Play with fire - save the planet.

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.

warmhearth

New Member
Apr 25, 2007
2
Back in the 70's the old Wood Heat Alliance (Now HPBA) provided us dealers with bumper stickers that said "Wood guys are Good guys!" and "Have you hugged your woodstove today?" This had to do with saving oil consumption during the oil crisis.
Now we need some that say -"Play with fire - save the planet" or "Wood heat is Green heat" or maybe "Wood heat is carbon neutral and home grown".
Whether or not you like Al Gore, his movie "An Inconveniant Truth" is a nationwide buzz. Our industry needs to get this message out. Wood and pellets are biofuels that do not add any carbon to the atmosphere that wouldn't occur anyway when trees decay in the forests naturally. Coal and oil and any electricity generated by fossil fuels takes carbon locked in the earth and releases into the atmosphere causing the greenhouse effect.
This is a fairly simple concept that most consumers now understand. The wood heat industry needs to promote our products as a big part of the solution to global warming. Burning wood for heat means less carbon released into the atmosphere because you use less fossil fuels in your daily life. Perhaps we can give our customers a free sapling to plant with each stove purchased to further remove carbon as the tree grows. Share ads with a local nursery somehow.
I've just started some newspaper ads that say "A CONVENIANT truth - wood heat is GREEN heat."
We'll see what happens.
Kerry Duggan
The Wood Stove Inc.
Gainesville, Florida
 
Kerry:

Re:
Back in the 70’s the old Wood Heat Alliance (Now HPBA) provided us dealers with bumper stickers that said “Wood guys are Good guys!” and “Have you hugged your woodstove today?” This had to do with saving oil consumption during the oil crisis.

Now we need some that say -"Play with fire - save the planet” or “Wood heat is Green heat” or maybe “Wood heat is carbon neutral and home grown”.

Whether or not you like Al Gore, his movie “An Inconveniant Truth” is a nationwide buzz. Our industry needs to get this message out. Wood and pellets are biofuels that do not add any carbon to the atmosphere that wouldn’t occur anyway when trees decay in the forests naturally. Coal and oil and any electricity generated by fossil fuels takes carbon locked in the earth and releases into the atmosphere causing the greenhouse effect.

This is a fairly simple concept that most consumers now understand. The wood heat industry needs to promote our products as a big part of the solution to global warming. Burning wood for heat means less carbon released into the atmosphere because you use less fossil fuels in your daily life. Perhaps we can give our customers a free sapling to plant with each stove purchased to further remove carbon as the tree grows. Share ads with a local nursery somehow.

I’ve just started some newspaper ads that say “A CONVENIANT truth - wood heat is GREEN heat.”

We’ll see what happens.

Kerry Duggan

The Wood Stove Inc.
Gainesville, Florida

All great slogans!

I think this one is my favorite:

"Wood heat is carbon neutral and home grown."

This addresses the fiction that wood heat is bad for the atmosphere.

It also points out that its processing cannot be outsourced.

Lastly, it (to the thoughtful, at least) indirectly makes the statement that we needn't be fighting foreign oil wars.

Also, your use of the word "grown" denotes the fact that it is a renewable, as opposed to something that has to be drug out of the ground, or processed, using massive amounts of energy to do so.

I see no reason not to like Al Gore. If he's not "the kind 'o guy you wanna have a beer with," well, that's okay, IMO. I mean, we've already had a retarded fratboy for "prez-nit," and we'll be paying for it for decades, in treasure, blood and a loss of international stature.

I spoke with one of "The Goracle's Oracles," recently, as she was presenting the slide show companion-show to "An Inconvenient Truth." She was at a local library. I brought up woodstoves, when she asked what we (the audience) could do. She agreed, and stated that she has two woodstoves herself (though she might be burning corn cobs--can't remember.) The point is, she's one of 1,000 such "Oracles" who Gore approved to carry his message forth, and therefore, she speaks for Al Gore, when she supports responsible wood heat. Gore is not a problem, though he may just be part of the solution. Whether one wants him for "prez-nit" or not, no one can deny he's made a HUGE contribution to humanity, in pushing the Global Warming issue to the forefront of American (semi)consciousness.

