Garage Forecourt Coal

[MtB]

4 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

Yes, but, lots of cities are building new tram systems at great expense (Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham and more) and I don't think anybody is re-introducing the trolley bus. Why?

 

A better question is why re-introduce trams at all? Is it so they can run on leccy? 

 

But I'm sure there have been plans for trams again since long before it became fashionable to 'go green'.

[IanD]

43 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

A better question is why re-introduce trams at all? Is it so they can run on leccy? 

 

But I'm sure there have been plans for trams again since long before it became fashionable to 'go green'.

 

Trams (and even more so trolleybuses) make much less sense now BEV buses are available -- going green (less pollution than diesel buses) was one of the big reasons but that's now largely gone, and there's all the cost of building the infrastructure -- high (and very obtrusive) for trolleybuses, much higher still for trams.

[noddyboater]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

 

I don't have any grandchildren -- at least yet, or not that I'm aware of. Doesn't stop me thinking that dropping this whole problem into the laps of our descendents by ignoring it is a bad and selfish idea though... 😞

 

Though even though banning "lifestyle" woodburners to reduce nasty PM2.5 pollution makes sense for the likes of George Monbiot, it doesn't make necessarily make sense to demonise boaters, since there are probably only about 20000 woodburning stoves on boats compared to about 2 million in Islington (just an example!) houses... 😉

 

Same reasoning for diesel propulsion (35000 canal boats vs. 35M cars in the UK, so also about 1% of the problem), and a similar issue in that it's difficult (and expensive) for boats to go all-electric just like it is for them to stop burning wood...

 

But this would all need some thinking by the government to make (justifiable?) exceptions for boaters, and thinking is not something they seem to be particularly good at... 😞

 

Also there's the court of public opinion to worry about -- I doubt that said Islington resident who has had their cosy woddburning stove forcibly removed will be very happy to look out of their window and see canal boats still burning wood. And it's people like this (ooh, generalisations again...) who have the ear of government (or *are* the government), unlike poorly-represented and disorganised boaters... 😞 

It's a minefield isn't it?

We slow cooked our dinner yesterday in the 150 yr old range, fueled by a few lumps of coal and some ash logs. The alternative was the electric oven (our 2nd in 6 yrs, hardly good for the environment), but our local power stations are run on imported gas and coal.

 

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

Those numbers are completely misleading, and show that you've misunderstood the problem... 😞

 

Rotting wood releases billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year, just like it did before humans came along. And the carbon absorption cycle re-absorbs that back into plants and algae, just like it did before humans came along.

 

it's the things that humans do on top of the natural carbon cycle -- mainly, burning fossil fuels and deforestation -- that are the big problem. And before you say "but we cut down lots more trees and let them rot!" -- well, cutting down the trees in the first place (deforestation) is a *far* bigger problem than the methane released by the rotting wood that might result from it.

 

It's always necessary to look at the big picture, not one isolated fact (or article) which appears to tell you what you want to hear... 😉

 

It looks like what we do represents only about 4% of CO2 release, but that is obviously enough to tip the balance away from the equilibrium that obtained previously.

 

Seemingly around 750 gigatons, (1 gigaton = 1 billion tonnes?) of CO2 is naturally output and absorbed by the planet, whereas humans output around 29 gigatons that isnt all absorbed by the planet, thus increasing the amount held in the atmosphere.

 

Puts Peters 10 billion tonnes into perspective as a relatively small number which, as you say, is/was always a part of the natural equilibrium, rather than an increase.

[peterboat]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

Those numbers are completely misleading, and show that you've misunderstood the problem... 😞

 

Rotting wood releases billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year, just like it did before humans came along. And the carbon absorption cycle re-absorbs that back into plants and algae, just like it did before humans came along.

 

it's the things that humans do on top of the natural carbon cycle -- mainly, burning fossil fuels and deforestation -- that are the big problem. And before you say "but we cut down lots more trees and let them rot!" -- well, cutting down the trees in the first place (deforestation) is a *far* bigger problem than the methane released by the rotting wood that might result from it.

 

It's always necessary to look at the big picture, not one isolated fact (or article) which appears to tell you what you want to hear... 😉

 

3 hours ago, tree monkey said:

It's not a problem as such though, it contributes to the natural carbon cycle and the system deals with it, the problem is our over release of carbon which means the system, robust though it is, could reach a tipping point

Look at it another way burning those trees instead of a fossil fuel is a win, if you let it rot it emits carbon, if you burn it its the same less any methane that might have been released in rotting. Yes particulate matter is a problem but thats the same as fossil fuels, so the evidence is there to burn wood as its the best of a bad job😊

[magnetman]

This will be why the Drax power station is allowed to burn imported wood pellets from Canada and be allowed to call themselves a renewable energy producer.

