Lighting Fires

[Marisa Meléndez]

 

Does anyone know which of these is the most enviro friendly for lighting fires?

 

Matches (tree cutting + landfill waste)

Reusable lighter (fuel)

Magnesium fire starter (mining)

[Martina Rowley]

Ooh, cool question! I don't have a definitive answer but based on what I do know I offer this:

Worst: reusable lighters. Requires a plastic casing, therefore using additional petroleum resources, plus metal ignition parts, and the fuel. Waste factor: Not recyclable, does not decompose, and mostly single-use (not many people buy nice silver refillable lighters anymore)

 

Least bad:  matches. Often made from pine or aspen trees; not sure if logged specifically for matches or if 'leftover' smaller pieces are used. The head of the match (tiny) is a bit of flammable chemicals and wax, plus the cardboard box with the lighting strip. See process and details here: madehow.com/Volume-3/Match.html

   Waste factor: Miniscule. Half of the match burns to a cinder during use. The remaining half will have a miniscule impact on landfill waste. Although they have been dipped in a fire retardant, I don't think they would leach anything noticeable into the groundwater. I hope.

 

Dubious: magnesium fire starter. Don't know how they're made or where they are sourced from. But any mining activity has major impacts on the environment, e.g. deforestation, removal of good top soil, disturbance of groundwater. Waste factor: no idea!

 

So I would stick with matches. But you may find details at above mentioned "Made how" website that suggest otherwise! Then let me know, please. :)

 

  ~Martina

[Marisa Meléndez]

Unfortunately, according to the link you gave me, matchsticks are not made from scraps but rather are made from whole tree logs. I also found this information on the Umbra site which pretty well corresponds to the Made How site:

"Safety matches, the most common variety, are made of woods like white pine and aspen and soaked in fire-retardant ammonium phosphate and paraffin wax. The tip is treated with a mix of antimony trisulfide, potassium chlorate, sulfur, powdered glass, and glue. Yum! I couldn't find a definitive answer on the toxicity of fumes from a briefly lit match; however, good to know: The Diamond Match Company, the largest U.S. producer of matches, patented our current nonpoisonous match in 1910 after its employees became ill from inhaling the phosphorus used in match manufacturing at the time. Another thumbs up goes to Diamond for using wood sourced from responsibly managed forests. Even better option? A book of cardboard matches made from recycled paper."

Here's a link to Diamond Match's info on their GreenLight matches which they claim are certified by the Forest Stewardship Council and to which they have a link to. http://www.diamondbrands.com/pages/greenlight/82.php However, I ran a search in the FSC's database to see if they truly are certified and/or if it is up to date, but I could not find anything. Perhaps someone else will have better luck. http://info.fsc.org/PublicCertificateSearch.

Martina Rowley said:

Ooh, cool question! I don't have a definitive answer but based on what I do know I offer this:

Worst: reusable lighters. Requires a plastic casing, therefore using additional petroleum resources, plus metal ignition parts, and the fuel. Waste factor: Not recyclable, does not decompose, and mostly single-use (not many people buy nice silver refillable lighters anymore)

 

Least bad:  matches. Often made from pine or aspen trees; not sure if logged specifically for matches or if 'leftover' smaller pieces are used. The head of the match (tiny) is a bit of flammable chemicals and wax, plus the cardboard box with the lighting strip. See process and details here: madehow.com/Volume-3/Match.html

   Waste factor: Miniscule. Half of the match burns to a cinder during use. The remaining half will have a miniscule impact on landfill waste. Although they have been dipped in a fire retardant, I don't think they would leach anything noticeable into the groundwater. I hope.

 

Dubious: magnesium fire starter. Don't know how they're made or where they are sourced from. But any mining activity has major impacts on the environment, e.g. deforestation, removal of good top soil, disturbance of groundwater. Waste factor: no idea!

 

So I would stick with matches. But you may find details at above mentioned "Made how" website that suggest otherwise! Then let me know, please. :)

 

  ~Martina

[Ray Leistner]

Way more important that how you start a fire is how you use the fire once it's started.  If you just want warmth, fires are not a good way to use trees.  It's better to fill a bag with leaves and use that to keep warm.  If you want to cook, sheltering the fire is most important, or else the heat will get blown away by the wind, nothing will reach the pot, and you'll end up using way more wood.   The amount of water in the food makes a difference, too.

 

Once a pot is boiling, you can place it on a thick layer of dry leaves, and bury it in more leaves, and the food will keep cooking on retained heat, and no more wood needs to be burned.  This will save much more wood than in a whole box of matches.

[Mich Poulin]

Personally, I am a very big fan of using Flint and Steel. Once you get the hang of it you'll appreciate its simplicity and effectiveness. Environmentally, I can not see it being too bad. You can light thousands of fires with the same equipment, and the materials used are readily available. You do not need to use magnesium, although it is helpful when all is wet, but rather a tuft of cotton with some sort of wax (I use lip balm or Vaseline) can be more easily used. Just send your sparks not the cotton ball and you and your fire will start without issue.

 

You can also used charred cotton cloth from old pieces of clothing as well (instead of a cotton ball...

 

I hope that this helps.

 

 

[Marisa Meléndez]

Okay, thanks! I will consider all of that.

[Mich Poulin]

If you have never started a fire with flint and steel, and would like to learn, I would be more than happy to teach you (or a small group) how to do so. It should not take more than twenty minutes from start to finish.

 

-Mich

Marisa Meléndez said:

Okay, thanks! I will consider all of that.

[Marisa Meléndez]

Sure! I'd appreciate that.