Wood burners - and open fires

[Dave2002]

This Guardian article raises concerns for some of us - https://www.theguardian.com/environm...on-study-finds

Wood burners should almost certainly not be installed or used in urban areas, but in rural areas, where they might be supplies of wood which are easily available, burning wood has the merit of not relying on electricity at all. There is often no gas supply - and in any case some (but not all) gas appliances may require electricity to function. That doesn't leave too many other ways of heating, which is why in rural areas oil is often the main fuel for heating. Unfortunately this requires pumps, and again will rely on electricity, so in the case of a power failure, which could present real problems, backups based on fossil fuels are perhaps the only sensible answer.

Some burners are dual or multi-fuel burners. It might be helpful to know whether these present the same problems if some form of coal or smokeless fuel is used instead of the wood mentioned in the article.

Also, and this may not be widely known, it turns out that a duel fuel burner should only be used either with coal/smokeless fuel or wood - but not both mixed at the same time. Mixing wood and coal/smokeless fuel can give rise to corrosive and toxic chemicals which can damage the burner, and are not a particularly good idea.

Open fires are usually hopelessly inefficient - though many people like the appearance. Often these people don't actually have one in their homes, but experience them in hotels or pubs. Wood and multi-fuel burners can at least deliver enough heat to warm a room effectively.

[Anastasius]

We've always had an open fire and much prefer it to a wood burner which we find soulless to look at. Reading that article won't stop us using it. Who knows....there might be someone doing a study somewhere or other into the sanitising effect against Covid that wood smoke and particles in the indoor environment is having.

[Dave2002]

We've always had an open fire and much prefer it to a wood burner which we find soulless to look at. Reading that article won't stop us using it. Who knows....there might be someone doing a study somewhere or other into the sanitising effect against Covid that wood smoke and particles in the indoor environment is having.

I agree that an open fire looks better, but we had one taken out because the heat it provided was pretty minimal. The dual fuel burner is much better.

One good effect of some open fires is that they can draw fresh air into a room - something we noted a couple of houses back, but this does seem to vary with the room and the house/fire combination.

I think you may be indulging in wishful thinking if you are anticipating any unexpected benefits of wood burners. A similar line of thought has been that smoking seems to reduce the risks of coronavirus, but the research is very uncertain, and overall smoking is now well known to generally have adverse effects.

I guess one has to take the view that some risks are perhaps unavoidable, or better than the alternatives. In the case of wood burners, not using them could, in some circumstances, lead to freezing to death - which is considerably less desirable than being aware of, and concerned by, worries about particles and experiencing smoke smells etc. That is however, likely to be an extreme situation.

[Anastasius]

I agree that open fires are not that efficient since a lot of heat goes up the chimney. But, since our fuel is free other than my own harvesting efforts, any inefficiency is of little consequence.

[Dave2002]

I agree that open fires are not that efficient since a lot of heat goes up the chimney. But, since our fuel is free other than my own harvesting efforts, any inefficiency is of little consequence.

Might cost you in terms of frequent need to sweep the chimney, or do you do that yourself too?

[oddoneout]

I agree that open fires are not that efficient since a lot of heat goes up the chimney. But, since our fuel is free other than my own harvesting efforts, any inefficiency is of little consequence.

Trouble is it's not just wasted heat that goes up the chimney. Many modern wood burners are designed to give as large a flame view as possible, something which has been helped by advances in efficiency of the burning process, and in fact that becomes a selling point; I have a small stove with a glass door that gives a view of the whole grate and I can enjoy firegazing when listening to the evening concert etc. A plus is not having to worry about sparks and bits ending up on the hearth or carpet.
The problem of open fires in urban areas is in good part another product of the reduction of funding to councils. Even where such fires are forbidden under clean air regulations, there is no longer(and has not been for some time) staff time to enforce, with the result that house sale particulars can blatantly advertise 'working hearth'. Writers in magazines and Sunday lifestyle papers can boast about their internal bonfires with impunity.
When agitation first started abut banning all domestic woodburning activity I was concerned( and angered) that typical government ignorance made no distinction between open and enclosed fires. At least more recent agitating by the Gove seems to have taken on board that there is a difference.
The research confirms what I had suspected might be the case - although not perhaps the scale of it - in terms of internal pollution but I'll still carry on using my stove. It's a supplementary heat source and particularly useful either side of winter proper when I don't necessarily need the CH on but would like the chill taken off the living room in the evening.It's also a back-up if power failures mean the CH can't run. I already ventilate the house each day due to allergy issues so I think the risks of real damage are not great enough to fret about. My son and his young family are a different matter and the OP and link which I had already read has reminded me that I meant to send it on to him. Insulation and glazing work to their house has reduced 'ventilation through inefficiency' (aka draughts) and they are not great at opening windows and airing the place. They spend a lot of time in their living room which has a (modern) woodburner so perhaps this article might make them consider opening windows for a while in the morning at least, when they tend to be in other spaces. Living in Greater London as they do the existing air pollution burden has to be taken into account when weighing up such matters whereas in my neck of the woods that isn't the case on a daily basis.

