[Closed] FAO those with log burners...you're in GRAVE danger, unethical, and illegal...

To be fair, many wood-burners contravene the Clean Air acts which make our cities benign places to live. My area can stink like a bonfire on cold windless evenings with all the woodsmaoke in the air.

I've just picked myself up from the floor from laughing. What a pile of twaddle.

There was a programme on radio 4 a while back saying stoves in homes were real pollution problems, and really needed more control ie banning

Lancashire CC can't even afford measures to stop people racing down our street so I reckon a bit of wood smoke is going to be low on the list of priorities.

Is it only me that likes passing through some towns where wood smoke or a burning tyre is all you can smell.
It has a nostalgic feel about it.

Does that so called Prof. realise in a village whilst being snowed in/snappy nights, that it's vital part of countryside living.

I suppose he probably thinks showers are no good for the planet but that if he stopped to think realistically what would happen if we didn't wash...

Damn, I am going to start smoking again 🙁

He's confusing the SMUG problem with woodburnerists for a SMOG problem, surely?

😆 I just made that up, I'm dead funny me 😀

Snap me too, that tickled me somewhat 🙂

Particles both remain airborne for weeks and re-enter nearby houses...

Matt strikes me as the sort to REALLY hate cyclists. Imagine the hand wringing if he discovered we al like bikes AND woodburners? 😯

Luckily he is from Worthing, so he'll never make it into actual countryside due to lack of artisan deli's.

Genuine Windows XP? I wouldn't be calling Matt for a laptop.

yeah, laugh it up you bastards - one of these days you'll pollute a child's face right off

*unt

Oh and it'll burn a baby robins face right off

Fire up your scientifically calculated washing machine burner, it's guaranteed* to actually improve air quality.

Matt needs to show his workings

He's got a point, most wood-burners aren't really necessary. And they DO cause pollution - it's not butterflies and rainbows that flow out of the chimney...

especially as most people tend to get one that's 3 times the size required, and then choke them off to keep the heat output something sensible, unaware (or uncaring?) that this makes for filthy 'orrible combustion conditions.

Are they any worse than diesel cars? I don't know. Do I want one? Yes.

Flame away...

I love our burner, its the sole heating for most of downstairs.

However, it must be polluting to some degree. All that carbon I'm chucking up in the air.

I'd be interested to know how it compares to, say, a car.

Yes it's polluting but wood will nearly always put its carbon back into the atmosphere as it decays/gets eaten etc. Oil and coal are deep store carbon that's not really part of the natural carbon cycle.

Stove is carbon neutral as wood decaying gives off the same co2 as burning it. Burn hot and fast in a clean burn stove and emissions are very low.

However, it must be polluting to some degree. All that carbon I'm chucking up in the air.

I'd be interested to know how it compares to, say, a car.

It's not really a fair comparison, it serves a useful purpose moving you from A to B in a way that (bikes, walking, and public transport aside) doesn't have many alternatives. But the car will be far far cleaner, the exhaust has ppm (or at least fractions of percent) levels of bad stuff in it, a wood burner produces so much crud they chimney fills with soot and tar (when did you last have a car service that involved sweeping the exhaust?).

A wood burner is just a really crap version of a boiler (which would be even cleaner than a car by some margin).

Stove is carbon neutral as wood decaying gives off the same co2 as burning it.

Not really, a some of the carbon goes into the soil if it's left to rot. By burning wood it's still releasing carbon that could have been taken out the atmosphere i.e. carbon positive. And it still got to your house in the back of a lorry/van/car, and if it's been dried artificially it's already had a lot of energy used drying it out, the chainsaws used to cut it, all the FC vehicles used to manage the forest and probably a lot of other sources of CO2 so it's not carbon neutral.

How many burn hot and fast though?

Fine if you are in one of these places that gets cut off every winter, otherwise unnecessary.

You are all also confusing slow release (decay) with quick release (burning), its really not the same thing.

Actually, the car comparison is poor, as you say.

Apparently my stove is 6kw, so the comparison ought to be with a 6kw boiler.

But that complex because the burner encourages me to stay in, when I might otherwise be out burning fossil fuels, and its high on impossible to quantify that.

