Garage Forecourt Coal

[tree monkey]

4 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

And there was me thinking that we are being encouraged to leave vegetation to rot down naturally to provide habitat for creepy crawlies?

Organic matter, including wood, is an important habitat, as it decays much it will be incorporated back into the habitat and locked up in the soil to be recycled back into the plant and bugs and beasties, there will obviously be some loss to the atmosphere via respiration, although I am a touch skeptical about any serious methane release, apart from anaerobic habitats but much of that will be held within the soil horizon 

[mrsmelly]

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

Organic matter, including wood, is an important habitat, as it decays much it will be incorporated back into the habitat and locked up in the soil to be recycled back into the plant and bugs and beasties, there will obviously be some loss to the atmosphere via respiration, although I am a touch skeptical about any serious methane release, apart from anaerobic habitats but much of that will be held within the soil horizon 

This thread has become another joke thread. The reality is that all those " Green " people on here decrying how people live are typing on their plastic laptop/phone/ device. Driving their car made of much plastic whilst buying stuff for their houses etc from China, flying all round the World on holidays etc etc etc etc. Its all nonsense akin to peeing in the wind until moves/changes, far bigger than buying a few milk floats are made. 

[tree monkey]

33 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

This thread has become another joke thread. The reality is that all those " Green " people on here decrying how people live are typing on their plastic laptop/phone/ device. Driving their car made of much plastic whilst buying stuff for their houses etc from China, flying all round the World on holidays etc etc etc etc. Its all nonsense akin to peeing in the wind until moves/changes, far bigger than buying a few milk floats are made. 

Not sure why I deserved that rant, but fair enough

 

[MtB]

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

Not sure why I deserved that rant, but fair enough

 

 

Maybe mrsmelly hasn't seen THIS:

 

 

 

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

This thread has become another joke thread. The reality is that all those " Green " people on here decrying how people live are typing on their plastic laptop/phone/ device. Driving their car made of much plastic whilst buying stuff for their houses etc from China, flying all round the World on holidays etc etc etc etc. Its all nonsense akin to peeing in the wind until moves/changes, far bigger than buying a few milk floats are made. 

 

The thing about the internet is that it is easy to portray yourself as 'green' but what matters in reality is what you do in practice.

 

I strongly suspect that some are not quite as 'green' as they would have us believe but at the same time lecture others on what they should and should not be doing.

 

Like lots of people I will be holding back from gluing myself to the A1(M) but I do what I can within the available resources that I have. Amongst other things we have cut back massively on our energy consumption of all types (Gas/smokeless and wood). Admittedly partly driven by rising costs but also because it's the 'right' thing to do. I could of course be talking absolute BS and in fact have done nothing. How would anybody know?

 

I also find it quite funny that some on here are quite ready to castigate government figures and data when it suits them but conveniently when the figures support what they are claiming they are suddenly accurate and 'facts'.

 

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by M_JG

[David Mack]

18 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Maybe mrsmelly hasn't seen THIS:

 

 

 

Doesn't really count since that wasn't an electric milk float!

[Stroudwater1]

1 hour ago, mrsmelly said:

This thread has become another joke thread. The reality is that all those " Green " people on here decrying how people live are typing on their plastic laptop/phone/ device. Driving their car made of much plastic whilst buying stuff for their houses etc from China, flying all round the World on holidays etc etc etc etc. Its all nonsense akin to peeing in the wind until moves/changes, far bigger than buying a few milk floats are made. 

 

I agree

 

I was interested in pictures from a friend in Victoria Falls Zimbabwe a couple of weeks ago. Train truck after truck full of coal, 16,500kg stamped on each wagon. This is all bound for coal firing in Zambia but where this coal is from in  Hwange there’s 2 or 3 giant coke from coal furnaces all built by Chinese for coke to be shipped to China for steel manufacturing . Nearby is a large 920Mw coal fired power station 

Next time I’m asking him to bring 20kg back in a bag on the plane. 

