Fri, 05 Jun 2026 16:59:29 +0100 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110651#Comment_110651 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110651#Comment_110651 Thu, 02 Jun 2011 22:51:50 +0100 SteamyTea ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110835#Comment_110835 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110835#Comment_110835 Mon, 06 Jun 2011 18:06:42 +0100 DamonHD
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/06/is-burning-wood-for-heat-really-green.php

Rgds

Damon]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110840#Comment_110840 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110840#Comment_110840 Mon, 06 Jun 2011 18:35:09 +0100 Joiner https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110864#Comment_110864 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110864#Comment_110864 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 06:36:32 +0100 SteamyTea ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110868#Comment_110868 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110868#Comment_110868 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 08:29:50 +0100 Joiner ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110871#Comment_110871 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110871#Comment_110871 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 08:49:04 +0100 Brianwilson Other Countries recognise the ramifications and are striving to minimise impact but not the UK,why?
Rgds
Brian]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110875#Comment_110875 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110875#Comment_110875 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 09:17:34 +0100 Brianwilson Thanks in anticipation.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110882#Comment_110882 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110882#Comment_110882 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:27:22 +0100 DamonHD
Rgds

Damon]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110885#Comment_110885 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110885#Comment_110885 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:53:14 +0100 SteamyTea Do they really want that, I asked my old head of department to make sure there was never any reference to me on the Facebook page, trouble is I cannot check, kind of caught by the short and curlies.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110889#Comment_110889 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110889#Comment_110889 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 12:13:54 +0100 Joiner

Oh, and putting in your username just pulls up something saying likes "his women like he likes his tea....hot and steamy". But that wouldn't be you. ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110893#Comment_110893 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110893#Comment_110893 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:30:15 +0100 SteamyTea

Heriot Watt, promotion already, may plagiarise his work too ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110913#Comment_110913 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110913#Comment_110913 Tue, 07 Jun 2011 19:46:59 +0100 renewablejohn Posted By: DamonHDHey, one for you Brian:

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/06/is-burning-wood-for-heat-really-green.php" rel="nofollow" >http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/06/is-burning-wood-for-heat-really-green.php

Rgds

Damon

Its amazing how many times negative reports are dragged up from the US/ Canada when European stoves have been more efficient for years. The most polluting feature of any stove is using unseasoned timber with more than 20% moisture content which can easily be rectified by the consumer by insisting on timber with a MC of less than 20%. If you compare that with Stevens Croft using timber at 53% MC you can see were pollution issues arise.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110921#Comment_110921 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110921#Comment_110921 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:25:20 +0100 SteamyTea http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20550-sustainable-timber-is-not-always-what-it-seems.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110935#Comment_110935 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=110935#Comment_110935 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:38:24 +0100 Joiner
The issue of sourcing timber from threatened forests has impacted directly on the availability of "hardwood" products, especially doors, some manufacturers shedding those product lines. And asking for meranti in a timber merchants will get you a raised eyebrow nowadays. I haven't been able to source any of the previously readily-available imported (with the exception of oak) hardwoods out of stock for some time, all such orders having now to be sourced via a centrally-held national stock (by the multis, anyway) so that quantities can be kept to a minimum. And that hasn't been driven by accountants keeping an eye on the bottom line, but by pressure from the environmental lobby. A while back, some merchants were regularly picketed by activists.

And John, the particulates issue can't be written-off as just more anti-wood propaganda. Biomass energy plants can be made more humanity-friendly, but individual wood stoves of any hue still kick out enough shite to be a concern, it's down to the individual as to how concerned they want to get about it. I can see the arguments pro and con and can also appreciate that without a readily-available alternative no one is going to choose to be without heating, but a lot of the arguments have nothing to do with necessity, just a preferred lifestyle choice, some of them on the still shaky grounds of arguable zero-carbon. I'd far rather people just came out and be honest about it because the evidence is stacked too high to be ignored. Bit like cigarettes.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111036#Comment_111036 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111036#Comment_111036 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:07:18 +0100 Brianwilson
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/business/business-news/look_at_new_ways_of_doing_things_drax_urges_firms_1_3462015
The press article details Gov is expected to reveal outline subsidy banding in July going out to consultation with Ministers making final decision in December.
It appears Drax stand to anticipate £4 billion plus bonus from consumers, 4800 MW capacity proposed ,possible 2ROCs with claimed 92% performance.
It is incredible that the Gov. is chopping subsidy to large solar but force us to pump £billions into biomass or am I missing something?]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111041#Comment_111041 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111041#Comment_111041 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:23:41 +0100 tony https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111042#Comment_111042 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111042#Comment_111042 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:42:49 +0100 bot de paille
Surely this has all been carefuly thought out....]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111044#Comment_111044 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111044#Comment_111044 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 19:48:15 +0100 tony https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111045#Comment_111045 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111045#Comment_111045 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 20:06:29 +0100 Joiner https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111046#Comment_111046 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111046#Comment_111046 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:20:17 +0100 bot de paille https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111047#Comment_111047 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111047#Comment_111047 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:25:58 +0100 DamonHD
Rgds