Your slogan is environmental poetry, IMO--renewable haiku!

Who among us can get such a bumpersticker produced, and at what cost?
 
If you go to makestickers.com, you can get them fairly cheap. I'm going to put one on the tree label in the environmental section that reads 'Wood heat is 'green' heat - carbon-neutral and grown in the USA'. Plan to put one on my Prius and one on the wife's RAV4. You might have started a movement here, Kerry. This is something everyone here believes in, so why not display it proudly? Sure beats one for some crooked politician.
 
Run with it! After 33 years in this business I have to keep reminding myself that our customers really just enjoy playing with fire. If we can show them the caveman thing can help save the planet, what a bonus!
The new status symbols in my hood are hybrid cars and trucks. The SUV's are going the way of the dinosaur. Soccer mom's feel better rushing the kids to practice while polluting less. What if wood stoves and high efficiency fireplaces become home status symbols?
Warmhearth
 
"Wood Heat - Veggies keeping you warmer and the planet cooler."
 
I love it! I have to disagree about Al being a 'good' guy, but I love the sticker idea. The inconvenient truth about Al is that global warming is BS. I'm certainly not against acting more responsibly though.

"Got Wood...Heat?"

"Burn clean, it's Green"
 
Wow, I didn't know we had a bear here that is smarter than 2,000 scientists from 150 nations - I think we are talking Yogi here - "Smarter than the Average Bear!"

I understand that reading and comprehension can be harder than watching the TV, and it is good to be skeptical of ANYTHING before it is proven using accepted methods - BUT, the recent reports of the world wide consortium is quite thorough.

Griz, it seems plain silly to dismiss literally MILLIONS of hours of work and data which is beyond our comprehension as BS. Maybe you are not convinced, and that is fine - but no reason not to continue your and our education on the matter.

Please take at least a minute to look at this:
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/005.htm

and page through that drop-down menu at the top of that page - you will see REAL scientific methods and collaboration of top researchers and scientists from all over the earth. These people are not stupid. Given the choice between their data and Glenn Beck, I would say it is about 1000+ to 1 that they are correct!

Politics have so divided this country that we like to shoot the messenger - and although I am certainly no Al Gore fan, I do appreciate the continuing work that the International Panel on Climate Change has done....it's quite important if we care about our children and the future.

So put the brew down, push those legs down so the barco-lounger ejects you - and read up. Then, when you finish (a couple years if you really read it all), let me know what is BS and what is not. :coolsmile:
 

Attachments

  • Picture 3.png
    Picture 3.png
    31.7 KB · Views: 1,199
Craig,

Thank you very much for what you just wrote. I occasionally host (and research and produce) an environmental radio show, and the data about wildly-shrinking polar ice caps alone is simply stunning. I almost wouldn't even know where to begin, when confronted with such a "flat earth" mentality (with all due respect to Mr. Griz, and I leave it to better minds than mine to decide how much is "due...") and I am very grateful that you took a stab at it. You cited a very good source--I truly hope he reads it.

Mr. Griz, I want to give you just one example of why you should not be lulled into a false sense of security by that old saw that "global warming is really just the normal climactic cycling of the planet."

To do this, we have to discuss two concepts, briefly--the "albido effect," and "tipping points." They become relevant to the fact that a HUGE AMOUNT OF POLAR ICE IS DISAPPEARING.

"Tipping points" are easy to understand--imagine rocking a canoe back and forth, harder and harder. Eventually, you get to a point of no return, and a new equilibrium point is reached--upside down. The canoe is stable again--just not in a way that's comfortable or practical, for humans.

The "albido effect" is a little more complicated, but basically, it is the ability of a white ground cover, like snow and ice, to reflect the sun's light energy back into space.
A white ground cover reflects (from memory here, so don't quote me) I believe 90% of the sun's energy back into space (less what gets trapped under the atmosphere/ozone layer, which isn't a huge amount).

(Because water is "dark," compared to ice, it absorbs the sun's heat, rather than bouncing back into space. A dark jacket is warmer in direct sunlight, all other things being equal, than a white jacket.)

