10

EPA: Better to freeze to death than heat with wood.

Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago to Government
159 comments | Share | Flag

What is next? Will they send inspectors to your home to sniff your chimney? The EPA is once again out of control! Wood burners beware! Campfires verboten?
SOURCE URL: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2014/01/29/epas-wood-burning-stove-ban-has-chilling-consequences-for-many-rural-people/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Zenphamy 10 years ago
    I was raised with wood heat and cooking, hand drawn well water, and no indoor toilet. We had no money for anything else. But that doesn't matter to a bureaucrat. It would have been better that we froze to death than a little wood smoke in the air.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by plusaf 10 years ago
      When I was a little kid in NJ a few million years ago, I noticed that one of the first droughts we experienced seemed to come just a few years after the State of NJ made it illegal to burn leaves in the fall.

      I'd theorized that it was the lack of available condensation nuclei for the raindrops to form around...

      Go figure. :)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years ago
    One thing we haven't mentioned yet in the article is this insidious crony tag teaming-where extremist environmental groups "sue" the EPA for not going far enough with the regs. Then the case is always "settled" out of court-giving the environmental groups money to operate. This cozy relationship means the taxpayers pay to keep these environmental nazis in business. Congress should threaten to de-fund the EPA if they continue this practice. OF course they won't. and breaches like this are so plentiful which holes in the dam do you plug first?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Hello khalling,
      It is easy to intimidate when legal costs are involved. Many citizens are done injustice for lack of funding to feed the lawyers...
      Regards,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 10 years ago
        in this case, however, there is no intimidation. The EPA encourages such groups to sue. After ll, it's the taxpayers money and built into their budget. In the article, it said 6 state atty general filed suit against the EPA for regulations on this not going far enough. EPA will settle the suits by giving the liberal states money.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by iroseland 10 years ago
    first, the EPA has its head up its ass. After that, I could never see wood as anything more than supplemental. Granted, I am from Wisconsin where it takes a bit more than a few cords of wood to keep a home warm for a real winter, Also, my house on Juneau was originally coal heated, it even had a handy coal dropper lever that could be operated from the second floor master bedroom.. But, during renovations the quantity of coal heating remains found between the wall was pretty nasty. I had not thought that would be a big modern problem, but now in the Pacific Northwest we are in a home with less than adequate heating and even less than adequate insulation. So, we have been using the fireplace to supplement the BTU's that the furnace can come up with. Even that has made a bit of a annoying mess.. Given a choice I am a radiant heat under the clawfoot tub kind of guy. Still, I recognize that while I have grown up to not have to depend on wood for heat there are plenty of folk who really need that option and I would prefer that they dont freeze to death and that the best among them grow up to also not need wood for heat.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Hello iroseland,
      I have radiant heat in my floors. It is fantastic. A few years ago I purchased a high efficiency natural gas boiler. This year it has paid off. Still, I have a nice freestanding wood burning stove and there is nothing like the warmth, smell, sight and sound of some oak logs burning away...
      Regards,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 10 years ago
    Some states (or in our case, "Air Quality Control Districts") already have "no burn days", and they love it when the neighbors of such evil cellulose-incinerating miscreants turn them in for the appropriate givernment money grab and pssible re-education.

    Our new home (as 98% of the businesses and homes up here) had all-wood heat - all of the stoves (and the house) were built before 1978, and as such, the rule was, until they were removed they were "grandfathered". When we had one of them replaced with a propane stove, the remover had to "disassemble" the old one to render it inoperable to comply with the Big Brother Nose-in-your-business law. (Amazing how easy it would be to reassemble it, and likely commit a class IV felony in the process... Probably should have tunred it in so the Elected Lackeys could "recycle" it to their own privileged homes to keep me from being "anti-social"...)

