SteamyTea

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_principle

I had a scientific post deleted just the other day as it was considered inappropriate. "Science moves on, not by better ideas, but when the old guard die"

But unfortunately not yet and until smoking tobacco stops the tobacco industry does a lot of harm to the environment. So is this becoming a personal attack on me. Find one weak spot and discredit everything they say. How have we, as a species come down to only binary choices. "He smokes, so knows nothing about wood burners" "He drives a diesel, so knows nothing about thermo-dynamics" "He once studied automotive engineering, a leopard cannot change it's spots" Come on, we are better than that. But to put things into perspective Over 50 years, so 102 CO2e/year. So about the same as 4 kg of cheese, or 20 kg of rice. https://ourworldindata.org/carbon-footprint-food-methane 75 lt/day, that is about 0.06% of the mean, per capita usage, of a UK citizen. https://ourworldindata.org/water-use-stress#water-withdrawals-per-capita A quick look at Wikipedia shows that India has a per capita usage of 1,255 kWh/year. The UK 4,500 kWh. Part of that number will be appropriated to industry, agriculture, commerce and trade. Oh, hang on a second, it is over 50 years, so 233 kWh/year, so 18% of an Indians usage, and 6% of a UK persons usage. I probably smoke half the mass of a packet of 20, so about 7gm/day. How many kW is that? well assuming 4 kWh/kg, 0.002 kWh. Smoking and wood burners are not in the same ball park, or the same game. Now I am sorry if some people feel offended that pointing out the science about your lifestyle choices is doing harm to others, you know have an idea what it is like. Now I am off for a coffee, and a fag, and shall read my Kindle, after driving a few miles. I suspect my behaviour will obliterate the planet, so I will not have to feed my neighbours cat on my return. It will starve happy as the whole house is being heated for its benefit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer) (he went to the same school as me)

No I didn't. Mainly because it was a flippant remark, but I did point out that it was strange the a josh stick, like a cigarette, which only burns a few grams hangs around for days, get a few kilograms of timber makes no difference. That strikes me as odd. I also pointed out that a brand new stove will probably perform different than one a few weeks old. There seems to be an idea floating around that newer designed stoves admit nothing. If this was really the case, then Hallelujah, all the worlds energy problems are solved. Grow a tree, cut it down, burn it.

It is near enough banned these days. They are highly taxed in some places. Mine does have a DPF, but can't drive it into some cities. Luckily Bristol is one of them. But taking this a step further, should wood burners have annual tests in them that check emissions, and should they only be allowed to run on an approved fuel supply. What car drivers have to do.

Yes, but this is not about me. I drive a diesel as well. Basically comes down to the misinformation about them. Starts with 'they are CO2 neutral'. They are not. Less CO2 for unit of thermal energy comes from direct combustion of natural gas. Though all combustion needs to be stopped to reduce atmospheric CO2 rising even further. If you don't think climate change is a problem, then this arguement will not change your views. Then we have 'trees die and rot, giving off CO2". They do, but the also create soil, allow fungi to colonise, help with flood control, allow space for new growth. Human managed woodlands are not very successful. Then there is the PM issues. From my understanding, and it is limited, but I did apply to do a PhD in air quality directly related to particulates, so I know a bit. Fine particulates can pass through the cell membrane because of their tiny size. Once inside a cell, they seem to be implicated in damaging the muscle system if the body. How this happens is not fully understood, but testing shows that there is increased heart attacks (basically serous muscle spasms) and slower muscle self repair, which can lead to premature heart failure. The affects of PM inhalation is accumulative, so seemingly low levels can still have an affect. PMs are not smoke and odour, and that is the problem. They are not even affected greatly by the moisture content of the wood just prior to combustion. Households that have wood burners generally have higher levels of PMs in them. A brand spanking new stove may, in rare occasions, not seemingly increase the internal air levels, but a 6 week old one probably will if used most days. The idea that they do not affect the local environment is usually a trick of the testing. Not many people get up a scaffold tower to check what is coming out thier pots. Nor do they go 400m down wind to check. You can check PMs, and other combustion byproducts on the Nullschool website. It is using large area data collection and at a low sample rate, that is then averaged. Not the best method, but gives a good indication. There are no difference between naturally occuring particulates and anthropogenic combustion ones as far as health is concerned. Bit tired now so small stop.

