kevinjohnsonmbe

Brilliant! Not getting into the debate, but that HAS to be the word of the day!! anyone see the piece on wood fires on Newsnight last night...? Although a ‘soft’ / early, fairly meaningless piece, it could be the harbinger of the potential demonisation of solid fuel probably leading to tax and dissuasion tactics to follow from government policy.

Couldn't help myself..... (unbelievably, recklessly, dangerous and arrogant individual)

Falling off chair with broken ribs...... That was the logic that I think was being lost..... It's already there (in a different form) so the argument that there would be a quantum leap in fatac's is hardly credible... Mrs E like the PM??

These must have been on the Dendrophobia register and been suffering whatever the opposite of OCD is....

??? What's that all about???

I'm struggling a bit with your logic KC! Every time salt has been spread this winter it's been followed by rain. Anything that has been put on the road has just made it's way off it just as quick. - so it is wholly ineffective as well as environmentally damaging (pointless & bad.) I've got some small piles of disintegrated pellets in the yard that have been there since Nov. Granted, not heavy traffic but they are still there, not washed away, not dissolved, not even moved! As for chip, it'll make its way to the side of the road and just turn to sloppy mud and because it wouldn't then be clean up regularly would cause accidents - you mean like all the leaves, debris, farm vehicle mud, hedge cuttings etc that already constitute road side detritus that isn't cleaned up, but oddly doesn't seem to lead to accidents? I know that's a tricky point to try and advance and I'm not suggesting that adding to an existing problem is necessarily a sound proposal, rather that I don't really see the counter argument that it might cause an increase in accidents as being a particularly sound one. The whole focus seems to be on the potential negatives associated with the proposal rather than a balance of the "bad" that currently exists with salt, measured against the potential reduction in efficiency (of pellet as compared to salt) most of which could be ameliorated if the will existed. Example, the roads could be swept after the application of pellets (when warm weather comes.) Of course its not a 100% solution for all roads for the reasons of surface drainage BOD that Mr & Mrs Eggs & Marcus have illustrated, but maybe some roads, some of the time? Aprroach it like some of the other "bad" things we do (drinking, smoking, fatty foods, sugar, speeding, too much time on AT etc etc....) cutting them out all together is probably not achievable - but reduction is good....

You’re more engaging than Mr Eggs Mrs Eggs! Ill leave the technical detail to you boffins, but just to add a curved ball.... Whilst we focus on the down side of possible alternatives, we should have a baseline of “badness” from which each can be judged. What about if all of the apparent disadvantages of wood pellets adds to less bad than the current unintended consequences of salt? Not just the effect on watercourse, but road side vegetation, trees etc? for OSM- there was mention of a patented magnesium coating in the video if I recall correctly.... PS - PM sent Mrs Egg

Ha! You’ll get more grief from the ‘massive’ about saying “PM sent” in an open post - that’s a cardinal sin!!!

PM yr address through Mr E and I'll mail it to you (you might see the abusive PM I sent you earlier too!) Was it AM show I was half listening to Sunday morning with Piers Morgan saying he was an early winner of Trumps US "Apprentice" show and that they had a friendship ever since.....?

You are such a twt! The money in that wouldn't even cover the hassle that is attached to the PC role... I'm gonna bin in a become a "Special" - it'll be less drama from richardcraniums!

There’s a BUT...... Mr E! Salt dissolves in contact with rain and immediately runs off to soil or watercourse contamination. Ive got some small piles of pellet spill in the yard been there since Nov past - still there. If that were Salt, it’d have dissolved within hours. Which has a worse / less bad contamination effect on watercourse - Salt or sawdust? (Mindful that considerably less pellet appears to be necessary than salt, ton for ton to achieve similar effect?) (There’s no relationship between my pellet making capability and my keenness on the subject BTW! Pure coincidence!!)

That’s a good run of comments there! In so many facets of UK life, the “entitlement” attitude seems to have replaced the “personal responsibility” attitude when it comes to problems. It cant be “my” fault, somebody else must be to blame!

Perhaps not a “perfect” solution - for the valid reasons presented. But could it be a “less bad” option in certain circumstances? Full and proper awareness of the harm caused by salt would be a good starting point.

“Goes” It doesn’t just ceases to exist..... No, it “goes” into watercourses and the soil. That’s the problem, we’re using it as a fire and forget.

Yome the man on this subject Mr E. If you think it would be a problem for drains that's good enough for me. I wish there was a viable alternative to salt though.... It's going to bite us in the ass at some point.

Not sure how this thread has managed to come up twice??

Think about it though Mr E - less than is already left to log the drains and certainly less adverse environmental impact. Lessr of 2 weevils??