Damon]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111050#Comment_111050 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111050#Comment_111050 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:51:24 +0100 SteamyTea
Have they done a really indepth energy analysis yet?]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111056#Comment_111056 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111056#Comment_111056 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 22:47:03 +0100 tony http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13714931

Air quality is already a problem -- how come the government know about it in relation to the Olympics but are still going for wood and biomass burning which shoots air quality in a downward direction?]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111058#Comment_111058 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111058#Comment_111058 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:15:43 +0100 SteamyTea https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111059#Comment_111059 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111059#Comment_111059 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 00:35:32 +0100 bot de paille
This is the problem with measuring everything in terms of CO2, misses out a large part of the picture!

The day will eventualy come when this mistake will be realised, that "sustainability" must be the top tier priority with CO2 reduction following. Those advocating Co2 reduction as the top tier priority with everything else following are misguided, however well intentioned they may think they are. Unfortunatly when these issues become so emotionaly charged, clear thinking suffers.

Anyone following the news in Japan will have already seen what is now coming to light, that the nuclear accident is a lot worse than previously thought/admited to, "melt through" Another example...]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111061#Comment_111061 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111061#Comment_111061 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:16:39 +0100 DamonHD
1) The school has a (small) river running right next to it, outside my daughter's classroom window in fact.

2) I suspect that any "in depth energy analysis" will be at least in part up to me to do.

Rgds

Damon]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111062#Comment_111062 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111062#Comment_111062 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:21:45 +0100 SteamyTea
Do they have a budget to monitor?]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111067#Comment_111067 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111067#Comment_111067 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:36:19 +0100 Brianwilson Claimed possible use of CHP loses credibility when you note anticipated 31 day incinerator downtime which means heat customers will require substantial backup infrastructure for hot water provision. Authorities claim emissions within limits but ignore reality that scheduled 38,000 cubic metres of pollution per MWh is 10 times higher than alternatives bringing massive increase in impact. Typical Local Authority response to concerns raised is “We were taken to see an incinerator on the Continent, thought it appeared fine and now look forward to the grand opening of our own plant”.
Lincolnshire produces substantial vegetable and food processing waste but pointing out AD should be preferred option for EFW brings response of perceived problem with digestate disposal ignoring DEFRA decision that even household waste passed through AD becomes suitable for organic use.
Bot de paille and S.T. agree it is a problem of inability to apply due diligence, obscured by CO2 issue. I questioned massive investment in Hospital biomass system pointing out it would degrade local air quality, increase HGV traffic and based on promise of locally sourced woodchip would it make sense to divert 1000ha of prime veg growing land into dedicated biomass production for a single boiler? Typical response “ we are advised it is a good idea and reduces CO2”
I note report today of proposed biomass plant at Immingham importing 250,000 tonnes of pellets annually from Balkans, last week read report that Denmark imports 80% of biomass from Eastern Europe and it is decimating forests.
We do need in depth analysis of energy provision and reality of resources before further degrading air quality but will it happen?

S.T. as an aside very concerned that you are proposing to tax anyone visiting Cornwall. ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111070#Comment_111070 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111070#Comment_111070 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 10:30:18 +0100 Joiner ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111077#Comment_111077 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=111077#Comment_111077 Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:30:10 +0100 SteamyTea But having said that a tax on caravans may have some mileage. I would think that somewhere in the region of £10,000 for crossing the Tamar (East to West) would be reasonable, £20,000 for the West to East. This way many would be left here and could be used to house the homeless or sold for scrap.
Anyway I thought we did tax them on rip off prices for car parking and over priced cans of coke/icecream.]]>