[Frances_iom]

When I was able to freely travel between the IoM + the UK one thing that struck me about arriving in London + the SE was the smell - almost certainly the pollution due to vehicles - with all the warning about using public transport and probably more importantly the very large rise in online shopping there are, it seems, more vehicles on the road than pre covid - this I suspect will also have strongly pushed up the death rate this winter - until electric vehicles take over for intracity deliveries I think it will only get worse.

[Dave2002]

Living in Greater London as they do the existing air pollution burden has to be taken into account when weighing up such matters whereas in my neck of the woods that isn't the case on a daily basis.

Indeed, and there has recently been focus in coroner's reports on at least one unnecessary death due to air pollution in London, though that was from external sources. Adding to the problems for people with allergy or breathing problems must surely be something to be avoided.

In country areas there may be significantly different issues and problems, and some people actually like the smell of fires, as I do - in moderation.

[LHC]

When I was able to freely travel between the IoM + the UK one thing that struck me about arriving in London + the SE was the smell - almost certainly the pollution due to vehicles - with all the warning about using public transport and probably more importantly the very large rise in online shopping there are, it seems, more vehicles on the road than pre covid - this I suspect will also have strongly pushed up the death rate this winter - until electric vehicles take over for intracity deliveries I think it will only get worse.

There has been a huge reduction in road traffic as a result of the pandemic, particularly in London, with a consequential improvement in air quality.

during the first nine weeks of the UK lockdown, nitrogen dioxide along London’s roads decreased by an average of 31% compared with the pre-lockdown period.

Compared with 2019, decreases of more than 40% have been measured along roads in the City of London and Westminster, including the Strand and West End.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/08/covid-19-lockdowns-global-air-quality-india-london-uk

I suspect that traffic levels have increased since that article was written, but in London at least they are still nothing like the levels before the pandemic. Central London and the City are like dead zones still.

[oddoneout]

Indeed, and there has recently been focus in coroner's reports on at least one unnecessary death due to air pollution in London, though that was from external sources. Adding to the problems for people with allergy or breathing problems must surely be something to be avoided.

In country areas there may be significantly different issues and problems, and some people actually like the smell of fires, as I do - in moderation.

And some of those country areas may play a part in London's problems according to some research I read about some 2 or 3 years ago. Analysis of particulate matter showed that open fires from areas to the west and south of the city were, not surprisingly given the prevailing winds, contributing noticeably to the gunge in the city air. There is a certain irony perhaps that those affluent folk who work in London and live in the Home Counties with their lovely houses and statement open fires send fallout to their friends who live in London full time. The unacceptable side of that is the additional load and disproportionate effect on the already disadvantaged living in London.

[Bella Kemp]

We love our open fire and although most of what we burn is smokeless fuel, very occasionally we indulge in a real coal fire - nothing beats the play of the flames and the fresh tang it brings to the air outside: although, as others have mentioned here, it would not really be helpful to burn this smoky stuff too often.

[gradus]

A guilty plea here as we use both a stove and an open fire. Neither produces much visible smoke as we burn seasoned and kiln-dried wood. We also have oil ch, as gas and for that matter mains sewerage have yet to find their way here, mains water only having made it it to a nearby cottage a few years back.

[eighthobstruction]

A guilty plea here as we use both a stove and an open fire. Neither produces much visible smoke as we burn seasoned and kiln-dried wood. We also have oil ch, as gas and for that matter mains sewerage have yet to find their way here, mains water only having made it it to a nearby cottage a few years back.

....does your cave have a number....

[Ein Heldenleben]

I was quite keen on open fires until an expert on wood stove and open fire exhaust gases told me just how complex it is to get the latter to vent properly and what was in the gases/particulate matter. That nice wood fire smell is full of carcinogens...

[LHC]

... overall smoking is now well known to generally have adverse effects.

Is this the first entry in the understatement of the year competition?