Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

SWMBO intended to have a log burner when ( if ever ) we complete the build.

Flue's in etc. I have tons of ready to burn dried fire wood.

 

She wanted it for visual effect and of course the heat it generates ( though with UFH it isn't necessary for that )

 

The log burner was planned many years ago long before climate change became a big thing. The house is designed specifically to be energy efficient and so it feels a bit irresponsible now to stick a log burner in.

 

I could just omit it and accept I wasted cash on the flue etc. What do others feel? - I guess potentially they could be banned? ( log burners ; not members ? )

Posted

Things like this make me rethink

 

"Just 8% of the UK population make up the emissions released by burning wood indoors. The Guardian found that half of those people preferred this method for aesthetic reasons rather than functional (heat) purposes. In response, Asthma UK and the British Lung Foundation urged people to only use wood burners if they had no alternative source of heat."

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, pocster said:

Things like this make me rethink

 

"Just 8% of the UK population make up the emissions released by burning wood indoors. The Guardian found that half of those people preferred this method for aesthetic reasons rather than functional (heat) purposes. In response, Asthma UK and the British Lung Foundation urged people to only use wood burners if they had no alternative source of heat."

Interesting points and I fully understand where you are coming from.

many of our tree surgeon customers are still getting payments to burn wood, to dry wood, to burn ?.

im sure they are supposed to use the heat produced to heat homes etc but several have bio mass “boilers” satin containers in the middle of fields just burning wood waste and getting paid for it.

Posted

I would say it depends where you live.  Out here in the sticks in the Highlands, I have no problem with them. But all I know is you are in or near Bristol.  If you are in a town or city I would say no, if you are out in the sticks then maybe?

  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, markc said:

Interesting points and I fully understand where you are coming from.

many of our tree surgeon customers are still getting payments to burn wood, to dry wood, to burn ?.

im sure they are supposed to use the heat produced to heat homes etc but several have bio mass “boilers” satin containers in the middle of fields just burning wood waste and getting paid for it.

Yeah it's the bad bits (PM) that I guess I am thinking of.

SWMBO might be persuaded for some electric 'flame effect' fire (FFS) but I'm not convinced . Really want something I can stick someone's hand in and burn them for punishment.

Posted
1 minute ago, ProDave said:

I would say it depends where you live.  Out here in the sticks in the Highlands, I have no problem with them. But all I know is you are in or near Bristol.  If you are in a town or city I would say no, if you are out in the sticks then maybe?

Agree. In the stick's no problem. In a city it does feel irresponsible for such a visual 'effect'. Only 1 planet earth.....

Posted
1 minute ago, pocster said:

Really want something I can stick someone's hand in and burn them for punishment.


Get a bio-ethanol fire.

Real flames, real pain if you put your/someone else’s hand in it.
No flue required.

No dedicated airflow required and when the going gets tough you can probably drink the fuel with a splash of tonic (and an ambulance on speed dial.)

  • Haha 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, pocster said:

Oooooo. You can recess into the wall and be a trendy mo-fo. More I look more I like.

 

Anyone interested in lots of dry wood ? comes with FREE walk on glazing!

Posted

We have a wood stove, lit it twice now, took longer to light it than it was burning, as the house got too hot.

 

We now have a candle in it, although when you go to blow it out, you get covered in ash.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, pocster said:

SWMBO intended to have a log burner when ( if ever ) we complete the build.

Flue's in etc. I have tons of ready to burn dried fire wood.

 

She wanted it for visual effect and of course the heat it generates ( though with UFH it isn't necessary for that )

 

The log burner was planned many years ago long before climate change became a big thing. The house is designed specifically to be energy efficient and so it feels a bit irresponsible now to stick a log burner in.

 

I could just omit it and accept I wasted cash on the flue etc. What do others feel? - I guess potentially they could be banned? ( log burners ; not members ? )

 

they are carbon neutral. Much better than a gas or electric fire.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Dave Jones said:

 

they are carbon neutral. Much better than a gas or electric fire.

Yeah I know. But still seems wrong with an energy efficient house and the world dying.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Put a flat screen tv behind a fireplace surround and play the log fire channel.

That's all the are in essence with an electric fan heater. I'd need to go to a show room first; to see one.

Posted (edited)

Have a look at these.  They are available as a cassete version, which can be built into your own furntirue or fire-place.  We've even plumbed one in, so it'll never need topping up. Some of them have a heat element in them, but ours doesn't.

 

https://www.dimplex.co.uk/optimyst

 

In my opinion, while it's not fire, they look more realistic than bio-ethanol if you're after a log-fire effect and also don't emit any smells at all.

Edited by Dan F
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Russdl said:


Get a bio-ethanol fire.

Real flames, real pain if you put your/someone else’s hand in it.
No flue required.

No dedicated airflow required and when the going gets tough you can probably drink the fuel with a splash of tonic (and an ambulance on speed dial.)

 

Bad idea.  Burning hydrocarbons causes pollution, really don't go there (from an air quality perspective).

Posted
1 hour ago, pocster said:

Agree. In the stick's no problem. In a city it does feel irresponsible for such a visual 'effect'. Only 1 planet earth.....

 

Bear in mind that it isn't just your neighbours who'll be breathing in all that crap. Even with an "efficient" woodburner and good extraction, you'll still end up far higher particulates in your house than if you didn't have a fire.

 

I can't stand the things. I hate the smell, I hate the watery eyes, and I hate the sore throat I end up with when I walk around the neighbourhood during woodburner season.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

We ditched the log burner in our new build.

 

Have an open fire in the current house and a log burner in the previous cottage. We love the cosiness of them in the winter but not the extra cleaning and drafts when not used. 

 

We have decided on one of them fancy electric fires instead that will be flush and be about the same width as the TV. 

 

Also I thought you we are only allowed to burn kiln dried wood nowadays. 

 

It's also one less hole in the house/roof. 

 

I won't miss lugging the coal/wood into the house as I get older.

Edited by Happy Valley
  • Like 2
Posted
55 minutes ago, andy said:

Bad idea.  Burning hydrocarbons causes pollution, really don't go there (from an air quality perspective).


Oo-er. Looks like I’ve got some learning to do.
 

I’ve got one, used it a couple of times. I was under the impression that they were perfectly safe for indoor use - that’s what they’re sold for. What am I missing?

Posted

I put a woodburner in my build, don’t light it that often but looks lovely and heats quickly. We are out in the sticks but I know @pocster is well within the city of Bristol surrounded on All sides by other houses so he won’t be popular ( if he isn’t already ?‍♂️).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...