Only problem I have with woodburners it the smelly crap people put in them, treated wood or painted things and other rubbish.

love the smell of a fire in the countryside, does not really have a place in the city IMO

and there is a saying "with firewood you warm up twice" if you buy yours chopped up you are missing out 😉

The article actually inspired me to have a fire tonight..
If just to play around with my IR thermometer I found in the garage.
I get bored. Numbers interest me..
[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

Interesting how the heat really drops off as you go up only a few cm up the flue.
And by interesting, I actually mean boring.

DrP

Cold and flues surely ?

BN12 has a magazine these days? Was Boring Goring when I lived there, has it gone hipster?

Emissions from domestic wood burning are increasing in the UK. They accounted for 17% of PM2.5 emissions in 2013, only marginally less than the 18% from all road transport.[3]

The UN Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization recommended phasing out log-burning stoves in developed countries to reduce global warming as well as dangerous air pollution.

http://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2757/rr-0

I've seen some papers somewhere that America is looking to ban stoves and open fires in a lot of states, if it happens there it won't be long before it comes over here.

they're a lifestyle/statement thing. We've got open fires and a gas boiler, bet most on here have a boiler as well. TBH as it's pretty much purely vanity in 90% of homes banning them is probably a good thing. Means I wouldn't have to clean the bastard out too.

That BMJ piece is interesting in a worrying kind of a way.

OP, are you a real Dr, cos it's your own professional journal which reckons this guy is right 🙂

One thing that's bad about t'internet is it's very easy to spread misinformation. One thing that's good is it's very easy to debunk it

Today was in fact the first day since about November that we let the woodburner go out over the course of the day. But I felt the need to light it again this evening. But then again, it is our only source of heat and has a back boiler running about 9 radiators so I hope I can be forgiven. And our nearest neighbours are a mile away too 🙂

[img] [/img]

What a polite thermometer.

even biomass boilers which will generally burn cleaner than wood burning stoves can cause problems, I know of at least one commercial installation that has had the biomass boilers removed & replaced with gas after just 3 years of operation.

If you are responsible at least check the local authority smoke free zones before you install a wood burner, the 1956 clean air act wasn't just brought into force for the hell of it

Poor professor matt does not seem to have discovered what punctuation is for and has consequently fallen victim to a fairly serious case of run-on sentenceitis in his first paragraph which makes me think that he is a product of the local school system for everyone knows that up to 70% of people who leave school with grades even as high as A* in GCSE English are nowhere near the standard that they should be.....

This is quite a good example of people not wanting to hear something they probably deep down know that a correct.

Ultimately most wood burners are lifestyle items that people don't actually need and there is no denying they are crude and stinky.

Hmmm, that article seems suspiciously similar to one penned by Sam Harris a while ago... I'll try to dig it out.

[url= https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-fireplace-delusion ]Here it is[/url] and it seems whole chunks of it have been lifted verbatim by the lazy Matt.

This is quite a good example of people not wanting to hear something they probably deep down know that a correct.

Ultimately most wood burners are lifestyle items that people don't actually need and there is no denying they are crude and stinky.

yeah it's a naughty one!

i don't really want to hear it because i only bought mine 4 months ago. and yes, my central heating works perfectly well. And i live in a city.

but on the other hand, i live an otherwise pretty green lifestyle. i drive about 5 miles a week, take maybe 1 short-haul flight a year, and all the furniture in my house is 2nd hand. you've got to have your vices..... right? 😳 😕

[i]WHO study says millions die due to solid fuel stoves / cooking...[url] http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/outputs/GACC/Session1-1_Carlos-Dora_WHO.pdf ][/url] I think stoves will go the way of the diesel engine.

I was going to mention cook stove deaths but it's not directly compatible as the problem there is the women and children being indoors with the typical "3 stone" cook stove that just has 3 stone (surprise, surprise) and they feed in lengths of wood. To make matters worse they often use waste plastic to light the fires. There is also a huge problem in Africa with deforestation due to fuel for cooking.

There are more efficient metal stoves built, a good example is one from Uganda which has been adopted in Sierra Leone and other places and bio charcoal made from rise husks and saw dust and provides local industries. But they are still horrendous used indoors. A flue is a luxury that most don't get the benefit of.

