Burning Issues is after the Webmaster!

[webbie]

OK, you guys and gals...now you've done it. I received an email from a BI wonk telling me I'm responsible for all the evils of the world......

Here it is, and my response:
------------
Sofia Moore <[email protected]>
to webmaster

show details
5:42 pm (1 hour ago)
Please take some initiative to diminish the dent you have and continue to
enlarge in destroying the earth and the cost the HEARTH has taken in
destroying the fragility of air and as a consequence, human life.
You shoult be denouncing the deadly toxins that are resulting in Resedential
wood burning and encourage wb only in emergency situations. The promotion is
no worse than China.
Sad reflection of stakeholders interest earning dollars at the expense of
little children.
They are the most vulnerable to the poison air you are responsible for
encouraging.
The issue is serious. Go to www.burningissues.org and act with conscience.
Thank you.
Sofia-----------


And my response:
---------------------------------------
Sofia, I think you would be better off working toward the abolition of cars and BBQ's and also studying the ENTIRE fuel cycle. For instance, you may think nuclear is clean energy, but from the mining to the disposal of waste there are unsolved problems. Most electric in the us is generated by coal, which is extremely dirty and polluting from the mining to the burning. If you read our site, you will see that we promote conservation of ALL fuels, which is the first step. We also come down hard on open fireplace, outdoor wood boilers and other smoke producing and low efficiency products.

Biomass, burned cleanly, is a part of our energy future - just one part. The fact that it is renewable and offsets CO2 (plants breathe CO2 and output oxygen) are two pluses.

As the Buddha says, everything in moderation. Those who run around crying that the sky if falling are often too busy wailing to accomplish anything. Nothing is without consequence, but the clean combustion of biomass is one of the better choices.

If you want more proof of this, please study europe and the scandanavian countries, which I'm certain you know are way ahead of us in fighting climate change and pollution. They have set high standards for biomass burning in central heaters and pellet appliances and are promoting such use. Germany in particular is super-strict in air quality management, yet they are also sane about energy options.

So I guess you must have a hard time seeing the difference between China, Denmark and Germany when it comes to responsibility?

Dumping on China is another matter....it's easy for you and I to sit here and complain about them, when we use 10X as much energy (per capita) and put out 4x as much CO2 per person. Vast portions of the population are still peasants working in the fields and barely filling their stomach. When you decide to live in a yurt, sell your car and grow all your own food, then I'll listen to you about China. But when you have decided to sit at your computer and critique others who are trying to solve problems and lift themselves out of poverty and ignorance, well.....count me among those who don't buy it!

 

[restorer]

Yeeehhh Haaaawww We got us a bull fight. The mailer is not a known quantity that I can tell from the members of BI or it's leadership, but it could be a dummy email address. Seems a lot of hysteria like Anti-Cancer in level, but didn't mention how half of us are killing ourself.

Your response was maybe too civil, but maybe we could add a hotlink to their forum and cross fertilize???? :wow: I was expecting them to blast you for sending your goons to their site and ruining their illogical and non-scientific facts.

 

[stoveguy13]

Are those people crazy i think best part of the whole reponse was the buddha line you go craig

 

[BrotherBart]

Hmmm... Wood heat has been around for a few hundred thousand years, and was prevalent for most of that time, yet the population sure kept growing by leaps and bounds.

It must not be killing too many people.

 

[Sandor]

Nice response Craig.

My opening line would have been:

Sofia, you ignorant slut.

 

[begreen]

Classic Sandor. Made my afternoon.

Well spoken Craig, to the point, but giving a positive solution (go squat in a yurt!) The Buddha suggestion of moderation was the perfect ironic counterpoint to Bodhi's moderating.

 

[Harley]

Nice response Craig.

My opening line would have been:

Sofia, you ignorant slut.

A little slow in responding - had to clean the monitor (thanks, sandor) :lol:

I agree - nice response, Craig. The rambling tone could be that of A/C, maybe under a different name, or just someone who found both sites while under heavy medication. It will be interesting to see if there is a "rallying of the troops" over there. I doubt it though.

I'm still waiting for someone to fess up as to who the real "gagging" is... that thread was really cut short and edited recently.

 

[restorer]

Classic Sandor. Made my afternoon.

