Coal, for use on steam hauled heritage railways - merged posts

[whole diary]

[TaplowGreen]

Do the heritage steam groups actively practice carbon offsetting in respect of the coal they burn?

I wouldn't have thought they have the money to splurge on greenwashing, or to buy indulgences, as broadgage calls it.

How dare you!

I see Broadgage as the Greta Thunberg of this forum with his strident views on the environment!  (I think he drinks more Port than Greta though!) 

[broadgage]

Do the heritage steam groups actively practice carbon offsetting in respect of the coal they burn?

I wouldn't have thought they have the money to splurge on greenwashing, or to buy indulgences, as broadgage calls it.

I expect that a new and improved version of indulgences is under development and will soon be available. At present the purchase of indulgences permits fossil fuel to be burnt as normal in return for a payment.

The new and improved version will permit of burning Russian coal and other fossil fuels in return for a payment. Making the payment will ensure that the Russian fuel is now called "not really russian" Perhaps by offsetting whereby a poor farmer in Malawi agrees to stop burning Russian coal.

In some cases BOTH types of indulgence will be needed.

The old style, whereby fossil fuel becomes not really carbon emitting, AND the new style whereby russian becomes not really russian.

[TonyK]

How dare you!

I see Broadgage as the Greta Thunberg of this forum with his strident views on the environment!  (I think he drinks more Port than Greta though!) 

I stand by my comment, which was actually a compliment. broadgage and myself are of very similar mind on this issue, if not on all issues. Pigtails probably wouldn't suit him, though. 

I expect that a new and improved version of indulgences is under development and will soon be available. At present the purchase of indulgences permits fossil fuel to be burnt as normal in return for a payment.

The new and improved version will permit of burning Russian coal and other fossil fuels in return for a payment. Making the payment will ensure that the Russian fuel is now called "not really russian" Perhaps by offsetting whereby a poor farmer in Malawi agrees to stop burning Russian coal.

In some cases BOTH types of indulgence will be needed.

The old style, whereby fossil fuel becomes not really carbon emitting, AND the new style whereby russian becomes not really russian.

I am surely vindicated 

broadgage's system of Hybrid Indulgences is probably already being worked into a Commons announcement as we speak, as a positive step towards Ground Zero. I have only one minor criticism - won't it be Rwanda, not Malawi?

[broadgage]

ISTR^▸ (I seem to recall/remember) that Malawi featured in some earlier scheme whereby carbon emissions could be offset by insulating the loft spaces in the homes of poor farmers.

BTW^▸ (by the way), I do not regard regard the comparison with Greta to be in any way derogatory.
Not perhaps entirely accurate, but fine as a light hearted compliment.

[Surrey 455]

The Talyllyn Railway has shared an update on the different types of "coal" that they have been using recently.
https://youtu.be/KGaP3iCB_XM

[Bmblbzzz]

Very interesting. I wonder what the rapeseed oil smoke smells like (probably not quite like your kitchen!).

[broadgage]

I have misgivings about the yellow "coal" which is a byproduct of rapeseed oil production.
So far as I can tell this is the solid residue left after the edible oil has been extracted by pressing. AKA^▸ (also known as) "spent oil seed"

Firstly presuming that this Is spent oil seed, then it is a valuable animal feeding stuff and burning it for fuel is rather a waste. When eaten by animals, the dung of the animals is a valuable fertiliser.

Secondly, spent oil seed still contains traces of oil and as a result it is prone to self heating and then to spontaneous combustion. Bulk storage is therefore a considerable fire risk.

It might of course be the case that the yellow "coal" is NOT in fact the spent seeds, but is some other residue such as the stalks or leaves of the plants, in that case the idea may have more merit.

[Bmblbzzz]

Firstly presuming that this Is spent oil seed, then it is a valuable animal feeding stuff and burning it for fuel is rather a waste. When eaten by animals, the dung of the animals is a valuable fertiliser.

In many places, the dung of animals is saved, dried and burnt as fuel for cooking or domestic heating. Burning the spent oil seed simply cuts out the middleman! (or middlecow).

But you're right that as with all cases of using food or food-related items for fuel, we need to ask whether it's a sensible use. Though I expect the amount used by Talyllyn railway, even should they go over to it for all uses, is negligible compared to the amount produced nationally.

[stuving]

Firstly presuming that this Is spent oil seed, then it is a valuable animal feeding stuff and burning it for fuel is rather a waste. When eaten by animals, the dung of the animals is a valuable fertiliser.

In many places, the dung of animals is saved, dried and burnt as fuel for cooking or domestic heating. Burning the spent oil seed simply cuts out the middleman! (or middlecow).

