EPA wanting to rule on use of wood heaters

[deerlakejens]

The EPA was created by that well known lefty, Richard Nixon. I wonder what he was thinking? So where in the Constitution are fishing and hunting regulations covered?

 

[NSMaple1]

I live in the woods on 500 acres. My neighbor has an OWB. We get the smoke. Not as bad as the other neighbor across the road, but we still get it. So I'll play that pollution card, thanks.

 

[jimbojango]

I live in the woods on 500 acres. My neighbor has an OWB. We get the smoke. Not as bad as the other neighbor across the road, but we still get it. So I'll play that pollution card, thanks.

Why do you care... its not cancer causing, its not foul odored and you must be a tree hugging hippie pile of crap to worry about it. Our neighbors could make it so hazy i couldn't see and i'd be happy for them because they are warm. I'll gladly take a touch of discomfort for the sake of warmth, resource use and money savings.

BTW you are a canadian, so keep your bad idea's NORTH of the border, we have enough ******* SOUTH of it. Thanks

 

[Woody912]

All that is still no justification for subjecting your neighbor to air pollution.

my neighbors burn brush and campfires all summer and their fireplaces are going right now. We're quite happy with each other and none of us like the EPA

 

[Woody912]

How is that??
The new regulations wouldn't place legal consequences on any sort of past or previous action or inaction (the definition of ex post facto law), it would only apply to future action or inaction. There ain't anything ex post facto about it in any way.
*

It would make a legally purchased item illegal to own which constitutes an illegal seizing in my book

 

[Woody912]

The EPA was created by that well known lefty, Richard Nixon. I wonder what he was thinking? So where in the Constitution are fishing and hunting regulations covered?

Believe it or not, a lot of historians would say Nixon's social policies were left of center including his attempts at government control of gasoline prices.

 

[jrider]

Oh... the new regulations do indeed apply to the older stoves.
The new regs don't "ban" the use of them provided they are currently "in use" (installed and being used)... but they "ban" transfer of ownership and new installations (which would include moving the stove to a new location).
Are you getting that?? If you sell your house the stove would have to be removed and destroyed... you can't take it with you, and you can't transfer ownership of it to the purchaser of your home. If you purchase a new stove you can't give your old one to your daughter and her husband... once you uninstall it, it becomes worthless junk iron.

FOUND ON PAGE 177...
§ 60.530 Am I subject to this subpart?
(a) You are subject to this subpart if you operate, manufacture, sell, offer for sale, import for sale, distribute, offer to distribute, introduce, or deliver for introduction, into commerce in the United States, an affected wood heater specified in paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this section:
(1) Each adjustable burn rate wood heater with a current EPA certificate of compliance, single burn rate wood heaters with a current EPA certificate of compliance, and each pellet stove with a current EPA certificate of compliance issued prior to [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE] according to the certification procedures in effect in this subpart at the time of certification that are manufactured on or after July 1, 1988 are affected wood heaters.
(2) All other residential wood heaters under this subpart manufactured or sold on or after [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE] are affected wood heaters.

FOUND ON PAGE 182...
§ 60.531 What definitions must I know?
Sale means the transfer of ownership or control, except that a transfer of control of an affected wood heater for research and development purposes within the scope of § 60.530(b)(2) is not a sale.




ON PAGE 4...
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734, by one of the following methods:

• 
  
  
  • www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
  • Email: [email protected], Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734.
  • Fax: (202) 566-9744, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734.
  • Mail: United States (U.S.) Postal Service, send comments to EPA Docket Center, EPA West (Air Docket), Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20004. Please include a total of two copies. In addition, please mail a copy of your comments on the information collection provisions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 735 17th St., NW, Washington, DC 20503.
  • Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, EPA West (Air Docket), Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Yes we know the government will come to our homes and make sure the old stove is destroyed...whatever that means. They also have the time and man power to come along checking all homes so they can be sure nobody moves a wood stove from one house to another.

 

[zogger]

The EPA was created by that well known lefty, Richard Nixon. I wonder what he was thinking? So where in the Constitution are fishing and hunting regulations covered?

small pic, hope you can read the caption, one of my fav far sides

 

[stihly dan]

Yes we know the government will come to our homes and make sure the old stove is destroyed...whatever that means. They also have the time and man power to come along checking all homes so they can be sure nobody moves a wood stove from one house to another.

May not be the gov. I had my insurance cancel my policy because they said I had a woodstove when I did not. I had to take a day out of work and meet an adjuster to prove I didn't. They said I did originally because my masonry chimney had a metalbestos extender on top because of an addition. Apparently metalbestos chimney's are only used with wood?

