BioBricks
- Thread starter gadgetgary
- Start date
Help Support :
Bio bricks go down my toilet every morning. I have no intent
~"A typical New England house will generate five tons of carbon in atmosphere a year. We just can't do that anymore. What we need to do is burn renewable fuels like wood," Engel said.
I LOVE half-truths......
uhm sweetie darling, doesn't burning wood create more pollutants overall (including particulates) than gas or oil?
~"A typical New England house will generate five tons of carbon in atmosphere a year. We just can't do that anymore. What we need to do is burn renewable fuels like wood," Engel said.
I LOVE half-truths......
uhm sweetie darling, doesn't burning wood create more pollutants overall (including particulates) than gas or oil?
The thought is that even though burning wood does generate carbon dioxide and other pollutants, the fact that trees absorb carbon balances it out. The thought is that if a tree is cut and burned, it is replaced with a new tree that will eventually absorb the carbon that was released from burning the old tree. If the planting of a new tree occurs or not is another thing, and it is highly dependant on the harvesting methods (like if a dead tree is dragged out versus chopping down a live tree!
Toggle, Now I know you know that you know that burning wood doesn't create the same hazards as burning other fuels. now, I may be wrong but all those wood burnt particulates will eventually settle back to the Earth and decompose back into the Earth considering their weight. Yes, smoke does weigh something. please correct me if I'm off base here but I see nothing wrong with wood burning unless you are Asmatic.
~burning wood doesn't create the same hazards as burning other fuels.
I really am not convinced of that statement. Please enlighten.
The only way to avoid carbon emission is to go to electrical or solar heating. Solar ain't happening in 2008, and as we all know electrical heating ain't so "green" especially if not using a heat-pump.
I really am not convinced of that statement. Please enlighten.
The only way to avoid carbon emission is to go to electrical or solar heating. Solar ain't happening in 2008, and as we all know electrical heating ain't so "green" especially if not using a heat-pump.
~burning wood doesn't create the same hazards as burning other fuels.
I creates worse ones. I might break a nail, wear off my hand-cream, get a splinter or roughen my skin.
(ducks and runs)
I creates worse ones. I might break a nail, wear off my hand-cream, get a splinter or roughen my skin.
(ducks and runs)
Bio-Bricks sounds like a good product, although unless you know exactly what chemicals are in the wood that the sawdust comes from you won't know what pollutants are made when the bricks are burned.
The AQMD (Air Quality Management District)here in Southern California would love to ban wood-burning fireplaces due to the particulates and other pollutants they give off. I'm completely opposed to this because most people don't use their fireplaces enough to matter, and as an architect I can't do a good traditional house without at least one wood buring fireplace. Natural gas burning fireplaces are generally too small and ugly to work aesthetically in a large living room.
It is true that, however, that there are much better ways to heat than with wood, so I wouldn't encourage it as a general practice.
The AQMD (Air Quality Management District)here in Southern California would love to ban wood-burning fireplaces due to the particulates and other pollutants they give off. I'm completely opposed to this because most people don't use their fireplaces enough to matter, and as an architect I can't do a good traditional house without at least one wood buring fireplace. Natural gas burning fireplaces are generally too small and ugly to work aesthetically in a large living room.
It is true that, however, that there are much better ways to heat than with wood, so I wouldn't encourage it as a general practice.
Bury, don't burn.
A PhD enviromental engineer just told me that excess carbon wastes should be buried not burned. Apparently we've gone way beyond what the forests can absorb. Pity, I was wanting to install a retro incinerator in my house. Oh well...
A PhD enviromental engineer just told me that excess carbon wastes should be buried not burned. Apparently we've gone way beyond what the forests can absorb. Pity, I was wanting to install a retro incinerator in my house. Oh well...
With me, using an airtight woodstove is the only way to heat my house. Propane is now way too expensive and we do not have natural gas in my area. My neighbors tell me that if I use the propane forced air furnace I am looking at about $300 a month for fuel versus using approximately one and a half cords of wood for the entire winter.
There are EPA-approved wood stoves and fireplace inserts that are quite efficient and control nasties like particulates etc in the smoke. They generally have catalytic converters, which can help to heat the home as well.
