Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Are you still using turf?

145791015

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Graces7 wrote: »
    There is a massive difference in population numbers between rural and urban that negates your argument and there is very little public transport out here. eg we have three buses a week. And sparse population

    city traffic is constant and heavy

    I'm wondering why you're continuing with this clearly ridiculous line of reasoning. Dublin's canal cordon revealed tat 70% of people enter the centre by sustainable mode, public transport, walking and cycling. If those people lived in rural areas they'd all drive long distances to work, i.e. an unsustainable mode. Why is this hard for you to understand? More and more people are living in cities now, therfore reducing their emissions from transport.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Peatys wrote: »
    €min wage/hr per person for time spent bringing it home and it becomes the most inefficient source of heat available.

    I guess not everyone footing turf is getting their €10 per hour.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Graces7 wrote: »
    Land changes; we adapt.The land cannot and should not be treated as some kind of folk museum. Nature has her own ways and some posters appreciate this.

    nature has yet to develop a defence against turf hoppers. Perhaps some teredactyl like creature will evolve and decapitate the humans footing the turf. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Graces7 wrote: »
    lol... The turf I buy at a very small cost as I am too disabled to cut it myself, is dug in the next field by a neighbour who cuts his own and a bit extra. For their winter heating. He does me a great kindness.

    urban/rural divide..

    Good thing you're not a 'blow in' all you'd get is curtain twitching, one word answers and thinly veiled accusations of immorality


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Actually no, it is about preserving habitats. Sprawling masses of concrete weren't exactly the preferred living quarters for the corncrake and hen harrier last time I checked... Im simply asking what about those habitats? Surely all construction should be forced to go up in cities instead of out, from now on?

    Yes, that should be the case also.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,431 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Always took you for a culchie, Emmet.

    I can't say this hasn't strained my admiration for you.

    Didn't it ever occur to blame the smog on the cars, and not our God given turf?

    Honestly, Emmet. I expected better. Tell us a toilet tale and all shall be forgiven.

    No, that’s a scurrilous thought, Dublin “bred and buttered”, as they do be sayin’.

    I blame the smog mostly on the coal but I worry about burning anything these days that could lead to the “pea soupers” returning.

    One thing I will say in defence of the turf and that’s that it does give off a lovely smell. I’m out “west” at the moment and have visited a couple of cottages, you know the types, no TV, main living room with four rooms off it and a big open fire with a heap of turf burning all day. Mixed with the damp it gives quite a sweet “musty” scent to the dwelling.

    I’m glad your admiration hasn’t been strained, that is reassuring as I know you “country” folk can have a bit of a “chip” on your shoulder when it comes to us Dubs. But do be careful not to “strain” anything else. I’d recommend adding a few prunes to your porridge to avoid this.

    The tide is turning…





  • Peatys wrote: »
    €min wage/hr per person for time spent bringing it home and it becomes the most inefficient source of heat available.

    I never get people who put a cost of their time like this for stuff they are doing outside of work, do you spend all your spare time doing things that are making you money? Do you put a cost on the time you spend cooking dinner and decide it’s cheaper to buy takeaway as if I paid myself 10 euro an hour cooking my dinner it would cost more :rolleyes:

    Stuff you do in your own time shouldn’t be looked at on a cost/hour basis. If I cut down a few trees, chop them up and burn them the only cost is a small bit of petrol for the chainsaw that’s the bottom line. Nobody sits down and says “well if I was paying myself 10 euro an hour that would have cost me 80 euro so that timber isn’t really free”. Nonsense.
    cgcsb wrote: »
    I'm wondering why you're continuing with this clearly ridiculous line of reasoning. Dublin's canal cordon revealed tat 70% of people enter the centre by sustainable mode, public transport, walking and cycling. If those people lived in rural areas they'd all drive long distances to work, i.e. an unsustainable mode. Why is this hard for you to understand? More and more people are living in cities now, therfore reducing their emissions from transport.

    Who said driving is unsustainable? It’s as sustainable as any other form of transport. As for the love for city living and packing people into small houses on top of each other, no thanks.


  • Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    cgcsb wrote: »
    I'm wondering why you're continuing with this clearly ridiculous line of reasoning. Dublin's canal cordon revealed tat 70% of people enter the centre by sustainable mode, public transport, walking and cycling.
    And Look! A barge comes bringing from Athy and other far flung towns mythologies - Kavanagh,

    (Those mythologies were turf, cgcsb, our dark, national memory)

    Have some respect for Patrick Kavanagh and the rural people of Ireland before you mention the canals in objection to the bogs of Ireland. We heated your tenements.

    I have set my face to ruddy/ highly frustrated.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Caroline Obedient Rivalry


    Graces7 wrote: »
    The land cannot and should not be treated as some kind of folk museum.

    Yes it should.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Yes it should.

    What all of it?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Caroline Obedient Rivalry


    gozunda wrote: »
    What all of it?

    All of the bog, yes.


  • Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    All of the bog, yes.

    What do you mean by folk museum?

    Surely it's those of us who enjoy a working bog who don't want to turn it into a folk museum?

    A bog is a living, breathing thing. Human interaction with the bog (and on the bog) is part of its life.

    Maybe this was your point, and I have taken you up wrong? I sure don't see how anyone who loves and *actually uses* the bogs thinks of them as a folk museum.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,756 ✭✭✭Dakota Dan


    But turf is so much cheaper. Cost really should be considered when discussing efficiency.

    Not wanting to split hairs, but that chart is really about efficacy, not efficiency.

    You're literally comparing 1 tonne of turf to 1 tonne of oil, while ignoring cost -- a huge factor.

    They couldn’t charge a carbon tax on it so banned it instead.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,308 ✭✭✭beggars_bush


    Kids get a sense of an honest days work when saving turf

    Honest, as in there's no monetary gain from it


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,460 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Graces7 wrote: »
    There is a massive difference in population numbers between rural and urban that negates your argument and there is very little public transport out here. eg we have three buses a week. And sparse population

    city traffic is constant and heavy

    It's per capita, urbanisation is much more efficient and eco friendly for numerous reasons.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Ush1 wrote: »
    It's per capita, urbanisation is much more efficient and eco friendly for numerous reasons.

    such as?


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    What do you mean by folk museum?

    Surely it's those of us who enjoy a working bog who don't want to turn it into a folk museum?

    A bog is a living, breathing thing. Human interaction with the bog (and on the bog) is part of its life.

    Maybe this was your point, and I have taken you up wrong? I sure don't see how anyone who loves and *actually uses* the bogs thinks of them as a folk museum.

    I used the term folk museum as an extreme term, never thinking it would be anything but ridiculed and denied... Life and nature move forwards and change; they are not fossilised. You cannot halt progression and trying to do so does more damage than accepting and looking to the future and there are many conservation areas already
    eg

    http://www.irishbogrestorationproject.ie/project_sites/glencullin-lower-mayo.html

    In Mayo we have the largest bog areas in Ireland also

    and we have many who use the bog respectfully and cut it carefully and responsibly for the love they have for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,920 ✭✭✭MayoAreMagic


    El Tarangu wrote: »
    There are all sorts of restrictions society places on the use of private property; if I were to buy the land next door to you and try to open an incinerator or start a strip-mining operation, I probably wouldn't be allowed to.

    They dont take away the entire purpose of having the property though... If you buy a shop, the council wont turn around and tell you, actually we have decided that that shop is no longer a shop and you cant do anything with it, but you can keep it anyway. That is effectively what is happening. Dont forget the reason these people invested in this land in the first place - it was sold to them to fulfill a purpose, even a business for some. It's simply unfair treatment


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Who said driving is unsustainable?

    :rolleyes: yeah yeah yeah, your views are well known on the topic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,226 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Graces7 wrote: »
    such as?

    more efficient travel, more efficient heating, smaller spaces, shared spaces, more efficient provision of services, shared services.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,460 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Graces7 wrote: »
    such as?

