Here we go again with this burn ban crap
- Thread starter Elderthewelder
- Start date
-
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
Highbeam said:
I agree if the air is terribly bad than there needs to be some sort of regulation, however as BeGreen said he can see Mt Baker 90 miles away clear as day, I live in between him and Mt Baker and the air / sky looks fine,
The main problem is there is no enforcement with the ban, I drove around town today and lost count of how many smoke dragons I saw that were bellowing smoke, I am sure these people have some sort of electric baseboard or wall inserts in their home. When I got home I said screw it and turned off my furnace and fired up my insert with North Idaho logs, I will switch to cord wood when it gets dark, although either way you just see a heat plum coming out of my flue, except on initial start up when using cord wood
Last year the city of Seattle put in a wood powered power plant down on the water, I am willing to bet that they do not stop operating it when these bans are called in King County
We have burn bans here which are more restrictive than the one up your way. We are not even allowed to burn pellet stoves and EPA rated woodstoves on burn ban day (called "Spare the Air" days here). The only exception is if you have no other source of heat in the house. If you have another heater, but it is broken, if they cite you, you have one year of exemption to get that other heater fixed.
My answer to this regulation was to pull out the marginally functional (determined by an inspection when I bought the place) 50 year old gas wall heater. Now, I only have a pellet stove. It burns very cleanly. You can't see any smoke from the chimney except for a small puff at start up. I'm putting in an EPA woodstove as a supplement. I won't be able to burn it on Spare the Air days. Then, it will be 55F in my sunporch/office, like it is right now.
Those who still burn garbage and any stove or fireplace that bellows smoke should clean up their act. I have a neighbor who burns constantly, and always has a thick black plume coming out of his chimney. When I look at that plume, I understand why woodburning gets a bad rap.
I'm also a tree hugger, but I don't like the broad, draconian details of the law. The powers-that-be could have done a better job of drafting the details. I guess it was easier to have an unrefined ban.
My answer to this regulation was to pull out the marginally functional (determined by an inspection when I bought the place) 50 year old gas wall heater. Now, I only have a pellet stove. It burns very cleanly. You can't see any smoke from the chimney except for a small puff at start up. I'm putting in an EPA woodstove as a supplement. I won't be able to burn it on Spare the Air days. Then, it will be 55F in my sunporch/office, like it is right now.
Those who still burn garbage and any stove or fireplace that bellows smoke should clean up their act. I have a neighbor who burns constantly, and always has a thick black plume coming out of his chimney. When I look at that plume, I understand why woodburning gets a bad rap.
I'm also a tree hugger, but I don't like the broad, draconian details of the law. The powers-that-be could have done a better job of drafting the details. I guess it was easier to have an unrefined ban.
Burn ban.... What a bunch of crap. It is just another example of how big brother wants to dictate every single activity of our lives these days. Why pay attention to it? Build a fire if you want. Its winter time out! If someone knocks on your door asking about it, tell them that your furnace is down and the stove is your only adequate source of heat at the moment, tell them to have a nice day and then close the door. I would give it no further thought or consideration than that.....
Just got back from a journey to the south sound. Guess was, the layer of brown smog was real, you could see it hanging there from sea level up for at least a couple thousand feet. Wish I had taken a camera with me. It was especially thick around South Tacoma. Sometimes you need to step out of your own neighborhood to see the big picture.
I have experienced significant air pollution living in Los Angeles and in Hawaii (vog from volcano) so I do appreciate the measures taken to improve air quality. To paraphrase Kilgore Trout-we are the only species that pollutes the air we need to breathe and the water we need to drink.
On the other hand I would be very frustrated to deal with a ban, especially (as was pointed out) when we are burning coal for power and you are not contributing to the problem.
On the other hand I would be very frustrated to deal with a ban, especially (as was pointed out) when we are burning coal for power and you are not contributing to the problem.
It is disappointing when people who blame their problems on government meddling refuse to take responsibility for their own inconsideration, which generates the regulations in the first place.
Smokey burning is an excellent example.
There's always a million reasons why it's someone else's fault, and not yours.
Want to make the world a better place? Change yourself.
Smokey burning is an excellent example.
There's always a million reasons why it's someone else's fault, and not yours.
Want to make the world a better place? Change yourself.
robertmcw said:
I know what I would do to get round that one.....
I'd remove the fuse from the plug on the central heating pump and it would then be inoperative.......
My woodburner would then be my only source of heat.
Same as all rules, study them in order to get round them, because that's what all the lawyers and politicians do all day long.......... ;-)
Elderthewelder said:
We get the burn bans from time to time in Mason County, but, it's 16 hours of dark here per day so I just burn through it. It's pretty tough to see smoke in the dark.
Bigg_Redd said:
The only time I can remember smoke/smog in the air was when Canada had a huge forest fire burning (in the summer) and that was 100's of miles away from here.. We don't have the mountains in this area that can trap the smoke.. I live in the country so it's less of a problem.. I still see many who run very smoky fires here and when you drive by my house you see nothing in comparison.. The emissions from this old stove meet the epa phase II requirements but it was made in the phase I era.. I think the new design stoves with the dual secondary burn/cat may become the new standard in the future... It still amazes me how efficient this stove runs considering its age..
Ray
For those who don't like government regulations to reduce pollution, there's this place called China where the air will be more to your liking.
DanCorcoran said:
Dan I think the point is that EPA stoves run properly emit no more pollution than an oil furnace.. It isn't that we want to pollute the air.. I can understand that old smoke dragons be banned during smog times but not a clean running stove.. Those who run cleaner should be allowed to run and I feel that this will encourage those who don't to get with the program so they can burn too.. This would create a win-win situation in my opinion..