I am helping some students at the local uni with a cleaner burning design based on modifying the current methods. It also makes better use of the waste materials due to being more efficient and designed specifically for them.

The problem here is not direct fumes into homes but the air around our homes and being I haled by those outside, entering other peoples homes and being an inefficient way to use fuel. If everyone had wood burners it would be a major step back in air quality to something resembling the industrial revolution.

Log burning was about before we used electricity and all the associated drawbacks attached to its production. The author can shove his pile of cobblers and do his little bit by switching off his computer.
If people are worried about air pollution lets see anything with an engine banned and electricity consumption slashed. If I stopped recreational use of engines I could half my fuel bill and that's with having to commute 23 each way each day. Not using the computer, telly and other pure luxuries would chop my bill and consumption as well.
Burning wood came first therefore it goes last.

This is quite a good example of people not wanting to hear something they probably deep down know that a correct.

Furthermore - I've no doubt that burning wood DOES send fumes into the air. But again, I'd like to see evidence (maybe some in the articles sited above) that a)this has a big impact on health, b) it's not just a drop in the ocean compared to industry etc etc.

I'm NOT saying that we as teh small guy shouldn't play our part, but it's a bit like the issues of running water for 30 seconds when brushing teeth - we're all made to feel guilty for it, but when you look at water wasted through leaking pipes and the farming industry, we the 'home consumer' are piffle players compared to them..!

I'll have a read of the BMJ piece today.. (But..Don't forget, a professional journal also published the MMR/Autism scandal quite happily...)

DrP

An article on the subject by a friend of mine, published a while ago now and Ive posted it here a couple of times.
http://www.isonomia.co.uk/?p=1558

Rather less "incendiary" ( 😉 ) and more measured.

Burning wood came first therefore it goes last.

This place is fantastic.

Smoking in a beer garden? Ridiculous and dangerous!

I can smell my neighbours cannabis! My children will be junkies!

Don't think that buying a brand new Tesla is a good idea? Heretic!

But when someone complains about woodburners, they flame him.

The article has some twaddle in it but he has a point about the burning of wood urban areas.

FWIW I have a woodburner but I don't live in a built up area.

Professor Matt would love my road. Some of the old boys still use house coal on their open fires.

I think it smells quite nice.

It's not great if you're asthmatic, most of my neighbours have wood burners and on a still day it's a bit unpleasant. I assume particulates are a big issue with even the best wood burners? must be better than coal but that's not saying much.

Incidentally removal of EGR or DPF is another blind spot many people have...

Another one to add to the list of things you're not supposed to question the environmental impacts of on STW:

1. Eating meat.
2. Pets (particularly dogs).
3. Wood burning stoves.

If you are responsible at least check the local authority smoke free zones before you install a wood burner, the 1956 clean air act wasn't just brought into force for the hell of it

Pretty much all wood burners are permitted in smoke free zones now as their emissions are low enough (we live in one and have a fire).

Another one to add to the list of things you're not supposed to question the environmental impacts of on STW:

You're forgetting children, who will consume far more resources than any stove / SUV / dog ever will throughout their life.

Stoner - your mate could do well to read the chimney heights memorandum - that part of the clean air act certainly does differentiate between urban and rural areas and fuel sulphur content, otherwise a pretty balanced article and to be fair he is concentrating on the domestic side of things

Footflaps - depends on what fuel you burn, check with your local authority to be sure

You're forgetting children, who will consume far more resources than any stove / SUV / dog ever will throughout their life.

Are you seriously suggesting people shouldn't be having children?

It will certainly reduce our carbon emissions but what will we do in 50 years time?

I think the biggest part of the problem is people not using them right and that probably accounts for a large proportion of lifestyle users. People who actually have a need to use them due to no other fuel supply are more likely to use them correctly as they want to minimise fuel burn.

Now I have no doubt the wood burning conosiurs of stw all use the correct seasoned wood and have air vents and baffles all set for optimum burn but what about dick head down the road who throws in any old crap, including plastic, and hasn't got a clue how to actually set it?

This is quite a contrast to cars, power stations and domestic gas boilers which are tightly controlled to burn clean.

