Wood Stove Destroyers Organization

[Ratman]

Wood Stove Destroyers Organization

It's kinda long but if you start at the 4 minute spot you'll see the guy that destroys old wood stoves because they smoke too much.
The first thing that came to mind was Pulp Fiction when Marsellus said:

I'ma call a coupla hard, pipe-hittin' n#####s, who'll go to work on the homes here with a pair of pliers and a blow torch. You hear me talkin', hillbilly boy? I ain't through with you by a damn sight. I'ma get medieval on your ass.

Ruining a beautiful old stove while consuming all that energy in the process because he's trying to save the world seems really really stupid.

http://www.youtube.com/v/DseI7i4tR3o?fs=1&hl=en_US

We need to form a posse...I'll get the Sheriff

 

[begreen]

Already discussed in another thread. Now required by law in Oregon on sale of a house.

Polluting the air isn't too smart either. It's kind of like peeing in your seat.

 

[DanCorcoran]

Kind of like cash for clunkers...get the polluters "off the road" and stimulate the manufacture of new wood stoves.

 

[Dakotas Dad]

Poor old Fisher.. never did nothing wrong but keep it's family warm..

 

[begreen]

The king is dead, long live the king! It's a hunk of steel heading to the smelter to serve a new life. Maybe it will show up in a new bar-b-q near u. Better than left rusting in the back 40, eh?

 

[Ratman]

huh...

they are not replacing them with wood burning appliances they are replacing them with gas or electric.
so you folks support this?
rather see it rebuilt.
i'd think this is something that wouldn't catch much favor on this site.

wow...

 

[begreen]

This is not an anti wood burning campaign. They are being replaced with what makes sense economically for the fuel available. In the town of Darrington, which is in the video, you can get a pellet or EPA woodstove too. I think they mention this in the video. Here's what the offer is:
* $2,500 for a propane, oil, or electric heating system (stove or furnace)
* $1,500 for a pellet stove
* $500 for an EPA-certified woodstove

The program is not mandatory. But if you ever were in Darrington in the winter you would know why the local population is behind this. They live in a valley that gets choked with smoke due to careless burning in old stoves.

 

[AngusMac]

This is not an anti wood burning campaign. They are being replaced with what makes sense economically for the fuel available. In the town of Darrington, which is in the video, you can get a pellet or EPA woodstove too. I think they mention this in the video. Here's what the offer is:
* $2,500 for a propane, oil, or electric heating system (stove or furnace)
* $1,500 for a pellet stove
* $500 for an EPA-certified woodstove

The program is not mandatory. But if you ever were in Darrington in the winter you would know why the local population is behind this. They live in a valley that gets choked with smoke due to careless burning in old stoves.

It all makes sense to me.
Where I live we have a coastal climate and that means wind all the time, so pollution is nt a problem.

I hope you dont mind if I ask one question, non stove related?
Does the US government take a look at the Automobile pollution and encourage more economical transport or cars?

 

[btuser]

why are fossil and pellets more highly subsidized? If you count the amount of electricity used with a pellet stove, and the fact that a majority of our electricity comes from coal I don't think there's a smidgen of difference. I chose wood because its hard to monopolize. How about a 90% efficient gassifyer?

 

[webbie]

why are fossil and pellets more highly subsidized? If you count the amount of electricity used with a pellet stove, and the fact that a majority of our electricity comes from coal I don't think there's a smidgen of difference. I chose wood because its hard to monopolize. How about a 90% efficient gassifyer?

I think it is a matter of trying to expand the market for pellets. Some of the better designed newer stove, for instance one Thelin model, have incredibly low electricity use.......

In Europe where pellet use has gained some market share, they use very efficient central heaters - again, the electricity use is a very small percentage of the equation.

I think you have a lot of hydro and nuke in NH, don't you?

 

[Pagey]

I liked the part where they were used a diesel guzzling front end loader to pick up lawn debris so it could be mulched rather than burned. Christ on a bicycle.

 

[Ratman]

I liked the part where they were used a diesel guzzling front end loader to pick up lawn debris so it could be mulched rather than burned. Christ on a bicycle.

Perfect!

 

[branchburner]

I'm all for offering incentives to retire smoke dragons, but I don't see the need to cut them up with a torch. It's inhumane. Same with destroying all the cars traded in as cash-for-clunkers. It takes a lot of money and energy to destroy things - things that took a lot of money and energy to create! Seems weird.

And a $2,500 rebate for an electric heating system vs. a $500 rebate for an EPA-certified woodstove? Seems weird.

 

[Mrs. Krabappel]

I hope you dont mind if I ask one question, non stove related?
Does the US government take a look at the Automobile pollution and encourage more economical transport or cars?

The US govt is a TOOL of the automotive and oil industry, among others. The short answer to your question is no.


Peace out :coolsmirk:

 

[gibson]

So true, Kathleen. I am always looking for an old stove on ebay to use as a chiminea.

 

[soupy1957]

I noted one camera shot, that showed a large mass of homes in a valley, surrounded by enormous mountain ranges. These areas are particularly vulnerable (and any valley community) to the settling of smoke that is trapped by the mountains surrounding the communities, and are in need of watching their air quality closely.

