Domestic Wood Burning Leads To “Very High Pollution Alert” For London

Posted: January 24, 2017 by oldbrew in atmosphere, Emissions, ideology
Tags: ,

Choking on greencrap – ‘unintended consequences’ indeed :/


By Paul Homewood

h/t Ian


From the BBC:

A “very high” air pollution warning has been issued for London for the first time under a new alert system.

Warnings are being issued at bus stops, roadside signs and Tube stations under the new system set up by London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

The rise has been attributed to cold, calm and settled weather, meaning winds are not dispersing local pollutants.

The mayor said “the shameful state of London’s toxic air” meant he had to trigger the alert.

“This is the highest level of alert and everyone – from the most vulnerable to the physically fit – may need to take precautions to protect themselves from the filthy air,” he said.

A spike in pollution on Sunday was the highest level recorded since April 2011……

The last time pollution reached this level was early last month, according to pollution monitoring stations…

View original post 112 more words

  1. Graeme No.3 says:

    I thought the Greenies wanted to go back to the early seventies “when life was perfect”. Seems they overshot and the UK is heading back to the Little Ice Age when London was notorious for smog.

  2. oldmanK says:

    That is bad. I’ve had the misfortune to be surrounded by nostalgic fools whose idea of a warm home is a fireplace — until the all-night coughing starts. It is really bad, see here:

    I then worked some numbers and found that a plain electric heater is actually cheaper to run on a per KWhr of useful heat than buying and using wood. But some have learnt the lesson because this year was much colder but fewer chose to run their stoves.

  3. Relax: This is sustainable and renewable smog.

  4. Somebody should persuade the Lord Mayor to buy some wind turbines to set up along the Thames in the city. They can be powered to act like fans in still conditions; to avert the development of smog.


  5. BoyfromTottenham says:

    Hi from Oz. I remember the great London smog of December 1952 – I walked to primary school in Tottenham by feeling along the walls and fences as the visibility was about 1-2 yards! This was apparently largely caused by a several-day temperature inversion trapping vast amounts of yellow / grey smoke from millions of home coal fires burning high sulphur coal – as a kid I loved to watch the coal burn in the grate at home. I suffered a scary bout of bronchitis around that time – could hardly breathe. I believe that this smog event led to the “Clean Air Act” which banned coal in home heating, being replaced by coke. Looks like the UK govt has to get out the history books and read up on this, and figure out PDQ that the smoke now from millions of wood fires will act the same way as the coal smoke in 1952 if there is another protracted temperature inversion over London. I for one could never figure out why wood is ‘zero rated’ for CO2 ‘pollution’ these days, but obviously a lot of “green” (or just ‘energy poor’) Londoners took that to heart and decided to use wood to heat their homes. Good luck!

  6. hunter says:

    The shameful irony bites hard. I just saw a fascinating TED presentation on nuclear power. California, the greenest state in the USA, is actually falling further and further behind in CO2 reduction and other alleged goals since they passed their famous CO2 obsessed cliamte laws.
    Clearly tings are similar in the UK.

  7. hunter says:

    sorry, forgot the link:

    this is really fascinating in several levels.

  8. hunter says:

    Someone bold and able to pull together the facts should show how the greens are doing the same thing to the UK as they are doing to California. And imposing green imperialism on the world.

  9. oldbrew says:

    Freezing Smog Chokes Europe

    ‘Heavy pollution enveloping much of Europe prompted emergency measures across the continent on Tuesday.

    A toxic cocktail of extreme cold, no wind and heavy burning of coal and wood for heating has left many regions shrouded in smog.’

  10. oldbrew says:

    Date: 26/01/17 David Sanderson, The Times

    Previous studies have suggested that levels of particulate pollution surge at weekends as people light up stoves.

    More than 180,000 wood-burning stoves were sold last year and 220,000 the year before, helped by the government’s promotion of wood as a “clean green” fuel and the exemption of approved stoves from “smoke control areas”.

    Time to admit ‘the government’s promotion of wood as a “clean green” fuel’ has blown up in its face big-time.

  11. hunter says:

    oldbrew, If you have a chance to watch the video I posted I would be very interested to know if you see any similarities between the California experience and what has happened to the UK by way of “green” imposed policies and laws.

  12. oldbrew says:

    hunter – which part of the video is about CA? The start was about animal conservation.

  13. hunter says:

    Oldbrew, he gets there. It’s not the fastest set up, but he is speaking to a very liberal crowd. I thought he was slow at first but he became very compelling as his lecture progressed.

  14. oldbrew says:

    OK he’s advocating nuclear power but there would have to be a lot of it to replace oil/petroleum as well as gas/coal. Can’t see it in the foreseeable future somehow.

    If they can get re-usability of nuclear waste sorted out it would be a start.

    And he admits wind and solar are only small-scale and much too intermittent to rely on. He didn’t point out they are land-hungry which was one of his themes re wood burning and meat production.

  15. oldmanK says:

    The theme of this thread has several ‘points of view’ that deserve study.

    1. Using coal/coke and especially wood for heating in cities is wasteful and very polluting. Low efficiency. Burnt in a dedicated plant and converted to electricity would raise efficiency and reduce pollution by modes of abatement. Using power plant cooling water for heating achieves even better efficiency. Its been done before, all it takes is good planning — it may even pay for itself.

    2. Nuclear works. But the biggest peril here is cowboy/monkeys at the controls in the upper echelons of the management structures of both the industrial and political arenas. (I know, I experienced both and it was at time frightening).

    3. Availability. There was ‘Peak oil’ once but that seems to have changed. Less known perhaps it was said fissionable uranium is also of limited supply – (and perhaps not good location of the ore??) Has that changed? Use of breeders then??

  16. hunter says:

    Of course it’s going to take a lot to replace the huge base of coal plants. The parts of the talk that were compelling was the part where he documents the failure of green policy in California and the cynical deception by big green to demonize nuclear. I also liked his strategy to turn big green’s strategy against them by appealing to the emotions.

  17. oldbrew says:

    The nuclear fear factor was reinforced for many by Fukushima. Nobody sees coal and gas plants causing problems like that. It certainly killed nuclear in Germany, whether or not the decision was rational.