 

It has made me re evaluate whether any efforts in the UK is actually of any point . I suspect that scrapping 4 year old solid fuel burner or even very old diesel cars are probably less environmentally friendly than just carrying on using them. We do need to do what’s possible but clearly with mass destruction in Ukraine and Chinese inertia our efforts often with cost to UK economy is unlikely to be as useful as we would like to think . 

 

[booke23]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

If 17% of particulate pollution comes from wood burning stoves (government figures) that suggests about 5000 deaths per year, with cost to the NHS/social care system of about £34M per year.

 

Does that answer your question?

 

No....how much cancer does it cause?

 

And why the attitude? 

[mrsmelly]

37 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Not sure why I deserved that rant, but fair enough

 

Not targeted at you old bean, just a general observation on this, and such as the milk float thread 

[MtB]

12 minutes ago, Stroudwater1 said:

It has made me re evaluate whether any efforts in the UK is actually of any point .

 

 

I considered this in as much depth as I could muster about fifteen years ago. I concluded that given the whole of the UK produces less than 1% of worldwide CO2 emissions, even if we could get down to net zero it would be pointless and futile given the really big producers (USA, China, India) are showing no interest beyond lip service in reducing their own output. 

 

The only point of reducing our own output is so we can apply political pressure to the big producers, who might otherwise say in response to us nagging them about it "Well you're doing nothing, why should we?"

[IanD]

17 minutes ago, booke23 said:

 

No....how much cancer does it cause?

 

And why the attitude? 

Don't know, the figures don't separate out cancer deaths from all other causes -- and why pick on this in particular, when other causes of death are more likely to be caused by it? You seemed to be suggesting that PM2.5 pollution can be ignored, the figures say otherwise.

 

No attitude -- you asked a question, I answered it. The figures about particulate pollution, deaths caused by it and NHS costs are all from the government, who are hardly likely to exaggerate the problem since they're the ones who'll have to solve it.

7 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

I considered this in as much depth as I could muster about fifteen years ago. I concluded that given the whole of the UK produces less than 1% of worldwide CO2 emissions, even if we could get down to net zero it would be pointless and futile given the really big producers (USA, China, India) are showing no interest beyond lip service in reducing their own output. 

 

The only point of reducing our own output is so we can apply political pressure to the big producers, who might otherwise say in response to us nagging them about it "Well you're doing nothing, why should we?"

 

The problem is that if everyone -- individually or as part of a group -- takes the "somebody else is worse than me" attitude then nobody does anything. Of course this is what a lot of people (and politicians) would like because they don't want to admit there's a problem, or accept any responsibility for it, or change their ways... 😞

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by IanD

[MtB]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

The problem is that if everyone -- individually or as part of a group -- takes the "somebody else is worse than me" attitude then nobody does anything. Of course this is what a lot of people (and politicians) would like because they don't want to admit there's a problem, or accept any responsibility for it, or change their ways... 😞

 

 

I dunno why you say "if". This is what people do and how they behave. 

 

Complain about it and deny it as much as you like, I predict the human race collectively will take no effective action whether or not you and I buy an electric car and some solar panels. Gaia will fix it for us. 

 

I think we should be expending our efforts on mitigating the coming sh!tstorm as there is nothing we here in the UK can do to stop it. 

 

 

[dmr]

9 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

I dunno why you say "if". This is what people do and how they behave. 

 

Complain about it and deny it as much as you like, I predict the human race collectively will take no effective action whether or not you and I buy an electric car and some solar panels. Gaia will fix it for us. 

 

I think we should be expending our efforts on mitigating the coming sh!tstorm as there is nothing we here in the UK can do to stop it. 

 

 

 

and to take this a depressing step further, it looks to me than humanity has collectively decided to commit a sort of mass extinction upon itself (and other creatures too which is a bit unfair). So, if we believe in democracy we should all go along with this decision, and so my humble efforts to half my CO2 footprint is wrong and I really should assist with the mass extinction.

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

I dunno why you say "if". This is what people do and how they behave. 

 

Complain about it and deny it as much as you like, I predict the human race collectively will take no effective action whether or not you and I buy an electric car and some solar panels. Gaia will fix it for us. 

