Wood Burning Pollution - Another Study about Rural Dwellers Health Risks

[gasgas]

I have a log burner and have bought seasoned pallets full, but my last lot was a cheap load from a groundsman who chops and sells the wood he has felled from His Lordship's manor. He claims to have stored it in the dry for at least 6 months. I have left it outside covered up but ventilated for 18 months. I don't think much of it. I am undecided if either of these are any better than Aldi smokeless solid fuel ?coal? which burns better, hotter and lasts longer. I would have thought that if you store it outside for however long you like it isn't going to dry out any more than the ambient humidity. An experiment might be to think how much you spend on logs, say £120 for a builders bag of supposedly seasoned stuff, with £120 worth of Aldi smokeless and see if the Aldi lasts as long as the logs.

Anyway while we are getting hot under the collar (hopefully) about our log fire pollution why aren't we bothered about the extraordinary pollution caused by all the HIMARS and other rocket propelled explosives being thrown around the place? That never gets mentioned anywhere. Not that any government can legislate against it. They should include in the "Rules of War" (what a ridiculous thing) that all rockets and explosives must have EGR valves and AdBlu. As with the distinctly undetectable proportion of worldwide pollution caused by our doing 4,000 miles a year in our diesel motorhomes, I don't think whether we heat our homes by logs or gas or electric matters one jot. It is scientifically and mathematically provable that the total energy used in the manufacture, maintenance and disposal after ten years use of wind farm generators is greater than the energy they produce. I don't remember exactly where the proof comes from but I have seen a well qualified professor describing why. The Norwegians are the only ones to have got it right, hydroelectric is the way to go but instead of damming the Wash, the Trent and the Severn we pay forriners to import their electricity, and waste billions payng for railway systems that won't get built, european ferry companies that don't exist and ppe that we have bought and paid for, and then have to pay to get rid of becuase it doesn't work and is useless.
I must try that burning from the top downwards method. It's illogical, one would have thought that our Scout Master was right when he said the flames from the kindling at the base of a fire ignite the logs above. I will definitely try it, I am always up for trying something new.
Now where's my flint stick? . . . . . I'm sure Greta wouldn't want me to use a small stick of wood coated in dangerous chemicals . . .
Meanwhile I am making a brew with my kettle on top of my log burner .

 

[bjh]

I love a good rant and Gasgas clearly also enjoys the same . Well done.
A few facts are a little (lot) wrong but hey whose counting.
Well I am actually. A typical wind turbine will recoup its carbon footprint in less than 6 months according to google, so it must be right!! Did I hear "Oh no it isn't"? Well it is the pantomime season.
Air drying wood gets the moisture out of the cells just as good as kiln drying. It does take a lot longer and the ambient humidity does have a bit of an effect, but when put on the fire, my wood is normally 15% or less moisture by simply air drying and keeping it well stacked and out of the rain. If you haven't got a moisture meter you can check by putting a bit of water with a tiny bit of soap on one end of the cut log and try blowing on the other end. If the cells have dried out you will make bubbles. Doesn't taste too good though and might take a lot of time for a tonne of wood.
Some trees do not make good wood for the fire. The worst one I tried was Elm, many years back. It was more like a lump of cast iron and sucked the heat out of the fire. Ash is king, Oak is good as well and I like Silver Birch as it dries quickly and is easy to light, but burns quicker than Ash and Oak. Pine is OK so long as you shut the stove door, as it spits. Willow is 50% water when cut so takes longer to dry and when dry it is very light and gone very quickly. Here endeth the lesson.

Have a great 2025 everyone

 

[trevskoda]

To much trouble & how feeds & cleans it, no regulation either, one of these is much better.

 

[gasgas]

bjh- that information about which logs to burn is very interesting, thank you. As for the wind generators, and every other engergy thing there are people who are convinced both ways. I remember buying double glazed windows in about 1974. The salesman said you can have either aluminium frames or plastic. What he didn't say was that it took more energy to make the aluminium frames than the window will ever save in its lifetime. The one energy source the world gains is from the sun, and the only reliable form of energy source is tidal. So long as the earth revolves and the moon allegedly drags the oceans to and fro, tides will come in and go out. Sun and wind come and go as and when they please so they are not reliable. Hydro electric is the next best, and probably actually the best if construction costs are included. We seem to have enough rain in this country to make that practical, but instead the government . . . well I won't start that . .
The basic problem is that there are too many people in the world, we need to reduce the population by half, at least. Putin's doing his bit, throwing away over 1000 young men a day. I'll be doing my bit to help in about 20 years. By which time there'll be another 1,400 million people to feed :70 million annually according to Google. I'm glad I won't be around. Forget not being able to drive your motorhome anywhere, there won't be enough space to walk to the shops.