A dark "ground" cover, like the oceans, ABSORBS most of the sun's energy. Different ground covers are assigned different "albido" values.

The albido values are actually measured in terms of fractions of a whole number, I believe. I don't have the actual albido values, but we can understand them easier by using percentages here, anyway. In other words, water only bounces 10% of the sun's energy back into space. The other 90% is absorbed into our environment, thereby raising global temps. Ice, on the other hand, bounces 90% of the sun's heat back into space (in rough terms).

So...Ice = Good (prevents global warming) and Water = Bad (contributes to global warming).

The "albido effect" works like this, re: tipping points:

In the past, with a healthy amount of polar ice cover, 90% of the sun's energy that hit those caps was bounced harmlessly back into space.

Now, however, we have MUCH less polar ice cover. Three years ago, a chunk the size of Rhode Island just broke off, broke up, and melted away. Go-n-e.

Since then, we've lost even bigger chunks.

So--ice reflects 90% of the sun's heat. Water absorbs 90% of the sun's heat.

Therefore, the less ice you have, the more of the sun's energy is absorbed into the environment, as opposed to bouncing harmlessly back into space.

Therefore, melting polar ice RAISES the Earth's temperature, by raising ocean temps.

Higher ocean temps then lead to MORE MELTING POLAR ICE.

THIS IS ACTUALLY A FEEDBACK LOOP, just like when the electric guitarist stands too close to the speakers. The screeching coming from the speaker is picked up by the guitar's electronic "pickups," and fed back through the amp, albeit at a louder volume than before. And the noise comes back out of the loudspeaker (even louder) and gets picked up, and AMPED UP in the same manner, until it comes out of the speaker EVEN LOUDER, until SCREEECH! and somebody pulls the jack out of the amp, or guitar.

Except it's with temperatures, not decibles.

And Al Gore's trying to pull the effing jack out of the amp, even as people laugh at him and say they can't hear anything.

Maybe they can't hear anything because they're already D-E-A-F?

ANYWAY....

More melted polar ice = Less Snow Cover, which = MORE SQUARE MILES OF OCEANS.

More square miles of oceans = MORE HEAT ABSORBED FROM THE SUN.

More heat in ocean water MELTS EVEN MORE ICE.

You see where this is going, right? It's a FEEDBACK LOOP, headed for a "tipping point."

Less ice = more heat-absorbing ocean acreage, and on and on. (Here, the "canoe is rocking ever more violently, and becoming unstable, approaching it's "tipping point.")

Eventually, A TIPPING POINT IS REACHED, after which, THERE IS NO RETURNING TO THE ORIGINAL EQUILIBRIUM POINT.

In other words, THE CANOE GETS CAPSIZED.

Putting this in thermal terms, just like a "runaway" wood stove, the Earth will continue to warm up, beyond what is acceptable to the species currently residing here. There is no more "brake" on the increasing temperatures, in the form of snow and ice, to bounce the sun's heat back into space.

Thus this warming cycle ACCELERATES.


I could link you to pictures of glaciers taken in the 1970's, that are NOW ENTIRELY TURNED INTO LAKES.


Thousands of square miles of what was glacier 30 years ago are now either black rock, dirt or water--all of which absorb WAY more heat than snow and ice.

Now, about the nonbelievers saying "this is all just part of a natural cycle"?

Well, ice core samples taken from this melting ice show that it hasn't been unfrozen in hundreds of thousands of years.

In other words--it didn't melt from some "normal cycle."

It melted because we are approaching a tipping point. Fast.

I hope this helped, a little.

Craig's way was much more efficient, and informative--I apologize to any who found this unwelcome.

Thank you, again, Craig, for having the courage of your convictions.

Peter
 
It never ceases to amaze me how much collective intelligence there is in this site. It is in all areas. Just in this thread you see scientific, marketing, political and general knowledge displayed that is far beyond the general population.

Not only that but also a remarkable amount of emotional intelligence (see post 8 by Craig).

Now I know why I read this forum.