Having said that, it appeared to me as if they were not trying to do away with wood burning altogether, but were promoting the replacement of the older, non-EPA stoves, with newer, more efficient EPA stoves that re-burn the off gases, which is a valid and useful approach to the air quality problem. All the merits and personal appreciations that we may have for burning wood aside, we DO need clean air to breath of course.

When I was young and uninformed, I used to think that oxygen was constantly being replenished. Not so. We have only so much oxygen, (and this applies to water as well), and that's all there is folks. It just keeps getting recycled by the environment. There is no "new" air out there. I'm sure you'd all agree that we need to protect it, since we LIVE off it.

Having said that, I'm not going to stop burning wood, but I AM glad that we bought at a time when the new EPA stoves were the typical type being sold. If nothing else, I'm contributing LESS pollution factors, and I won't have to change OUT my stove any time soon.

When I watch that video, I don't see a bunch of do-gooders who are anti-wood burning..........I see concerned citizens who are trying to protect the environment, and that's a big part of being "green."

For all those who wear their wood-burning on their sleeves as being those who have freed themselves from the evil of fossil fuel consumption, who drive electric cars, etc...........it is perfectly acceptable that we also take the same position about the air we breath. Being "green" includes burning responsibly, which is one of the bigger points often made in this Forum.

There is room, in other words, for movements that ensure good quality air, and any responsible wood burner would be happy to do what they can to promote that. I hope that we DON'T reach a point where it becomes illegal to burn wood, (as it is in some places, already), because I see it as a wonderful alternative to fossil fuels, (not to mention the emotional caveman connection to "fire" which is innate in all of us).

It WAS painful to watch that old Fisher Stove get cut up for scrap however........lol.

-Soupy1957

 

[AngusMac]

I hope you dont mind if I ask one question, non stove related?
Does the US government take a look at the Automobile pollution and encourage more economical transport or cars?

The US govt is a TOOL of the automotive and oil industry, among others. The short answer to your question is no.


Peace out :coolsmirk:

I like a straight answer, thanks Kathleen.

This is something that most Europeans, including myself, dont understand.
In the US, if you could have a car that does 60 miles / gallon, why do they still produce cars that do 20 miles / gallon?
Fuel economy is a major factor with most people in Europe when deciding on which car they want to buy.

 

[Ratman]

I noted one camera shot, that showed a large mass of homes in a valley, surrounded by enormous mountain ranges. These areas are particularly vulnerable (and any valley community) to the settling of smoke that is trapped by the mountains surrounding the communities, and are in need of watching their air quality closely.

Having said that, it appeared to me as if they were not trying to do away with wood burning altogether, but were promoting the replacement of the older, non-EPA stoves, with newer, more efficient EPA stoves that re-burn the off gases, which is a valid and useful approach to the air quality problem. All the merits and personal appreciations that we may have for burning wood aside, we DO need clean air to breath of course.

When I was young and uninformed, I used to think that oxygen was constantly being replenished. Not so. We have only so much oxygen, (and this applies to water as well), and that's all there is folks. It just keeps getting recycled by the environment. There is no "new" air out there. I'm sure you'd all agree that we need to protect it, since we LIVE off it.

Having said that, I'm not going to stop burning wood, but I AM glad that we bought at a time when the new EPA stoves were the typical type being sold. If nothing else, I'm contributing LESS pollution factors, and I won't have to change OUT my stove any time soon.

When I watch that video, I don't see a bunch of do-gooders who are anti-wood burning..........I see concerned citizens who are trying to protect the environment, and that's a big part of being "green."

For all those who wear their wood-burning on their sleeves as being those who have freed themselves from the evil of fossil fuel consumption, who drive electric cars, etc...........it is perfectly acceptable that we also take the same position about the air we breath. Being "green" includes burning responsibly, which is one of the bigger points often made in this Forum.

There is room, in other words, for movements that ensure good quality air, and any responsible wood burner would be happy to do what they can to promote that. I hope that we DON'T reach a point where it becomes illegal to burn wood, (as it is in some places, already), because I see it as a wonderful alternative to fossil fuels, (not to mention the emotional caveman connection to "fire" which is innate in all of us).

It WAS painful to watch that old Fisher Stove get cut up for scrap however........lol.

-Soupy1957

huh...

The point was the stove should have been refurbished and they were leaning toward other forms of replacements much more than wood.
Sorry I'm not as informed as you.

 

[grommal]

I hope you dont mind if I ask one question, non stove related?
Does the US government take a look at the Automobile pollution and encourage more economical transport or cars?

The US govt is a TOOL of the automotive and oil industry, among others. The short answer to your question is no.


Peace out :coolsmirk:

I like a straight answer, thanks Kathleen.

This is something that most Europeans, including myself, dont understand.
In the US, if you could have a car that does 60 miles / gallon, why do they still produce cars that do 20 miles / gallon?
Fuel economy is a major factor with most people in Europe when deciding on which car they want to buy.