Well spoken Craig, to the point, but giving a positive solution (go squat in a yurt!) The Buddha suggestion of moderation was the perfect ironic counterpoint to Bodhi's moderating.

They are so tightly wound over their, I can no longer lurk using an anonymous browser. I am soooooo, banned. I really wonder how may have been cut off from their forums.

 

[Kenny1]

A very good reply Web.

I did read some of the BI web site (until my head started to hurt...).

In the end, what is produced by our stoves is probably not too healthy to breath. However, the options are either just as bad, or in the case of nuclear, put off the problem for another generation to worry about.

Interesting dilemma, do we poison the air today, or store the poison and let our children deal with it?

I think that part of the attraction of bio fuels is that it "closes the cycle" on some of the issues (CO2 neutral). I think that most on this site have an interest in keeping the burn as clean as possible. And I am worried that BI may be building a gathering who will not look at both sides of the issue.

 

[BrotherBart]

A very good reply Web.

I did read some of the BI web site (until my head started to hurt...).

In the end, what is produced by our stoves is probably not too healthy to breath. However, the options are either just as bad, or in the case of nuclear, put off the problem for another generation to worry about.

Interesting dilemma, do we poison the air today, or store the poison and let our children deal with it?

I think that part of the attraction of bio fuels is that it "closes the cycle" on some of the issues (CO2 neutral). I think that most on this site have an interest in keeping the burn as clean as possible. And I am worried that BI may be building a gathering who will not look at both sides of the issue.

BI has been been around since 1999 and has a following of zilch.

 

[jpl1nh]

Couldn't stand by without standing up. I posted the following response in support of Craig and the rest of us.

Sofia,

I know you recently contacted Craig Issod at Hearth.com regarding the issue of wood smoke. It's apparent that your concern for the well being of people everywhere is genuine and I admire your intent. I share that with you. As individuals and as a society we face grave issues concerning pollution of many forms, likely even more forms than we know. One of our greatest causes for concern comes from our efforts to meet our energy needs, and as my friend, Craig, who you initially contacted, pointed out in his response to you, we in the US are the greatest energy consumers in the world. Each energy form comes with its pluses and minuses, even solar, wind, and hydro power suffer from the "not in my backyard" syndrome. Again, as Craig mentioned, he and the members of Hearth.com advocate energy conservation as a vital direction. You may visit this link to consider some of these efforts in that direction, https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/wiki/100_ways_to_save_energy/ I would like to point out that many of the health issue studies Burning Issues cites involves developing nations where wood smoke is not properly ventilated such as the study involving women who used wood burning stoves that had no chimneys to vent the smoke outside, a practice that most practicle people would never indulge in even if building codes allowed anything that absurd. Quite a few of the studies are dated 10 to 15 years ago when most stoves were not EPA-approved stoves. Even now, many of the stoves in use are not yet EPA approved stoves. One study discusses "degredation" of the stoves particulate controls. As a memeber at Hearth.com I've learned that education of the wood stove user is the most important aspect of effective wood burning. A poorly used EPA stove isn't much better than a pre-EPA stove. I know that Hearth.com advocates and encourages the replacement of pre-EPA stoves with the new EPA approved stoves and actively is involoed in legislative efforts to encourage that replacement. That in very large part is why we are here and are so well attended. Wood is not a perfect fuel. Admittidly wood heat does produce particulate matter, as does your poorly maintained car, forest fires, volcanoes, and coal fired energy plants, etc and I for one would not want to sit in the exhaust of a wood stove anymore than I would want to wallow in coal, oil, or gas combustion emissions. Properly vented though, wood smoke is a large enough particulate to either form the basis for water condensation and precipitate out, or to eventually settle from the atmosphere. For me, the minus of the very small amount of EPA approved particulate matter that I and the other responsible wood burners that I know emit is more than offset by the benefits from the reduction in CO2 contamination, international political instability, domestic economic drain to foreign interests, and environmental topographical degredation that coal, oil, and natural gas expose us to. That wood heat provides us with beneficial physical activity, a lower cost on stressed family budgets, and a bone warming and aesthetically pleasing heat are bonuses that anyone who has experienced it greatly appreciates. I know that the other members here share your concern about the overall health and well being of our children, our neighbors, and our global neighbors as well. Craig pointed out that wood heat is only one piece of a complex puzzle of energy solutions. We work hard to make sure that this important and beneficial piece of that puzzle is used as responsibly as possible. I am a member here in large part because of that admirable goal. I hope you will reconsider your position in regards to wood heat. I assure you, properly utilized, it is not the villan you fear it to be but a small yet important part of the solution.