    Economies of scale, higher density, easier and cheaper to power, supply water to, sewage systems, less roads, public transport, less erosion of countryside and habitat, etc...


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,387 ✭✭✭Badly Drunk Boy


    Dafuq is spruss?

    I have never heard of this SPRUSS. It sounds like a German high-speed rail.

    It is mowl, it will always be mowl.

    Omg this is what rural areas used to go to war over, isn't it?
    In these here parts, it's turf mull. Maybe you just have one of them funny accents, and that's what you mean. :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    [QUOTE=cgcsb;

    did you say something? Odd a blank page


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Economies of scale, higher density, easier and cheaper to power, supply water to, sewage systems, less roads, public transport, less erosion of countryside and habitat, etc...

    Greater volume of consumption outweighs all these.

    The very existence of a city erodes environment and destroys habitat 100 % Air quality especially.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,460 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Graces7 wrote: »
    Greater volume of consumption outweighs all these.

    The very existence of a city erodes environment and destroys habitat 100 % Air quality especially.

    What do you mean greater volume of consumption?

    This is per capita, it's clearly more efficient having a high density in a smaller area than spread out throughout the countryside.

    Cities destroy habitat because people need a place to live but they destroy a much smaller amount than ribbon development and one off housing. A block of apartments is easier to service with roads, infrastructure, power, heat etc...


  • Registered Users Posts: 38 mammychicken


    My father always used turf ash from the fire to heap on his rhubharb growing in the garden, it was some crop, we'd chop it when it was ripe and have stewed rhubarb and custard for desert, now I have to buy it in the shop, miss those days....


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    My father always used turf ash from the fire to heap on his rhubharb growing in the garden, it was some crop, we'd chop it when it was ripe and have stewed rhubarb and custard for desert, now I have to buy it in the shop, miss those days....

    Probably flown in from Venezuela ....

    Not at you btw - but I do have to laugh at anyone who proposes that cities are somehow 'eco friendly.

    Not only do high density urban areas involve the total annihilation of all natural ecosystem and habitats - they concentration of pollutants means that emissions and discharges to the wider environment are a significant and persistent source of toxic pollution.

    High density living is not only bad for humans- it certainly does nothing for ecosystems and wildlife which depend on them . That said most development in Dublin and other urban areas in the last couple of decades have been on Greenfield sites with vast areas of detached houses which are spreading at an alarming rate into what was once countryside and all significantly dependent on private transport. See fek all criticism of this tbh .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭ Karlee Cold Genius


    Cities can be more efficient.

    If you have an excellent public transport system and provision for cyclists then obviously that beats people commuting in cars.

    If you have heavy traffic in gridlock and cyclists choking on car fumes then that is not ideal though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭El Tarangu


    gozunda wrote: »
    ... I do have to laugh at anyone who proposes that cities are somehow 'eco friendly.

    Not only do high density urban areas involve the total annihilation of all natural ecosystem and habitats - they concentration of pollutants means that emissions and discharges to the wider environment are a significant and persistent source of toxic pollution.

    https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/environment/agriculture-and-septic-tanks-source-of-dangerous-e-coli-found-in-40pc-of-water-sites-37581386.html

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but the current sanitation set-up in rural areas' involves people literally befouling one another's drinking water, so I'm not sure how 'eco friendly' that is.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭ Karlee Cold Genius


    El Tarangu wrote: »
    https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/environment/agriculture-and-septic-tanks-source-of-dangerous-e-coli-found-in-40pc-of-water-sites-37581386.html

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but the current sanitation set-up in rural areas' involves people literally befouling one another's drinking water, so I'm not sure how 'eco friendly' that is.
    I'm going to admit that I'm a lot more conscious of what I put down my drain since I moved somewhere that it all ends up filtering into the soil in my back garden.

    Modern bicocycle wastewater systems are pretty good if they work right... Not sure why I pay taxes for other people to be connected to mains wastewater systems while I'm also liable if my private one malfunctions, but there you go.


Advertisement