 

Some clever brainy people have worked it out. Not sure about the pelleting and transport but never mind. Renewable can't not be good.

 

Lignite for me today and its lovely. A whisp of smoke from the chimney and a nice warm cabin. Seems alright and the ash is actually ash rather that non combustible binders from those awful smokeless briquettes.

 

Only issue is that its German. Oh dear but they make good cars so why not good coal too.

Edited January 3, 2023 by magnetman

[peterboat]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

 

Trams (and even more so trolleybuses) make much less sense now BEV buses are available -- going green (less pollution than diesel buses) was one of the big reasons but that's now largely gone, and there's all the cost of building the infrastructure -- high (and very obtrusive) for trolleybuses, much higher still for trams.

I disagree Ian I think trams and trolley buses are the better option until cheap batteries are available, Also they operate on routes so what is the problem? Once Sheffield and Rotherham had Trams Rotherham also had Trolley buses, Sheffield had a few but only for certain routes, now we have gone the full circle and trams are back they generally run much faster than the buses without delays on some routes as its dedicated tramways

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, peterboat said:

 

Look at it another way burning those trees instead of a fossil fuel is a win, if you let it rot it emits carbon, if you burn it its the same less any methane that might have been released in rotting. Yes particulate matter is a problem but thats the same as fossil fuels, so the evidence is there to burn wood as its the best of a bad job😊

I don't think you've got that quite right there...

 

If you let it rot there may be some methane emitted but most of the carbon ends up back in the soil, both as if this happened naturally.

 

If you burn it all the CO2 and particulates end up in the atmosphere, which is much worse for both the planet and people.

 

The best thing to do with trees is not to cut them down in the first place, and when they die just let them rot. Once you've done the damge by cutting them down it gets more difficult, but burning them is probably still not the best thing to do...

Edited January 3, 2023 by IanD

[peterboat]

4 minutes ago, magnetman said:

This will be why the Drax power station is allowed to burn imported wood pellets from Canada and be allowed to call themselves a renewable energy producer.

 

Some clever brainy people have worked it out. Not sure about the pelleting and transport but never mind. Renewable can't not be good.

 

Lignite for me today and its lovely. A whisp of smoke from the chimney and a nice warm cabin. Seems alright and the ash is actually ash rather that non combustible binders from those awful smokeless briquettes.

 

Only issue is that its German. Oh dear but they make good cars so why not good coal too.

Used to be able to buy Lignite in Scotland worked well on our stove for many years

[magnetman]

Cutting wood and burning it is the right idea if you are shivering.

2 minutes ago, peterboat said:

Used to be able to buy Lignite in Scotland worked well on our stove for many years

 

Mole Valley Farmers cooperative still sell it. It was 80p a kilo for my last load of 100kg delivered. Not cheap but it really is a very nice heating fuel.

 

It is briquetted, does not break down in damp conditions and comes prepacked in 20kg bags.

 

I think the May coal ban will put a lid on this so wondering if they will be dumping stock in the spring as it is not an authorised smokeless product.

 

Some people sell it as smokeless. It doesn't produce as much smoke as ordinary black coal does.

Edited January 3, 2023 by magnetman

[IanD]

7 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I disagree Ian I think trams and trolley buses are the better option until cheap batteries are available, Also they operate on routes so what is the problem? Once Sheffield and Rotherham had Trams Rotherham also had Trolley buses, Sheffield had a few but only for certain routes, now we have gone the full circle and trams are back they generally run much faster than the buses without delays on some routes as its dedicated tramways

Tramways are good for a small number of heavily trafficked routes where there's space for the tracks (like in Sheffield), but are very expensive to both build and maintain compared to buses. Trolley buses also need all the overhead cables and poles installing which are again expensive and obtrusive. Both were a good idea before LFP batteries for buses came along, where the overall cost (including infrastructure and buying the buses) is considerably smaller than tram/trolleybus systems, as well as being much more flexible about where they can go.

5 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Cutting wood and burning it is the right idea if you are shivering.

 

Mole Valley Farmers cooperative still sell it. It was 80p a kilo for my last load of 100kg delivered. Not cheap but it really is a very nice heating fuel.

 

It is briquetted, does not break down in damp conditions and comes prepacked in 20kg bags.

 

I think the May coal ban will put a lid on this so wondering if they will be dumping stock in the spring as it is not an authorised smokeless product.

 

Some people sell it as smokeless. It doesn't produce as much smoke as ordinary black coal does.

Lignite (brown coal) has the dubious distinction of being pretty much the only fuel which is "dirtier" than coal, for both CO2 and other emissions, which is why it's pretty much disappeared from use.

