stop burning our trees!

[elfinwood saws]

saw an ad for this website on the rear of an artic trailer.

Stop Burning Our Trees

[treequip]

Hmmmm

Well I am all for environmentally friendly but how thought through is this?

So we should stop burning virgin timber and set fire to the used stuff, contaminated with all sorts of toxic paint, adhesives and chemical treatments on it?

 

That’s going to be an emissions challenge, then there is the sorting segregating and carting to consider.

 

I am sure the system can be made to work but I don’t think this is quite as simple as that.

[morten]

saw an ad for this website on the rear of an artic trailer.

Stop Burning Our Trees

 

They are plain wrong in many of their arguments.

 

Firstly, it is a renewable resource. So as long as you plant new trees to replace the ones that are felled, the CO2 emission will equal the CO2 absorption.

 

Secondly, unless you cut down the trees, they will eventually fall by themselves , and during decomposition (fungi and insects) they will emit as much CO2 as if they were burnt.

 

Thirdly, it is naïve to think that all threes that are currently used for firewood could be "made into useful things like tables, wardrobes, kitchens and flooring". The species chosen for firewood/energi production are typically not usable for much else.

 

I would support a campaign that requires the plantation of new trees when clear felling, but such campaigns already exist, and regulations are in place in most civilised countries.

[scraggs]

I can sort of see the thinking behind it

Locally one of the big recycling firms/transfer stations is shipping wood chip from skip and other waste to sweden or finland (one of those can't remember which) for thier biomass stations, which to me seems completely stupid.

Chimneys can be fitted with scrubbers that trap the contaminants, i'm sure if it can be burnt in other countries it can be burnt here.

[skyhuck]

I can sort of see the thinking behind it

Locally one of the big recycling firms/transfer stations is shipping wood chip from skip and other waste to sweden or finland (one of those can't remember which) for thier biomass stations, which to me seems completely stupid.

Chimneys can be fitted with scrubbers that trap the contaminants, i'm sure if it can be burnt in other countries it can be burnt here.

 

No necessarily, unfortunate we apear to have a very stupid and ill educated population in this country, who kick up a stink when ever incinerators are mentioned.

 

Many other country burn a huge amount of their rubbish, they are burnt at very high temperatures and as you say the fumes are filtered, but over here people won't accept that its safe. So we still landfill

[nepia]

No necessarily, unfortunate we apear to have a very stupid and ill educated population in this country, who kick up a stink when ever incinerators are mentioned.

 

And yet it can be done: London has two successful incinerators in semi-inner London; why not more?

[Mesterh]

They are plain wrong in many of their arguments.

 

Firstly, it is a renewable resource. So as long as you plant new trees to replace the ones that are felled, the CO2 emission will equal the CO2 absorption.

 

Secondly, unless you cut down the trees, they will eventually fall by themselves , and during decomposition (fungi and insects) they will emit as much CO2 as if they were burnt.

 

Thirdly, it is naïve to think that all threes that are currently used for firewood could be "made into useful things like tables, wardrobes, kitchens and flooring". The species chosen for firewood/energi production are typically not usable for much else.

 

I would support a campaign that requires the plantation of new trees when clear felling, but such campaigns already exist, and regulations are in place in most civilised countries.

 

 

I thought that it would be better than equal ie carbon will be locked up in the root system that would eventually become coal? Or well some of it will.

 

So in effect burning trees helps lower emitted co2. Is that right?

 

I see their point about used timber going to landfill though, although wont that also help by being looked away underground!

 

Maybe it is just best to burn and extract the energy from everything that we would normally landfill as suggested.

[face cord]

There talk of builing a load of more new biomass powerstations all over the UK . Alot of the wood will be imported from places like Canada Baltic & Australia etc.

 

 

UK biomass plants

 

Wonder what this will do to timber prices?

 

Prices of woodfuel will skyrocket I reckon as there will be a huge demand increase....

 

 

Alot of the proposed plants are massive in scale compared to the existing ones.

 

RWE to convert Tilbury power station into biomass plant | Business | The Guardian

 

This one would burn 7 million tonnes of wood every year. Buring rubbish makes more sense to me as it s not imported.

[Old Mill Tree Care]

No necessarily, unfortunate we apear to have a very stupid and ill educated population in this country, who kick up a stink when ever incinerators are mentioned.

 

And yet it can be done: London has two successful incinerators in semi-inner London; why not more?

 

I agree Nepia but it's as Skyhuck said, we're a dumb ass nation.

[WorcsWuss]

Personally I have enough tables, chairs and wardrobes.... perhaps if there was a world shortage of furniture this organisation wouldn't come across as so utterly bizarre... but there isn't and frankly I can't see what they're trying to achieve....

Some people plainly have too much time on their hands and not enough common sense...

 

BUT... they do need to be quickly and effectively put out of their misery, because as has been pointed out, we're bloody idiots in this country and if the media sniff this, before too long there will be a mass pouring of treasury funds into some sort of inquiry and review on whether this is a good idea.... it'll last years, cost millions, no doubt make the figures behind the campaign very wealthy yet achieve absolutely nothing... the potential good points behind their campaign, ie reducing land-fill or encouraging tree planting, will be lost amongst a witch hunt against commercial forests and government policy...

 

So, who's going to challenge it in public and nip this in the bud, by destroying what little bit of credibility they might be building up, before it goes too far ...? Just needs 1 good decisive argument from a figure of authority...