Thank you for your concern,

Pierre La Tourette

 

[restorer]

A very good reply Web.

I did read some of the BI web site (until my head started to hurt...).

In the end, what is produced by our stoves is probably not too healthy to breath. However, the options are either just as bad, or in the case of nuclear, put off the problem for another generation to worry about.

Interesting dilemma, do we poison the air today, or store the poison and let our children deal with it?

I think that part of the attraction of bio fuels is that it "closes the cycle" on some of the issues (CO2 neutral). I think that most on this site have an interest in keeping the burn as clean as possible. And I am worried that BI may be building a gathering who will not look at both sides of the issue.

BI has been been around since 1999 and has a following of zilch.

Kenny:
There are some references in threads on this forum, but BI is the lunatic fringe of the burning fuel range. They have the idea that all burning should be immediately banned and that electric appliances are the best. You really can not read their threads without either getting real hot under the collar, or falling down in a laughing fit.

Several members of this forum have been banned, their posts selectively edited, complete threads removed and blocking put on some so tight even an anonymous browser can not shield them. If you say what they don't want to hear too strongly you are gone, yet their own ranters can carry on for ever.

I see them as the poison pen pals with a one way monolog. Their way or no way.

 

[mayhem]

I'm wondering if Sofia would rather I run my stove or my oil burning boiler to heat my home. Burning wood I feel (correct me if I'm wrong) I am not only reducing my carbon footprint, but also conserving a non-renewable resource (home heating oil) and saving a significant amount of money (the $4500 I have wrapped up in the new stove, custom hearthpad and installation will probably be covered in about 4 years of oil savings).

 

[begreen]

Short answer, yes. There is no connection between the BI thermostat and reality.

 

[restorer]

jpl:
Kudos for the response. Hope that what you gave us you sent to Ms Sophia, and maybe posted on BI. An eloquent in your face with enough, "don't dis me, because I didn't dis you." Many of us have tried, many have been banned, but you and Harley may get the point accross to the few real remaining members.

 

[TruePatriot]

Craig and jpl:

Excellent responses! As were all of them, but those two especially, and since they were actually posted over there, I give them the praise they deserve--well done!

This was especially enjoyable:

When you decide to live in a yurt, sell your car and grow all your own food, then I’ll listen to you about China.

LM*AO!

However, I would offer just one additional factoid that, while perhaps alluded to, needs to be written on the foreheads of people like the BI-ites, namely:

>
Wood heat is carbon-neutral. IOW, wood that falls over and plays dead in the forest, from natural causes like lightning, bugs, disease or old age, OXIDIZES slowly over time, relasing it's carbon back into the atmosphere.

Wood burned in a wood stove ALSO OXIDIZES, albeit quite a bit faster--but it's the SAME PROCESS! IOW, wood heat is "carbon-neutral." That means it DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO GREENHOUSE GAS PRODUCTION, over the long haul.

IOW, Sofia, all the pretty trees on yonder hills are going to end up as released carbon in our world and, yes, much (most?) of it will even become airborne. Wood stoves just speed that process of oxidation up. And btw, the carbon from wood is already on top of the Earth's crust, unlike the carbon in oil, nat. gas and coal. That's why wood burning is carbon-neutral--we're only changing the FORM of the carbon, as opposed to dredging more of it up from under the crust, and introducing it into atmosphere.

Next week, Sofia, we'll talk about these fun facts:

52% of America's 'lectric comes from coal-fired power plants.
Coal contains Uranium 238 and other bomb-grade, radioactive isotopes--naturally.
Coal contains Mercury, naturally.
When you use electricity, you burn coal, and you end up breathing Uranium 238 and Mercury.
Mercury has been linked to autism, and is known to cause birth defects and cancer (an' I knows you're concerned about the chillun', as are we all....)
Uranium causes cancer (and war).