I did read somewhere that in this country we are now consuming more wood for burning than at any other time since the industrial revolution and that really can't be good no matter what kind of spin you try and put on it.

gobuchul - Member

Are you seriously suggesting people shouldn't be having children?

no, he's not.

but i'm sure he'll thankyou for proving his point.

meat
stove
dogs
kids

all off-limits with regards environmental consideration.

([s]we all[/s] most of us agree that we should fly less to save the planet, few will question that logic. But suggest that maybe a [i]hypothetical[/i] couple might think about stopping at 2 kids, for the sake of the planet, and you're heartless psycho.)

Are you seriously suggesting people shouldn't be having children?

I'm merely pointing out that everyone seems to overlook the fact that the single most selfish thing that people do, in terms of the damaging the environment is to have children. I realise this is what is known as an 'uncomfortable truth'.

Basically, once you've had kids you've guaranteed such a huge environmental impact that whether you buy an SUV, recycle or have a log burner is in the noise.

Footflaps - depends on what fuel you burn, check with your local authority to be sure

All modern wood burners are absolutely fine. You're about 30 years behind the times.

I'm merely pointing out that everyone seems to overlook the fact that the single most selfish thing that people do, in terms of the damaging the environment is to have children. I realise this is what is known as an 'uncomfortable truth'.

But that's making a rather large value judgement/assumption that humanity has no place on planet earth? Also, what population are you looking across? The 'indigenous' populations of Europe are probably reproducing at less than replacement rate?

I think the biggest part of the problem is people not using them right and that probably accounts for a large proportion of lifestyle users. People who actually have a need to use them due to no other fuel supply are more likely to use them correctly as they want to minimise fuel burn.

Does trying to keep my house warm without running my boiler make me a 'lifestyle user'?

If so, I'm guilty as charged 😯 :lol:. I have an endless supply of free wood washed up on the beach on a daily basis, a days cutting will keep me going for a fair bit.

Though I really should think of my chainsaw emissions. 😆

I'm merely pointing out that everyone seems to overlook the fact that the single most selfish thing that people do, in terms of the damaging the environment is to have children.

I think the 'panda and tiger penis' burner I recently installed in our 4th holiday home on the coral reef is more of a travesty to nature, TBH... 😉

DrP

just remembered we've done this one!

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/have-we-done-stoves-the-environmental-cost

anyway - surely in terms of fire-related pollution issues, the garden bonfire should be well ahead of the stove in the banning queue? That pile of damp logs and leaves probably counts for months worth of fires in a decent modern stove....

what about BBQs? How bad are they?

But that's making a rather large value judgement/assumption that humanity has no place on planet earth?

At the current rate of progress I think mankind will wipe itself out at some point in the next few 100 years, so the argument is largely academic.

.Does trying to keep my house warm without running my boiler make me a 'lifestyle user'?

There we go, woodburnerist in flounce mode.

Let's just ignore 90% of what was written and go for the "but poor me is only trying to heat my home with all this free wood I get" 🙄

No flounce here fella, I'm basking in the warm glow of my lifestyle choices! 😆

We use a log burner most days and as it saves heating the whole house via CH, I suspect it's more energy efficient than using the boiler (they're both supposedly 80%+ efficient).

Footflaps - woodburners aren't magic but then again you knew that didn't you?

Footflaps - woodburners aren't magic but then again you knew that didn't you?

I honestly have no idea what you're on about...

However, I do know I'm in a smokeless zone and the Local BC were quite happy to sign off my log burner (along with quite a few neighbours who also have them).

.We use a log burner most days and as it saves heating the whole house via CH, I suspect it's more energy efficient than using the boiler (they're both supposedly 80%+ efficient).

Which leads in to a valid point: a lot of it comes down to how each heating method is used in a certain application.

Some people don't have access to mains gas, some people have old difficult to heat houses and just want to heat one room they are in most of the time, some people have back boilers fitted and it powers their house as they don't have gas and don't want oil etc etc. There are still plenty of valid reasons for legitimate use but there is also an increasing amount of lifestyle users who just do so as it's trendy and whose sole motivation for doing so is selfish and with no real need.

