New Gov study on Wood

[CTFIRE]

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=15431

Hmm. Fossil fuel prices skyrocket and gov is surprised by 50% increase in people using wood

 

[smokedragon]

That my friend is why they get paid the big buck

 

[Jags]

Huh - strange correlation with % by income. As income increases - so does wood use.

 

[trguitar]

Where does it say they are surprised?

They are just making an observation.

 

[Jags]

I do believe that thar from the OP was sarcasm

 

[kennyp2339]

How long is it going to take before the media paints the picture of us wood burning guys being bad people for excessive smoke, although many of us burn with cat stoves or epa stoves. Or better yet a wood storage tax.

 

[farmboy05]

I like the second chart and the 'BTU in wood consumed per household'. Assuming that lower income people use mainly older style stoves and fireplaces and higher income uses EPA stoves and insets, I think it shows the effectiveness of more efficient stoves. Course, there could be other factors involved as well.

 

[farmboy05]

Or better yet a wood storage tax.

Smoke tax... gov makes you pay to install a smoke meter on your chimney so they can tax you on how much smoke you exhaust...

 

[Applesister]

The polar vortex was an excuse for polar screwing. Home heating costs exceeded the cost of gas at the pumps, by almost a dollar a gallon.
Major price gougeing on top of bitter temps.
I dont know how the government came up with these numbers. Obviously fossel fuel suppliers must report to gov. agencies. Are they watching to see what we do??
I cant imagine any of those wood dealers reporting any of their cash sales from craigslist or anyone paying sales tax on anything so they cannot track numbers that way.
So is this information based on how much fossel fuels didnt get sold? Compared to consumption last year?
Maybe we all decided to just freeze.
I did. I refused to pay the prices they charged and exclusively heated with wood. Every year I burn more wood and buy less fuel.
And the EPA wanting to establish even tighter restrictions on stove emissions??? Where exactly is that all heading?
They are already trying to ban Outside Wood Boilers.

 

[farmboy05]

Where exactly is that all heading?

Once enough people switch over and big oil starts to whine, gov will do what it does best... Tax and regulate. They'll find creative ways to make wood expensive to burn. And they'll claim it's to help the children after more homes burn down because people don't research proper wood seasoning and burning techniques.

 

[Applesister]

If they are tracking numbers by how many households by one means or another purchase inserts or purchase stoves or build new houses with fireplaces built in. Dont know.
Theres no way they can track useage by wood. Not with the serious scrounging that goes on just from this site.
Hurricanes and other natural disasters, tree care and landscaping contractors and non burning homeowners giving wood away. Landowners self supplying the good old fashioned way.
unscrupulous wood dealers and just plain old folks not reporting those 2 extra cords they sell.
Nothing accurate from tracking wood, so how do they come up with BTU's?

 

[blades]

I'd say burn DC, but it already puts out way more hot air and nasties into the atmosphere than anything else.

 

[BrotherBart]

If they are tracking numbers by how many households by one means or another purchase inserts or purchase stoves or build new houses with fireplaces built in. Dont know.

Good grief. It is one of the 24 questions on the back side of the census form. The American Community Survey. "How do you heat your house?" Electric, oil, gas, wood etc. Along with about the length of your commute and your kid's school and your income.

They don't care if your stove has a gold door or if it has legs or pedestal.

 

[fossil]

Does this thread have a purpose? Any meaning here?

 

[BrotherBart]

No.

 

[paul bunion]

That first graph is utterly meaningless in comparison. Rhode islands 170 % increase could have come from a total of 10 burners rising to 27, whereas Vermont's 100% increase could have come from 100,000 becoming 200,000.