Wood burners in the news

[Suffolkrafter]

Hi everyone. There have been many articles recently (in the guardian at least) on wood burner pollution.

I'm interested to know what people's thoughts are on this. Are pollution concerns justified? I have no problem with discussions on pollution in the media, but I can't help thinking the issue is descending into class war and politics, and associated click bait articles in the media.

There's also the difference between those who need a burner as main source of heating etc., and those who have them for asthetic reasons. Personally I think there's nothing wrong with the latter. We all value asthetics in our own personal ways. I'm interested to know people's thoughts and opinions on all this.

 

[FerlasDave]

I believe the govt don’t view them as profitable which is why they’re being pushed. I do think there is an issue with pollution though, particularly when people burn all sorts and don’t seem to see the impact.

However, a good burner working efficiently I believe will have minimal impact on the planet, especially when compared with natural disaster emissions. I personally use a wood burner to supplement our heating system, thermostat is turned down and radiators are shut to a minimum. We use the wood burner each night and it helps keep downstairs warmer for free. Granted, we live in a small cottage and that’s how it works for us. I cut all my own wood which is split, stacked and seasoned to a maximum of 17%.

Back to the subject of profitability, councils seem to do an awful lot of subcontracting by for tree work on highways, car parks etc and all the waste is chipped at the side of the road. A sensible solution I can see would be to send all usable timber to a processing plant, where it could be split, dried and sold as firewood. They could use green energy to process if they wished, and it would be a renewable resource too which would be great. They would also have greater control* over potentially what people are burning and it’s suitability for firewood.

Long and short of it I think most is just greenwashing, without getting into the realms of politics anyway.

*control in the meaning of policing the suitability of the material, not a totalitarian communist regime.

 

[Toddy]

I think it's very dependent on where you live and how close you are to neighbours.

One of our 'new' neighbours fitted a woodburner.....and the stench got so eye wateringly bad that the rest of us were closing windows and doors....then we realised that the stench was them burning the offcuts of tanalised decking boards.
They were not pleased to be asked to stop. They were not pleased at neighbours complaining about the air quality and stating clearly that unless it improved then they would ask Environmental Health services to audit.

They changed their fuel, and the smell is still bad even though it might well comply with guidelines.

Thing is though, I mind dirty rain, I mind soot on every blooming thing, and much though I like fires, I don't want to live like that again.

All the claims for 'clean burning', etc., etc., are total mince unless all that's coming out of your flue is steam.

If you live close to neighbours it is no kindness having a woodburning stove. Not these days when we know the harm that particulate matter causes and that woodburning stoves are the largest air pollutant.

On the issue of fuel costs; I think feeling you have an option, a way of being somewhat in control of your expenses, of providing heat / cooking for your family, must be very reassuring.
I think it's often a false economy though, because you have to vector in not only the cost of firewood but the all too often ignored costs of your time and labour.

I grew up with a fire in the house every day in life. I know how much work it is to constantly be attending to it. Of the never ending cleaning, the storing of fuel, the acquisition of fuel, and the dirty air.
I don't want to live like that again, even though I do love a real fire, and I do appreciate the option.

I hadn't heard of the woodburners as being a 'class thing'. I know folks who live in sandstone villas who have them, and folks who live in council housing who have them.
The only difference is in how much they have available to buy logs. Both are now finding it a chore to constantly cut up firewood as this winter drags on though.

Each to their own, just please don't pollute the air I breathe by burning stuff that shouldn't be burnt, and don't destroy the woodlands with constant picking.

 

[FerlasDave]

Wow Toddy. There is a lot to unpack there from what you’ve said to put things down in a forum discussion.

Firstly I think your neighbours must be doing something terribly wrong with their wood burner. If done correctly there is no “smell” and there shouldn’t be much smoke at all.

Clean burning, nothing is “clean” is it let’s be honest. However the efficiency of a good stove run well these particulates that get talked about are minimal. It’s extremely difficult also to measure as there are many factors involved ( e.g. temperature, fuel type, moisture content, ambient temperature, etc) I would say that the argument that they are the largest cause of air polluter is laughable!

I’d assume the fire you grew up with was an open fire? If so that argument does not belong here as an open fire is vastly different to a wood burner and I would agree they are messy and inefficient.

I absolutely agree with people burning the wrong thing though, and taking wood when your out on a local walk is a questionable act too.

 

[Toddy]

My grandpa heated his workshop with a genuine pot belly stove It looked like something out the Clampetts but it was the other end of the garden with a field between it and the neighbours.

I'm serious though. If you can smell your neighbour's stove burning, then that's particulate pollution.

And, if you don't clean your stove regularly, then the pollution increases.

There are no 'free' energies. Mass production energy though does have to go through industrial scale filters, etc.,

 

[SaraR]

Yes they do definitely pollute and yes it's definitely bad for people's health. Some of that can be mitigated against by use of appropriate fuel (eg seasoned wood), modern efficient wood burners and sufficient knowledge on part of the operator.