That's already taken care of by the flail cutting of hedgerows which is left to clog the drains Khriss.... Happens every year just the same. Last year I brought it to the Highways manager's attention. His response was that in rural areas it's risk assessed and not worth the effort - he was rather surprised when I pointed out this area which is EA Flood Zone 3. Apparently that 'trivial detail' hadn't featured in his risk assessment.... Same again this year. 1 week after the flail comes the heavy rain, then Cormac are out clearing the drains.... Too little too late as usual. The 1 plus side is that since he's not interested in his contractors clearing the highways, I have no issue leaving my debris everywhere now....

I've posted these before, but just to illustrate the abject, casual disdain attached to the use of road salt, and the ambivalence of Local Authorities and major government departs to the resultant damaging environmental effect, the following pictures were taken at Derriford Hospital. These trees are subject to Tree Preservation Orders too.

Picked up from a FB post, I thought this was really interesting.... Great to see new trends and progressive environmental protection measures being trialled. Thankfully we don't suffer from too much frost in Cornwall, but it would be interesting to know how many tons are dumped on the roads of Cornwall (and more broadly the UK) each year and what the environmental impact is. This quote is taken from the Smithsonian (Jan 2014 followed up in May 17) so it's certainly not a new line of development: "...Road salt pollution is generally a bigger issue for the surrounding environment and the organisms that live in it. It’s estimated that chloride concentrations above 800 ppm are harmful to most freshwater aquatic organisms - because these high levels interfere with how animals regulate the uptake of salt into their bodies - and for short periods after a snow melt, wetlands nearby highways can surpass these levels. A range of studies has found that chloride from road salt can negatively impact the survival rates of crustaceans, amphibians such as salamanders and frogs, fish, plants and other organisms. There’s even some evidence that it could hasten invasions of non-native plant species..." Since Cornwall Council has a statutory duty under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 it will be interesting to understand how this activity is not in breach of that Act. It may be that the upfront cost of pellet is more expensive than salt, but that excludes any consideration of the associated environmental harm caused by salt. A true understanding of costs and liabilities would doubtless provide evidence of a cost saving if we were served by any form of open thinking and imagination by our Local Authority.

Picked up from a FB post, I thought this was really interesting.... Great to see new trends and progressive environmental protection measures being trialled. Thankfully we don't suffer from too much frost in Cornwall, but it would be interesting to know how many tons are dumped on the roads of Cornwall (and more broadly the UK) each year and what the environmental impact is. This quote is taken from the Smithsonian (Jan 2014 followed up in May 17) so it's certainly not a new line of development: "...Road salt pollution is generally a bigger issue for the surrounding environment and the organisms that live in it. It’s estimated that chloride concentrations above 800 ppm are harmful to most freshwater aquatic organisms - because these high levels interfere with how animals regulate the uptake of salt into their bodies - and for short periods after a snow melt, wetlands nearby highways can surpass these levels. A range of studies has found that chloride from road salt can negatively impact the survival rates of crustaceans, amphibians such as salamanders and frogs, fish, plants and other organisms. There’s even some evidence that it could hasten invasions of non-native plant species..." Since Cornwall Council has a statutory duty under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 it will be interesting to understand how this activity is not in breach of that Act. It may be that the upfront cost of pellet is more expensive than salt, but that excludes any consideration of the associated environmental harm caused by salt. A true understanding of costs and liabilities would doubtless provide evidence of a cost saving if we were served by any form of open thinking and imagination by our Local Authority.

You have a cunning mind Gary! There was an observable attempt to mildly subdue the burning rage of vesuvian contempt that was obviously simmering just below the surface as I casually announced "...didn't have time for shopping, but there's a card there..." on Christmas morning. It was a sufficiently volatile and finely balanced a situation as you might imagine, so I subdued the urge to follow up with "be January sales before you know it, I'll bag us a bargain...!" It was a numbers game, I knew she couldn't go full psycho (is that even an "allowed" phrase these days? I'm confused) since we had the in-laws staying.... It was just a case of seeing if I could bluff it out 'til the sales started

Talks a lot of sense.... Good man!

Apparently, there are 2 Dyson hoovers in the hoose, one hand held and one upright - I wouldn't know exactly 'cause I wouldn't use the 'king appliance while married! I've got a Henry for the boiler and the fire places, everything else is "if she says she needs it, who am I to argue" sort of scenario... She just got a new washing machine, I'm guessing it's got more RAM than an early space shuttle, it 'adjusts' it's cycle time according to the weight of the load apparently.... I can't even 'look' at it, scary beast of a thing! Back on subject, the Dyson upright did go TU, but apparently, they have a life-time guarantee. She phoned up, they talked, it was replaced - bosh! (no, that's the washing machine...) The Dyson hoover sends text messages to her phone telling her when to clean the filter apparently.... How lazy is that? Seriously, I don't know how they fill their days in the modern era. Anyone got a mangle for sale....?

Surf boards and some leggy blondes in the back, roll up a phat one... Happy daze!