What are the facts on this one?

  • 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
Not open for further replies.

rkshed

Feeling the Heat
Jan 15, 2012
269
NH
The facts are- EPA rating ensures cleaner burning, MORE EFFICIENT stoves. Old ones were grandfathered in. It's like requiring car manufacturers to make cleaner burning cars or install airbags- it's good for the consumer and helps the manufacturer's reputation.

Outdoor wood fired boilers have a bad rep because they often previously regulated heat by damping down until they belch terrible smoke. In some towns there really have been issues with air quality due to wood burning, and I wouldn't want to live on a 1/2 acre lot with one of those old boilers on my property line. I think that regulation may actually HELP producers expand markets by avoiding bans in many of these places.

(You can be sure that any article that uses the sort of language in that piece of... ahhemmm... journalism doesn't have the consumer in mind)
 
Wow, that article reminds me of stuff a couple decades old!

The basic fact is a singular one. If you feel that it's OK to drive a car down the road with exhaust and burning oil spewing out the tailpipe and hood, then you should be on the side with the author. Otherwise, you should be like us.......here!

That article is simply political theater. I could write one for you in 5 minutes complaining about how Big Gubment wants me to pour concrete for a skyscraper before it starts setting....or why they want me to get a vaccine, etc. etc......
 
typical, articles these days arent actually news, theyre all editorial in nature, most either embellish certian stats over others, cite only parts of data which support the view of the writer (or his benefactors) while ignoring anything that may contradict their opinion. some straight up lie, then deny it citing sources which may or may not be real.

short version, dont believe anything you cannot go back and check multiple sources to confirm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.