EPA issue ban on wood stoves

   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #301  
Tightening controls to the point that it kills the use of the product by making it too expensive, too complicated, too unreliable is the same as outlawing the product. Regulations that are constantly adjusted are simply a tool to manipulate subjects - us.

All the while, the same government builds nuclear reactors and concentrates radioactive material at enormous financial and environmental cost, to produce heat, thereby produce steam, thereby produce electricity to use to crack sea water to produce hydrogen and oxygen. Then an entire chemical facility on said warships then use these elements in a Synthol - like process which adds carbon and other elements (probably sulphur) and produces long chain hydrocarbons which are refined into jet fuel for aircraft. No-one wishes to speak of what becomes of the by products of this process while at sea (I worked on Synthol reactors for years and they are messy). I assume they are dumped over the side or best case scenario - flared off into the atmosphere...

Now if we want to talk about efficiency or pollution that is one thing, but when the regulating authority exempts themselves, then they are behaving like monarchs or dictators.
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #303  
I posted this link in one I started regarding the EPA overreaching and regulating anyplace that rain may fall on that was moved to politics thread. however this is regarding ANY EPA rules over last couple decades where they admit not much they have done can be proven to have made any difference.

EPA Concedes: We Can

The Wood Stove one is just an additional one this new one that was moved to the politics section is WORSE where it will cost ALL of us tax payers a lot more $ as they have to increase the bureaucracy 10 fold more just to try and look at every spot that collects rain or has rain flowing thru it.

Mark
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #304  
It's OK to burn as much oil and gas as you want. As much as you can afford, in fact... Don't worry about the impact to the environment from getting it from the ground, piping it, transporting it, processing it, transporting it again, etc...

Forget the past paragraph and it's planetary enormity . We need to now micro-focus on a non-proven negativity, of a non tax generating sensible alternative, that being locally grown wood. Being front-lined as a possible irritant to kids with asthma.
This require immediate government action, and restrictions that will cost all involved dearly.

Absolutely Absurd
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #305  
It is not only the EPA in the US with regulations on these particles:

Air Quality | Environmental Performance Index

What the targets are: 10 オg/m3 for Average Exposure to PM2.5 (fine particulate matter); 0% for PM2.5 Exceedance; 0% for Household Air Quality Indoor Solid Fuel Usage. For more information, click here.

Why we include it: Suspended particulates contribute to acute lower respiratory infections and other diseases such as cancer. They can penetrate human lung and blood tissue, leading to higher incidences of cardiovascular and lung disease. Most countries currently monitor and report coarse particulate pollution, or PM10 (particles between 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter). However, fine particulates or PM2.5 (2.5 microns and smaller) lodge deep in lung tissue and are far more injurious to health than coarser particulates. PM2.5 also travel farther from their source than PM10 and can have a more toxic composition, including heavy metals and carcinogenic compounds.

Cooking with solid fuels over open fires or in simple stoves exposes households to daily pollutant concentrations that lie between those of second-hand smoke exposure and active smoking. (See: Considering Smoking as an Air Pollution Problem for Environmental Health). Solid fuel combustion is associated with increased mortality from pneumonia and other acute lower respiratory diseases among children. Among adults it is connected to increased mortality from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and, where coal is used, lung cancer. The most recent Global Burden of Disease project (GBD 2010) found household air pollution responsible for around 3.5 million premature deaths worldwide .1, A measure of solid fuel use (as a useful proxy for household air pollution) served as an estimation of health impacts from household air pollution in the GBD 2010 and, until 2007, as an indicator of environmental sustainability in a MDG.

