Are you still using turf?

glaswegian · 09-07-2019 7:04pm

Deleted User wrote: »

300 plus time and labour saving it, tending the fire, cleaning out ashes to heat a single room is cost efficient vs 500 to heat the rest of the house with no effort?

That all depends on how you define time and labour.My definition,which is shared by a lot of people,is a day on the bog is time well spent,your in the fresh air and getting plenty of exercise,and saving your heat source for the whole winter,if you find cleaning out ashes is hard work then the bog is certainly not the place for you.

Capt'n Midnight · 09-07-2019 8:39pm

cgcsb wrote: »

There's your next business venture, faux crackling false fires.

Too late, even the Tesla has a Romance Mode, fireplace app thingy, and it's a car.

Pissartist · 09-07-2019 8:44pm

If the japs stop killing whales I'll stop burning turf.

Capt'n Midnight · 09-07-2019 8:47pm

beauf wrote: »

I will miss it, and coal. Nothing like an open fire. But both were back breaking work and filthy. I remember the smog back in the day. Like Victorian London some days.

Ah the smog, where you couldn't see the fourth street light.

gone forever

bodice ripper · 09-07-2019 9:38pm

It's goddawful that we're still cutting bog. AFAIK bogs are about as rare as rainforest...

EmmetSpiceland · 09-07-2019 9:41pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Ah the smog, where you couldn't see the fourth street light.

gone forever

I remember the smog in Dublin in the 80s. Some people even went around wearing those “face masks” you sometimes see Asian people wearing.

The buildings in town got covered in black soot and it had an, incredibly, eerie look. I’m delighted that it hasn’t come back and was shocked to learn that the banned of “smokey” fuel wasn’t extended to the rest of the country.

Obviously, I was aware that some people “down the country” still burned whatever they wanted but I had, at least, expected they’d be liable to get a fine.

It’s pretty shocking, and damning, in this day and age that the burning of non-“smokeless” coal, and other such pollutants, is still perfectly legal.

AMKC · 09-07-2019 10:05pm

Yes I still burn it but not often and certainly not at the moment but maybe once or twice over the winter I will.

09-07-2019 10:16pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I remember the smog in Dublin in the 80s. Some people even went around wearing those “face masks” you sometimes see Asian people wearing.

The buildings in town got covered in black soot and it had an, incredibly, eerie look. I’m delighted that it hasn’t come back and was shocked to learn that the banned of “smokey” fuel wasn’t extended to the rest of the country.

Obviously, I was aware that some people “down the country” still burned whatever they wanted but I had, at least, expected they’d be liable to get a fine.

It’s pretty shocking, and damning, in this day and age that the burning of non-“smokeless” coal, and other such pollutants, is still perfectly legal.

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.

09-07-2019 10:40pm

glaswegian wrote: »

That all depends on how you define time and labour.My definition,which is shared by a lot of people,is a day on the bog is time well spent,your in the fresh air and getting plenty of exercise,and saving your heat source for the whole winter,if you find cleaning out ashes is hard work then the bog is certainly not the place for you.

I had to do it for years and figured out turf wasn't for me long ago.
Still enjoyed going for a walk in the bog yesterday.
I do recognise the attraction to people - only cash spent is to contractor.

ToddyDoody · 09-07-2019 11:04pm

My grandparents had a pile of turf in the barn-like shed. You could see into the neighbours elaborately planted back garden by climbing the pile. The Jack Russell got sent to said shed when granny had enough of him, or he wouldn't drink his bovril. They burned it in an old stove which was used for cooking.

It was what it was. I wouldn't get too romantic about it.

09-07-2019 11:09pm

ToddyDoody wrote: »

My grandparents had a pile of turf in the barn-like shed. You could see into the neighbours elaborately planted back garden by climbing the pile. The Jack Russell got sent to said shed when granny had enough of him, or he wouldn't drink his bovril. They burned it in an old stove which was used for cooking.