The flouncing nobeerinthefridgeasitdoesntwashuplikemyfreewood 😉 just states he his heating is house via his wood burner despite having a boiler. No justification despite there potentially being a perfectly valid reason, just I am doing this, end of. Hence me declaring it a flounce 😛

I think nobeerinthefridge can justifies the use of his burner by the fact he runs it on driftwood. Seems completely green to me.

It's not really though is it? It's just free. If a load of tyres washed up on the beach should i burn those as they are free?

It's not really though is it?

Well it's just going to rot and release carbon that way.

He has to heat his house with something so he may as well use the driftwood. Especially if he burns it to STW standards and not like Joe Public who doesn't understand the subtleties of the top and bottom vent balance. 🙂

but there is also an increasing amount of lifestyle users who just do so as it's trendy and whose sole motivation for doing so is selfish and with no real need.

But is burning wood (which is a renewable) really more selfish than burning oil / gas CH (which isn't renewable)?

NB With Ash die back, we're going to have a lot of wood going spare in the next 20 years.

Some people don't have access to mains gas, some people have old difficult to heat houses and just want to heat one room they are in most of the time, some people have back boilers fitted and it powers their house as they don't have gas and don't want oil etc etc. There are still plenty of valid reasons for legitimate use but there is also an increasing amount of lifestyle users who just do so as it's trendy and whose sole motivation for doing so is selfish and with no real need.

...although one could probably argue that a lot of those 'legitimate uses' aren't all that legit, if we were to go full SanctimonyTrackWorld about it.

If you're a farmer then fair enough (perhaps) but those who just decided to go and live out in the wilds because it's nice, well that's just as much of a 'lifestyle choice' is it not?

😉

such is the problem with the kind of absolutist moralising we get on here. We could all sell our cars, changing jobs and downsizing if needs be, and clothe our children in charity shop garb, if we were really serious about the environment. Beyond that you just have to make your peace i guess...

and clothe our children in charity shop garb, if we were really serious about the environment

Too late if you've had kids, their impact will dwarf any steps you undertake to make yourself feel better..

gobuchul - Member
Well it's just going to rot and release carbon that way.

there's a lot more to 'clean' than CO2.

Footflaps - fair enough, and it is the local authority I am having a go at here, just because bc have signed it off as safe it doesn't make it legal to burn anything you want on it in a smokeless zone, in fact it could at the very extreme end not be legal to use it, still doesn't stop bc from signing it off though :-S

Footflaps - fair enough, and it is the local authority I am having a go at here, just because bc have signed it off as safe it doesn't make it legal to burn anything you want on it in a smokeless zone, in fact it could at the very extreme end not be legal to use it, still doesn't stop bc from signing it off though :-S

Well yes, I could only burn plastic on it, but I'm pretty sure most people just burn wood in their wood burners....

NB pretty much any new wood burner will be certified for use in Smokeless areas as they all burn much cleaner than older designs. When we looked at which one to buy, they were 100s to chose from.

BN12 pah... wrong side of the Adur, never trust anything from the wrong side of the Adur 😆

(went back to look over WHO figures)
In 2012 they calculated 600,000 Africans died from particulates because of domestic solid fuel use. High earning europe was aprox 18,000 deaths - In Europe about the same as road deaths.

Having lived in NZ where they actually have a rather forward thinking policy on wood stoves.

Live in an urban area and want to replace a wood stove? I must be an ultra efficient one.
Want to install a new wood stove where there was non before? Not a chance.

This is where there is arguably much more need for a wood stove too - no mains gas for gas boilers and central heating, earthquakes likely to knock out infrastructure and electricity supply....

They've lived through decades of poor air quality and are trying to clean it up now.

We've been through the same a generation ago, with smog, towns covered in coal fired haze, poor health and an asthma epidemic. Now the new generation want a lifestyle choice of axes, beards and log burners.*

Some links for the bored:

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/air/home-heating-and-authorised-wood-burners/about-list-authorised-woodburners-and-requirements
https://www.mfe.govt.nz/air/home-heating-and-authorised-wood-burners/burners
http://www.pce.parliament.nz/media/pdfs/The-state-of-air-quality-in-New-Zealand-web5.pdf

*flamebait, not to be taken seriously.