    God forbid if someone opened, say, a steel mill or glass manufacturer or even a blacksmith forge here in the states... One, it takes work away from the far-eastern people's democratic republics, which is who we are supposed to be supporting before we "privileged Americcans", Two, the liberally-poisoned state governments would likely send the national guard in to shut it down, confiscate it, and turn it into something more 'politically acceptable", like a Shared Common Core/PETA Video Production Facility...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years ago
    think about the industry. They can only sell pellet stoves. Wow.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Exactly. In addition to the infringement on individuals, it is another job killer. That is our government ...hard at work!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 10 years ago
        destroyers with no conscience
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Susanne 10 years ago
          Government approved pellet stoves, that burn regulated government tested pellets. We used to have one in the old house - it put out heat, good, massive heat, easy on pellets, but the regs changed so we were supposed to change it out for a newer, government-approved --catalytic-- wood stove. Used more pellets to burn allegedly cleaner, and put out less BTUs. Then we were told that the county would no longer allowe anyone to use wood as their primary heat source. AND they were looking to add a woodstove surcharge onto our property tax.

          We sold the house and left. Now we can heat and cook with wood. Converting my "decomissioned" franklin (put in propane) to a coal forge, taking their dotgov commandments and turning it into a moneymaker.

          Prolly gonna break some environmentalists heart, too! --grins--
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by loneeagle 10 years ago
    Wonder how EPA plans on handling those pesky forest fires that are allowed to burn all that horrible wood? Remember, forest fires are critical for healthy forests! What a conundrum! If wood burning stoves in rural areas are so terrible how does one justify allowing forest fires to burn? Wonder if anyone has done a study of the amount of smoke particles produced by an average forest fire compares to all wood burning stoves say in the United States? I suspect one forest fire far exceeds all wood burning stoves combined.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Hello loneeagle,
      I recall a natural history program on TV some years ago that asserted rightfully, that populating the continent has reduced the natural state of forest fires. People have cleared land and combated forest fires, thus reducing the acreage nature would and has burned in the past. The notion then that man has increased the pollution above what would be natural is therefore discredited. If anything man has reduced the pollutants associated.
      Respectfully,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Notperfect 10 years ago
    Another reason why Michigan still has people that love the establishment in all parts of this country. End of the year winter season and people up hear cannot find wood and if they do try $300.00 a cord. Just a few weeks ago it sold for $50-$60.00 a cord.I truly believe in capitalism, but those who do not are taking advantage of those who really need it. Those who have run out that sell I have talked to say well will those who buy from them now will they buy again in the future. I have kept their numbers and will not forget. Just sayin'
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Greetings Notperfect,
      Indeed. A face cord of split hardwood is still selling for $60 dollars just a few miles from me in northern Oakland county. Anyone gouging will lose customers. If the price is that high more people will sell and drive the price back down. That is a perfect opportunity for someone more competitive to enter the market. Still, it is best to buy early while the supply is plentiful.
      Respectfully,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 10 years ago
    Living in suburbia and tree farming on the side, we save about $5 every night when burning wood in cold weather. The woodstove is old, trustworthy and so are we.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 10 years ago
    This is just part of the UN Agenda 21 process, get everyone into the inner city apartments where the government controls what heat you may have. Those using wood, represent freedom instead of control.
    In Ohio, we don't use our fireplace, family allergies. However, when we cut down any of the trees on our wooded lot, we always have people take the wood who heat either their whole house, or their garage workshop with woodburning stoves.On the Navajo reservation,in the Four Corners area our Wast, we regularly have donated to buy such stoves for winter heating. There are a lot of areas that don't have natural gas lines, propane delivery to remote areas is not easy and there just is not electricity everywhere. The EPA does not care about the environment, or it would make weather control stations in the US, Russian and 20 other locations around the globe, including China and Scandinavia their focus. They are the ones heating the ionosphere and changing the jet stream.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by exindigo 10 years ago
    Chinas main source of heating and cooking is coal. Even in large cities, workers can be seen carrying coal home in plastic bags exactly like those we are banning here. So how is the EPA going to regulate the massive output of particulates from China. Also, India uses charcoal as a primary heating and cooking fuel. Are we going to also regulate India? In emerging nations in Africa and South America, wood and coal are primary heating and cooking fuels. Are we going to regulate them too?

