Daniel Matthews

Yes, I'm starting to wonder if i have barked up the wrong tree, so to speak. Still, what is wrong with a bit of healthy debate? Or is that not something Arborists are happy to have ?

Errr..i believe it is, Steve. As i understand, burning wood can be considered co2 neutral, due to the offset of co2 due to the trees growth. Is there some secret you are not revealing here, Steve ?

You reckon that China has reduced its enviromental impact by producing for us. How about the improved standard of living for the poor sods in killed in that collapsed clothing factory so we can have cheap disposable clothes. China has benefited greatly and it would be tough to argue that their standard of living hasn't improved - it obviously has by a massive amount. You see, as countries develop, the population becomes more educated which slows population growth, and in some cases decline (eg Japan). This in itself reduces the environmental impact. Couples no longer have to produce 5 children to go out and herd the sheep and knit the village clothing, in order to make a living and put food on the table. I would argue that if the West had started trading with China 50 years ago on todays scale, their population would be half, probably far less. Think global, my friend. It's the only way.

Your outlook is very bleak...i'm not surprised you have run for the hills (are you in the hills there in your pic?). The solutions will revolve around improvements in technology for things like renewable energy production and efficient modes of transport - including shipping, electric vehicles etc. Guess where the engineers live that develop this technology? In cities. Where? All over the world. How do they share their information - via the internet. Where does the internet come from...engineers working for corporations working in cities....get where I am going with this? The problems will only be solved quickly if globalization is a key part of it. By importing products, we create jobs in developing countries, who improve their standard of living and therefore can adopt new technologies which over time will reduce their own environmental impact. We need to think on a global level, not a local.

Look, Muttley, I'm sure you are a very nice chap and it is admirable that you are following your beliefs and trying to better the world for the greater good. But this goes back to my Real World comment. Do you think it is practical for populations of large cities to live like yourself, everyone having their own little flock of sheep and making their own clothes? NO. The REALITY is that for mankind to move forwards, we must all specialise and contribute the results with the GLOBAL village. It is far more efficient that way. Sure, there will be challenges along the way, such as global warming, but they will be solved in time - as long as we keep moving forwards. Keeping us all firmly rooted in the past...knitting our own clothes and herding our own sheep is just not practical in this day and age, my good friend.

So do you make your own clothes too? Or if you were to look at the label on your t-shirt would it say Made in China? Where do you think the balloons in that picture of yours were made? Wake up my friend, we live in a global village now - products move all over the world, everywhere, everyday. I am sure it feels good to sit in your eco-bubble and point the finger at everyone else because of your theory on logs, but the reality is that international trade is both necessary and unavoidable.

You are entitled to your opinion. But i can't resist to comment.... 70 tonnes of firewood for personal use a year... i wonder what the sky would look like if everyone in London did the same with all that relatively damp wood. Take a look in the mirror my friend. :thumbdown:

You sound like a very responsible wood burner. Somehow i can't see the 12+ million population of London (where i live) sourcing firewood from Forests within 60 mile radius... i agree it would be wonderful if that were a reality if that were possible...but it's not. We live in the real world here. Burning imported wood is still more environmentally responsible than burning fossil fuels to heat our homes which have taken millions of years to form - and which a majority of the UK population choose to do. So on that basis alone it's tough to take the moral high-ground. JFYI - many kilns nowadays are heated by burning wood, so the net CO2 emmissions is nil. cheers

From distribution to depot to customer is likely to be the same in both cases, on average. From forest to dist depot obviously depends on where the forest and distribution depot are relative to eachother, but all i'm saying is that there may not be much in it, because for the imported case, the shipping leg can be excluded from the equation, since the ships carry something like 10,000 containers, so on a per container basis the carbon footprint is negligible vs the road haulage required in both cases. im not sure about your last statement - maybe easy but it's expensive...

i don't follow....

it's not, but i've found the seasoned/air-dried log deliveries i've had in the past are not reliably less than 20%. With kiln dried it's guaranteed. Their crates are a mixture of hardwoods but i believe always at least half Birch which seems to burn very hot in our stove. I don’t care about bugs – but I always test the moisture and it has never been above 16%.

For me, it's a no brainer....kiln dried logs are far superior to seasoned logs and a pleasure to burn...and for around the same price. I don't really buy the environmental argument either since most imported wood comes in by container ship which has a fairly low carbon footprint....eg vs hauling long distances via road all across the UK which a lot of the UK-sourced wood suppliers have to do anyway and is no better IMO I've purchased from The Luxury Wood Company a few times now and been thoroughly impressed. I haven't found anyone cheaper on the web yet and they seem to be the best value for money: www.luxurywood.co.uk Check them out. HTH