“None of us are as smart as all of us”
 
I am a skeptic - and a cynic, as anyone who has been here for awhile can attest to. BUT, I like to think that at least some of my opinions are at least partially based on digesting the science which is out there...

Even a quick look at the IPCC work will show that there are very serious about their methods, and also that they are the first to admit that drawing simple conclusions from complex data is impossible......

I understand that it is daunting to consider Global Warming. Just a generation or two ago, we thought the world was too big to pollute. But now we have had it proven 100% over and over again that we are EASILY capable of polluting large percentages of the worlds land, water and air. The evidence of human activity is in the environment in even the most remote areas of the planet. We can cut off mountaintops, re-route rivers and even hold back the sea. We can split the atom and send machines to celestial bodies which are millions of miles away. We can fly around the world in record time in metal machines which can hold hundreds of thousands of pounds and yet lift off the ground with grace. These machines and processes are designed, tested and built by the same type of disciplined minds that research Global Warming.

So why do people still have a hard time accepting the fact that we can warm the atmosphere by a few degrees?

TruePatriot took a good stab at explaining the tipping point and similar effects. Most of us are NOT scientists and I think we have what could be termed "brute minds", meaning that we have a hard time understanding how little changes can cause big ones. But they do. Examples include that small splinter that we might have gotten in our foot, but since we did not treat it properly and also have other diseases (diabetes, for example), we end up both blind and without a leg. I once almost had my foot amputated from the infection of a small cut!

The earth has a LOT of "conditions" from both natural and man-made causes. It therefore makes sense that relatively small changes can cause major domino effects. One example of this is hurricanes, which our weather experts here can hopefully confirm are subject to vast changes based on just a few degrees of water or air temperature. The topography and watershed of Florida has been shaped by such storms. So what happens if Hurricanes are steered just a couple hundred miles north to where they virtually never hit before?

On the other hand, Climate Change does not in almost any case threaten our existence as a species. As per the reports, the poor will suffer most (as usual) and we can adapt. However, adaption will cost vastly more than the alternative - which is the reduction of CO2 output.

Which gets back to the Wood is Good thing!
 
I like all I am hearing.

Here is what I do to help save the planet for my kids:

-Use wood heat.
-Bicycle to work when I can.
-drive a 1995 Geo Prizm that gets 35 mpg.
-replaced most lightbulbs with CF lightbulbs.
-turn the lights off when I leave the room
- do all errands in one trip a week.
- don't buy anything unless I really need it.
- recycle everything I can.

I hope a good example makes for good followers. I promote my less consumption message as much as possible.

Carpniels
 
loss of international prestige

How about a bumper sticker that says: Cut Carbon Because Europe Says So .
 
NewtownPA said:
How about :

- "I burn my carbon credits in my woodstove"

- "My woodstove eats carbon credits for breakfast"

- "Trees burn better in a woodstove"

- "Fuel really does grow on trees"

:)

NICE! I like em'

How about along the lines of "Heat your house...Let Arabs pay for their own AC" lol :)
 
Webmaster said:
Wow, I didn't know we had a bear here that is smarter than 2,000 scientists from 150 nations - I think we are talking Yogi here - "Smarter than the Average Bear!"

I understand that reading and comprehension can be harder than watching the TV, and it is good to be skeptical of ANYTHING before it is proven using accepted methods - BUT, the recent reports of the world wide consortium is quite thorough.

Griz, it seems plain silly to dismiss literally MILLIONS of hours of work and data which is beyond our comprehension as BS. Maybe you are not convinced, and that is fine - but no reason not to continue your and our education on the matter.

Please take at least a minute to look at this:
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/005.htm

and page through that drop-down menu at the top of that page - you will see REAL scientific methods and collaboration of top researchers and scientists from all over the earth. These people are not stupid. Given the choice between their data and Glenn Beck, I would say it is about 1000+ to 1 that they are correct!

Politics have so divided this country that we like to shoot the messenger - and although I am certainly no Al Gore fan, I do appreciate the continuing work that the International Panel on Climate Change has done....it's quite important if we care about our children and the future.

