Jump to content
william petts

The woodsure scheme, do we need it?

Recommended Posts

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 by difflock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 
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scheme punishing firewood retailers for customers using wet wood is like fining supermarkets for customers eating out of date food.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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

 

That wasn't my intention. What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter how diligent a retailer is (best before and use by dates, for example), a person can still do themselves harm by ignoring the guidance. 

 

Given that the average person has a better understanding of food safety than efficient fire usage, I'd say that the Woodsure scheme will have little effect on improving burning practices or reducing emissions. 

 

15 minutes ago, openspaceman said:

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.

 

I'm entirely in favour of electric vehicles and reducing domestic firewood usage. I say that as someone with a V10 Touareg and a 20kw stove. I can't wait until my car simply plugs in and I no longer have to feed a stove. 

 

However, legislating like this punishes the retailer who is fundamentally selling a sound product. There is no such thing as bad firewood. There is only firewood that is sufficiently dry and firewood that needs more drying time. The education and legislation needs to be targeted at the end user, not the retailer. 

 

Ban open fires, ban inefficient stoves, make flue pipe thermometers compulsory or even automatic vents to moderate air flow. Educate the end user and stop punishing the retailers for idiots that don't know how to use a fire or what to burn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, openspaceman said:

had a problem along these lines,

It wasn’t so much a problem as it was the solution (successful defence) against HMRC. 
 

I see the points being presented above but not sure a difference in process cost between 2 businesses could result in the more efficient business being charged with failing to bring a non monetary benefit to book where that benefit only arises in comparison to a less efficient business process. 
 

As much as I despise state interference, not even HMRC Nazis could pull that off....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

It wasn’t so much a problem as it was the solution (successful defence) against HMRC. 
 

I see the points being presented above but not sure a difference in process cost between 2 businesses could result in the more efficient business being charged with failing to bring a non monetary benefit to book where that benefit only arises in comparison to a less efficient business process. 
 

As much as I despise state interference, not even HMRC Nazis could pull that off....

Ah but my tongue in cheek point was about whether a self supply of arb waste for burning yourself could come under the definition of "sale" in the regulation as it was a benefit in kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, openspaceman said:

Ah but my tongue in cheek point was about whether a self supply of arb waste for burning yourself could come under the definition of "sale" in the regulation as it was a benefit in kind.

It’s a can of worms 😂 which the Upper Tier Appeal Judge refused to open - much to my very evident and obvious (just short of contempt) displeasure.... 

 

Id been allowed to do ‘em over just enough to prove a point but was prevented from delivering the Coup de gras that I had my sights set on. 
 

Wouldn’t do for the “little man” to be seen to have tucked up HMRC would it 👊🏻

 

It might catch on.....

Edited by kevinjohnsonmbe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
I'm entirely in favour of electric vehicles and reducing domestic firewood usage. I say that as someone with a V10 Touareg and a 20kw stove. I can't wait until my car simply plugs in and I no longer have to feed a stove. 
 
However, legislating like this punishes the retailer who is fundamentally selling a sound product. There is no such thing as bad firewood. There is only firewood that is sufficiently dry and firewood that needs more drying time. The education and legislation needs to be targeted at the end user, not the retailer. 
 
Ban open fires, ban inefficient stoves, make flue pipe thermometers compulsory or even automatic vents to moderate air flow. Educate the end user and stop punishing the retailers for idiots that don't know how to use a fire or what to burn. 





Purely playing devil’s advocate here but I thought with the new woodsure thing the supplier had to also give the purchaser a pamphlet on how to store the logs properly? And how hard is it to use Google? Ignorance is a choice these days.
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Featured Adverts

  • Tip site reviews

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.