Sadly there are plenty of instances of people getting one or all of those wrong on a regular basis, certainly around where I live.

I do think the discussion on how to regulate, or rather manage, their use needs to be more nuanced.

 

[Kadushu]

From my observations a lot of people are pretty stupid about how they store their firewood. It should be common sense that the drier it is the better it will burn which is beneficial from a completely selfish perspective: it's lighter to carry, it's easier to light and it provides more usable heat. The formula for good wood storage is pretty simple: waterproof roof, breathable sides. Further to that is having your wood cut, split and stored before the end of the summer to make use of the warmer weather to dry it out. This could be put in a pamphlet that is a mandatory inclusion with every stove or with every delivery of logs.

As for a class war, I think it's more complicated than rich vs poor, it's also about town dwellers vs countryside, differing population densities and differing health concerns between individuals. I hope it doesn't become another heavy handed greenwashing exercise if something as simple as a filter could be fitted to flue outlets to remove the particulates.

 

[Oliver G]

I think wood burning stoves are fine, the house we moved to doesn't have gas so all our heating is electric bar the two wood stoves, one in the kitchen and one in the living room.

We have a fire most nights in the winter as it means we can turn off most of the heaters. As much as I would like to say we but carbon neutral power with the cost of electricity I can't afford to be picky so there is a portion of brown electricity coming in.

In terms of fuel my wife is a ranger so we have a regular supply of dead fallen trees and it's all stored suitable, there is however some education needed for the wider population on how to store wood, our neighbours is just stacked against a wall and is constantly wet.

Interesting fact though is that roughly 1.6-1.8 kg of CO2 is released per kg of wood burnt.

1kg of wood gives off roughly 4.9kWh of energy so that's 0.36kg of CO2 per kWh for wood.

The UK grid is running around 0.31 kg of CO2 per kWh for electricity so there's only 16% difference.

(Before anyone asks I've not done the maths for kWh into BTUs and efficiencies for actually getting that energy into usable heating energy.)

 

[Kav]

Los Angeles has ‘No burn Days’ when the air quality hits a certain
Measure. The only exceptions are homes that still rely on wood burning stoves. These are mostly more remote cabins in the foothills of the wilderness and a few older homes like my grandmothers with two brick chimneys.
It hurts on a emotional level. I do feel resentment, taking sea showers or skipping one during a fire storm or our drought to maintain water pressure. Then I read about Kim kardashian watering her grass and paying a fine less than her designer purses.
Or, I save to keep my sailplane license active and watch Tom Cruise take off in his P51 Mustang
Burning enough fuel to run a ambulance for a month.
We all extract resources and put pressure on Gaia. I don’t mind reducing my carbon footprint( size 11 UK)but want to stick it up a few
Entitled types rears.

 

[Robbi]

Come over here and smell the Peat burning.

So much nicer than welly boots and car tyres.!!

 

[Ystranc]

There has been a recent increase in the use of wood burners, often in urban homes. Until recently it was unusual to see smoke from a chimney in a town and people had got used to clean air and being able to hang out washing. In these situations it was frowned on to even burn garden waste, it all has to go into into a green waste wheels bin to be chipped and composted (no matter how unsuitable)
Suddenly there are all these urbanites falling in love with the idea of wood burners but nowhere to buy firewood other than extortionately priced netted softwood from the local garage so they’re burning whatever they can lay their hands on including old fence panels and plywood. Perhaps they all need to buy a plot off woods4sale.co.uk and get into forestry.

 

[Laurentius]

The Guardian is as much responsible for this problem to begin with. Wood is just another form of solid fuel, like the old housecoal and not any better than smokeless fuel, or coke as we used to call it.

Back in the 60s Councils reacted to air pollution by introducing smokeless zones and forcing an end to burning house coal on open fires in most urban locales. I can remember when that hit my locality as I used to burn house coal, which could not have been that good for my lungs when a gust of wind blew the smoke back down the chimney.

What really becomes a difficulty is creating universal bans, which penalises people where there is not a problem with wood burners.

I really don't want to go back to burning solid fuel either in an open grate or a sophisticated modern stove in my flat, but on my allotment, and camping, why ever not?

 

[Ystranc]

I grew up on the West coast and the ban on house coal was not enacted there, nor was it enacted where I live in rural Wales. We never burn coal because no matter how bad wood is it is at least sustainable and not a fossil fuel. We don’t have the options available to the average urbanite, no mains gas and a ropey electricity supply prone to getting cut off when the weather is bad. We plant more trees than we fell and most of our firewood comes from coppicing. We have sufficient space to dry three years wood undercover along with all the kit you could reasonably expect…having been involved in forestry for a large part of my life I’ve been boring people to death about planting trees and managing woodland for well over 40 years. Non of this has come as a surprise to me.