It was what it was. I wouldn't get too romantic about it.

you havent inhaled enough turf smoke, clearly.

PM me your details. The first bag is free.

Soon, you'll be ringing me up at 3am begging for a sniff of turf mowl.

ToddyDoody · 09-07-2019 11:14pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

you havent inhaled enough turf smoke, clearly.

PM me your details. The first bag is free.

Soon, you'll be ringing me up at 3am begging for a sniff of turf mowl.

For you:

https://www.amazon.com/Scents-Ireland-Candle-Decorated-Tin/dp/B01IPCB4WM

"Candle is not made of turf - It is made of wax made to smell like turf"... they're aiming at the US market I see.

MrMiata · 09-07-2019 11:18pm

Just got in from throwing some into the shed.

My parents had the bright idea of having the shed opening not quite big enough to reverse a trailer into but also big enough that you can f*ck the load on the ground in front and then have the kids throw it in..

Alf Veedersane · 09-07-2019 11:18pm

Saoirse Tasty Coat wrote: »

Yeah burn timber we cut ourselves and turf.

I’m building a new house with heat pump, underfloor heating etc but still going to put a solid fuel stove in the living room with back boiler and burn turf and timber, a living room just isn’t the same or cosy without it. Also on cold winter evenings it can be taking the load of the heat pump (expensive electricity) and doing most of the house heating with timber (free) and turf (cheap).

If you make sure the house is built properly, the stove will be redundant and the heat pump will be run cheaply.

09-07-2019 11:38pm

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

If you make sure the house is built properly, the stove will be redundant and the heat pump will be run cheaply.

It will be built properly but the fact is that in cold weather an air to water heating system is heavily propped up by electricity, it’s effectively electrical heating and will use quite a bit of electricity. There are myths floating around about how they are nearly free heating but they are just that myths.

I’ve seen a friend do the sums for his house and he calculated that it was cheaper to go with oil heating and a solid fuel stove than a heat pump and after a few years in the house it is following his sums, assuming a 15 year lifetime on a heat pump with is all they are rated for. He went for radiators though whereas I will most likely go for underfloor and in this case the heat pump is is a better option (if we go for it).

So add in the solid fuel stove which we want for the room anyway, a living room just wouldn’t be the same without a fire to us so it’s going in but add a back boiler and splice it into the system and while it’s burning away free timber or cheap turf on cold winter evenings it’s doing the heavy lifting rather than the heat pump eating electricity while providing a nice atmosphere in the room too.

Snow Garden · 09-07-2019 11:49pm

Pissartist wrote: »

If the japs stop killing whales I'll stop burning turf.

It's actually the Norwegians that kill the most whales. They kill more than Japan and Iceland combined.

Pissartist · 10-07-2019 12:03am

Snow Garden wrote: »

It's actually the Norwegians that kill the most whales. They kill more than Japan and Iceland combined.

Maybe, but when the japs stop killing whales i'll stop burning turf.

MayoAreMagic · 10-07-2019 12:28am

I find it hard to swallow the habitat argument as regards cutting turf. Especially so from people who have chosen to live in cities. How many different kinds of habitats were destroyed in the building of said city? How can everyone be so concerned about these habitats, but not those? Why is human development deemed ok in one area but not another?

Similarly, I take issue with people from overseas telling us what to do with our blanket bogs and telling us how valuable and rare they are. Many of these are on private owned land so if they are that valuable then put your hand in your pocket and buy them, then you can do what you want with them... Shall we start off the bidding at around 1 million an acre? So rare and valuable after all...

Alf Veedersane · 10-07-2019 7:37am

Saoirse Tasty Coat wrote: »

It will be built properly but the fact is that in cold weather an air to water heating system is heavily propped up by electricity, it’s effectively electrical heating and will use quite a bit of electricity. There are myths floating around about how they are nearly free heating but they are just that myths.

