The government’s advertising watchdog has issued an “advice notice” to Brighton and Hove City Council over a campaign in which it said that wood burners were “cosy killers”.
But the council said that its claims about the potential harmful effects of wood-burning stoves were fully supported by research which is in the public domain.
The Advertising Standards Authority said: “We received a complaint about a magazine ad for Brighton and Hove City Council’s ‘cosy killer’ campaign.
“(It) claimed, in relation to wood burners and open fires, that ‘particle pollution contributes to 1 in 20 deaths of people over the age of 30’.
“The complainant challenged whether this claim was misleading and could be substantiated.
“We wrote to the advertiser with an advice notice, explaining that if consumers are likely to understand a claim as an objective one, then advertisers are required to hold adequate supporting evidence to substantiate said claim.
“We told Brighton and Hove City Council that they shouldn’t make objective claims in relation to the effects of wood burners and open fires if those claims can’t be backed up by adequate evidence.
“We issue an advice notice where we consider there are potential problems under our advertising rules but do not consider the issues raised are so significant as to warrant a full formal investigation.”
Councillor Tim Rowkins, the council’s cabinet member for net zero and environmental services, said: “All the statements included in this campaign were substantiated with DEFRA or Public Health England references, based on research which is available in the public domain and which have now been added to our website.
“Wood-burning stoves and open fires are a risk to public health, particularly in cities.
“We have a duty as a local authority to make people aware of this and will continue to do so.”
The council has added links to a web page headed “Using solid fuels safely and legally”.
The complaint became the subject of a story on the Mailonline news website which described the campaign as “scaremongering”.
The Mail said that wood burners remained legal to use and some 1.5 million British homes were estimated to have them installed.
The news website quoted Andy Genovese, who runs Hove Wood Burners, saying: “In conducting such a campaign they have harmed small local solid fuel businesses, domestic manufacturers and a genuinely innovative British success story.
“The council has wilfully misinterpreted scientific studies into air pollution and waged war on wood stoves.
“If they had read beyond the headlines of the studies, they would have found candles, air fryers and toasters are far more problematic in terms of particulates in the home.
“The studies they cited show wood stoves sit well within the government safety margins while a host of other household activities clearly do not.
“As regards air pollution outside the home, eco-design stoves account for less than 5 per cent of airborne particulates, less than cigarette smoke and considerably less than road traffic.
“It is hard to come to any conclusion other than the council are either very poorly advised or they had another agenda when this misconceived campaign was launched. It looks like a waste of taxpayers’ money.”
Mailonline added: “Particulate pollution is widely agreed to be the air pollutant with the biggest impact on human health, increasing the risk of respiratory and heart conditions, as well as hospital admissions.
“Children growing up exposed to particulate pollution are more likely to have reduced lung function and can develop asthma as the tiny particles penetrate the lungs and enter into the bloodstream.”
It’s not surprising the council have received a slap on the wrist for this. The had to withdraw another claim that wood burning accounts for more pollution than all traffic on the UK’s roads mid campaign after DEFRA produced figures showing this was not the case.
That’s not true
But it is..
The official DEFRA statistisc are here in black and white (see Figs. 4 & 5.) – https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/emissions-of-air-pollutants/emissions-of-air-pollutants-in-the-uk-particulate-matter-pm10-and-pm25
Why do claim what that?
The easy solution to this would be to reduce gas and electric prices, then people wouldn’t need to use cheaper options…
Hmm! Judging by that wood burning advert from B&H City Council, anyone over about 65 should now be dead because in the early days we all had open fireplaces and often burned wood! I did so for about 40 years!
My father had a wood burning stroke and recently had a stroke. It may not have been this that caused this but they do increase the risk of stroke. Trust me. If you visited the stroke ward, vaping and wood burning stoves would be off your list.
What is a ‘wood burning stroke’?
According to the Centre for Disease Control, the biggest risk factors are:
High blood pressure
High Cholesterol
Heart disease
Diabetes
Obesity
Other factors include; smoking, inactivity and poor diet. There is no mention of air borne particulates and wood burners.
Where did you get your information from?
There’s lots of other information.
https://www.dsawsp.org/health/particle-pollution
And here’s some info from Centre for Disease Control.
https://www.cdc.gov/air-quality/media/MTbiomass_conference_health_outcomes_1.pdf
The conclusion of the second study you referenced says nothing about negative outcomes. It merely suggests where more research could be carried out. There is not much of a point being made here.
More wokeism from the nannies at BHCC
Is clean air woke?
We already have the cleanest air since records began
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/jun/10/physicalsciences.research
There is no safe level of air pollution. The air can be cleaner.
Phasing out wood burning will reduce health issues.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/may/02/rise-in-percentage-of-homes-with-wood-burners-since-2022-analysis-finds
There is no safe level of anything for that matter. Just about every activity that humans must engage in for survival involves risk. The idealised risk free environment will never exist.
A zero sum argument. ‘This practice doesn’t align with my world view so it should be banned’.
Those with a knowledge of solid fuel will know there are ways it can be used to minimise pollution, and that a blanket ‘phasing out’ of something that offers a great many people warmth and joy over the dark winter months is not the answer
Does Brighton council promote the use of alternative smokeless fuel? (no!)
Do they advertise good burning practice and the advantages of using seasoned wood fuel? (no!)
Do they promote the environmental benefits of using DEFRA approved or Eco Design stoves? (no!)
Do they enforce the current rules governing Smoke Control Areas in the city? (no!)
Other councils have implemented the above to great effect.
This campaign has been a missed opportunity.
This is a modern classic of a squirming, virtue signalling non-argument.
Many of us grew up in homes with open fires, driving cars with smelly exhaust fumes, and we’d typically light bonfires in the garden to get rid of unwanted vegetation and rubbish.
We now have cleaner cars, electric or powered by low polluting fossil fuels, and we have all sorts of efficient heating in our homes, none of which produces smoke.
We (hopefully) compost our unwanted vegetation and food waste, as I do at my allotment.
The woodburning stove has similarly come a long way, in that secondary combustion stoves are generally ‘clean burn’ – when using the correct seasoned logs or other kiln-dried timber.
But the council’s need for net zero policies has put woodburners on the woke list of no-nos, and that’s so sad to see, especially when they bend the facts to suit their policies.
I guess the seasonal British BBQ, with burgers and burnt sausages – or flame-charred halloumi – is also at risk.
The world is not, and never will be, a hazard free environment. It is difficult to understand the level of Hubris that makes certain local councillors believe that a thousand or two votes in local elections renders them sufficiently expert to waste vast sums of public money with campaigns like this. Take Tim Rowkins; is he a Doctor? No, actually, according to his CV on the council website, he is a ‘mix engineer’, whatever that is. (‘m guessing It is likely to involve messing about in recording studios with ‘wannabee famous’ musicians as opposed to a more adult occupation). It is a source of despair for many, including myself, that public money is used in such a profligate way like this.
Another epic waste of public money from Brighton Council
The city Council had no qualms when entering into a waste contract resulting in the huge black sack burner in Newhaven.
What about the ultra fine particles released from that 24/7 364/yr?
The same thing has happened to the Stove Industry Association.
The SIA misinformation is arguably worse as it wasn’t new information that made it out-of-date, like the Cosy Killer campaign.
https://medium.com/@ChronicIllnessChannel/scaremongering-misinformation-complaint-about-sia-also-upheld-b3cb5388b5c8