But you release it now and reabsorb it in a few years time. The net effect is an increase in the CO2 in the air. It is not carbon neutral.
Its the same with wind power, etc. It isn't carbon neutral.. it only saves CO2 when compared to other methods. Once all electricity is wind/wave/solar it will not /save/ any CO2.
The reality is that you can only save CO2 by not using the energy.
It will take a large scale move to actually removing CO2 before anything is actually carbon neutral.
Alternate way of looking at it, it /was/ absorbed from the air over the last x years, during which period it was carbon negative, it is then release by burning and becomes carbon neutral.
Yes if you want to smirk about how green you are. However I could say the same about fossil fuel it was absorbed by plants in the past and buried for a few million years then burnt.
However if you actually believe we are causing GW then its of no use whatsoever as both increase the CO2..
...
Sounds to us as though you're the one who's smirking.
They can. The man won't buy it because the certificates cr@p. The woman won't buy it because the kitchen units are the wrong colour.
>
What about? I am not the one who keeps claiming they are carbon neutral even when its obviously untrue.
Most people ought to be able to figure out that an older property with solid walls is going to have a poorer rating than a newer one and that there is little that can be done apaprt from a bit of loft insulation and perhaps some double glazing, assuming that that hasn't been done already.
They may be interested in the heating costs, but they depend on the size of the building anyway.
I suspect that there may be some small short term influence on prices, but don't see that unless it is demonstrated what the actual *cost* will be of heating a given property that they will rank this as a high priority.
Location, school catchment area and perhaps the kitchen rise further to the surface.
Houses won't become unsaleable and nor will energy requirement be totally ignored. Whether this exercise will influence purchases and prices, I rather doubt.
Given that most people decide to buy in the first 30 seconds, I can't imagine it will make any measurable difference. It's a "nice to know" when it comes to negotiating down the price, is all.
Besides, we could save a *lot* more energy by persuading Screwfix to stop sending out catalogues at the drop of a hat! I threw 3 away this morning and there's still one in the garage.
This point was made at a recent Part L conference I was at. The speaker observed that the last pub he had visited had - following no smoking restrictions - 7 x 14kW patio heaters outside using more energy than the pub building.
There's not much to be said: you just put your property on the market as-is with an E F or G rating. It is noticeable though that depending on their agenda, newspapers say one of two things:
(a) this is terrible; owners of older houses are going to get dreadful ratings which will render their homes unsellable.
(b) the whole exercise is a waste of effort as no one is going to take any notice of the energy certificate anyway. It's the kitchen units that matter!
both of which cannot be true.
No, the tree absorbed it in the past and it is released now.
Not if the same mass of wood is gown again.
Your looking at the wrong timescale.
We don't ned to remove CO2, just to slow down the rate of (net) emission.
Should a refurbished house get a lower rating because of all the energy used in making the new kitchen units?
Owain
As is the case for fossil fuel and we all know how bad using tfossil fuel is.
And not used.
No I am assuming that people will still use energy and that the new growth will also end up as fuel. So there is a net release of CO2 from the initial burning.
How?
How would that help? Either GW is caused by CO2 or it isn't.. if it is then it doesn't matter how slowly we increase it the end result is the same.
/me gets a large popcorn and comfy chair.
Not quite because the carbin absored into coal was 300 MY ago. carbin absrobed by trees is taken from today's atmosphere.
No, as long as the same mass of wood is grown and regrown the net contribution to GW is nil.
Because it replaces existing generating capacity.
Make room for me, I promise not to snore.
Mary
>
And what about the timber used for wooden spoons ...
>
Ah well, if you ask any estate agent and they'll tell you that men don't buy houses, women do. And they're right...
David
Because it would be released back into the atmosphere anyway when the tree dies and decays.
We've never bought a house through agents, their figures would be skewed if we had.
Kitchens? I hate 'modern' kitchens, if he said that he liked a house with a 'modern' kitchen I'd rip it out with my own hands. and tools of course :-) But I don't think he would. A kitchen has to work, most 'modern' kitchens I've been in don't work.
Mary
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required