Thread: Should We Burn Wood or Gas

With-out starting a huge debate.......fingers crossed.

If you burn timber you are releasing carbon from this (or recent) carbon-cycle. If you burn fossil fuels you are releasing carbon from a previous epoch.

To put it very simply, the carbon you release from fire-wood is going to go back into making another tree.

So, you're not making the problem any better (well, you might be if your heating alternative is fossil fuel), but you're not making it any worse.....especially if you use plantation timber as fire-wood.

I miss using my log-burner..........

Hi Bazza....they are drawing a pretty long bow in the article, but nonetheless, we have a Masport wood fire in both houses and in winter they sometimes go non-stop and for heating, but more importantly, ambiance, you can't beat them.

However, having said that, when I had crane trucks I was always on the lookout for iron-bark logs and have at times, gone through several in a winter.

Now I have retired and no trucks my huge stash has nearly dwindled to zero and I figure next winter will be on gas.....and more importantly, my love hate relationship with the block splitter is fast becoming a win for the splitter, the body will no longer allow wood chopping, and much as I love the evenings in front of the wood fire I want to live long enough to enjoy it..forget the green twinge, unless you have an endless supply of chopped wood (and someone to chop it) go with gas.

Cheers

John M

Originally Posted by seanz

With-out starting a huge debate.......fingers crossed.

If you burn timber you are releasing carbon from this (or recent) carbon-cycle. If you burn fossil fuels you are releasing carbon from a previous epoch.

To put it very simply, the carbon you release from fire-wood is going to go back into making another tree.

So, you're not making the problem any better (well, you might be if your heating alternative is fossil fuel), but you're not making it any worse.....especially if you use plantation timber as fire-wood.

I miss using my log-burner..........

I can't argue with you, I'm only going by what the man says and he does quote a few references. I also have some printed copy that he sent me a bit different to what is on his website.

Originally Posted by ravna

Hi Bazza....they are drawing a pretty long bow in the article, but nonetheless, we have a Masport wood fire in both houses and in winter they sometimes go non-stop and for heating, but more importantly, ambiance, you can't beat them.

However, having said that, when I had crane trucks I was always on the lookout for iron-bark logs and have at times, gone through several in a winter.

Now I have retired and no trucks my huge stash has nearly dwindled to zero and I figure next winter will be on gas.....and more importantly, my love hate relationship with the block splitter is fast becoming a win for the splitter, the body will no longer allow wood chopping, and much as I love the evenings in front of the wood fire I want to live long enough to enjoy it..forget the green twinge, unless you have an endless supply of chopped wood (and someone to chop it) go with gas.


Cheers

John M

Well where I live I would have to use bottled gas and cart it myself. I live on 5 acres but with the use of 1400 acres and plenty of volunteers to chainsaw it up and a 20 tonne hydraulic log splitter to split it up. BTW I hate the smell of gas.

Bazza....looks like a no brainer, stick with the wood fire.
-------------------
Cheers John M

Yep, no brainer, wood is beautiful to watch burning, smells sweet, doesn't cost the earth, a renewable resource and best of all you can pick out the odd special bit to take down to the workshop and have a play with.
I've just been to politics in the pub in newcastle tonight to see a couple of AGL reps, a couple of gas industry reps, a couple of renewable energy people and a couple of wine and farming people all debate the whys and wherefors of the gas industry in australia. All very polite and well moderated but the gas people came out looking especially bad. At one point they had just assured us all that the fracking liquid used in the hunter valley contained no poisonous chemicals when a woman in the front row jumped up and announced that she had just done her PhD on the chemicals used in the gas industry and that they were in fact using amazing amounts of carcinogenic compounds much of which is mixing into bore water.
I came home and nearly put my head in the oven.

We use wood for heating, but only naturally fallen trees (we do not cut down any trees for firewood).
As I understand it, by burning this wood we contribute no additional CO2 to the atmosphere. If the wood is left untouched the natural decomposition will release as much CO2 as burning it.
We do produce some polution from the chainsaw used to cut it up.
I think wood heaters are not so good in cities because of the smoke from so many fires in a small area, get a bit of a temperature inversion and it is choking.
We do use gas for cooking in summer, mostly wood stove in winter.
Our house is old (100yr+) is very well insulated and has a verandah right around it, so requires no air conditioning in summer (we don't even have one) and minimal heating in winter.
I get a bit disturbed about people who have thermally inefficient houses, run big air conditioners all day then complain about how much electricity they use.

