Bolt

Safe to say, not a Shiesle...... ..a Schliesi.... ..a Shclislin.... ..a Snchliesli.... ..a, one of them there German chippers.

Not to mention Alan, he still is.

That's not overloaded. Still room for a palettes worth of block pavers in the back of that.

Lovin' the shorts.

The trick with hedges like this is to add a zero to the price and sub them out if you get them.

...AND, I offered biochar (which, ironically is one of the few credible suggestions to the original post). Anyway, what is your great suggestion Rob? Hope it's better that a cart and a hole, though I doubt it will be as good as the rollin' coal.

It's pretty simple. You can’t 'lock carbon up' in wood. You can just very temporarily confine it there for at best a decade or two. Carbon can be very successfully ‘locked up’ in the form of oil or coal. Successful until we all started letting it out from underground over the last couple of hundred years. Many are naive enough to think that you can plant a few hundred trees to ‘offset’ burning fossil fuels (just like many think planting a load of whippy saplings somehow mitigates felling mature trees on a development site). I ain’t one of them, sorry. The meaningful capture of carbon in wood is a delusion. If you are worried about carbon, leave it underground. PERIOD.

Thats perfectly fine old fella.... My kids will sort out all our carbon problems on your behalf.

yep, just relax* *but only if you intend to operate on a 320 million year timescale.

Thats the spirit. Tie the carbon up in a bit of old wood for a bit, and lets hope our children deal with it in due course.

You could convert arisings into biochar, for use on site as soil conditioner. Conversion may well invove fossil fuel and certainly will involve burning, so not exactly meeting your criteria!!

What is the benefit of releasing carbon slowly?

*...and no, it wont be nessessary for anyone to post up any stupid poems about firewood...

Dry and seasoned for me*

Invalid experiment. Everyone knows that rabbits aren't brilliant.

sorry, that should have read "I thought the term 'global warming' was superceeded by the term 'man-made climate change'".

The former. Humans are brilliant.

I thought 'global warming' was superceeded by 'man-made climate change' on account that the globe has been chearfully warmin' a little bit for the last few millions of years all of its own accord.

Some would say they are better, as you dont need to ask someone else to hold your beer.

A phenomenon well known to health and safety professionals (but clearly less known by the health and safety amateurs so often found throwing their weight about in industry) is something called revenge effects. Revenge effects are a bit like drug side effects in so much as the very attempt that is made to make things better often introduces a new set of hazards. Sometimes the revenge effect is more hazardous than the original issue. Sometimes the revenge effect lays undiscovered for years. Revenge effects are very common, and when I encounter some H+S billshut, I usually look for the revenge effect (just for grins, like a hobby….). As a climber of decades standing, who started working a few years back on a utility network that insists on two rope working, I was intrigued what the revenge effects of the twin system business would be. The obvious ones to spring to mind have already been mentioned in this thread… > error due to over complication > fatigue due to making simple jobs into a faff. > poor work positioning due to compromising on anchor point placement because you just can’t be arsed to move multiple tips multiple times. > fatigue due to more kit to lug across two ploughed fields and a marshy bog. > waste of financial resources that could be more effectively spent elsewhere. > etc. In reality, the real revenge effect became apparent much later, and it was this: I am a real fan of high anchor points. A good high anchor means that jobs which others can’t do become a piece of cake. I am too old to struggle, so I always tie in as high as I can as point of principle. I generally make good choices, and until recently, rarely had that many snap out on me. For me, if you always have two anchor points, you start thinking that as long as one is well selected and sturdy, and the other can ‘push the envelope’ a bit (you do, after all, have backup to catch you…. Literally). It is surprising just how much you can rely on a really shabby anchor point when you start using them on a regular basis. Human nature is that once you start becoming conditioned to making poor anchor point choices, you make them on a more and more regular basis, which I guess is OK…. but only up to the point where neither anchor point turns out to really be that good……

Fines are issued by the courts, and go to the treasury, not to the HSE. The HSE partially funds itself using FFI (Fees for intervention) which in effect allows them to invoice you for the time they spend investigating you. Although it may seem similar, fines are not tax deductible, whereas fees are (so there's a silver lining).

Maybe where he works, his nanny dosen't get to tell him how to do his job?

Confused. Why would the council fell a tree (or refuse to fell a tree) that is on someone else's land?

Silver lining. .... Them bricks look really tidy.

But they are used for raisin things up.