Shred this

[VisionSet]

Every year I produce many piles of holly clippings like those below from the trees shown. I'm now sick to death of cutting them up and putting them in the bin. Holly doesn't compost well, I need a shredder. How long does it take to shred stuff? How long for the pile in pic? The max size I would want to shred is ~15mm Some shredders say 90kg/hr or similar, doesn't sound very fast. Want to make a model recommendation? (though there are tons of archived posts on this). Always been pleased with Bosch as a make. Don't want to spend the earth no more than 150 notes.

W

[Chris Bacon]

[VisionSet]

I know, but I've no where to burn it, I don't want to piss the neighbours off and mulching is more enviro. But I will be burning the bigger stuff in the fireplace.

-- Mike W

[chris_doran]

I've never really timed it. It always seems to take for ever as it's the last thing you do before going indoors on a darkening autumn evening. Probably no more than 1/2 to 1 hour for that pile, single-handed, on a "domestic" machine. An assistant to pass wodges to you would speed things enormously, as much of the time is going to and from the pile.

I'm sure my Alko is now obsolete, so I won't bother looking for the model number, but the cost was within your range, especially on a Homebase 10% day. It has a side tube for feeding in the 15mm branches which it "shaves".

Chris

[Sue]

"VisionSet" wrote

Get a good sturdy shredder, you won't regret it. That little pile in your pic would barely take a couple of minutes to be fed through a decent machine.

We've discussed shredders often here, so if you do a Googlegroups search you'll find the threads. The cheaper bladed models are pretty useless imo. You'd do better to spend a bit more and get one of the ones that chop and crunch, with a screw or cog type mechanism. Bosch ones are regarded well and Ive had an Alko 'Silent power' model for several years which has chomped it's way without a hitch through what would otherwise have been many skips full of branches and prunings by now. It's saved dozens of trips to the dump and all the material is composted with other garden and kitchen waste and put back on the garden. AFAIC my shredder is the best thing since the invention of the wheel. :)

[Phil L]

90KG is about fifteen wheelbarrows full, bearing in mind that it weighs almost nothing...that pile in your picture would probably weigh less than 4KG and you'd fit it inot a carrier bag once shredded. the whole hedge (minus trunks) would probably only weigh about 150KG.

[VisionSet]

You don't know Holly, it definitely weighs much more than you think. I fill wheelie bins up with the stuff and each years worth of densly packed cut up clippings fills about 6 bins to the point that the bin is bordering on 'bin men won't empty it' territory. I'd guess each year I shift a minimum of

300kg. Holly is heavy, it has very thick densely packed leaves that take an age to lose their water. Branch for branch at least 4x heavier than a regular deciduous.

-- Mike W

[VisionSet]

I think you are probably right. So prob 200 - 250 quid then.

-- Mike W

[Phil L]

So you'd need the shredder for approximately 4 hours a year....

Holly is heavy, it has very thick

the shredder in question gives an average of 90kg per hour, this is based on average wood / twigs / leaves, the weight of the starting material has no effect on it, it'll probably do 180kg of holly considering it's water retention / weight. I certainly wouldn't buy one if I had space to store the cuttings until I had enough to warrant hiring a shredder for a day @ about £25, but I don't know if you have the space / time / inclination.

[Kev]

Why is mulching more environmentally friendly than burning. ok is doesn't make visible smoke but if was well dried there would be no smoke. Whether its mulched and decomposes or is burnt the end result is the same. I would put it that burning is more environmentally friendly since you have not used electricity to shred the stuff and therefore did not consume any fossil fuel at all. Also take into account the carbon produced in making and transporting the shredder and the carbon cost of recycling it at the end of its life. I like the way that our local council gave everybody a huge green wheelie bin then every two weeks come around in a huge diesel lorry collecting grass clippings then say it is environmentally friendly. Yeh right.

Kevin

[Rupert (W.Yorkshire)]

Burning does produce smoke whether you can see it or not. and produces carbon dioxide and a plethora of other substances ,some of which are highly toxic, depending on what plant material you are burning. Composting and mulching keeps the carbon locked in a more complex form.

[Mark]

If you don't want to annoy the neighbours don't get a noisy shredder. Some of them are _very_ loud.

Mark

[Kev]

And composting produces CO2, the organisms that live on the decaying fibres produce CO2. I accept that burning does produce some nasties but then so does using a shredder by virtue of the production on the electricity, making the shredder, the packaging, transportation etc etc. Plethora of other substances seems a bit OTT given that a tree is only made up from CO2 taken from the atmosphere and a few trace elements taken from the soil. Given the few other substances given out by burning verses those given by buring fossil fuels, not to mention the noise pollution, I don't see why burning is looked down upon.

Kevin

[George.com]

If you chop the holly cuttings (or whatever cuttings for that matter) in to reasonably small segments you do not need to use a shredder. I cut my prunings by hand and throw them on the compost. They make a nice layer of matter that helps (in a limited fashion) with aeration. It does take a little longer for them to break down but time is time. Bypasses the electricity and noise issue.

rob

[michael adams]

Because it destroys all the organic\humus content. Along with any attendant beneficial micro-organisms which would otherwise thrive during decomposition.

When the leaves eventually break down, as will all organic matter eventually, otherwise we'd have been buried in the stuff thousands of years ago, they will help maintain a better balanced soil structure. Humus - clay- minerals\sand

That's the actual reason. Whether you want to follow it or not however, is totally down to you.

michael adams

...

[Guy King]

The message from "Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" contains these words:

However, composting releases methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

[Rupert (W.Yorkshire)]

By plethora I meant hundreds, if not thousands, of organic substances which can be analysed and controlled at a power station. In a garden bonfire environment you do not stand a chance of any control. You are performing a high temperature reaction on a majority of the elements in the Periodic table.

[Rupert (W.Yorkshire)]

Anaerobic fermentation does the methane bit ?

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:56:52 GMT someone who may be "VisionSet" wrote this:-

How well does it compost after being cut up or shredded?

[David Hansen]

On 26 Apr 2006 01:27:50 -0700 someone who may be "Kev" wrote this:-

If the person has 100% renewable electricity then this is not a factor.

The likely alternative is people putting grass clippings into the "normal" rubbish bin, where it will add to the landfill mountain. Better to separate it out and use it for composting by the council. Better still to encourage people to compost most of it themselves.

Burning is for perennial weeds, unless one puts them in the council composting bin.