 

[Suffolkrafter]

Thank you all for the responses, a lot of food for thought. I have a stove, that really, I don't need. The house just doesn't need it. But then I only run it maybe four or five times a year, on particualrly cold days. I've always figured that everything we do in life has an environmental impact and we all have to make choices along the way.
But your responses, particular Toddy's responses do make me think that I need to consider my neighbours and the impact it may have on other people around me. Unfortunately I don't live in the wilderness.

 

[Paul_B]

Most wood burning households use wood from trade suppliers. These are to be regulated or licenced I believe tum ensure they supply wood that's dry enough. How do they dry it? Don't they use industrial kilns to dry the wood? Is that clean fuel after that?

Storage? Most places know with wood burners have garages or sheds for storage. Certainly not great fit keeping the wood at suitable moisture content.

Then you're into ignorance. Who tests for moisture content? Certainly the minority.

Then you're into practicality. Do you have an efficient central heating system? If the answer is yes then shouldn't you be using that? Or do you have the heating on and burn wood too?

Then you're into pollution. Even if dry and burnt efficiently you'll get pollution. It's been a while now since rules about efficiency in burners. Still pollution. The only chance of nearly clean burn is with a wood gasification type of stove with secondary burning of the volatiles. No household burner is close to that I believe.

Imho Toddy has been very reserved with comments. I think you could be a bit more harsh when criticising wood burning stove use by the general public.

Our neighbour burns and the smoke is black, heavy and immediately drops down to float past our front door or back door. Our windows are well sealed but about 10 years old. They do not stop the smell of the fumes getting into our house if the wind is coming to us after them.

The other neighbour has a wood but I doubt he dries his wood enough.

 

[Paul_B]

Thank you all for the responses, a lot of food for thought. I have a stove, that really, I don't need. The house just doesn't need it. But then I only run it maybe four or five times a year, on particualrly cold days. I've always figured that everything we do in life has an environmental impact and we all have to make choices along the way.
But your responses, particular Toddy's responses do make me think that I need to consider my neighbours and the impact it may have on other people around me. Unfortunately I don't live in the wilderness.

Don't burn unless you really have to is my advice. That could be if your other heating options are out of action, it's exceptionally cold or you're struggling financially and have a good source of cheap, dry wood. Plus you have read up on how to efficiently burn wood in your burner and how to keep your fuel dry enough.

That is just my opinion.

PS we have an energy efficient gas boiler and radiators. We also have solar panels. We do like a fire but decided environment is better without us burning wood. We're trying our best but we're not perfectly green. We're better than we were by about 18k miles a year, public transport for most journeys, solar and heating/boiler temp turned down. Oh and I do the lights and devices turn off. Obsessive about or microwave!

 

[Tiley]

I live in a remote location and have a woodburner as the primary means of heating the house. There is also an oil-fired boiler that can provide heat but the cost of fueling it has become nearly prohibitive of late. Would the government prefer me to burn oil or wood? I know that there are emissions downsides to both and that H.M.R.C. will not benefit from my modest consumption of well-seasoned, dry ash but punishing me for doing so seems perverse.

I will wait to see what is in the detail of any proposed legislation before getting really angry/shrugging my shoulders/smiling smugly but, until that moment, I will stay warm in the chillier months by lighting my woodburner and enjoying the cheery blaze.

 

[TLM]

A lot of smoke (meaning also particles) is the result of incomplete burning. That again depends on a lot of factors like wet wood, too big wood, cold stove, bad draft and a few others. A lot can be done by lighting the fire with small dry kindling than then moving to bigger chunks when the fire is burning hotly enough.

I think that stove design also has a lot to do with it and some old ones are just bad, though good ones exist. If there was enough market for them a more efficient and cleaner burning stove could with high probability be designed. If electric blower can be used there are several options for clean burn designs.

 

[FerlasDave]

I hope it doesn't become another heavy handed greenwashing exercise if something as simple as a filter could be fitted to flue outlets to remove the particulates.

There are already wood burners on the market that are fitted with catalytic converters. These are certified to be used in smoke controlled areas too.

 

[slowworm]

I'd like to see some accurate studies into where the pollution is actually coming from, not basing reports on wrong assumptions like last time and to split out pollution from modern woodburners from other sources such as open fires, bonfires, firepits etc. It doesn't make much sense to me to bring in even more legislation when councils can't be bothered to use the current laws.

I also think more could be done to educate people rather than bring in laws that many just ignore. For example, one of Monbiots Guardian columns was pointed out to me where he was moaning he had installed three woodburners and he slumbered them so the produced loads of smoke therefore they should be banned for the masses of uneducated idiots etc. But failed to note his hypocrisy of not having a well insulated house (so you wouldn't need three woodburners) and learning how they should be used, i.e. do not slumber them but run them fast and hot.

Perhaps most people are too daft in this country to be left to their own devices but I hope wood fuel isn't completely banned so those of us that know how to use it responsibly and have little other viable alternatives can be left to get on with it.