kevinjohnsonmbe

I should have included.... If poss and suitable, maybe consider a secondary circuit either PV or thermal as a 'pump primer' for the Summer months. I've got 2 flat thermal panels (in hindsight I should have gone for tubes) and on a good day in the Summer they provide a full tank of passive heat! Having a third input (elect immersion) also adds redundancy and has got us out of trouble when the burner had a snag. I haven't done it yet, but since the smart meter was fitted it would be interesting to see what the cost comparisons are running elec immersion when solar PV is running hot. System redundancy - well worth a thought.

To answer the question in the title - yes, I did. I had mine installed several years before the commercial RHI tarif was rolled out (which I think was early 2010?) and at a time when all the apparent wisdom was that it was a pipe dream to even expect an RHI tariff. There was a small grant payment available though but, as you say, that was likely swallowed up in the cartel pricing associated with accredited equipment and installer. When we did it, it coincided with a significant house extension and the requirement to replace a +/- 30 year old oil boiler which had (genuinely) broken down on 3 consecutive Christmas eves 🤣 So, whilst a very big consideration was getting off oil, it had to coincide with the removal of a genuinely pooped system rather than pulling a system out ½ way through its anticipated life cycle. So. technically, if the question was would you, then I'd answer yes, because I did. Would I do it again? Probably yes and possibly regardless of any grant incentive - for the reasons you allude to. If fuel source is ready and available, if the existing system is pooped (or there isn't one) and if the life style is suitable to cope with a biomass system - then yes I would do it again - regardless of RHI. Getting off oil, replacing a obsolescent system and - perhaps most important - being able / willing to adjust lifestyle to accommodate biomass would be my 3 main check items...

I think there is a fine line which (probably) provides a divide between owner operator and hire-in users. I believe this on the basis that owner operator is a whole lot more ‘invested’ in training & safe use and proper inspection & maintenance than a hire in user might be. It’s just a ‘feeling’, unsubstantiated by data / stats but there you are. The biggest concern remains the apparent desire to drive the industry away from climbing and towards MEWP whilst not really acknowledging that the single weakest link is the user...

Have you got access to BS library? Sounds like you might have access to an academic library with a research subscription - if not, would be well worth buying (or acquiring) your own copies of 8545, 3998 & 5837. Make yourself known to local planning agents / architects and see if you can pick up some leads from them for 5837 jobs. Post grad already (albeit in another field) with aspirations for Masters in Arb (but no practical experience) - sounds perfect for a local authority job role....

I can almost hear the self employed dress makers and book keepers whooping and a hollerin.....

Only money does - or so it seems. Wouldn’t be that way after the uprising 😂

Or whack an extra £25k on the quote to allow for resurfacing. If it doesn’t need it have a nice bonus.

I wrote a longer post before that one - but deleted it since it was becoming a bit rambling. In essence- the only viable alternative is full on revolution. The whole bunch of them lack credibility.

The surgery is deemed to be at risk of damage if the tree fails but they are not the tree owner - am I reading that right? Quite right that surgery would seek to recover costs for damage remediation - why would they want that liability. Can they provide credible spec for car park make up? I’d say the tree owner would have to assume liability for potential damage remediation. You can’t take that risk - you might end up well and truly in the cack! Joking aside - have you considered a helo-lift? Might not be as mad as it seems given the potential future liabilities.

Doubt it. You think so? Not convinced.....

I remember something very similar you posted maybe a year or more ago. I’m (almost) sure it was the same speaker and similar subject but in a different format. Strangely, I find myself quite keen on listening to RB.

Seems about right given current headlines viz a viz Sir Philip Barton who just about personifies all that is rotten in the civil service.

You can still grab / pick up cut stems by just ‘pinching’ the tree in the shear but I know what you mean. I’m happier cutting and letting it drop rather than cutting and holding on - means I can cut bigger and further away without risk of going over with it.

My thinking came down to 2 key points. Firstly - I specifically did not want a cut & hold function because it was my assessment that this could / would lead to an unacceptable likelihood of toppling the machine over. With the best will in the world, human nature is likely to lead to the temptation to push the limits leading to catastrophe. It is a relatively narrow wheel base after all. Second - I did want a rotator function for the likes of hedge reduction and the ability to cut at any angle rather than just upright. So far as I could see, there wasn’t a grab + rotator function so - for me - rotator was more important than grab although I like the functionality of the Avant variant using the grab part for grabbing. It’s horses for courses I guess. Like any tool - great in the right circumstances. I got mine from Exac-1 all the details are on their website.

Alright, if the phone’s up the swanny it’s up the swanny - if you say so. I’m seeing ‘the man’ tomorrow morning to fix what happens next. That gives you the morning to get yourself a phone sorted. PM 👊🏻

Turn your phone on you dopey c*nt!

All the ‘meds’ I need are right here: 1 lottery ticket away 🤔 Turn the wireless down - your phones ringing.

Also - Pop, great for kindling. If you know of any wholesale kindling producers they may be interested. Or, see if estate is interested in purchase a kindling machine and go straight into source, process and supply of bulk kindling.

Matty, I genuinely appreciate and greatly respect that. I didn’t want to fall out (with anyone) on a subject which generates high passion on many levels.

Ages since I last saw that - hilarious 😂

Labour re-shuffle.... What a bunch of no-marks and non descripts : Labour reshuffle: Yvette Cooper becomes shadow home secretary WWW.BBC.CO.UK Sir Keir Starmer makes big changes to his shadow cabinet, for the second time as Labour leader.

Yeah, quite right, poor choice of words on my part.

It’s useful being able to discuss the issue (from differing perspectives) with grown ups. Here’s what doesn’t add up (for me) I do accept the point that dispersal of fit and destruction of unfit is (probably the only credible) justification for what was known pre ban. That said, I wouldn’t acknowledge or accept as a credible argument that mounted hunt with hounds is an appropriate or efficient means of achieving that. It is also highly contradictory when one pro hunt advocate states that 9 times out of 10 they wouldn’t even see a fox and then another one blames the (supposed) demise of hunting post ban for wholesale species degradation. It’s like they are opposing statements both used as justification? How does that work?

There are 2 very clearly definable differences in the 2 examples though Craig. (1) Setting terriers amongst rats is a short sharp high intensity high return and might be considered as having an efficient and functional output. (2) It wouldn’t normally be considered as a recreational pastime dressed up as a credible pest control measure. On that basis I don’t think there is a contradiction or even a correlation between the 2 examples. Whilst I wouldn’t necessarily say it made me happy to see a terrier amongst rats - I could / can / have seen the necessity and efficiency that can be achieved. I don’t believe the same degree of necessity / efficiency exists in relation to fox hunting.