But you're right that as with all cases of using food or food-related items for fuel, we need to ask whether it's a sensible use. Though I expect the amount used by Talyllyn railway, even should they go over to it for all uses, is negligible compared to the amount produced nationally.

That sounds like similar logic to the Ecotricity (prop. Dale Vince) plan to meet all our gas requirements greenly, i.e. from grass directly.

How is green gas made?

Unlike other forms of green gas which often use animal waste, ours is made ethically and sustainably from grass cuttings. The grass is broken down by anaerobic digestion in vats, producing biomethane. This is then captured and fed into the grid.

Can we power Britain with green gas?

Yes. Our 2022 report on powering Britain using green gas mills shows exactly how we can do it without taking away land for food production.

As the report demonstrates, we can power both homes and businesses with green gas – and it’s much cheaper and faster than making everyone convert to heat pumps.

The cited report from Imperial Consultants claims to be independent, but it doesn't really read like it.

For some reason nobody else seems to believe in this idea. The report does assume a decline in meat eating and thus production as a source of spare grassland to harvest, though so do other prognisticators. I suspect the numbers need to be looked at carefully to work out if they make any sense. Still, they are now building the first of their "green grass mills" somewhere near Reading.

[Bmblbzzz]

Isn't that sort of super-silage at heart? Dale Vince of course has his personal ethics to produce 'green gas' without using animal products (which would include by-products such as waste) and these might also influence the maths with the decline of meat eating.

Still, I'd rather have him as owner of a football club than, say, Mike Ashley!

[TonyK]

For some reason nobody else seems to believe in this idea. The report does assume a decline in meat eating and thus production as a source of spare grassland to harvest, though so do other prognisticators. I suspect the numbers need to be looked at carefully to work out if they make any sense. Still, they are now building the first of their "green grass mills" somewhere near Reading.

There must be a subsidy there somewhere. Otherwise, someone would point out that using the farmland to grow fuel would mean importing more food, with all the problems that brings. Even if the proportion of UK^▸ (United Kingdom) citizens eating meat were to fall below the present 90%-95%, it would still make more sense to reduce food miles by growing more of the stuff here. Raising crops for fuel whilst flying lettuces from Africa seems like robbing Peter to pay Paul, then robbing both of them again.

[broadgage]

We should not in my view by flying lettuces in from anywhere. Waste of fuel.

Some food imports are unavoidable, but these should in my view by non perishable, high energy density foods that can be imported by sea or rail.
Grain, canned meat, edible oils and fats, or spices and condiments that are only needed in small volumes.

I am in general opposed to energy crops displacing food.

Trees for building timber and firewood can be grown in places unsuited for food crops.

[TonyK]

I am in general opposed to energy crops displacing food.

Trees for building timber and firewood can be grown in places unsuited for food crops.

We disagree again, alyhough only on matters of degree. I am wholly opposed to energy crops displacing food.

I also abhor so-called biomass power, which relies on importing kiln-dried wood pellets from across the Atlantic. Some studies show that the biggest power station using this fuel emits more carbon dioxide than it did when it burned coal. These sound like good ideas and attract the attention of politicians keen to tick a few boxes in the carbon records. That drives perverse behaviour. Biodigesters were originally supposed to use waste, from animals and crops. Fields of maize are grown just to feed them now, with stuff being transported from the Bristol area to Devon in some cases. They use the slurry from dairy farms, which turns another waste product, albeit a valuable one, into a much less smelly fertiliser, but slurry can't work on its own. Farm crop waste doesn't produce as much gas as maize when added to the mix, so the fields fill with maize instead of feeding the cattle. If the whole country were to suddenly go vegan, I would wager that cattle would still be bred to make waste for biodigesters until the end of the subsidy programme.

Om places unsuitable for food crops, you see a lot of Christmas trees being grown under high voltage electricity lines. I don't think it's because the magnetic fields promote growth so much as the ground being unsuitable for much else.

[Bmblbzzz]

A lot of maize that's grown in Britain is as cover for pheasants, I'm told (by someone who spent several years in agricultural work). Some of it is not even harvested.

[eightonedee]

To give an idea of the acreages involved, last night I had a conversation with a local farmer who is part of a consortium running a gas (for energy)-producing digester. The consortium has about 5000 acres under cultivation for various crops, half of which are for feedstock for the digester.

Apparently there is seen to be a market for the gas in Germany. Although there is quite a digester industry there, the gas currently goes straight for use for electricity generation.

If this is typical, I imagine that the odd use of maize for gamebird cover is inconsequential by comparison.