I’ve seen a friend do the sums for his house and he calculated that it was cheaper to go with oil heating and a solid fuel stove than a heat pump and after a few years in the house it is following his sums, assuming a 15 year lifetime on a heat pump with is all they are rated for. He went for radiators though whereas I will most likely go for underfloor and in this case the heat pump is is a better option (if we go for it).

So add in the solid fuel stove which we want for the room anyway, a living room just wouldn’t be the same without a fire to us so it’s going in but add a back boiler and splice it into the system and while it’s burning away free timber or cheap turf on cold winter evenings it’s doing the heavy lifting rather than the heat pump eating electricity while providing a nice atmosphere in the room too.

Properly installer, a heat pump won't be eating electricity in cold weather. Not properly cold weather. I've seen some real time data from during the cold snap last year with the sub zero temperatures. I'm not entirely sure what those sums were based on so I can't comment on them.

There are also a lot of myths at the other end of the scale about heat pump electricity consumption.

That said, I do understand why the look of a fire appeals. I just don't think it would be used all that often.

Graces7 · 10-07-2019 7:40am

El Tarangu wrote: »

That's great, and more power to them.

But I imagine that the people in days gone by, out footing turf on the bog, were doing it for survival rather than by choice; and if you offered them central heating at the flick of switch, they would throw down their tools and be off the bog in a shot.

well, once the first ESB bill came in or for whatever fuel they were using, they would be off back down the bog pretty fast.

The houses then were hard to heat, with a tendency to damp and they kept the fire going 24/7 . I have lived in an old stone cottage and did likewise.

d8491prj5boyvg · 10-07-2019 8:06am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Actually if you inherit a bog you'll probably get your turf for free from the contractor. Which makes it even cheaper.

I'm half-kidding by starting this thread
Of course we need to protect our Habitats. They are not just a carbon sink but a vital resource for biodiversity. But we're still allowed to be sad about not having turf anymore. For a phrase that is so clichéd, it actually is the end of an era.

I grew up spending summers footing turf for so know all about it. I agree we are losing something socially and culturally but is small relative to the habitat loss.

And while the tongue is slightly in cheek, those feeling hard done by really get on my wick. The have been lucky enough to inherit a resource they abused for their own good at the expense of the rest of us. They should be paying society back for the damage caused not crying about not having turf.

10-07-2019 9:10am

Caroline Obedient Rivalry wrote: »

I grew up spending summers footing turf for so know all about it. I agree we are losing something socially and culturally but is small relative to the habitat loss.

And while the tongue is slightly in cheek, those feeling hard done by really get on my wick. The have been lucky enough to inherit a resource they abused for their own good at the expense of the rest of us. They should be paying society back for the damage caused not crying about not having turf.

I have a bit of a query about this, and I may be completely ignorant, so I really would appreciate clarification.

On our bog, all of the interesting plant life is living not on the turf banks, but in the part of the bog that has been cut away (still plenty of peat underfoot there). The turf Bank itself is almost a monoculture of purple heather (ubiquitous across Ireland anyway) apart perhaps from some frogs and molluscs, which might be interesting i suppose.

But the grouse, the skylarks, the orchids and the cotton, all of the really interesting stuff lives in the adjacent wilderness which is bog that has been cut already. Not much lives on the turf Bank. Almost every bog I've been to looks the same way.

Again, I'll gladly be corrected here. I assume I am wrong, because that's what the experts are indicating, but I'd appreciate some clarification.

Also, just to clarify something for any city dwellers, when you cut turf, the part of the bog you cut is still a bog. You can't farm it. It's utter wilderness for most of the year, and a vibrant ecosystem. It's not like it reverts to arable land or anything like that (draining bogs is a whole other issue, and is inexcusable)

MayoAreMagic · 10-07-2019 9:59am

Caroline Obedient Rivalry wrote: »

I grew up spending summers footing turf for so know all about it. I agree we are losing something socially and culturally but is small relative to the habitat loss.

And while the tongue is slightly in cheek, those feeling hard done by really get on my wick. The have been lucky enough to inherit a resource they abused for their own good at the expense of the rest of us. They should be paying society back for the damage caused not crying about not having turf.

Paying society back? Even if they own the land themselves? Also, define abusing the ecosystem.. Id imagine cutting a bit of it away is still infinitely less abuse that digging it out and covering it in concrete. If that is the attitude then there should be no new builds in any city, bar highrise, as to save any more ecosystems being destroyed.
Part of the outskirts of Galway city is build on bog - does development stop there too? How far do you go with this?

coolshannagh28 · 10-07-2019 10:02am

Turfcutting should be restricted to those willing to use the Slean .

Alf Veedersane · 10-07-2019 10:14am

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Why is human development deemed ok in one area but not another?

Environmental Impact Assessments and the like. It's why infrastructure projects are held up because of snails.

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Similarly, I take issue with people from overseas telling us what to do with our blanket bogs and telling us how valuable and rare they are. Many of these are on private owned land so if they are that valuable then put your hand in your pocket and buy them, then you can do what you want with them... Shall we start off the bidding at around 1 million an acre? So rare and valuable after all...

There already is a compensation scheme for those affected by the restriction on cutting turn on the bogs designated as Special Areas of Conservation and Natural Heritage Areas. It was the NPWS who defined the bogs that met the criteria and not people from overseas.

Thelonious Monk · 10-07-2019 10:22am

Sounds like a mare to heat these rural houses. My terrace house needs the heat on for an hour or so in the evening even on the coldest winter nights and the heat is retained.
Also when you finish destroying the bogs maybe get your septic tanks fixed too, apparently 50% of them are leaking and polluting the lands.

d8491prj5boyvg · 10-07-2019 10:24am

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Paying society back? Even if they own the land themselves? Also, define abusing the ecosystem.. Id imagine cutting a bit of it away is still infinitely less abuse that digging it out and covering it in concrete. If that is the attitude then there should be no new builds in any city, bar highrise, as to save any more ecosystems being destroyed.
Part of the outskirts of Galway city is build on bog - does development stop there too? How far do you go with this?

Abusing the ecosystem is destroying the natural habitat. Like bringing in a JCB and completely destroying whatever was there. Not a couple of lads with a spade that has two sides.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKqCog5m5Yo

What is lost is lost forever. And we all lose. For the benefit of those lucky enough to have a bog.

It is lost in Galway too.

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

If that is the attitude then there should be no new builds in any city, bar highrise, as to save any more ecosystems being destroyed.

Now you're talking

Graces7 · 10-07-2019 10:28am

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

Turfcutting should be restricted to those willing to use the Slean .

Well, we are OK here then as that is how they cut it...sheer poetry in motion

10-07-2019 10:31am

Caroline Obedient Rivalry wrote: »

What is lost is lost forever. And we all lose. For the benefit of those lucky enough to have a bog.

Why would you be lucky to own a bog, these days?

"How much of your land is in bog?" is a compulsory question for any marriage contract to proceed, in my hometown. A lady with nothing to her name but sphagnum moss and thousands of frogs won't be walking down the aisle in Borrisokane any time soon.

MayoAreMagic · 10-07-2019 10:32am

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Environmental Impact Assessments and the like. It's why infrastructure projects are held up because of snails.

There already is a compensation scheme for those affected by the restriction on cutting turn on the bogs designated as Special Areas of Conservation and Natural Heritage Areas. It was the NPWS who defined the bogs that met the criteria and not people from overseas.

But do those snails result in the blanket stoppage of all development in that area? It is frankly a bit ridiculous that people are being told they have to maintain a habitat, yet we have sprawling cities, some of which are expanding over bog, and there is no similar issue...

The compensation schemes are garbage to be honest. If they want to dictate on said lands they should CPO them and pay a rate that reflects the value of these places.

As regards people from overseas, I believe there was some interaction with european bigwigs in the initial move away from cutting turf, going back a good few years now... This is what I was referring to.

Are you still using turf?

Comments