BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Murray McGregor <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 2 Nov 2002 10:33:37 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (85 lines)
In article <[log in to unmask]>, Karen
Oland <[log in to unmask]> writes
>Polystyrene would have to be rejected on any environmental grounds.

I think that is an emotive knee-jerk reaction.

Scandinavia is about as eco-friendly as you can get. They cite
environmental grounds in their reasoning behind using them. So at least
some places with immaculate credentials would see fit to disagree with
you.

>2) If having to burn equipment in the case of disease, wood is a relatively
>clean burning fuel, while polystyrene is not. Not to mention the large
>puddle of goo left at the end,

What puddle of goo? We are talking expanded polystyrene here, not solid
stuff. It burns away to nothing. And it does not need much in the way of
fuel to get it going. A couple of handfuls of dry grass and twigs, or if
you like, an egg cup full of petrol (gasoline).

Not being a scientist I cannot tell you what goes into the air, but for
sure there is no residue problem where you get rid of it.

However, properly looked after, these are boxes for LIFE. You need never
cut down another tree to replace them. If you break them they glue back
together easily with a good wood glue and are then just about as strong
as new. I have broken a few (mostly in one incident where I ran over a
stack I was unaware was behind the truck) and have repaired them ALL
with ease in a very short time. So in 5 years absolutely zero to burn
and zero to landfill, and no weathering or ageing apparently taking
place at all either. Wish I could say the same for my wooden ones, which
cost more to begin with, and cost me many dollars a year to keep up the
endless repair and replacement cycle.

>(while if you have used only environmentally
>friendly paints, you could break and burn woodenware even inside, if in a
>small enough quantity).

Up to a point yes, but you are left with more residue to dispose of in
these cases than with polystyrene. Even if we are just talking about the
nails alone.
>
>3) At the end of life, wooden ware will either decompose well if tossed out
>or may be easily burned (and if no lead paint, the ashes spread in pasture
>after removing nails). Polystyrene contributes to the landfill and
>essentially never breaks down.

Look after it and it need never get there. The pollination benefits due
to the superior colony strength are not taken into account in your
condemnation. The bees seem very happy in the boxes and they suffer from
so many fewer problems. Perhaps you think it eco-friendly to condemn 4
times more colonies to winter death? Getting upset at polystyrene
beehives, when they have such market benefits, is not, in my opinion, a
balanced response. I do not pretend they are perfect, but they are the
best I have found so far and I feel the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

If you are in an area where the climate is very hard on woodenware you
can be replacing boxes at an alarming rate. In polystyrene this is
markedly reduced. Even the fuel expended in getting your woodenware
felled, shipped, sawn, cut to size, and delivered to you, is largely of
petrochemical origin. There are ecological negatives on both sides.

Also, have you seen how degraded land is after a crop of trees has been
felled? Only suitable for more trees without vast efforts to clear the
roots and stumps. To get the sizes needed for deep boxes you need OLD
trees too.

In some parts of the area I go to in summer with the bees they are still
trying to repair damage done by tree felling 60 years ago, and the
landscape is still seriously degraded. The deep rutting from extraction
work, the mineral deficient soils left behind, and their acidification
as the old wood breaks down. The loss of species smothered by the dense
canopy of conifers (its a desert in there) takes a long time to repair
itself, if it ever does. Not topics the timber industry care to dwell
on.

This is getting seriously off topic, (I did not even post it on Bee-L)
when the only subject was thickness of hive walls and bee health,
coupled to a question about polystyrene from Scandinavia.



--
Murray McGregor

ATOM RSS1 RSS2