The woodsure scheme, do we need it?

[nepia]

3 hours ago, openspaceman said:

"a person supplies a relevant solid fuel if the person supplies such a fuel by way of sale from or by means of—"

 

which I think means money must change hands, or is it any supply?

'by way of sale' I wouldn't see as ambiguous; it surely has to mean in exchange for money or money's worth

[Gav73]

'by way of sale' I wouldn't see as ambiguous; it surely has to mean in exchange for money or money's worth

The money’s worth is where it can be a little iffy, as it can be interpreted in different ways.

A sale is a “transfer of something (and title to it) in return for money (or other thing of value)”

In the case of arb waste, the “money’s worth” is the “other thing of value”. Generally waste costs money to dispose of, so it could be construed that by providing arb waste for free, the arborist is gaining the value of not paying for disposal.

Now I don’t believe it would fall under the scheme, all of my firewood is arb waste, so I hope it doesn’t, but it is a good example of how legislation can be a headache and open to interpretation.

[nepia]

I think you're reading too much into the legislation there tbh.  I was thinking along the lines HMRC rules whereby both money and money's worth are theoretically taxable (for Income Tax purposes anyway).

 

In your example the arb's saving in disposal fees would not be seen as a financial gain

[Gav73]

I think you're reading too much into the legislation there tbh.  I was thinking along the lines HMRC rules whereby both money and money's worth are theoretically taxable (for Income Tax purposes anyway).
 
In your example the arb's saving in disposal fees would not be seen as a financial gain

What you’ve just said kind of proves the point I was making. You’re reading it one way, I’m suggesting it could be read another way. I don’t think either of us is right or wrong, it’s just a typical example of legislation not being straightforward.

When it come to enforcing the legislation, none of us know how the legislation could be interpreted and used, and until that happens everyone will have to make their best guess on what’s right and wrong.

[openspaceman]

27 minutes ago, nepia said:

I think you're reading too much into the legislation there tbh.  I was thinking along the lines HMRC rules whereby both money and money's worth are theoretically taxable (for Income Tax purposes anyway).

 

In your example the arb's saving in disposal fees would not be seen as a financial gain

It's funny you came up with that one as I was thinking @kevinjohnsonmbe had a problem along these lines, perhaps it was supplying himself with firewood which HMRC wanted to tax as a benefit in kind?

[difflock]

17 hours ago, DocMustard said:

The problem isn't the retailers of firewood, it is the bloody morons who don't have a clue about the moisture holding properties of wood and try to burn it wet (even when the wood may have been sold to them dry), don't understand the 'physics of fire' such that they produce a load of smouldering embers and in many cases don't know how their appliances actually work so can't adjust airflow, for example, to alter the characteristics of the fire.

 

I source my own firewood, from diseased trees that have been condemned and felled. I season it for over 2 years under cover outdoors with plenty of airflow, cutting and splitting it to let it dry out. If my stocks get high, I may sell a bag on to a family member. There isn't a woodsure logo to be seen, but the logs sure burn brilliantly because we know what we are doing. 

 

The legislation is being forced in because of idiots who don't have a clue. 

Same as all the punative punishing motoring legisation, re  draconian speeding and alcohol limits, etc etc.

I.e. punish the majority of moderate sensible individuals in a vain attempt to curtail the witless uninformable uncaring  offenders. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by difflock

[Martin du Preez]

I’m sorry but it’s a load of crap pushed by one fo the biggest importers and one the biggest exporters of firewood from one of the largest areas of deforestation, selling a load of firewood which has mould on it at 18% moisture. Ours is 15% out the gate. Dried in a barn.

[trigger_andy]

 
Supermarkets sell food that is in date and fit for consumption. It's the consumer's responsibility to ensure that they eat it when it is fresh. The Woodsure scheme punishing firewood retailers for customers using wet wood is like fining supermarkets for customers eating out of date food. 
 

I agree with everything you’re saying J, but surely your analogy of a Supermarket selling in date produce only backs U.K. the woodsure stance? A Supermarket has a duty of care to provide in date produce. That would be akin to a woodsure accredited log provider supplying logs below 20% MC. Both the supermarket and the accredited log provider provide the product according to their relative standards and once sold it’s the customer’s responsibility to safely store either their fresh fish or logs under 20% MC in the correct way.

Anyway, it’s all BS and thankfully not yet here in Scotland.

[openspaceman]

2 hours ago, Big J said:

I take my hat off to any of you who have jumped through the hoops to comply. It's patently bollocks and is designed to force out the smaller producers. 

It's designed to cut particulate emissions into the local air shed, whether it will be effective is another matter but as you say  it's likely to adversely effect the small producer and benefit a large importer, such is legislation with it's unforeseen consequences. The instigators like Sadiq Khan want all combustion stopped in favour of electric vehicles and heat pump for homes.

 

Looking back there were a couple of times when wood  for home heating seemed to get popular, in the years after dutch elm disease from 1971 and following the demise of the hardwood pulp mills from 2000. I wonder if the sales of wood stoves reflect this.

 

The main thing about this and other environmental or  health laws is they not only increase costs to home producers and make imports from less fettered economies more competitive but they introduce a new layer of bureaucracy which a whole raft of jobsworths gravitate to.

[agg221]

1 hour ago, trigger_andy said:

 

I agree with everything you’re saying J, but surely your analogy of a Supermarket selling in date produce only backs U.K. the woodsure stance? A Supermarket has a duty of care to provide in date produce. That would be akin to a woodsure accredited log provider supplying logs below 20% MC. Both the supermarket and the accredited log provider provide the product according to their relative standards and once sold it’s the customer’s responsibility to safely store either their fresh fish or logs under 20% MC in the correct way.

Anyway, it’s all BS and thankfully not yet here in Scotland.

 

It would be akin to extending the date stamp requirement on food so that anyone who sells a few apples or eggs from the gate has to provide a date stamp on them, and has to pay for the privilege of applying that stamp at such a high figure that they are forced to stop doing it, thereby giving the supermarkets a monopoly.

 

Alec