob 1,458]

3 hours ago, WILF said:

Realistically are solid fuel heating systems a major health concern ?......I don’t bloody think so, the air quality in my old area is in the top 10 worst in Britain and nobody uses solid fuel heating at all.

 

Exactly wilf when I grew up everybody had a coal fire iam from a mining town very few people had cars,it's gone the other way now   but it's still getting worse it doesn't make sense does it

[WILF 44,182]

2 hours ago, ChrisJones said:

I don't think the issue would be so bad if it were simply having the fire on for a few hours. It's the fire plus the other factors. Notice also how these problems are exacerbated around the city?

The data is damning but until you can provide me with an alternative that I can I actually afford to use then I don't have much of a choice. I don't burn a lot. I'm pretty keen on insulation across the board from house to person but until we have a legitimate reliable alternative that's the way it'll have to be.

Disconnect, refuse to acknowledge their data mate.......it’s f***ing nonsense.

A complete refusal to acknowledge any type of buffoonery (no matter how well backed up by science) is the very first step in the disconnect process......and if we ain’t listening then they are talking to themselves  

The fact is, there are 98 gazillion cars in the world, industrial chemical plants, lakes in China like something out of 2000AD and Chernobyl but nah......2lb of cut up pallet on your front room fire is what’s going to do for you !!

Mate, I’m never ever going to acknowledge nonsense like that.

[Ptd87 304]

I'll be fu*ked if I'll start worrying about my co2 whilst people are still allowed to fanny around with those monster truck/lorry things   smoke billowing out them fu*kers makes me less worried about which box my milk carton goes in .... As been said a volcano farting lets off more than we ever have 

[ChrisJones 7,973]

18 minutes ago, WILF said:

A complete refusal to acknowledge any type of buffoonery (no matter how well backed up by science) is the very first step in the disconnect process......and if we ain’t listening then they are talking to themselves  

"I can accept their argument from a well researched POV with undeniable evidence. I cannot reliably act on it as I do not have an affordable alternative" ~ Chris

"The facts are in and we're changing the law. Pay up you gullible f*cks" ~ Europe

People are dying because of it, but instead of removing the massive government subsidies (the US is closer to $52bn) that prevent the market from regulating the price we're left in the hands of the powers that be. We've proven we can run both countries on renewables. We've got the technology to make emissions practically zero yet we have an institution that constantly blocks this and bills us at every step of the way... Funny how we've gone from a computer the size of an average warehouse to one in the pocket yet the power source for all of this hasn't changed in 200 years. I think the majority would switch tomorrow if they could afford to.

 

Edited May 22, 2018 by ChrisJones
Additional Hyperlink