 

I think we should be expending our efforts on mitigating the coming sh!tstorm as there is nothing we here in the UK can do to stop it. 

 

 

 

How do you suggest mitigating it -- move to Mars? 😉

 

The problem will only be solved by collective action by most/all countries across the planet, especially the bigger polluters. It's what COP27 and what will follow on for it is pushing for, but there's a lot of resistance from countries and multinationals who are heavily invested in fossil fuels. Doing nothing will lead to rapidly rising costs to counteract the effects of climate change, and at some point it will be cheaper to do something than carry on ignoring the problem or pretending it doesn't exist or nothing can be done -- the question is whether governments will realise this before we pass several critical irreversible "tipping points".

 

Blaming "doom-mongering greenies" like some people on the forum are doing is basically sticking your head in the sand and hoping the problem will go away, or only happen after the poster is dead. OK for them, not so great for our children and grandchildren... 😞

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

How do you suggest mitigating it -- move to Mars? 😉

 

 

 

Maybe have an electric boat built? Or rather one that is only part electric?

 

So when the waters rise at least you can still float?

 

But at least you could claim your boat is 'green'.

 

Hypocrite. 

[Richard10002]

10 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

I dunno why you say "if". This is what people do and how they behave. 

 

Complain about it and deny it as much as you like, I predict the human race collectively will take no effective action whether or not you and I buy an electric car and some solar panels. Gaia will fix it for us. 

 

I think we should be expending our efforts on mitigating the coming sh!tstorm as there is nothing we here in the UK can do to stop it. 

 

 

 

I tend to agree. Given that the experts are telling us that the actions of various governments, as a consequence of various COPs and similar, are relatively insignificant, it would seem that the sh!tstorm is coming, like it or not.

 

I recall a TED talk some years ago where a Dutch scientist suggested that new technology over the next century would take care of accommodating the downside of climate change over time, and that there were much more pressing things that our resources should be directed towards.

 

My own take is that someone should organise the building of several huge solar farms around the tropics and arrange for the power to be distributed world wide. As far as I can tell, in relative terms, it wouldn't take much space, and the locations would be such that environmental "damage" would be pretty much nil. I am thinking about places like the Sahara Desert and similar. I think Elon Musk has something like this on his radar, but I'm not sure how far he has got with it... and I may be wrong.

 

Having said that, whatever the rest of the world does, I think electrification, powered by renewables, (wind, solar, tide..... not wood), is no bad thing. Walking along a busy road, the fumes from vehicles are very noticeable. If they were all electric, things would be much more pleasant.

 

 

 

 

[booke23]

15 minutes ago, IanD said:

Don't know, the figures don't separate out cancer deaths from all other causes -- and why pick on this in particular, when other causes of death are more likely to be caused by it?

 

I didn't pick on this in particular....the Guardian article did. It proves my point about newspapers writing click bait stories to sell papers. The article you posted stated wood-burning stoves in urban areas are responsible for almost half of people’s exposure to the cancer-causing chemicals found in air pollution particles. As you say there are no figures to actually link cancer cases and wood burning stoves.  

 

However you could write that sentence like this: wood-burning stoves in urban areas are responsible for less than half of people’s exposure to the cancer-causing chemicals found in air pollution particles. But that wouldn't sell as many papers. 

[sigsegv]

2 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

This thread has become another joke thread. The reality is that all those " Green " people on here decrying how people live are typing on their plastic laptop/phone/ device. Driving their car made of much plastic whilst buying stuff for their houses etc from China, flying all round the World on holidays etc etc etc etc. Its all nonsense akin to peeing in the wind until moves/changes, far bigger than buying a few milk floats are made. 

[booke23]

1 hour ago, Stroudwater1 said:

 

I agree

 

I was interested in pictures from a friend in Victoria Falls Zimbabwe a couple of weeks ago. Train truck after truck full of coal, 16,500kg stamped on each wagon. This is all bound for coal firing in Zambia but where this coal is from in  Hwange there’s 2 or 3 giant coke from coal furnaces all built by Chinese for coke to be shipped to China for steel manufacturing . Nearby is a large 920Mw coal fired power station 

Next time I’m asking him to bring 20kg back in a bag on the plane. 

