Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Thanks Nigello




I had a quick look at the site, but does miscanthus produce lower levels of particulate matter when burned? or is it purely more eco from a growing perspective?


Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'll say it again -- try miscanthus.

> https://www.terravesta.com (I have no connection

> to this firm about from having bought its products

> and liked them.)

goldilocks and Nigello -



Miscanthus produces 3 TIMES more particulate emissions than soft wood!



https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02786826.2015.1121198



Burning plant matter = particulates and carcinogenic aromatic compounds - same as burning tobacco. No way round it.

Thanks for that - would seem its not a better solution.


I don't have a woodburner, so won't be burning anything, but I do think that its a hard sell to stop people once they have one - the views on this thread have backed that up, in a 'its actually very environmentally friendly' kind of way. Its understandable given the marketing around these burners that people would be under the misapprehension that they were not 'polluting'. 2030 is a long long way off and the damage to ours and our childrens lungs is happening now. I was just trying to see if there was a 'better' interim step for people given the likely reluctance to stop using something that's 'allowed'!

Rosetta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yesterday I noticed a very strong smell of

> woodsmoke on Oglander Road at the Grove Vale end.

>

> It was impossible to see where it was coming from

> though.

>

> It was very unpleasant.



Woodsmoke has a really nice smell.


Are you absolute sure that this unpleasant smell came from burning wood?

goldilocks - absolutely - once people have spent thousands on a stove it is unlikely that they will stop burning.


Unfortunately I just can't see an interim solution. Defra-approved stoves (the ones mainly used) give as much particulates as 33 modern cars!


But this is with dry wood and in lab conditions. I.e that is the best they can possibly be.


If I had bought a stove and then found out what I know now (my sister's in this boat) I would put it down to an expensive mistake and use it as an ornament. Stoves can fill the owners homes with particulates and it's like getting kids to passive smoke - and a few grand is not much in the scheme of things. But of course I don't expect most people would do this. I suppose they could use it less though. And try to avoid it in cold, still weather - when the pollution is held at ground level (although this beats the object).


The only answer is legislation. But like you said this could take years and meanwhile the damage is happening now. All I can think of is to put pressure on MPs/Councillors/ Mayors office - let them know that people actually care. So far the issue has been going under the radar. Expert groups have warned Defra and the Mayor but they appear to have been ignored and the public is really quiet on this. The problem is set to get worse as stove sales are growing and they last for decades and are often sold with the house...


British Medical Journal have an interesting (depressing) article and comment on the need for legislation https://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.k167/rr-3


For my own preservation, I'm just going to stay out of London next winter.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In  parts of Europe you just get charged tax at the end of your stay somewhere. Usually a couple of quid added to your bill. Most tourists are pretty happy to stump up the cost, as it's an expected expense.  I  think it's a good way to make money and remove the burden from locals.  It's for foreigners, Sue - I'm sure Londoners and brits will still be able to freely cross the borough lines without having to go through checkpoint charlie 🙂 
    • It doesn't work like that. There won't be differential pricing for tourists and residents at any attractions, checkpoints or a requirement to carry one's papers with one at all times. A levy is put on hotels, maybe on Air B&Bs, on a bed per night basis. That cash goes to Southwark. It's pretty easy to administer.
    • Don't see an issue at all. Sounds like the protest is being made by friends and families of the two off licences, Morleys, pret and maxim chicken who are within 100 m of the school. Much ado about nothing. Besides if it doesn't proceed, the kids will walk a but further!!
    • Whilst I agree to some extent,  are they going to have some kind of checkpoint?  I can't see how this could work in practice. Surely Southwark residents go to these places quite frequently as well, particularly Tate Modern?  Will we have to take proof of residency every time we go out? What happens when family are with us who don't live in Southwark? Will other London boroughs start doing the same thing? Will Southwark residents be charged a tourist tax to visit "tourist attractions" in other areas, eg the V&A and the British Museum?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...