Mack has it dead right, particularly on the RMHs. One major point touched on here is the ridiculousArchived Message
Posted by Rhisiart Gwilym on February 21, 2019, 7:38 pm, in reply to "^This! (nm)"
idea of cluttering up the vanishing landscape of Britain with 300k - wholly inappropriate - new houses every year. This is nothing more than a sop to the building-for-profit racket. There are two ghastly examples of this 80-houses-at-a-time abomination, facing each other in recently green fields, in the village where I live: 4 and 5-bedroom houses at prices that only the already well-heeled can afford. Fat lot of good they'll be to the homeless, the food-bank-dependents and the many thousands of victims of the persecute-the-handicapped Ian Duncan-Himmler-style bastards. Horrendously badly built, to an abysmal standard, just as Mack details. Very profitable for the tory-friend racketeer-builders, though; which is the only real point of these unnecessary chuck-ups.
There is no real difficulty with burning biomass, including wood - so long as it goes with a massive reforestation programme for the whole of Britain, and long-term management of these lands as forest-permaculture public utilities. Properly done, these lands can be carbon-neutral, and actually can slip over the boundary into carbon-negative territory. I've been running a one-man version of this for over 20 years now: heating and cooking with home-made wood-stoves, including rockets of the several kinds, and at the same time guerrilla-planting of trees - till 'our leaders' catch up with what a supernally good idea planting great tracts of trees is, for a whole raft of converging sound reasons, ecological, political, and economic.
Its also worth learning a lesson from the USSR - sic!! - and its RF successor, as they have been using communal heating of large numbers of dwellings, using waste heat piped from centralised burner/boiler facilities to multiple homes, for many years.