Where the data come from: The satellite-derived PM2.5 data were provided by Aaron van Donkelaar of Dalhousie University. Population data for population weighting of PM2.5 concentrations and measurement of the proportion of the population above various PM2.5 concentration thresholds were obtained from the Global Rural Urban Mapping Project, v.1 at the NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center hosted by the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) at Columbia University. The Household Air Quality data came from the WHO Household Energy Database, which provides estimates of the percentage of households using solid fuels (coal, wood, charcoal, dung, and crop residues), liquid fuels (kerosene), gaseous fuels (LPG, natural gas, biogas) and electricity. The WHO data come from household surveys, with a total of 586 data points in 155 countries.

http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/123085/AQG2ndEd_7_3Particulate-matter.pdf

PM2.5 in Salt Lake Valley

BBC News - Air pollution 'still harming Europeans' health'

cnsnews raises some questions on objectivity
CNSNews's file | PolitiFact Oregon
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/NAR_Point_Counterpoint_with_CNS_News.pdf
About CNS | CNS News Watch

Most municipalities that implement the more restrictive measures have reacted to serious air quality issues. I have an Andes kitchen cook stove and a Lopi heating stove in terrible NY. Many wood burning stoves in our area..the sky isn't falling. Some efficiency and particle reduction measures are good.

Loren
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #306  
All I can say is my Grandparents lived healthy lives well into their 90's on the farm and they cooked with their Wedgewood wood stove and had radiant heating with a basement wood fired boiler... they had zero lung issues and neither had cancer.

My Grandfather only needed a pacemaker which he refused... said he had never spent a day in the Hospital and that was that.
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #307  
It is not only the EPA in the US with regulations on these particles: Air Quality | Environmental Performance Index What the targets are: 10 オg/m3 for Average Exposure to PM2.5 (fine particulate matter); 0% for PM2.5 Exceedance; 0% for Household Air Quality Indoor Solid Fuel Usage. For more information, click here. Why we include it: Suspended particulates contribute to acute lower respiratory infections and other diseases such as cancer. They can penetrate human lung and blood tissue, leading to higher incidences of cardiovascular and lung disease. Most countries currently monitor and report coarse particulate pollution, or PM10 (particles between 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter). However, fine particulates or PM2.5 (2.5 microns and smaller) lodge deep in lung tissue and are far more injurious to health than coarser particulates. PM2.5 also travel farther from their source than PM10 and can have a more toxic composition, including heavy metals and carcinogenic compounds. Cooking with solid fuels over open fires or in simple stoves exposes households to daily pollutant concentrations that lie between those of second-hand smoke exposure and active smoking. (See: Considering Smoking as an Air Pollution Problem for Environmental Health). Solid fuel combustion is associated with increased mortality from pneumonia and other acute lower respiratory diseases among children. Among adults it is connected to increased mortality from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and, where coal is used, lung cancer. The most recent Global Burden of Disease project (GBD 2010) found household air pollution responsible for around 3.5 million premature deaths worldwide .1, A measure of solid fuel use (as a useful proxy for household air pollution) served as an estimation of health impacts from household air pollution in the GBD 2010 and, until 2007, as an indicator of environmental sustainability in a MDG. Where the data come from: The satellite-derived PM2.5 data were provided by Aaron van Donkelaar of Dalhousie University. Population data for population weighting of PM2.5 concentrations and measurement of the proportion of the population above various PM2.5 concentration thresholds were obtained from the Global Rural Urban Mapping Project, v.1 at the NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center hosted by the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) at Columbia University. The Household Air Quality data came from the WHO Household Energy Database, which provides estimates of the percentage of households using solid fuels (coal, wood, charcoal, dung, and crop residues), liquid fuels (kerosene), gaseous fuels (LPG, natural gas, biogas) and electricity. The WHO data come from household surveys, with a total of 586 data points in 155 countries. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/123085/AQG2ndEd_7_3Particulate-matter.pdf PM2.5 in Salt Lake Valley BBC News - Air pollution 'still harming Europeans' health' cnsnews raises some questions on objectivity CNSNews's file | PolitiFact Oregon http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/NAR_Point_Counterpoint_with_CNS_News.pdf About CNS | CNS News Watch Most municipalities that implement the more restrictive measures have reacted to serious air quality issues. I have an Andes kitchen cook stove and a Lopi heating stove in terrible NY. Many wood burning stoves in our area..the sky isn't falling. Some efficiency and particle reduction measures are good. Loren
Did anyone compare the health of those people had they eaten all raw uncooked food over the same time? That seems to be the real comparison. HS
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #308  
I've heated with wood since 1976. I've used a variety of stoves. I was worried when the first epa rules came through with the need for more efficiency and catalytic converters. I was worried that I would not be able to replace my stove. I ended up buying a shenandoah- inexpensive, big capacity, and no epa stuff tacked on. My guess is that they will be still selling their stoves. Buy the cleaner stoves if you afford it, but check out shenandoahs. I'm on my 2nd (18yr on the first), and its identical to my first one.
Sometimes these regs are more fuss than anything. There will always be a stove to buy.
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #309  
Really ? Did you per chance try to buy a diesel passenger car between 2005 and 2009 ? Thats right, no diesel passenger cars were sold for 4 years excepting the big trucks with 6+L engines and $50k+ price tags. And then in 2009 when VW came back, their only diesel car cost $25k and only gets 42mpg where they previously got 50mpg. The diesels that used to cost $13k are gone forever. I had one in Germany that I bought in 2001 and it cost $10500 and got 60mpg. Guess what ? The Europeans can still get them....