    After the EPA completely takes freedoms away, they will issue reports about how much this draconian order has reduced worldwide particulate levels. We are being screwed and screwed badly by a group of radical environmentalists who are so sure of their cause that even Jesuite true-believers blush at the extreme nature of environmentalists belief.

    Oh, a side point: EPA officials are not authorized to carry concealed in addition to being armed while working. What do EPA people need with guns? Why do they need to have concealed carry authorization like police? Does tyne EPA now have police powers?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by WIGGY 10 years ago
    This maybe an economic move. sell off the old stove for scrap metal and buy a new updated one.
    That will help the economy. do you think that is what they are attempting?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by RevJay4 10 years ago
      No. They are after one thing, and only one thing. Power over the people where each and every one of us must kiss at the altar of government for everything in our lives. GW is just another excuse to reach that goal.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Hello Wiggy,
      Unfortunately no. In any case it would be Keynes' "broken window theory" and wouldn't work anyhow. I believe Hayek has successfully disproved this theory.
      Respectfully,
      O.A.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by amagi 10 years ago
        Dear O.A., The broken window, I believe, was
        by Frederic Bastiat.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 10 years ago
          Hello amagi,
          You could be right. Bastiat probably was the originator. I have studied both. Keynes did support such notions though. He may have been the one that suggested the equivalent; the notion that economic activity such as digging holes and refilling them would be just as valuable to an economy... Nonsense either way and Hayek's arguments to the contrary are more persuasive.
          Regards,
          O.A.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 10 years ago
            P.S. Upon further reflection I may not have been clear. Both Bastiat and Hayek argued against such notions as positive economic benefit from breaking a window so the glazier would have work, noting that this ignores the reality that this revenue would have been spent anyway and benefited the spender more. Economically it would be a wash except for the benefit to the spender. Keynes would have supported such actions oblivious to this consideration.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by SolitudeIsBliss 10 years ago
    Well, unless they go house to house how are they going to know who's burning wood? Bleep them. We'll burn what we want when we want !!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by exindigo 10 years ago
      They will solicit neighbors to turn other neighbors in. The same thing happened under Lenin and Stalin and Khrushchev. People turned in neighbors to "People's Committees" who were in charge of a myriad of public rules. In the end, most of the people turned in and sent to the Gulag were the victims of petty jealousy and insignificant local spats. We're headed in the same direction.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by amagi 10 years ago
      Agreed. REminds me of the local man who wanted to build a big greenhouse. The city inspector showed up and told the man who he should continue which made thegreenhouse look more like a guest house with many windows. The man got real angry, grabbed a
      baseball bat and shased the inspector off the property shouting that if he came back he would kill him. He never did show up again and the man
      had his self-designed greenhouse.
      That inspector was our neighbor for a while and I am certain he was at least a borderline psycho-
      pat who had toldl us we could not cut any trees
      over 3 inches in diameter without permission. We did, many times, but the fool was afraid of my husband who once had told him to get lost.
      I do believe that for some of those busybodies
      intimidation works for they are cowards.
      Wonder how far we could go with that ...?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years ago
    They're quite wrong:
    "The EPA has recently banned the production and sale of 80 percent of America’s current wood-burning stoves, the oldest heating method known to mankind"

    That would be the "fireplace", not the wood-burning stove.

    Anybody else here know how to build a natural fireplace? Anybody else done it?

    Maybe I could become a modern day Harry Tuttle...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dht_3Nzi...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jlc 10 years ago
      Technically not so. The fireplace with a chimney (which is what we mean when we say 'fireplace') was invented in the 14th century. (Though the Romans had hypocausts.) The earliest method of heating was a campfire - outside or inside (as in an Anglo-Saxon or Norse great hall).

      FYI. Fireplaces and wood burning stoves are prohibited in LA County - even though there are catalytic converters that you can put in chimneys to reduce the emissions to EPA acceptable limits.

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 10 years ago
        Hello jlc,
        California has so much to offer. Its politicians/politics not so much... I feel for the few rational residents. If people were allowed to harvest and burn the dead wood in controlled ways wouldn't it help alleviate some of the wildfire problems?
        Regards,
        O.A.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo