02/03/2020
Several people have asked what effect the impending ban on domestic coal will have on Ayle Colliery. The short answer is none at all, as the ban does not apply to Anthracite with a sulphur content below 2%. The reason for the ban is not carbon emissions (which will be increased because of some of the other steps that they are taking, like insisting on firewood being kiln rather than naturally dried) but particulate emissions. Fortunately the Freeminers in the forest of Dean have been exempted from the ban, so they can continue as normal. If people switch from imported coal to Alston Anthracite it will benefit us as well as the environment, time will tell. Anyone that is concerned about carbon emissions might like to know that I have worked out the carbon footprint of production at Ayle. All of the power used comes from diesel, burning 1 litre of diesel produces 2.68kg of carbon dioxide (this is more than the diesel weighed as it has combined with oxygen from the atmosphere so gives off more than you'd expect). 600litres of diesel are used per week, so working 48 weeks a year produces 77.2 tonnes of carbon dioxide....sounds like a lot, doesn't it? However, an acre of mature woodland absorbs about 2.6 tonnes per year. Ayle Colliery has 25 acres of mature woodland, this will be removing 65 tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere every year. So our total footprint per year is 12.2 tonnes, which could be reduced to zero by planting another 4.69 acres. If I wanted to cheat here, I could loan the mine some of my own woodland, as I have more than enough to absorb my own emissions. Production varies between 20 and 25 tonnes of Anthracite per week, so between 960 and 1200t per year. If we chose 1000 tonnes then the sums are easier and production emissions per tonne are about 12.2kg. Burning one tonne of Anthracite produces about 2.8 tonnes of CO2, so if we add on the 12.2 kg, the total carbon footprint associated with burning one tonne of Alston Anthracite is 2.8122 tonnes. Less than most other domestic heat sources once you add their production and transport emissions to their smokestack emissions, the total footprint is considerably smaller than the chimney emissions from biomass (over 3 tonnes co2 per tonne burned), without adding the emissions from production. If we were to plant another 1080 acres of woodland then we could say that burning Alston Anthracite was completely carbon neutral. If anyone feels the urge to work out how much worse other heat sources are, there is some useful information on these web sites (and google...) https://e360.yale.edu/features/carbon-loophole-why-is-wood-burning-counted-as-green-energy https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php http://www.treesintrust.com/environmental.shtm
A loophole in carbon-accounting rules is spurring a boom in burning wood pellets in European power plants. The result has been a surge in logging, particularly in the U.S. South, and new doubts about whether Europe can meet its commitments under the Paris accord.