Ray
The issue as I see it is that someone sitting in an office whose power is not checked by the ballot box, can determine what type of material you can use to heat your home. Everyone has their own level of comfort with what is reasonable for the government to control but this type of thing should be resisted. Sure, Dan makes the argument that it is for the protection of the elderly, etc. That's exactly the type thinking the government wants you to have. Every piece of unconstitutional and overbearing legislation is passed to protect some sort of vulnerable class-that doesn't mean it is a good regulation.
If a person in WA is burning a smoke dragon and impacting their neighbor negatively, the neighbor should ask them to stop burning and if the burner refuses, the neighbor can sue them for nuisance. Many times these types of regulations break down the neighbor relationship and reduce it to a 1984 style rat-out the person across the street. Whether the regulators intend it or not, they are de-humanizing relationships. History is replete with examples of government abuses beginning with de-humanizing groups of people in order to make it easier for the government to abuse them. I say take a stand.
For those of you that think the regulation is reasonable, I encourage you to reconsider your postition. Do you think it is reasonable for the regulators to set a maximum temperature for your home in the winter? What about a very reasonable 74 degrees? Wake up! That legislation will be here within the decade if there is no resistance now.
Those of you in WA that are against the ban should get together, develop a plan and resist. As an example, after you all meet and get to know each other, commit to putting a set amount of dollars to the problem. Keep burning your stove no matter what the ban but burn cleanly and responsibly, perhaps even filming your chimney for proof. Then if one of you gets hit with the fine, use the money to hire an attorney and fight the ordinance. At least do something.
When you put out the fire in your stove because of a burn ban, you might as well be extinguishing the fire of freedom.
Kathleen, obviously Kilgore Trout never visited a cattle farm. There's a reason you drink upstream from the herd...
If a person in WA is burning a smoke dragon and impacting their neighbor negatively, the neighbor should ask them to stop burning and if the burner refuses, the neighbor can sue them for nuisance. Many times these types of regulations break down the neighbor relationship and reduce it to a 1984 style rat-out the person across the street. Whether the regulators intend it or not, they are de-humanizing relationships. History is replete with examples of government abuses beginning with de-humanizing groups of people in order to make it easier for the government to abuse them. I say take a stand.
For those of you that think the regulation is reasonable, I encourage you to reconsider your postition. Do you think it is reasonable for the regulators to set a maximum temperature for your home in the winter? What about a very reasonable 74 degrees? Wake up! That legislation will be here within the decade if there is no resistance now.
Those of you in WA that are against the ban should get together, develop a plan and resist. As an example, after you all meet and get to know each other, commit to putting a set amount of dollars to the problem. Keep burning your stove no matter what the ban but burn cleanly and responsibly, perhaps even filming your chimney for proof. Then if one of you gets hit with the fine, use the money to hire an attorney and fight the ordinance. At least do something.
When you put out the fire in your stove because of a burn ban, you might as well be extinguishing the fire of freedom.
Kathleen, obviously Kilgore Trout never visited a cattle farm. There's a reason you drink upstream from the herd...
raybonz said:
Dan's clownish comments aside, EPA stoves put out about 2-5 grams per hour. A new furnace puts out less. I believe less than 1 gram per hour. But, if they were serious about improving air quality during bans than they should force all modern diesel trucks and buses to the side of the road as they emit 36 grams per hour... which is more than a fireplace using hard wood (30 grams per hour).
My Avalon is rated at:
2.6 Grams Per Hour (EPA Phase II Approved) – Tests conducted by E.E.S.P.C.
I guess I can drive 13.846 diesel trucks and buses with my insert ???????????
That is POWER.
Robert
2.6 Grams Per Hour (EPA Phase II Approved) – Tests conducted by E.E.S.P.C.
I guess I can drive 13.846 diesel trucks and buses with my insert ???????????
That is POWER.
Robert
As far as I know, the only reason we have cleaner air than the Chinese is that we regulate and enforce. I agree that discussions of where/when/how much to regulate are valid (as well as regulating diesel trucks and busses, coal-fired power plants, etc.)
Does anyone seriously believe that government has no place regulating or enforcing air quality and that neighbors suing each other is the answer to improved air quality? If so, I assume it is because they are lawyers.
Does anyone seriously believe that government has no place regulating or enforcing air quality and that neighbors suing each other is the answer to improved air quality? If so, I assume it is because they are lawyers.
Pyro said:
“modern diesel trucks and buses to the side of the road as they emit 36 grams per hour.â€
My insert is rated at 2.6 grams an hour.
36 grams/2.6 grams = 13.846
It was supposed to be a hahahaha …………. But if ‘they’ really wanted to clean the air, we could.
EDIT:
I live in the Houston area and most don't have inserts or wood stoves. Its the millions of cars or 100-plus chemical plants and refineries that are harming the air.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703626604575011120836818934.html
Robert
“modern diesel trucks and buses to the side of the road as they emit 36 grams per hour.â€
My insert is rated at 2.6 grams an hour.
36 grams/2.6 grams = 13.846
It was supposed to be a hahahaha …………. But if ‘they’ really wanted to clean the air, we could.
EDIT:
I live in the Houston area and most don't have inserts or wood stoves. Its the millions of cars or 100-plus chemical plants and refineries that are harming the air.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703626604575011120836818934.html
Robert
- Status
Similar threads
