Some stats on woodburning

[kalevi]

Saw an article in today's Globe and Mail on fine particulate and heart health. It says survey found woodburning stoves and fireplaces are responsible for 28 percent of fine particulate matter polution in Canada and that 44% of those living in communities of less that 10000 have wood stove, pellet stove, or fireplace and use it daily or almost daily during winter.

Question: Are most of these people still using smoke dragons or EPA stoves/inserts?

I'm burning a PE Vista insert for about 10 hours weekdays and 16 or so weekends.

 

[argus66]

burn bio bricks, never worry again plus no cresote.....

 

[webbie]

My guess would be a LOT of Canadians still use older stoves and furnaces. This would be a good question to put to our Guru (just for a guess)....that is, the inventor of trees - Mr. John Gulland. I'll shoot him an email.

 

[webbie]

Ok, here are some basics and my opinion of them:

"Nine years ago only 11 percent
of wood stoves in use were reported as being EPA certified,
whereas today 39 percent are clean burning."

Ok, so just in the world of stoves alone, that means 61% are non-EPA. Add central heat, open fireplace, outdoor fireplaces, open burning and other such things....and you can speculate that wood burning in EPA stoves is a relatively small percentage of the total particulates.

 

[stoveguy13]

burn bio bricks, never worry again plus no cresote.....

That would not really be a true stament it is still wood and cloud still cause the same issues you cloud get with cord wood at low combustion temps. pellete stoves can even make cresote when they are not burning right

 

[granpajohn]

I'm not sure how to concisely say this, but I suggest that some of the stats listed in that report, (oops, "survey"), are not fully true. Modern newspapers can receive a report from any group or non-profit organization and blather headlines about it without any verification. The group that issued this document, Heart and Stroke Foundation, is trying to connect air quality with heart disease. They seem to be successful and honest on that point. The source of particulates was taken from a third party (unnamed) and is not substantiated. The other non-medical claim is apparently taken from a survey of households. They do however, quote Environment Canada on the air quality as measured.

Here is a quote by the medical doctor in the story: "I would not have predicted that wood burning, in Canada, is such a major contributor to air pollution," he said. "I think some of the information caught all of us by surprise."

I agree with him, because it may be simply untrue.

I'm not making hard and fast arguements. I would just like readers to be more careful with these sort of claims, because it seems to go on so much these days. I also believe that the average Hearth.com reader is more knowledgable than most when discussing scientific endevours. In fact, it's amazing what one can learn here!

 

[billb3]

I rather agree with granpajohn and will add that I can buy any survey results I want. Any one and any organization can and does.

Thirty years ago I could go outside in the dead of winter on a windless night on this same farm and smell burning wood.
Not stings your eyes burning wood like up in maine and new hampshire but unless a skunk was tangling the smell of wood permeated the air.
there's got to be at least three times as many people living here now and all I smell is dryer sheets.

 

[KeithO]

How much of the particulate is caused by brushfires ? They aren't EPA approved either... And they consume more wood than all the woodburners in the world combined. What about all the diesel vehicles, which as far as I know are still allowed to belch soot from the factory, BRAND NEW ? The US has cleaned up on road diesels since 2007 and the soot filters will arrive with every new OFF ROAD diesel from 2010. Then there is industry. To a large extent still unregulated or uncontrolled. Many industrial facilities will burn dirty stuff at night (flaring at refineries) since one cannot see the column of soot at night. Not sure how much in the way of petrochemical, fertilizer and coal fired operations one has in Canada.

 

[webbie]

I agree that most of these stats are just guesses. But a guess beats nothing at all. My "conclusion", as biased as it might be, is that CLEAN wood burning is not a major contributor to Canadas air quality problems. In a cold place where a LOT of people burn wood, it could be expected that wood burning would represent a decently sized part of the particulates....say 10% or more. That's fine as long as all the sources together don't add up to dirty air.

 

[berlin]

"To a large extent still unregulated or uncontrolled."

please. you can't fart in powerplant or other "smokestack" industry without someone doing an opacity test on it...

 

[Burl]

Better check you facts on diesel vehicles, "smokeless" diesels have been the norm since circa 1997 (maybe earlier) and the current regs are quite stringent.