 

It has made me re evaluate whether any efforts in the UK is actually of any point . I suspect that scrapping 4 year old solid fuel burner or even very old diesel cars are probably less environmentally friendly than just carrying on using them. We do need to do what’s possible but clearly with mass destruction in Ukraine and Chinese inertia our efforts often with cost to UK economy is unlikely to be as useful as we would like to think . 

 

 

 

I found this on youtube a few months ago.....How times have changed, although with the price of gas what it is I did find myself wanting one of those hopper fed anthracite boilers featured at the end of the video!!

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by booke23

[magnetman]

The End of The World is nigh! Repent Repent. Woe betide the unbelievers. 

[Guest]

M_JG towers this evening...

 

[IanD]

24 minutes ago, booke23 said:

 

I didn't pick on this in particular....the Guardian article did. It proves my point about newspapers writing click bait stories to sell papers. The article you posted stated wood-burning stoves in urban areas are responsible for almost half of people’s exposure to the cancer-causing chemicals found in air pollution particles. As you say there are no figures to actually link cancer cases and wood burning stoves.  

 

However you could write that sentence like this: wood-burning stoves in urban areas are responsible for less than half of people’s exposure to the cancer-causing chemicals found in air pollution particles. But that wouldn't sell as many papers. 

If you think that article was clickbait, you have a rather distorted view of what constitutes that. It's why I linked to it instead of the much more clickbaity George Monbiot one, most of it is pretty straight facts. Given that PM2.5 are known to cause cancer (and other problems), it's difficult to avoid the conclusion that something that emits getting on for half of the pollution will also cause getting on for half the cancers, unless you think that the particulates from woodburners are somehow miraculously less harmful than those from other sources.

 

"Almost half" and "less than half" are both correct, but "less than" could equally be seen as a way to encourage people to downplay the seriousness of the problem by making it seem smaller -- in other words, bias the other way.

 

Either way it's arguing about whether the flames are red or yellow when the real problem is that your a*se is on fire -- however you try and polish the results, the governments own figures imply that particulates from woodburners are a relatively large cause of pollution and deaths in the UK. Along with other causes of pollution too (the other 83%), but that's playing the "somebody else is worse than me!" card, like saying there's no point the UK doing anything about emissions until China/USA/India does...

Edited January 2, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

I've just had to put a few more grade A Columbian doubles on the fire as it's a bit chilly. Also have a good stock of Union Lignite briquettes which are great. They have a really good slow burn and relaxing heat release which is just the ticket in this little boat. 

 

Being the inner city boat I can't really burn wood as Grauniad readers would have a go about it. 

 

On the country estate boat it is fresh winter felled ash all the time. Lovely. 

 

Smoke signals warmth and comfort. Basic. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

If you think that article was clickbait, you have a rather distorted view of what constitutes that. It's why I linked to it instead of the much more clickbaity George Monbiot one, most of it is pretty straight facts. Given that PM2.5 are known to cause cancer (and other problems), it's difficult to avoid the conclusion that something that emits getting on for half of the pollution will also cause getting on for half the cancers, unless you think that the particulates from woodburners are somehow miraculously less harmful than those from other sources.

 

"Almost half" and "less than half" are both correct, but "less than" could equally be seen as a way to encourage people to downplay the seriousness of the problem by making it seem smaller -- in other words, bias the other way.

 

Either way it's arguing about whether the flames are red or yellow when the real problem is that your a*se is on fire -- however you try and polish the results, the governments own figures imply that particulates from woodburners are a relatively large cause of pollution and deaths in the UK. Along with other causes of pollution too (the other 83%), but that's playing the "somebody else is worse than me!" card, like saying there's no point the UK doing anything about emissions until China/USA/India does...

 

Oh hang on....

 

'Imply'

 

I thought they were facts?

[GUMPY]

33 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

My own take is that someone should organise the building of several huge solar farms around the tropics and arrange for the power to be distributed world wide.

Octopus Energy are already putting money in to something like this. A solar farm in Algeria and a cable to the SW of England.

Ambitious project