Originally Posted by BRADFORD

As I understand it, by burning this wood we contribute no additional CO2 to the atmosphere. If the wood is left untouched the natural decomposition will release as much CO2 as burning it.
We do produce some polution from the chainsaw used to cut it up.

True. This is one of the big myths thrown around in carbon accounting schemes that rely on planting trees or retaining standing vegetation as a 'credit'. This is not a credit in the sense that it offsets additional output from fossil fuels. For that to occur, after they have grown you would have to deepfreeze the trees in the polar ice or blast them into outer space to stop them decaying/burning and releasing the carbon that is temporarily stored in the timber into the atmosphere. There are plenty of other reasons to plant trees and retain existing woody vegetation without incorrectly including them in carbon trading schemes. Maybe the economics of doing so is useful in one sense because it provides insentive to plant trees but it is a logically flawed approach to combating rising CO2.

Originally Posted by BRADFORD

I think wood heaters are not so good in cities because of the smoke from so many fires in a small area, get a bit of a temperature inversion and it is choking.

Yes this is exactly the issue. Here in the ACT they are actively encouraging (i.e. paying) people to remove wood heaters cos the air pollution in the Tuggeranong and Woden Valleys is so bad on some winter evenings/mornings.

Another problem with wood stoves is that they are commonly inefficient in design.... >90% of the heat disappears up the chimney. I do find it ironic though that the ACT government spends hundreds of thousands of dollars every year cutting, chipping and removing trees in public spaces primarily as trees are viewed as a public liability. It would be great if this wood fueled something like domestic heating but it is wasted as a resource.

Best people to ask would be the Easter Islanders.

Wood does not cleanly burn and releases many other compounds, natural gas is a clean burn, in fact about the cleanest burn there is.

FYI the smell has to be added to gas as there was a few major accidents involving gas and no-one knew because of the lack of smell.

FYI the smell has to be added to gas as there was a few major accidents involving gas and no-one knew because of the lack of smell.

This event New London School explosion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia led to the inclusion of Mercaptan in gas.

Originally Posted by Toymaker Len

At one point they had just assured us all that the fracking liquid used in the hunter valley contained no poisonous chemicals when a woman in the front row jumped up and announced that she had just done her PhD on the chemicals used in the gas industry and that they were in fact using amazing amounts of carcinogenic compounds much of which is mixing into bore water.
I came home and nearly put my head in the oven.

The problems associated with frac fluid getting into groundwater supplies is happening in the coal seam gas industry where the coal seam are relatively shallow and dewatering of same is a part of the production process. Where gas production is from conventional reservoirs it is less of a problem as the gas reservoirs are generally deeper (eg Permian reservoirs in Cooper Basin) than the shallower artesian aquifers and production method is slightly different from that used in CSG.

Originally Posted by seanz

If you burn timber you are releasing carbon from this (or recent) carbon-cycle. If you burn fossil fuels you are releasing carbon from a previous epoch.

To put it very simply, the carbon you release from fire-wood is going to go back into making another tree.

Trees don't care where the CO2 they take in comes from ......doesn't matter if it comes from burning a tree or burning fossil fuels.

The big difference between burning wood and fossil fuels is that trees are replacable where as fossil fuel is a finite resource. The sensible approach is to burn plantation timber and replant trees at a rate that makes the exercise carbon neutral.

One little known fact about "clean" gas....most of it comes out of the ground containing a significant amount of CO2 (up to 20%), H2S and other impurities. Until recently this would have simply been separated at the processing plant and vented to the atmosphere. On many of the newer projects the CO2 is injected back into the reservoir.

Are we still allowed to burn witches

Originally Posted by artme

Are we still allowed to burn witches

They burn ok but theyre a bit hard to get into the wood burner and they take a few packets of firelighters to get going.....