Sofia, please reread Craig's and jpl's posts, with the above in mind. And since you mentioned that you did approve of wood burning "only in emergency situations," I got news for ya--we're in one now--it's called the B*sh Administration. 3,400+ (or 9,000--depends upon who you believe) dead American service men and women, and 100,000-650,000 dead Iraqi's (again, estimates vary--who can keep score, right? I mean, they're only civilians, fer Chrissakes-sheesh!) DID NOT DIE BECAUSE OF FIREWOOD.

See...it's about OIL. No one is dying over firewood, burned or otherwise. Hundreds of thousands dead in an unnecessary "war" (illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, based on LIES to Congress about WMD's) that the best minds believe was started mainly as an oil-grab? I'd call that "an emergency," wouldn't you?

 

[wg_bent]

Nice reply Craig. You even held back a lot. I personally have yet to see two countries go to war over a log, yet much of the worlds political issues today are over oil. I'm sure she has not accounted for the pollution that war causes either.

I'm going back over to the Forno Bravo forums now to read up on the fastest way to heat up your wood fired oven!
I did decide to bag the wood fired pool heater. I decided to install a Mr Fusion pool heater instead. ;-)

 

[Harley]

Couldn't stand by without standing up. I posted the following response in support of Craig and the rest of us.

Unless I missed it.... its gone already.

 

[MrGriz]

Great replies Craig and Pierre!

 

[detmurds]

Great response! Europe...however has greater problems than we do alone living with terrorism every day.

 

[webbie]

Great response! Europe...however has greater problems than we do alone living with terrorism every day.

Huh? Translate, please.

 

[detmurds]

Ah, never mind me,...I look at the political side too much I guess.

Again,..I love your reply!

 

[jpl1nh]

I have received a response regarding my e-mail to Sophia. Here it is: Dear Pierre La Tourette,
EPA stoves, as you know are without doubt a shameful profit well
orchestrated market scam .
EPA stoves were moved aggressively on the market (1990) to curb the downward
trend that was reflected in the early nineties when concerns were reflected
regarding the dirty deadly emissions from the burning of wood.
Regulations to withold reality, are as you know a shameful attempt to secure
the marketing and sales.
Regardless of the accepted fact from research, of non ability of these
appliances to come any way near the "DOCUMENTATION " testing is clear
testimony of the co-operative trick that has succeeded in moving the product
beyond general criticism. The deception that is a result of diverging from
the real truth about home'domestic resedential emissions has cost many
their health.
Perhaps you may wish to think about the saddness that has resulted from the
self indulgence. Perhaps you may in the depth of the moment, hear the coughs
and the wheezing , the slow steps of the wife or husband who has lost a
loved one to the illness that ruined their lives.
The carcinogens from wood smoke , as you know are also directly associated
with breast cancer.
Take the time to question the consequences of so many who have given in to
the compliance of fraud and deceipt.
When looking at wood smoke contaminents , take time to recognize the
verification of the dioxin and furan emissions, the independent studies that
analysis indicate TEQ emissions 490 to 1010 pg TEQ/kg for certified stoves
compared with 200-300 for conventional unit. Recognize that both are
environmentally and especially health destructive.
Any intelligent person who has evolved from Stone Age level of awareness
woul be capable of seeing the facts. Reports , for example Resedential Wood
Heating , Summary of Results from 1999-2002 confirm thatb RWB is responsible
for more air toxins and GHG than industry and car emissions combined.
Conclusion when you do the math:One conventional= 45000 km car in one day.
One stove EPA = 34000 km of a car in one day. Environment Canada studies
confirm that this avoidable disaster is the cause of deadly ozone and VOC's
metals and a host of cancerous agents. Health Canada reports directly
conclude the immune resistance and the ability of PAH's and carcinogens to
enter the bloodstream and years later convert the cellular composition into
cancer. Look at the research from The New England Journal of Medicine ,
Feb. 1, 2007.
I am wasting my energy as the realization that the facts on cornonary heart
disease, second hand wood smoke actually 18 times more cancer causing than
cigarette smoke. Hazard ratios are I am certain not of interest to those
whos chart is investors group focused.
Also research concludes that the cost of heating with wood is higher than
alternate choices.
What kind of business would continue to destroy with vengence the fragility
of the planet. The only answer is a like minded "ol boys club whos concern
for their golf game far superseede the life and well being of the world
resources that their children and grandchildren will suffer in sweltering
humid heat that will result in mass world sufferring and extenction ao much
that they take for granted.
The real truth about management:
Thinking beyond the golf game and the selfish immediate is not within the
consciousness of many who control the market place.
What would inspire anyone to dedicat their time and efforts to such immoral
industry that is so well cossied up with politicians?
Now to conclude with a persuasive note:
What is the truth? What inspires such absolute and unevolved thinking. Do
you think it is right to conduct a business on the very breath of peole when
your industry could actually make a substantial difference in helping to
ensure health and sustainability. There eventually will be accountability
and transparency. Citizens will demand accountability and these
manipulations will be brought to the forefront. Damages will be sought in
legal compensation.
Minimizing the truth and exagerating benefits in lies when one examines the
loss of lives and quality of life is deplorable. Where in does a criminal
act lie. Is this not criminal negligence?
Questions :
Do you consider 53% of particulate matter, national 24% GHG caused by 4.4% a
little matter?
It is appalling to read such denial.
Have you seen Al Gore's movie? Take a moment and wake up! The problem is
that the earth is being destroyed and large corporations like HEARTH are
contributing on a vast scale and denying it as they plow awar at the life
sustaining air that we need and that once destroyed does not ever come
back..Can you get the picture?
What denial lies at the foundation.?And this nonsense about CO2 is that a
mad scientist ..even a secondary one student can prove this to be absolutely
absurd. It is beyond reason and what mind would be so limited as to think
this as deductive reasoning? Is there anybody home?
Or is this vacant?
Somewhat inconvenient ?
What significant influence can be resolved outside Supreme Court?

