mikehinford.bsky.social
Wannabe Film Producer. Allergic to lots of stuff. Severe mould allergy. Atheist.
Clean Air Campaigner.
Universal Basic Income.
Bristol, UK
743 posts
648 followers
1,500 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Thank you 💚
comment in response to
post
📌
comment in response to
post
The official figures don't convince you?
bsky.app/profile/mike...
comment in response to
post
Still haven't figured out that wood burning is worse than burning gas then?
comment in response to
post
📌
comment in response to
post
Now we need the same for the Disability Benefit cuts too.
comment in response to
post
And we have to factor in the amount of energy we get from those sources.
Gas Boilers - 806,815 TJ
Stoves and Fireplaces - 54,194 TJ
and of that for Eco stoves burning Dry & Seasoned - 7,637 TJ
(NAEI data for 2022)
comment in response to
post
It's quite telling that you see our posts as ranting.
You've already decided on your opinion, and you have to find a way to dismiss us.
Maybe just try reading them as being from people who are passionate, which we are.
I don't think anything would persuade you to see the truth anyway.
comment in response to
post
Why only CO2?
Methane and Black Carbon also contribute to climate change.
These graphs are just for the "Ready To Burn" wood (Dry and Seasoned)
Look how high just the modern eco stoves are compared to gas boilers.
And there's 23 million boilers and 900k eco stoves!!!
comment in response to
post
And not minor for doctors either.
Here's one saying even the modern stoves are "a major cause of concern"
2/2
comment in response to
post
Minor.... FOR YOU!
Not minor to many other people. Otherwise it wouldn't cost the UK economy nearly £1bn every year in health-related damages. 1/2
www.theguardian.com/environment/...
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately it includes wood burning stoves. Which are more polluting than gas boilers.
And gas boilers aren't being allowed.
That doesn't make sense.
www.theguardian.com/environment/...
comment in response to
post
And I bet the results that contradict the fact wood burning releases carbon dioxide are from the Stove Industry.
I wrote this article.
Worth looking at the video (link in article) about the UK gov figures.
medium.com/@ChronicIlln...
comment in response to
post
Myself and a few of my friends really suffer if we are around wood smoke.
I can never know if where I am going is going to be ok.
Even in rural areas wood smoke is a problem.
This is one of my friends.
www.dsawsp.org/personal-sto...
comment in response to
post
The stat that Global Action Plan use here:
www.cleanairhub.org.uk/clean-air-ni...
is from here: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
comment in response to
post
Definitely.
I campaign against wood burning mostly because of health issues, but I include the CO2 argument too because it's also relevant.
I've been in contact with scientists, and they don't believe that wood burning is carbon neutral.
comment in response to
post
UK electricity - 0.207074 kg CO2e per KwH
Wood Burning - 0.35 kg CO2e per KwH
(Look in the 'Outside of Scope' sheet for the wood burning one. )
www.gov.uk/government/p...
comment in response to
post
As I said before I don't like companies that say wood burning is carbon neutral to make money.
If it's cheaper for you, then do it.
If you are happy you are still reducing your CO2 by changing to a heat pump.
But you could reduce it further if you wanted to. You don't want to. That's fine.
comment in response to
post
You keep saying the same thing about fossil fuel CO2. You haven't read, or haven't understood the article I posted.
It's irrelevant whether it's fossil fuel CO2 or other CO2.
All that matters is putting CO2 into the atmosphere. Wood burning does that.
comment in response to
post
If everyone did the same it would be a problem.
Yes you are reducing your CO2 emissions by changing your gas boiler to a heat pump.
But you could reduce it even more by using a realistic fake fire with the electricity from your solar panels.
Just say you like burning wood. That's OK.
comment in response to
post
The loop you talk about. When do you start it from? Start it billions of years ago and fossil fuel carbon was also plant matter.
Start the loop today and any future burning is bad.
The loop argument is very flawed.
WHEN WE HAVE MUCH BETTER OPTIONS.
comment in response to
post
Then you haven't understood the points in that article.
You'll be contributing more to climate change if you burn wood rather than burning gas.
The facts show it.
comment in response to
post
We also have to actively remove the CO2 from wood burning to get back to where we started. Yes we can plant trees, but do they absorb it as fast as its emitted when burnt? No.
So when it's in the air, it will be causing warming.
When we have other options, WHICH YOU HAVE, we should be using them.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
I don't care if you don't buy it.
Lots of other people do. Including doctors and scientists.
Also physics doesn't care either.
Read the article I posted earlier.
Especially the parts in my next reply.
1/2
thebulletin.org/premium/2022...
comment in response to
post
As I said in my first reply in this thread.
Wood burning emits more CO2 than gas or oil per unit of heat.
That's scientific facts.
Burn wood to save money if it's free and wasn't cut down.
Homes with wood burners are more polluted, so it will be harmful to your health. You sound ok with that?
comment in response to
post
I don't think you can compare it, because that's once in the manufacturing process.
"The average three-bedroom household with a log burner ends up releasing 5.36 tonnes of CO2 per year – more than twice as much as a gas boiler."
www.theecoexperts.co.uk/news/log-bur...
comment in response to
post
The main point I'm making is it's not carbon neutral.
Their are companies saying it is, so they can make money.
It's also not just CO2 emitted from wood burning. There's also climate damaging black carbon and methane.
Just don't say it's carbon neutral please.
2/2
www.dsawsp.org/environment/...
comment in response to
post
And that's your decision.
But it's strange you say it's a poor argument when lots of organisations are making the argument.
Including Denmark's Consumer Ombudsman.
1/2
www.familiesforcleanair.org/wood-stove-i...
comment in response to
post
"Due to the high amount of greenhouse gases emitted when burning wood and solid fuels, the Climate Change Committee strongly advises that it needs to be phased out as it is not carbon neutral and has no place in how homes should be heated in the 21st century”
2/2
www.theguardian.com/environment/...
comment in response to
post
Strange then the organisations Global Action Plan, Mums For Lungs, Impact on Urban Health, all include it in their campaigns.
Lots of others are putting in the effort, including the Climate Change Committee.
1/2
comment in response to
post
Totally disagree.
We have no need to burn anything.
Wood burning releases CO2. Gas burning less CO2 per unit of heat, and less pollution.
If we have to burn it should be gas, but rather nothing.
The only reason to burn wood is if it's free.
www.nottingham.ac.uk/policy-and-e...
comment in response to
post
When it rots naturally, some is absorbed by the soil, and some is absorbed by animals, and it happens A LOT slower, so the level of CO2 in the atmosphere will always be lower, than if burnt.
Nope, wood burning is just as bad as fossil fuels, if not worse.
The source of carbon doesn't matter.
comment in response to
post
Also:
"the fact that the carbon in wood was previously removed from the atmosphere as the trees grew is irrelevant: A molecule of CO2 added to the atmosphere today has the same impact on radiative forcing whether from fossil fuels or biomass grown last year."
thebulletin.org/premium/2022...
comment in response to
post
It's really not a poor argument.
Especially when cutting down living trees. It's doubly destructive.
bsky.app/profile/glob...
comment in response to
post
📌
comment in response to
post
I cook vegetarian sausages all the time, and don't use any fire.
(Tho there will probably be some used for electricity generation.)
We have no need to burn anything.
comment in response to
post
Nope, fire is good. It's not just fossil fuels that harm people and the planet.
Burning wood does too.
Burning wood releases more CO2 per unit of heat, than gas or oil.
I would suggest combustion instead of fire.
www.cleanairhub.org.uk
comment in response to
post
Does your hat have a skull on it?