vanity, conservation and hipocrits

[middi]

My chainsaw decided to give up the ghost yesterday after 15 years of use and I am in the market for a new one.
First step---------- research.
second step-------manufacturers
third step---------quality and value for money

The research bit ( being a new toy !!!!!) a very enjoyable process, the quality and value for money a bit confusing but narrowed it down to a good quality manufacturer that should suffice my need.
During the manufacturers research bit I was flabbergasted by the sales hype and the totally inappropriate hipocritical decription as to the vastly advanced technology used for those little powerful engines regarding reduced emissions ideal for a clean enviroment, also watched u-tube demonstration of these little machines power. Then it dawned on me, what a load of "bollockeros", " you are barking up the wrong tree, you b***dy morons"( excuse the pun).
IT'S A CHAINSAW !!!!!!!!, IT CUTS TREES, IT DESTROYS FORESTS, IT USES FUEL.
( I purchase one, anyway)

Middi

 

[skier-hughes]

But for every one purchased they make two new ones!!

What make did you buy?

 

[middi]

A Stihl 391

64 cc, 20 " blade. Apparently a very good all rounder.
( had a jonsered 2163 previously)
Middi

 

[philpjuk100]

After a little accident this is the only one I am allowed now!

 

[philpjuk100]

This was the one i wanted!

 

[MdB]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9x8rBKC4BE
:shock:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDWqJe1dCg
:shock: :shock:

 

[Penners]

Can we just be clear about something?

There's nothing wrong with cutting down trees, per se.

Trees are a crop, just like wheat or barley. In properly managed forests they're grown to be cut down and used. The mortal sin is cutting down virgin forests, or cutting down man-grown trees and not replanting them.

The Scandinavian countries now have strict legislation about this. You cannot harvest trees unless you replant the forest afterwards - in fact most of the replanting that takes place actually exceeds the number of trees harvested. So the Scandinavian forests are growing all the time - in fact they're now larger than they have been at any time since the last ice age.

Young, vigorous trees absorb more carbon dioxide than old trees. Timber that is felled and used for building, furniture... or whatever... is prevented* from ageing, falling and rotting, thus releasing its carbon back into the atmosphere.

So let's maintain a balanced view about cutting down trees. The felling of virgin forests is an abomination; the felling of managed forests is a normal, essential, even beneficial cycle.

(Dons kevlar and heads for exit).

* "prevented" is perhaps an overstatement, but the process is greatly slowed down.

 

[middi]

Ok mr P, you made your eloquent point. Nevertheless, does it really make that much difference if one needs 100 litres of fuel to devastate ( sorry, harvest) one acre of forest or 99.8 litres. All I wanted to hear from the manufacturers was:- "this chainsaw of ours will devastate any timber that it comes in contact with and will never break down" . I would have dealt with my conscience if I decided to take it for a trip to the amazon forest or to attack the giant sequoya trees wich they were demonstrating on.

Funny old world the sales promoting sector.

Middi

 

[Feltwell]

Quite possibly urban myth (or b@ll@cks if you prefer a more direct term), but there are supposed to be regulations concerning exhaust emissions for military vehicles, including tanks.

It seems a little pointless when whatever comes out of the pipe at the back is going to be nowhere near as environmentally damaging as what comes out of the pipe at the front!

 

[middi]

Good comment Feltwell, it totally substantiates my topic heading

( mind you, opposing and well substantiate views totally depend on the one that pulls the trigger and the other that stands behind the emission pipe :wink: )

Middi

 

[philpjuk100]

I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK
I sleep all night and I work all day
(He's a lumberjack and he's OK
He sleeps all night and he works all day)
I cut down trees, I eat my lunch
I go to the lavat'ry
On Wednesdays I go shopping
And have buttered scones for tea

 

[vicky whitworth]

Is this boy talk?

 

[philpjuk100]

I cut down trees, I skip and jump
I love to press wild flow'rs
I put on women's clothing



And hang around in bars

 

[Penners]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZa26_esLBE&feature=related

 

[AMc]

Quite possibly urban myth (or b@ll@cks if you prefer a more direct term), but there are supposed to be regulations concerning exhaust emissions for military vehicles, including tanks.

It seems a little pointless when whatever comes out of the pipe at the back is going to be nowhere near as environmentally damaging as what comes out of the pipe at the front!

I reckon that there must be emissions regulations on tanks as the people behind them are more than likely to be infantry and support personnel who you'd probably need to arrive ah hem "fighting fit" at their destination.

I remember a quite serious news report about the British Army becoming more environmentally responsible by decreasing the amount of depleted uranium in their ammunition. The report completely missed the point, somehow implying that a small amount of left over bullets might be cluttering up Salisbury Plain - totally missing the point as you can see from this article from 2003.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/14/iraq.military