Electric heat isn't all that clean... if the electricity is generated by burning coal, it emits twice as much, or more, carbon if used to heat a home vs. burning wood in an EPA approved wood stove or insert. Additionally, a coal-fired electricity power plant emits more radioactivity than a nuclear power plant, as well as a lot of mercury and other stuff.
We could look to France, which generates 80% of its electricity using nuclear power.
Electric heat isn't all that clean... if the electricity is generated by burning coal, it emits twice as much, or more, carbon if used to heat a home vs. burning wood in an EPA approved wood stove or insert. Additionally, a coal-fired electricity power plant emits more radioactivity than a nuclear power plant, as well as a lot of mercury and other stuff.
We could look to France, which generates 80% of its electricity using nuclear power.
Hopefully none extra, and that the sawdust is what would otherwise be wasted from other uses of wood.
Less sawdust means less particle board
And that's a good thing.
And that's a good thing.
No-I would stray away from burning wood as a fuel-it has too many other uses than to burn as a HIGH pollution fuel.We should harvest the wood and make products from it before trying to burn it.When wood is burned-even in modern efficient appliances-the complex carbon particulates are still there.Catalytic converters still don't get rid of all of them.And with the variying temps inside most wood burning heaters-the converter may not always be operating hot enough for it to be effective-I would nix the idea of the wood "bricks"and esp if you don't know what else is in them.I would rather use the other means of heating unless they are not available.The heat pumps and other electric sources may still be best-because the pollutiuon from the power plant is easily controlled and is only one source-versus many wood burning appliances spread out over many homes and other buildings.Fuel oil even burns more cleanly than wood-and even ---coal.
In this area there's a good chance the Air Quality Board will enact a requirement that people refrain from using their traditional fireplaces on "Spare The Air" nights, which are usually during calm, cold, still winter nights, when the smoke tends to hover near ground level. The act would be enforced by anonymous calls, with sizeable fines for smoking up the joint on the verboten evenings.
At first I was repelled by the idea, but I am a little tired of inhaling the smoke of other peoples' fireplaces, esp. when it seems like they are burning green or wet wood that doesn't smell so good. Unfortunately the biggest offenders appear to be in a gated condominium complex so I would have to do some snooping to figure out which houses the stench is originating from... lol... but maybe someone else would call it in anyway.
At first I was repelled by the idea, but I am a little tired of inhaling the smoke of other peoples' fireplaces, esp. when it seems like they are burning green or wet wood that doesn't smell so good. Unfortunately the biggest offenders appear to be in a gated condominium complex so I would have to do some snooping to figure out which houses the stench is originating from... lol... but maybe someone else would call it in anyway.
pturo
New member
I think there is a separation of city versus rural wood burning needs. I lived in San Francisco, and hardly ever used my furnace, but when I did, I did. I lived in LA and used my fireplace for "atmospheric" reasons, with no thought to the air pollution. People in the remote areas need to heat with wood, in the Sierras of CA, and in the Adirondacks of NY. Oil heat is now 3.54 a gallon. I do believe that in big cities, if you have access to natural gas, then the fireplace with wood is just a luxury, and not efficient at all.
The only problem is that the wind blows everything around - it doesn't stay in one place. On the whole, though, I think so few people use fireplaces regularly that regulating them is a very, very inefficient use of resources plus a nasty intrusion into personal preferences. My only point is that the use of woodburning fireplaces as a primary source of heat shouldn't be promoted. Most places require some sort of heater for a building to get a Certificate of Occupancy anyway.
~regulating them is a very, very inefficient use of resources plus a nasty intrusion into personal preferences.
I'd much rather see laws regarding mandatory insulation, and the resulting need of mechainical living-space ventilation.
2x6 inch studs on 24 inch centers (fits R-19 indusltion) is structurally equivalent to 2x4 on 16 inch centers Fits R-11).
R is the "resistance" factor. Therefore R-19 is nearly doubly indulating cmpared to R-11
BTW 16 inch centers are used in that it suits a standard 4 x 8 foor piece of sheating. 4x8 foot = 48 x 96 inches.
16" centers mean that the end studs are shared by two pieces of sheathing and there are two evenly spaced studs in the middle. 24" in centers means one stud in the middle.
I'd much rather see laws regarding mandatory insulation, and the resulting need of mechainical living-space ventilation.
2x6 inch studs on 24 inch centers (fits R-19 indusltion) is structurally equivalent to 2x4 on 16 inch centers Fits R-11).
R is the "resistance" factor. Therefore R-19 is nearly doubly indulating cmpared to R-11
BTW 16 inch centers are used in that it suits a standard 4 x 8 foor piece of sheating. 4x8 foot = 48 x 96 inches.
16" centers mean that the end studs are shared by two pieces of sheathing and there are two evenly spaced studs in the middle. 24" in centers means one stud in the middle.
Toggle wrote: "Solar ain't happening in 2008...&quo
Toggle, solar is here and now.
My whole house runs from solar. This post is typed on a computer powered by solar.
Of course some may argue that clean energy is too expensive. In my opinion, dirty power is too cheap. If renewables got even a fraction of the subsidies given to oil, coal and nuke, we'd all be solar already.
Here in the state of Victoria, we already have mandatory insulation, energy and water efficiency measures. Any new house must have minimum R1.5 exterior walls; R2.0 exterior ceilings; minimum "5 star" overall energy rating when assessed with the state's First Rate software, which awards from 1 to 6 stars for energy efficiency, based on heating and cooling requirements; and either solar hot water or a rainwater tank minimum 5000 litres.
I don't know how to convert USA R-ratings to Metric R-ratings, but as an example 4 inch fibreglass batts typically rate at R2.0 or R2.5. I have 6 inch polyester batts in my celing and they are R3.5.
Water conservation is really getting serious here. Call it drought or call it climate change, water conservation is becoming THE issue here. Last year my partner and I visited two lakes towards the North of the state, Lake Eppalock and Lake Eildon. Both were major holiday destinations up until the 1980s. They are now dry. Lake Eppalock has been below 10% capacity for near 10 years. The hotels around it are empty and being demolished. At Eildon, old farmhouses from 100 years ago which were submerged when the lake was created are now exposed. We drove around the floor of the lake in our little hatchback car, it is dry. As a teenager my hubby used to canoe around the area. The lakes were created for irrigation and town water supply, the farmers aren't getting water and the towns are constructing pipelines to bring water from hundreds of kilometres away, from rivers that are dwindling too. Meanwhile residents are prohibited from watering lawns or gardens, except with water saved from washing or showers. Washing cars is banned too. Luckily we live further South where it still rains, so we are OK but it is much drier now than even 5 years ago.
Chris
Toggle, solar is here and now.
My whole house runs from solar. This post is typed on a computer powered by solar.
Of course some may argue that clean energy is too expensive. In my opinion, dirty power is too cheap. If renewables got even a fraction of the subsidies given to oil, coal and nuke, we'd all be solar already.
Here in the state of Victoria, we already have mandatory insulation, energy and water efficiency measures. Any new house must have minimum R1.5 exterior walls; R2.0 exterior ceilings; minimum "5 star" overall energy rating when assessed with the state's First Rate software, which awards from 1 to 6 stars for energy efficiency, based on heating and cooling requirements; and either solar hot water or a rainwater tank minimum 5000 litres.
I don't know how to convert USA R-ratings to Metric R-ratings, but as an example 4 inch fibreglass batts typically rate at R2.0 or R2.5. I have 6 inch polyester batts in my celing and they are R3.5.
Water conservation is really getting serious here. Call it drought or call it climate change, water conservation is becoming THE issue here. Last year my partner and I visited two lakes towards the North of the state, Lake Eppalock and Lake Eildon. Both were major holiday destinations up until the 1980s. They are now dry. Lake Eppalock has been below 10% capacity for near 10 years. The hotels around it are empty and being demolished. At Eildon, old farmhouses from 100 years ago which were submerged when the lake was created are now exposed. We drove around the floor of the lake in our little hatchback car, it is dry. As a teenager my hubby used to canoe around the area. The lakes were created for irrigation and town water supply, the farmers aren't getting water and the towns are constructing pipelines to bring water from hundreds of kilometres away, from rivers that are dwindling too. Meanwhile residents are prohibited from watering lawns or gardens, except with water saved from washing or showers. Washing cars is banned too. Luckily we live further South where it still rains, so we are OK but it is much drier now than even 5 years ago.
Chris