The sense of urgency seems far from your limitated will.
Thank you and regarding international political instability and the global
impact, the Hearth Industry in replacing the conventional is a sleezy
corrupt market fraud providing a short term profit . An absolute disgrace to
integrity, to
So Pierre,

Take a moment and examine the position of the American Lung Association on
the issue of such contamination from wood stoves.
Have you awakened to climat change yet?
Do you have the ability to see what harm you are causing to the world, to
the threatened forests, the air, to people's lives, to the kids whose
parents are lied to about the fumes and emissions?
The issue is not minor. It is not about a minor dimin

 

[jpl1nh]

Uh..the whole e-mail from Sophia did not fit evidently, but I think there is enough there for you to draw whatever conclusion you wish. As for me, there are so many factually incorrect points in her message that it seems useless to continue a conversation with her. I was especially intrigued by her assumptions of my profiting from the sales by the hearth industry. In my mind, if she can so easily draw such obviously erroneous conclusions about me, it significantly diminishes her credibility on everything else as well. As many of you already concluded, assuming she is somewhat representative of the Burning Issues organization, it iseems a waste of time trying to have a discussion. Whatever pertinant facts there are are lost in a flurry of vitrolic accusations, factual and contextual inaccuracies, and dreadful grammer. :zip:

 

[restorer]

Uh..the whole e-mail from Sophia did not fit evidently, but I think there is enough there for you to draw whatever conclusion you wish. As for me, there are so many factually incorrect points in her message that it seems useless to continue a conversation with her. I was especially intrigued by her assumptions of my profiting from the sales by the hearth industry. In my mind, if she can so easily draw such obviously erroneous conclusions about me, it significantly diminishes her credibility on everything else as well. As many of you already concluded, assuming she is somewhat representative of the Burning Issues organization, it iseems a waste of time trying to have a discussion. Whatever pertinant facts there are are lost in a flurry of vitrolic accusations, factual and contextual inaccuracies, and dreadful grammer. :zip:

JPL:
I read sophias diatribe. I tried to make sense of it, but I realized it was a rant of the 12th degree. I makes no sense. Your response to the OP and the website are gone. Spaced to the enth degree. If we get a post from another of these whacko's what do we do? Ignore them? You have clearly wasted your effort to provide a reasonable response, there is an empty void there.

The greater the space we allow these folks the more time we spend wasting our time. I vote we ignore them, just as the BI site has less than 75 members. How tall do we stand? I will spend my time making things better for all than dealing with the whining of the few.