So put the brew down, push those legs down so the barco-lounger ejects you - and read up. Then, when you finish (a couple years if you really read it all), let me know what is BS and what is not. :coolsmile:

Web...I'm "on the fence"...and prefer to stay Neutral on the GW/climate change issue.

Has anyone figured into the equation that there haven't been any "Major" volcanic eruptions???

The reason I point this out is "maybe" just "maybe" mother nature or "the man upstairs" might still "hold a trump card".

Look back into history to like 1815-1825 how the climate changed after (Krakotowa?) blew in 1815? I remember seeing some info along the lines of "1816...the year without a summer".

The numbers might show an upward trend...but how accurate are they???

Either way...nobody can argue against the fact the world needs to change it's views and opinions about energy consumption.

"I'm sure mother nature didn't put coal and oil (i.e. carbon) into the ground...just for us to have a 'treasure hunt'..." :)
 
How about: "Wood-the other white heat!"
"Woodheat-not just for the Amish!"
"Burn wood-STICK it to the Saudis!"
"Wood-the quicker-heater-upper!"
 
Burn wood the renewable energy source

Think Green Burn Green Wood (ODWB)

Wood Made in the USA

Have Woody will burn

Recycle wood, burn it
 
Make fires, not War!
Keep US independent, burn wood.
 
I really don't want to get into the whole global warming debate. I will just say that I think many of the points used to tout global warming are as accurate and well founded as much of the dribble on burning issues. Even Al's scientists can't agree completely and many denounced the conclusions presented in his movie. By the way, didn't they change the term 'global warming' to 'global climate change', since they can't quite agree on things?

Look, the average temperature of the planet may in fact be increasing. I certainly don't doubt that earth's climate is constantly cycling. I just think that to say man is the cause and beyond that to say that we can now suddenly reverse it is preposterous. In my mind, saying we are in control of the planet's climate is extremely arrogant. There were temperature cycles (warming and cooling) long before man's insignificant amount of time on this planet began and I'm sure they will continue long after we are gone.

I agree that we should do things to be more ecologically responsible. We should make efforts to conserve resources, recycle, live more responsibly and consider the effects of our actions. I think that we also need to look at how we can be more adaptive to what we cannot control. It makes more sense to me to say; 'earth's climate is changing, how can we adapt to this;' rather than 'earth's climate is changing, how can we reverse this.' I believe that the rotation of the earth is also slowing. What can we do to speed it back up and what is the ideal speed of rotation?

Craig, I will read the information in the link you provided. I'm not against hearing both sides of the argument. I may just do it with a beer in the barco-lounger though. The only thing that has a negative effect on seems to be my waste line. I'm not out to shoot the messenger either. If it wasn't Al up there, I would have the same opinion. Sometimes so called science needs to be challenged by plain old common sense. If it stands up, it stands up, if not we can just move on.
 
Yeah I don't really feel the need to jump on either side, but I do feel the need to conserve energy and natural resources and do our part to take care of this little planet of ours.



To me, it shouldn't matter whether global warming is occurring because of us, or not. Reducing what we consume and making environmentally friendly choices should be done just for the sake of doing them (categorical imperative). So what if our awful habits haven't hurt the earth yet? So what if they never will? Lets just all do our part irrespective of global warming.
 
Just smell the air in a big city and then go out to the country and take a deep breath, big difference. I am going to do my part and have a fire tonight.
 
Unfortunately, I think the concepts of the slow oxidation of rotting wood and of carbon absorption by growing trees is beyond the understanding level of most of the people who will be reading the bumper stickers.
 
We should focus on the issue of energy independence, this can unify liberals, conservatives and the apolitical. We need to not burn oil for heat strictly on patriotic/geopolitical grounds. I think a bit of natural gas gets produced domestically but I don't care, New England Wood Pellets in Jaffrey, NH is getting my heating $$$.

This debate about global warming gets too emotional, like a religion debate.
 
"Wood Heat - No refinery required"

"Wood Heat - Energy doesn't have to come from a desert"

"Heat With Wood - Make a Sheikh miss an SUV payment"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.