Re: [GBlist] burning wood, was RFH and back-up system

["Steven Shepard" <sbtdesigns@earthlink.net>]

The main flaw in your entire statement is we would never use PV for heat.

SBT Designs
25840 IH-10 West #1
Boerne, Texas 78006
210-698-7109
FAX: 210-698-7147
www.sbtdesigns.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tawney, Patricia - PNG-1" <pjtawney@bpa.gov>
To: "'Ralph Bicknese'" <ralph.bicknese@christnerinc.com>; "Sacie H
Lambertson" <dlambert@grasshoppernet.com>
Cc: <greenbuilding@crest.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 1:01 PM
Subject: RE: [GBlist] burning wood, was RFH and back-up system


> Just a question - I appreciate that the Sun is renewable - but I don't
> believe the plastic or other component parts in a Photovoltaics system are
> either renewable or recycled while trees, when properly managed, grow
back,
> right?  The smoke that comes from burning actually is a natural component
> part of an eco-system, containing much of the same qualities as wood
> produces when it rots what will become of old Photovoltaic components?
Our
> citites are polluted because we drive cars in them, not because of wood
> burns and the dangerous health impact of the two pollutants are
> significantly different isn't it?  I have a bias I admit.  But as I
> understand it while wood produces more particulates (which eventually
return
> to earth and become part of the planet) the fumes from cattle and cars
> contain chemicals that are poisonous and will remain so.  I also have 40
> acres of trees, and live in an area with a population of 5,000 (about half
> are horses).  But still - If you want to clean up the planet focus on
cars,
> exploding populations and commercial cattle production - because both are
> causing sick air and aren't a natural part of the eco-system. Trees have
> always burned and in fact actually burn less now then they use to.  We may
> actually be hurting the planet when we don't let forests fire burn.  I
think
> things like Photovoltaics come into the sustainability question only for
> those electrical uses that we can't live without - like brain scans and
hot
> water.  Using Photovoltaics for this to off set use of goal or other big
> polluters makes sense but comparing it to wood heat - doesn't wash.  Just
a
> thought.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Bicknese [mailto:ralph.bicknese@christnerinc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 7:13 AM
> To: Sacie H Lambertson
> Cc: greenbuilding@crest.org
> Subject: RE: [GBlist] burning wood, was RFH and back-up system
>
>
> Sacie:
>
> I really appreciate your input.  I am sorry if I came off a bit strong on
> the issue of wood vs renewable sources. That was not my intent.  I know
from
> your posts and off-post conversations we have had you are very dedicated
to
> sustainability.  I just wanted to point out the moral dilemma I wrestled
> with and that I choose not to install a wood stove and have planned for
the
> installation of photovoltaics (or other) when it becomes realistic for me
to
> do so. I am sorry if my posted suggested I was questioning your morals.  I
> do not and very much respect your ethics regarding sustainability.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralph Bicknese
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sacie H Lambertson [mailto:dlambert@grasshoppernet.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 9:00 PM
> To: greenbuilding@crest.org
> Subject: [GBlist] burning wood, was RFH and back-up system
>
> Several have responded to the suggestion that it might be considered
> slightly immoral to burn wood, or at the least, that the practice is
> ungreen.  In some parts of the country where the population is more
crowded
> and where wood stoves are most commonly used, there can be a polutant
> problem--eg in Missoula Mt.--or where there are temperature inversions,
> such as Denver Colo., but here on 80 acres of mostly trees in NE Kansas in
> a county of 14,000 people, I don't worry too much about it.  Not many
folks
> in Kansas use wood as there sole source of heat.
>         Furthermore, I know even the most efficient wood burning stove is
> not
> terribly efficient, but for us the fuel is free, the cutting of it is what
> I like best to do in the winter, (we have a log splitter), and most
> importantly, the trees on this land need desperately to be thinned to
allow
> some to grow tall and straight and large.  We are very good keepers of our
> land and I'm afraid I have no apologies for using the wood on it this way;
> aside from the aesthetics of the practice, we are greatly improving our
> property.   BTW, our nearest neighbor is 1/2 mile away as the crow flies.
> Sacie Lambertson
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
> Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
> Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
> Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
> Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
> Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
> Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
> ______________________________________________________________________
>


______________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
______________________________________________________________________