9 kWpis a relatively large installation. Roof mounted, especially roof integrated, used less area for the same output than ground mounted. In England, there is a limit of 9m2 for ground mount, bigger needs planning permission. You will have to look up the connection/installation rules in the ROI, they will be different. Theoretical there is no reason a competent person cannot fit then, they are basic panels, held in place with captive bolts on rails, that are bracketed to the roof joists. Your structural engineer can work out the extra loads imposed i.e. wind and snow. The main thing to remember with PV is to make sure there is no shading. Even a small amount of shading on part of single module can seriously reduce the performance.

Looks like a floating pontoon at a marina. Looks to be B@B, but I am viewing on my phone.

My thoughts are that there are no 'right settings'.

Forget batteries for a few years. As for system sizing, there are two trains of thought. Make it small, then you can use all you generate. Make it large, and reduce winter imports. It comes down to a game of averages. Much easier to be grid connected, but you need to see what limits you have on your local grid.

Einstein said, when asked what the environment was "everything but me". So yes. As for how much, we are not sure. But the WHO did a report about 4 years ago where they stated that 'there is no safe limit'.

Isn't that the wind tight layer? That is usually vapour open in the UK climate.

My Father was a director of Shell. Some of us have been banging on about the problems of WBS for over a decade now. When I did my BSc, we had a module on biomass. I was one of three to highlight the pollution aspect. The other two were from Africa and knew first hand the problems that it causes. It is easier to follow the science than a political agenda, and more correct. I would be quite happy to swap wind turbines and solar farms for biomass. But there is a problem with that. If we took all the biomass on the planet, including what is in the oceans, we have about 400 days worth of energy at current usage. It really is not a viable option on so many levels. Really is time that the developed world did something about it. If I said nothing ever again, about WBS, they are still going to be outlawed in the not too distant future, but before then, it will be considered unacceptable to use them. So the warnings are there, fit one by all means, but no complaining when they have thier usage limited by legislation.

Yes, good start.

Pick Celotex or Kingspan as the benchmarks, they are well known and available almost everywhere. Similar to comparing all cars to a Ford.

Not easy, but an inclined manometer and a flow meter will be needed. All the things that a plumber probably has already.

There are 4 main parameters: Thermal Conductivity, the W.m-1.K-1 The Compression Strength, the MPa The Vapour Resistance, the gm/MNs The Moisture Absorption, usually as a percentage, % There are secondary considerations, price, handleability, fire resistance, chemical reactions (polystyrene and PVC don't mix well), sound absorption/transmission. The manufacture should have al those details, even if they do not publish them on the specification data sheet.

Just tape it. Venturi, but that is when you want to get posh and measure pressure and flow as well.

Same base. PUR is shorthand for polyurethane. PIR is shorthand for polyisocyanurate. Polyurethanes often use isocyanurates as the hardening agent. There is a difference, but only really in the manufacturing process of EPS (expanded) and XPS (extruded). It is the thermal and mechanical properties that are important.

There are many sources of air pollution, even within the same category i.e. NOXs, PMs, SO2. The thing is, it is easier to tackle the low hanging fruit first. It also has to be done against a backdrop of reducing CO2e emissions, and all current combustion, except hydrogen/ammonia (which can cause NOX), cause. As for rural/urban. Is it ok to fly tip in a rural area? Or pollute rural rivers/water courses?

It is as a comparison. We need to be reducing both, it is not a binary problem.

Saw a helicopter this morning. Because of this. https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/live-road-hayle-closed-after-8176680 But it did not stop the cars in front of me doing U-Turns on the A30. https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/impatient-idiots-risk-lives-u-7960834

If he is not wearing his mask, this is what he may look like. Here

Same reason I was going to lend you my very old car.