UKTC Archive

Re: Dsiposal of Waste

Subject: Re: Dsiposal of Waste
From: nick.wilkinson
Date: Nov 28 2000 14:17:03

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Moya <Timmoya@xxxxxxxxxxx.com>
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxxxxx.co.uk>
Sent: 28 November 2000 12:10
Subject: Re: Dsiposal of Waste


However we should also take into account CO2 emissions resulting from tree
works and transport when making this calculation.

I suppose its a question of whether we think sustaining energy production
is
more important than reducing CO2 emissions or the other way round.

Good point. I think most tree maintenance companies justify using a chipper
only in terms of cost savings to the company. A fully utilised chipper can
burn as much diesel as a small van per week, not to mention CO2 released
during its manufacture, or in the manufacture of spares. It would be a good
project to compare a large chipping/shredding/composting facility versus use
of a fleet of towable chippers, in terms of how much CO2 is released in just
chipping/shredding.

The ideal situation would be to use compost in large numbers of planting
schemes. I worked for one LA situated 20 miles away from a composting
facility who would buy mulch in the form of peeled bark from a supplier 200
miles away. I'd imagine that this scheme was justifiable financially,
although indefensible from an environmental point of view.

It gets harder and harder to adopt the scheme with the least detrimental
effects on atmospheric CO2 levels when so many organisations are split up,
pulled out of the public sector perhaps (and away from public
accountability) and then told to justify their actions in terms of financial
considerations alone.


The UK Tree Care mailing list - http://uktc.oak-wood.co.uk/
To unsubscribe send mailto:unsubscribe-uktc@xxxxxxxxx.co.uk