Selfish??

[Weston Super Saint]

These people that are buying wood burning stoves, are they really very selfish?

 

So, they're gonna save a few quid on the old leccy and or gas bills, but at what cost?

 

Wood is of course needed to fuel these burners, but that means chopping down trees. Trees which at the moment are happily turning that nasty carbon dioxide stuff into glorious oxygen.

 

Oh, and the bi-product of them burning the wood, more of that nasty carbon dioxide, that can't be recycled because the trees have been chopped down.

 

So, good on 'em for saving a few quid on the bills, or boo to 'em for speeding up global warming / climate change or whatever it's name is these days??

[Wiltshire Saint]

Because electricity production doesn't contribute to climate change

[Essruu]

I don't remember the world ending when cavemen burnt wood on their fires. I bet they never had wacko freaks moaning about it either.

[Baj]

Dont remember there being 6.6 billion cavemen.

 

However, I think the point is that the trees that are chopped down for firewood are replaced within 3 years (When the soil recovers), that's certainly what they do in the Ardenne

[Hatch]

I own part of the Amazon Forest. Someone bought it for me as a Wedding present.

Even though we have a certificate , I'm not sure of the validity of it and whether I actually do own it or not.

Serves me right for inviting vegetarians to my Wedding.

 

Not that this has anything to do with the thread apart from the tree link.

[Baj]

Serves me right for inviting vegetarians to my Wedding.

lol

[St Landrew]

These people that are buying wood burning stoves, are they really very selfish?

 

So, they're gonna save a few quid on the old leccy and or gas bills, but at what cost?

 

Wood is of course needed to fuel these burners, but that means chopping down trees. Trees which at the moment are happily turning that nasty carbon dioxide stuff into glorious oxygen.

 

Oh, and the bi-product of them burning the wood, more of that nasty carbon dioxide, that can't be recycled because the trees have been chopped down.

 

So, good on 'em for saving a few quid on the bills, or boo to 'em for speeding up global warming / climate change or whatever it's name is these days??

 

Well tbh, at least a wood burning stove is converting the wood into heat directly. And nowadays it is quite easy to get a super clean burning one, that can even be used in the urban environment. When I lived in NZ, the country was awash with the things. There's no doubt NZ has been years [maybe even decades] ahead of the UK in the development of the high efficiency wood burning stove or fire. I can vouch for the fact that they are very quick, very warm, and can burn a thick green wood log quite spectacularly. And if they only burn managed wood, or dead wood, then they aren't doing huge harm. Remember that electricity is generated by various methods and because they are often a long way away from the comsumer, the losses over distance mean that a lot of the energy created goes to waste. Then remember what the electricity is being generated from, maybe coal or oil, and you get an electricity source that isn't any better, in fact is a lot worse in many cases. So the argument against wood burning stoves can very quickly go out of the window. But, I agree, they should remain only a fringe product, and utilise what wood fuel is available. Not create a special demand, as such.

 

Their main advantage is that there aren't many of them though.

Edited 6 November, 2008 by St Landrew