If gas were 8 bucks a gallon in the US like in most of Europe, Americans would lean much more heavily toward smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles. The federal government DOES have corporate average fuel efficiency (CAFE) regulations for car manufacturers, and those have been getting somewhat stricter over time, though we could certainly argue that this could be done more aggressively if we wanted the government to tell us what to do. But ultimately, people in the US will buy what they want. With cheap gas, many folks will buy gas guzzling vehicles because they are roomy, or because they give a feeling of safety because of their size, or because of the commanding view of the road from a tall vehicle, or whatever.

 

[grommal]

There is room, in other words, for movements that ensure good quality air, and any responsible wood burner would be happy to do what they can to promote that. I hope that we DON'T reach a point where it becomes illegal to burn wood, (as it is in some places, already), because I see it as a wonderful alternative to fossil fuels, (not to mention the emotional caveman connection to "fire" which is innate in all of us).

It WAS painful to watch that old Fisher Stove get cut up for scrap however........lol.

-Soupy1957

huh...

The point was the stove should have been refurbished and they were leaning toward other forms of replacements much more than wood.
Sorry I'm not as informed as you.

There's no easy way to "refurbish" an old smoke dragon stove to make it clean burning. Plus, it is still possible, unfortunately for us wood burners, to burn a clean EPA stove in a manner that still makes a lot of smoke, so wood burning still gets a bad reputation when it comes to air quality.

 

[Ratman]

The point was the stove should have been refurbished and they were leaning toward other forms of replacements much more than wood.
Sorry I'm not as informed as you.

There's no easy way to "refurbish" an old smoke dragon stove to make it clean burning. Plus, it is still possible, unfortunately for us wood burners, to burn a clean EPA stove in a manner that still makes a lot of smoke, so wood burning still gets a bad reputation when it comes to air quality.[/quote]

agreed grommal, it can be done but it is difficult, kinda like anything that's worth fighting for.

and Soupy I feel your pain about watching the murder of that old Fisher.

 

[begreen]

I hope you dont mind if I ask one question, non stove related?
Does the US government take a look at the Automobile pollution and encourage more economical transport or cars?

The US govt is a TOOL of the automotive and oil industry, among others. The short answer to your question is no.


Peace out :coolsmirk:

I like a straight answer, thanks Kathleen.

This is something that most Europeans, including myself, dont understand.
In the US, if you could have a car that does 60 miles / gallon, why do they still produce cars that do 20 miles / gallon?
Fuel economy is a major factor with most people in Europe when deciding on which car they want to buy.

Separate topic Angus and a good one, but more appropriate for the green room or ash can.

 

[begreen]

agreed grommal, it can be done but it is difficult, kinda like anything that's worth fighting for.

and Soupy I feel your pain about watching the murder of that old Fisher.

I feel the same way when I am at a junkyard seeing a classic car crunched up. But if you follow behind one these days, it's immediately apparent in the gas fumes coming from their exhaust, that the car is not burning cleanly. I try not to follow them.

There are several old stove types that can burn relatively cleanly with proper burning and good dry wood. If you live in a rural area and burn responsibly, I don't see a problem with that. But there are also a lot of yahoos out there that stuff the old boxes with semi-seasoned wood and turn them down almost all the way 30 minutes later. You all know what I am talking about. On a cold day I can drive around and spot a half a dozen of these belchers on the way to work. Ask them and they'll tell you that they have been burning wood for XX years and this is the way they've always done it. My next question to them is "have you ever had a chimney fire?" Almost all say yes. In most communities there are ordinances against this type of burning, but they are rarely enforced. FWIW, we have a 29 yr old Jotul that burns quite cleanly after getting the stove hot. There is no smoke coming from the flue at all. When I took down it's flue it was still clean after 7yrs. of burning. But that is because we burn only dry wood and ran the stove on the hot side. We never choked it off and let it smolder.

An EPA stove will not allow the air to be completely cut off, so these stoves stand a better chance of burning much cleaner. But indeed, ultimately it's the stove operator that needs to be educated. Maybe we should come up with some good woodburning advice articles and submit them to our local papers as a pro-active method of education?

 

[branchburner]

But indeed, ultimately it's the stove operator that needs to be educated. Maybe we should come up with some good woodburning advice articles and submit them to our local papers as a pro-active method of education?

A great point. In addition to educating others, I think responsible burners need to put a little pressure on the irresponsible ones when the opportunity arises. It can be done in a friendly way, as in "hey, can I give you a few tips on making less smoke and maybe burning more efficiently, and using less wood?" Or we could just let them know that eventually they're going to ruin it for all of us, including themselves.

I think burning improperly seasoned wood is the biggest problem of all, and it is perpetuated by virtually all wood dealers selling partly-seasoned wood as fully seasoned. Add that to the fact that relatively few buyers are willing to pay the substantial premium for truly dry wood. I suspect many view it as an unneeded luxury.

 

[AngusMac]

I talked with a stove dealer the other day and he told me that the laws on woodburning stoves in the USA and Europe are that they must burn to an efficiency standard, which means burning hotter, therefore all stoves now will not be able to shut down as much as before.