Edited January 3, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

Tramways are good for a small number of heavily trafficked routes where there's space for the tracks (like in Sheffield), but are very expensive to both build and maintain compared to buses. Trolley buses also need all the overhead cables and poles installing which are again expensive and obtrusive. Both were a good idea before LFP batteries for buses came along, where the overall cost (including buying the buses) is considerably smaller than tram/trolleybus systems, as well as being much more flexible about where they can go.

Lignite (brown coal) has the dubious distinction of being pretty much the only fuel which is "dirtier" than coal, for both CO2 and other emissions, which is why it's pretty much disappeared from use.

 

I noticed that. The thing is it burns very slowly, does not block up the flue and stays in overnight yielding a low heat output. This makes it actually very suitable for small boats.

 

Emissions will presumably be per kilo burned so if you burn less then at some stage the emissions will actually end up lower compared with other fuels which would end up making the cabin far too warm.

[Higgs]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

If you burn it all the CO2 and particulates end up in the atmosphere, which is much worse for both the planet and people.

 

The planet will be fine and plants use CO2 and can use more. Humans will be long gone, before the last organism dies. It isn't only our planet. We're still trying to control nature, but nature is better off when we don't interfere. We need to stop expanding beyond the planet's capability. We're going to need to leave the planet on some ark of species. The planet and we are done for in time. We're so arrogant, as to think humans are it. 

 

 

 

[magnetman]

Add a couple of selected consonants to the last word and it might be a more accurate reflection of the unfortunate species they call humans.

 

Humans think they are "important" in the grand scheme of things but actually they got the word wrong. They are in fact "impotent". It does sound similar.

 

 

Look at birds. I know people take if for granted but they just fly about in the air silently. Now that IS clever. Seriously. We are surrounded by other living organisms that have evolved past us by millions of years and actually know how to interact with their environment. Either we kill them all now as they are nicking the oxygen or we die off.

 

 

[bizzard]

Twolley buses have a double twolley so need more overhead catenery, double wires to complete the electrical circuit because they run on rubber tyers. Tramcars like dodgem cars at the fair only need one overhead wire because they have a singe trolley, so the circuit is completed via the wheels on the rails.

[bizzard]

[Captain Pegg]

9 minutes ago, bizzard said:

Twolley buses have a double twolley so need more overhead catenery, double wires to complete the electrical circuit because they run on rubber tyers. Tramcars like dodgem cars at the fair only need one overhead wire because they have a singe trolley, so the circuit is completed via the wheels on the rails.

Presumably the electric tug in Harecastle tunnel used the same principle.

[bizzard]

2 minutes ago, bizzard said:

Going to school on our bikes we could get a tow from a diesel bus by hanging on to the platform handle if the conductor was upstairs and not looking. But we chickened out of hanging on to a Trolley bus which shared the same route, they jerked as the driver knotched up and they went much faster than the sluggish diesel buses,

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

Presumably the electric tug in Harecastle tunnel used the same principle.

You mean one or two wires? IIRC from the photos I saw it only had one wire, return current was via the chain it pulled itself along. Or maybe that was somewhere else...

[magnetman]

@bizzard

Were these fitted with batteries as well? The extra set of stern wheels seems to say they mght have been.

 

.

Edited January 3, 2023 by magnetman

[Higgs]

13 minutes ago, bizzard said:

 

The pantograph contacts used to come off at roundabouts, and they carried a long bamboo pole with a hook to reposition the contacts on the wire. And the bus fare into town was tuppence. 

 

 

[bizzard]

10 minutes ago, magnetman said:

@bizzard

Were these fitted with batteries as well? The extra set of stern wheels seems to say they mght have been.

 

.

Pretty certain they didn't have batteries because when the trolley fell off the overhead wires the bus couln't move until the conductor shoved the trolley back up with the long bamboo pole. Termini like ours at Wangey Road Chadwell Heath Essex, Barking and Bow and tight bends on their route the road surfaces well cobbled so that the tyres on the four rear wheels wouldn't scrub so much as the bus turned so the tyres lasted longer.

[bizzard]

10 minutes ago, bizzard said:

Pretty certain they didn't have batteries because when the trolley fell off the overhead wires the bus couln't move until the conductor shoved the trolley back up with the long bamboo pole. Termini like ours at Wangey Road Chadwell Heath Essex, Barking and Bow and tight bends on their route the road surfaces well cobbled so that the tyres on the four rear wheels wouldn't scrub so much as the bus turned so the tyres lasted longer.

This was the sort around our way, the big LT's

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, magnetman said:

@bizzard

Were these fitted with batteries as well? The extra set of stern wheels seems to say they mght have been.

 

.

 

Service battery only I think for lights etc.

 

Motor drive was direct electric.

[Guest]

Here's ours. Just four wheels. The trolley depot long gone but the large building adjacent is still there. Was occupied by Dorman Long and Subsequently British Steel.