I HAD to get a 3/4 ton truck in 2010 so that I could legally tow my 8000lb loader backhoe and its gooseneck trailer. The 2008 Ford F250 diesel I got can hardly be described as reliable transportation. With less that 70k miles on it, it shut off the engine on the side of the road and locked out the ECU to prevent it being re-started due to an exhaust system sensor malfunction. If this had happened to me in the boonies in Colorado, where all this equipment is going, and it happened to be mid january, that inconvenience might have become a survival situation. The 3 nearby dealerships were so backlogged on warranty work on "those trucks" that I had to wait over 3 months to get my truck back. Oh, I forgot to mention that while the dealership was "fixing" it, they re-flashed the controller and the fuel economy dropped 2-3mpg to nothing better than 15mpg. It seems to be standard - every ECU re-flash = 2-3mpg less. When I bought it in Texas and drove it to MI it got better than 17mpg

This is from the same EPA, and these are going to be the same kinds of operating issues (and cost issues) people will be having with their stoves. If you have to spend $500/yr to replace damaged ceramic parts in your stove (problem with recent VC stoves as well as Harmon) you may soon decide that it is too expensive to burn wood. All the while the EPA phase 2 stoves are already performing at about 90% of the possible efficiency that is achievable without having real time computer control of your stove. And don't worry folks, that will be coming, just like points and condensers gave way to EFI and engine control computers. The problem, in case it is not obvious, is that very few wood stoves are sold in the US, so the cost compared to a controller for cars that are made by the millions will be very substantial. When every wood stove costs $6000 and annual maintenance is $500, wood stoves would have been effectively banned and merely a curiosity object.

Sometimes these regs are more fuss than anything. There will always be a stove to buy.
 
   / EPA issue ban on wood stoves #310  
It "wood" be nice if our Federal agencies acted on our behalf and provided comprehesive "improvement and upgrade" guide lines for existing stoves.

The Fischer stove down stairs is over 30 years old, and still burns wood as new (brick lined!)

I "wood" love to get 90% efficiency from that same stove. ;-)

Burn hot, burn short, feed often!
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

4- 6 DRILL COLLARS (A50854)
4- 6 DRILL COLLARS...
2018 FREIGHTLINER M2 26FT NON CDL BOX TRUCK (A51222)
2018 FREIGHTLINER...
2013 FREIGHTLINER EXT CAB SERVICE TRUCK (A51406)
2013 FREIGHTLINER...
377780 (A48837)
377780 (A48837)
40ft Shipping Container (A49461)
40ft Shipping...
2013 INTERNATIONAL WORKSTAR 7600 SBA 6X4 DUMP TRK (A51406)
2013 INTERNATIONAL...
 
Top