Fri, 05 Jun 2026 13:04:13 +0100 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148259#Comment_148259 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148259#Comment_148259 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 09:34:42 +0100 Joiner Yup. They'll probably List the cooling towers!]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148260#Comment_148260 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148260#Comment_148260 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 09:36:11 +0100 SteamyTea You have just made the one thousandth contribution to this thread

Will probably be more emission if measured by CO2/Particulates/NOX/NO2 by MWh.

Now just to wind Joiner up, would it be a good place for a very large windfarm, say 9 E-126s, that would be an installed capacity of 67.5 MW, so may produce about 150 GWh.year^-1 of green electrons, ensuring a safe and healthy future for the next generation

What does the current installation supply at the moment?]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148267#Comment_148267 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148267#Comment_148267 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 10:57:26 +0100 Joiner What photographs don't show about Buildwas is that it's actually sited in a valley, effectively little more than a cleft cut by the Severn. By all means site the turbines there because you'll get no noise nuisance because they won't ever be turning unless powered-up by one of the new nuclear stations. ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148270#Comment_148270 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148270#Comment_148270 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 11:27:12 +0100 joe90 ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148276#Comment_148276 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148276#Comment_148276 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 11:56:05 +0100 Joiner
It's a fair old walk, Joe! ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148278#Comment_148278 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148278#Comment_148278 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 13:57:04 +0100 joe90 ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148281#Comment_148281 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148281#Comment_148281 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 16:24:15 +0100 Joiner
Oh, and it's never been a volcano.

http://www.donsjotter.co.uk/wrekin1.html

Would actually make a good site for a nuclear station! ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148283#Comment_148283 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=148283#Comment_148283 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 17:40:36 +0100 Brianwilson http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/meeting-energy-demand/bio-energy/5142-bioenergy-strategy-.pdf
Principle 4: Air quality page 73 B.39 “Replacing gas boilers in an urban area has the potential for significant air pollution impact”
They push biomass combustion but yet again fail to actually embrace the impact consequences.
There are serious inversion problems connected to biomass combustion emissions and local topography can exacerbate difficulties, thermal buoyancy also features.
Dave- ref windfarms Lincolnshire County Council have stated their intention to oppose any turbines within 10km of 10 or more dwellings which I suspect will cause interesting times for the future of wind in the County. I find it difficult to equate this stance to their recent vociferous support for a straw burning plant immediately upwind of a primary school knowing the plant will produce hundreds of tonnes of hazardous emissions scheduled to impact locally.

http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/Council-vows-resist-new-wind-farm-plans/story-16297549-detail/story.html

They claim the turbines will deter tourists but are currently building an incinerator immediately upwind of the City with Cathedral and hospital in elevated position downwind. Hundreds of tonnes of hazardous pollution with levels per tonne of waste processed far higher than Continental plants. The SO2 content is scheduled to be hundreds of times higher than equivalent gas per unit of useful power out so it will interesting to monitor tourist reaction to that new feature.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151823#Comment_151823 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151823#Comment_151823 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:02:55 +0100 James Norton
J

]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151833#Comment_151833 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151833#Comment_151833 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:45:50 +0100 tony https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151839#Comment_151839 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151839#Comment_151839 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:12:37 +0100 James Norton
J]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151864#Comment_151864 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151864#Comment_151864 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:22:02 +0100 Brianwilson The impact of embracing biomass combustion continues to evolve, see the Mikeee5 problems
http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/forum114/comments.php?DiscussionID=9305&page=2
I am currently checking a proposal for a small biomass energy plant on a Scottish Island . Application data indicates particulate pollution will equate to exhaust emissions of diesel vehicles travelling 24 million km per day around the Island. Pollution per Gj of energy produced scheduled to be many times higher than equivalent fossil fuel.
Another biomass project details burning imported feedstock to replace a current gas fired power plant at Barrow, compare hazardous pollution per unit of power, the scheduled efficiency and the question , where is the joined up thinking?
We are aware the degradation of air quality created by biomass combustion will add £billions to health and environmental costs but simply greenwashed out.
Where are our priorities on combustion for energy provision in the UK?
Brian
]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151875#Comment_151875 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151875#Comment_151875 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 22:15:56 +0100 renewablejohn https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151887#Comment_151887 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=151887#Comment_151887 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 06:39:21 +0100 SteamyTea http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120716214334.htm]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156707#Comment_156707 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156707#Comment_156707 Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:40:51 +0100 justdoit
Think I will consider blocking in the fireplace and instead use the space for a cupboard or something. But with some kind of removable flap so when a fuel crisis happens a fire could be lit for warmth and emotional comfort.

My hope is to encourage Jo Public (in exisiting houses) to adopt environment friendly things on their own patch of the planet and reading this thread has given me so much to think about. Older wiser and better informed BUT still looking for a practical answer to a "hard to heat" old home so that people can choose to be environment friendly and comfortable. I meet rural and urban householders and as ever with retro fit its a different answer but perhaps always the same question "how can I make my home comfortable and environment friendly".]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156711#Comment_156711 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156711#Comment_156711 Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:55:17 +0100 joe90
Simples.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156717#Comment_156717 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156717#Comment_156717 Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:25:20 +0100 justdoit https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156910#Comment_156910 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156910#Comment_156910 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:49:14 +0100 joe90 ]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156911#Comment_156911 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156911#Comment_156911 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:26:51 +0100 justdoit https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156913#Comment_156913 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156913#Comment_156913 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 19:06:09 +0100 renewablejohn Posted By: joe90I am in exactly the same situation, originally planned a wood burning boiler stove but some on here say they put out too much heat for a passive house, some say they are a cold radiator (due to outside air in the flue) and others say they are not a cold radiator. (plus some may not talk to you again if you install one)https:///forum114/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/devil.gif" alt="" title="" >

Please all get a grip on reality. Yes old stoves had particulate problems but thats no excuse for tarring all stoves with the same brush. If you really want to reduce the particulate problem to zero it is very easily done at very little cost. Start with ceramic afterburners, then electrostatic filters and finally the belt and braces wet scrubber. Any of these will reduce particulate emissions below the levels of a gas boiler and nobody is paranoid about gas boiler emissions. On a commercial scale its a different matter but the solutions are still the same only industry will not pay the price unless forced into the situation by government.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156922#Comment_156922 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156922#Comment_156922 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 20:12:59 +0100 billt Posted By: renewablejohnIf you really want to reduce the particulate problem to zero it is very easily done at very little cost. Start with ceramic afterburners, then electrostatic filters and finally the belt and braces wet scrubber.

Got any examples of these techniques applied to domestic burners? I've heard of stoves with catalytic converters, thought they seem to have gone out of fashion, but I've never heard of electrostatic filters or scrubbers being used domestically.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156932#Comment_156932 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=156932#Comment_156932 Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:06:24 +0100 SteamyTea Posted By: Joe90(plus some may not talk to you again if you install one)I will always chat to you.

Yes I too would like to know where all this super dooper flue cleaning kits is available.

I like the idea of a large question mark in the fireplace, will highlight that they are not perfect and there are large issues surrounding them.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157167#Comment_157167 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157167#Comment_157167 Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:32:42 +0100 renewablejohn
Domestic filters are available from mainly Austrian German or Scandinavian suppliers but really reserved for those paranoid about PM pollution.

This report puts things into perspective bearing in mind most of the anti wood burning brigade started in America thanks to the horrendously polluting OWB burner which is now banned in virtually the whole of America.

http://www.adksc.org/e$pi_dec/RAYALB~1.PDF

You will also see in the report the progress which has been made in PM reduction unfortunately that is not always reflected in the bias reports which Brian keeps quoting.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157176#Comment_157176 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157176#Comment_157176 Mon, 24 Sep 2012 10:09:55 +0100 renewablejohn
http://www.ultralowdust.eu/index.php?id=201

As I said its not new technology just old industrial technology applied to the domestic market]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157210#Comment_157210 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157210#Comment_157210 Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:00:05 +0100 Brianwilson “Domestic filters are available from mainly Austrian German or Scandinavian suppliers but really reserved for those paranoid about PM pollution”
“You will also see in the report the progress which has been made in PM reduction unfortunately that is not always reflected in the bias reports which Brian keeps quoting.”
You are being a little naughty John when aware of the direct correlation between PM pollution and health and environmental consequences. To raise concerns at our failure in the UK to act on the pollution impact is not paranoia when the external damage and cost is well documented.
I am not biased against biomass combustion only concerned that we are encouraging deliberate degradation of air quality in the UK and failing to apply BAT in order to minimise impact. Biomass combustion causes special concern because it creates levels of the most hazardous pollution per unit of energy hundreds of times higher than alternative fuels. Your link indicates Austrian pellet stoves create PM pollution/Mj some 500-1000 times higher than N.G. and we know pellets (without bark) are the best choice with woodchip, logs etc producing much higher pollution.
Your reference to abatement technology fails to detail cost implications, this link (Canadian) includes cost comparisons .
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:VBZGnRc1a94J:www.env.gov.bc.ca/epd/industrial/pulp_paper_lumber/pdf/emissions_report_08.pdf+biomass+combustion+emissions&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShPMVnhSll_HJsyL9RqWp479VKgeTnvBQ1_urrDOaD3Y6TYNkv3_eZTKaR0ZTTLjIz0k4DeIq-O0NRPp5Mk6f0irl64IQUqaBh5Vf3sAi8tcNOYkUZN4UAR5PwuipJ5avPxIMqe&sig=AHIEtbRXHQMtM3VaUdwAoJlnoswNlAAO_g
You refer to the industry actively working to reduce emissions pollution but sadly when current biomass combustion proposals in the UK detail PM pollution up to 10,000 times higher than equivalent N.G. then I remain very concerned at the external costs of our decision to spend £billions in subsidising deliberate air quality degradation.
We know biomass combustion is a very complex subject, at domestic level the pollution impact relies heavily on the competence of the operator, PM decreases with use of dry material but NOX increases etc. At commercial/industrial level in the UK there appears to be a widespread use of diluting pollution concentration by increasing airflow, sadly the resulting pollution rate and impact is far higher than permitted elsewhere.
John -I am only interested in the truth and would welcome evidence that we are taking steps to protect health and the environment in the UK. Sadly the published parameters of current UK proposals and the Mikee experience indicate impact problems with biomass combustion at all levels .
We are both aware the abatement technology is available so why the failure to take the necessary action in the UK.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157212#Comment_157212 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157212#Comment_157212 Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:22:26 +0100 renewablejohn Posted By: justdoitTaken 2 days to read whole thread. I started out looking for guidance on what woodburner to put in a retrofitting show home in a rural place but much visited by urban folks. Much convinced by Brian Wilson's info on particulates and emmissions and horrified that defra "clean air" standard seems too lax. Urban air quality is so important and although our wood fuel would be dry, local and sustainably grown (wood habitat I planted) and I would choose as efficient and clean a woodburer as I could I can see we could encourage a greenwash mindset that could encourage people down a very wrong road. Being obsessed about the toxic load people get exposed to in the home and then advocating killing the neighbours is mad. So it's back to the drawing board for me.

Think I will consider blocking in the fireplace and instead use the space for a cupboard or something. But with some kind of removable flap so when a fuel crisis happens a fire could be lit for warmth and emotional comfort.

My hope is to encourage Jo Public (in exisiting houses) to adopt environment friendly things on their own patch of the planet and reading this thread has given me so much to think about. Older wiser and better informed BUT still looking for a practical answer to a "hard to heat" old home so that people can choose to be environment friendly and comfortable. I meet rural and urban householders and as ever with retro fit its a different answer but perhaps always the same question "how can I make my home comfortable and environment friendly".

Brian

The point of posting was sparked by the comment above. Fair point to justdoit to spend the time reading the whole thread but the cumulative drip feeding of negative biomass comments paints a totally unrealistic picture of the state of Biomass today. By all means highlight PM as a known Biomass problem but then encourage the use of Ultra low PM stoves in the same manner that you would encourage higher efficiency stoves and boilers.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157451#Comment_157451 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157451#Comment_157451 Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:38:23 +0100 Brianwilson “Please all get a grip on reality. Yes old stoves had particulate problems but thats no excuse for tarring all stoves with the same brush. If you really want to reduce the particulate problem to zero it is very easily done at very little cost. Start with ceramic afterburners, then electrostatic filters and finally the belt and braces wet scrubber. Any of these will reduce particulate emissions below the levels of a gas boiler and nobody is paranoid about gas boiler emissions”
John – You claim any of the above abatement technologies will reduce PM emissions below the levels of a gas boiler at very little cost. The reference link you give details gas fired boiler PM pollution at .00002 lb/MMBtu. Where is the data to support your claim of low cost solutions that will reduce hazardous pollution produced by wood stoves below this level for gas when your reference displays pellet combustion creates hazardous pollution at best hundreds of times higher than equivalent gas and we are aware woodchip and logs produce far higher levels of pollution.
Your statement-
“The point of posting was sparked by the comment above. Fair point to justdoit to spend the time reading the whole thread but the cumulative drip feeding of negative biomass comments paints a totally unrealistic picture of the state of Biomass today. By all means highlight PM as a known Biomass problem but then encourage the use of Ultra low PM stoves in the same manner that you would encourage higher efficiency stoves and boilers.”
John- Unfortunately the published data indicates the state of UK biomass has declined, three years ago a Gov report detailed that embracing biomass energy would bring £billions of additional health and environmental costs due to air quality degradation. This prediction was based on anticipated hazardous pollution levels that were subsequently increased by up to 300% for England because it was claimed biomass installations were unlikely to be able to comply. Current proposals indicate biomass powerplants scheduled to produce hazardous pollution up to 10,000 times higher than equivalent gas. The largest UK biomass project has apparently applied for special dispensation to pollute above specified limits when we are already known as the dirty man of Europe.
We all need to encourage use of combustion systems that minimise pollution and make best use of resources but also need to be fully aware of the impact consequences compared with alternatives.
GBF should surely encourage full transparency on the impact of our energy decisions, domestic, commercial and industrial.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157498#Comment_157498 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157498#Comment_157498 Wed, 26 Sep 2012 10:23:14 +0100 renewablejohn
Your just getting silly now. Just think of a hoover which you want to capture particles of 1mm you install a 0.5mm filter. How many particles go through the filter??. Its not rocket science.

As for the commercial side I have been through this in great depth on the 21st century fuel thread with regard clean solutions (Buggenum type plant). We have the solution but DECC are not interested in pollution hence the current raft of power plant proposals with lax pollution control. Our only hope lies with European Directives forcing UK into line but I doubt whether it will ever happen.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157745#Comment_157745 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157745#Comment_157745 Thu, 27 Sep 2012 22:25:15 +0100 Brianwilson Ref your comment “Brian

Your just getting silly now. Just think of a hoover which you want to capture particles of 1mm you install a 0.5mm filter. How many particles go through the filter??. Its not rocket science”
John- A fundamental problem is rapid blinding of filters with serious consequences , the biomass combustion process creates mainly submicron particles (the most hazardous size spectrum) which adds to the filter challenge. There are reports of proposed domestic filters requiring replacement every 6 hours, totally impractical. Any partial blockage presents both a serious fire risk and dangerous degradation of internal air quality. The need for domestic wood burner pollution abatement has been recognised in Europe and a 3 year study initiated but it would appear the high cost of effective filters creates problems. A quoted basic cost of £2000 plus !
Was hoping that your post indicated an effective low cost and low maintenance solution had been found.
My fundamental concern is our failure to address the deliberate UK air quality degradation when aware of the health and environmental consequences ,hardly silly John.
I agree there is a place for biomass combustion in the UK energy mix but it must surely be subjected to regulations that ensure minimum health and environmental impact and makes best use of resources.
Can you explain why the UK Administration and biomass industry is failing to clean up their act when as you confirm the technology is available for a massive pollution reduction and efficiency increase?.]]> https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157751#Comment_157751 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6241&Focus=157751#Comment_157751 Thu, 27 Sep 2012 23:24:29 +0100 tony
Even the relatively clean burning options like pellet burners, were they to have filters, then these would encounter less severe problems and less quickly but with problematic and expensive results.

Emissions are a big problem.]]>