 

[KindredSpiritzz]

I think its time to stock up on more ammo

 

[isaaccarlson]

I am putting a wood stove in the pole shed/shop. I am running the stove pipe up through the peak of the roof and making it bland in to the roof line so nobody notices it.
The hole will be about 4"x12" and will stick up just past the roof line. It will be the same color as the roof and is on the end away from the driveway so it will be even harder to spot. I was thinking of running it out through a back wall, but this seems a little more sophisticated.

 

[singinwoodwackr]

Puck the EPA!!!

 

[Whitespider]

So where in the Constitution are fishing and hunting regulations covered?

Don't be confused... use your head... think before making a response and reacting from emotion.
Fishing and Hunting regulations are State regulations not Federal... the numerated powers in the Constitution only apply to Federal Government.
The Constitution specifically says any power not granted to the Federal Government is granted to the states.

It would make a legally purchased item illegal to own which constitutes an illegal seizing in my book

Hardly. It simply makes older stoves illegal to "sell" (change of ownership) or "install" after the regs become effective... you can still own it, and even keep using it if it was installed and in use before the new regs become effective. How is that an illegal seizure?? Don't make this into something it is not; doing so only makes things worse and buries the truth even deeper... which only helps them, not you.

Yes we know the government will come to our homes and make sure the old stove is destroyed...whatever that means. They also have the time and man power to come along checking all homes so they can be sure nobody moves a wood stove from one house to another.

There's a law making the ownership, the transfer of ownership and the use of marijuana illegal... and the same law says the stuff is to be destroyed. No government entity (as you say) "come(s) along checking all homes", but people are arrested for it every day. Like I said, properties are "checked" all the time... tax appraisers, insurance appraisers, local code inspectors, real estate agents, delivery people, the meter man, you even invite friends and neighbors into your home. Heck, if you moved into a new home and installed a non-compliant stove the neighbor could file a nuisance complaint because of smell, smoke or even unsightly wood piles that would bring law enforcement to your door with enough cause to enter your home, or get a warrant to enter your home. The EPA ain't an "enforcement" agency... they're a "regulatory" agency.
*

 

[zogger]

Don't be confused... use your head... think before making a response and reacting from emotion.
Fishing and Hunting regulations are State regulations not Federal... the numerated powers in the Constitution only apply to Federal Government.
The Constitution specifically says any power not granted to the Federal Government is granted to the states.


Hardly. It simply makes older stoves illegal to "sell" (change of ownership) or "install" after the regs become effective... you can still own it, and even keep using it if it was installed and in use before the new regs become effective. How is that an illegal seizure?? Don't make this into something it is not; doing so only makes things worse and buries the truth even deeper... which only helps them, not you.


There's a law making the ownership, the transfer of ownership and the use of marijuana illegal... and the same law says the stuff is to be destroyed. No government entity (as you say) "come(s) along checking all homes", but people are arrested for it every day. Like I said, properties are "checked" all the time... tax appraisers, insurance appraisers, local code inspectors, real estate agents, delivery people, the meter man, you even invite friends and neighbors into your home. Heck, if you moved into a new home and installed a non-compliant stove the neighbor could file a nuisance complaint because of smell, smoke or even unsightly wood piles that would bring law enforcement to your door with enough cause to enter your home, or get a warrant to enter your home. The EPA ain't an "enforcement" agency... they're a "regulatory" agency.
*

Sure looks like they are, guns, badges, arrest powers

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3063

70 different federal cop agencies

http://www.examiner.com/article/ove...rmed-divisions-arrest-authority-over-citizens

 

[Whitespider]

Actually zogger, every US citizen, government employee or not, has "arrest and firearm authority".
It's called a "Citizen Arrest" in conjunction with the Second Amendment... unless, of course, you live on one of the left coasts and a few other "leftest" places..
*

 

[jebatty]

I think I can support an individual's right to breathe harmful substances in the air, so if a person wants a wood stove/boiler that has emissions in excess of that permitted by local, city, state or federal regulations, the easy solution would be to pipe that stuff back into the person's house (or wall it off so it stays entirely within the property boundary), and then filter all the bad air coming out. That way the person could enjoy his/her private property rights to the fullest, and all others could enjoy their private property rights not to be polluted by a neighbor to the fullest. What I hear when sifting through the emotional comments is that people want their private property rights to the fullest, and this would accomplish that perfectly.

Don't forget that, unless preempted by federal law, your local town, city, county, state etc. can also regulate the emissions from your stove. This isn't just a federal question, in fact the EPA is lagging far behind local controls which are more restrictive, as many towns, cities, counties and states are regulating stove emissions already,and more are doing so as the smoke from inefficient stoves destroys the private property rights of citizens to be free of neighbors' smoking stoves. So, unless you live in an area where people don't care about their private property rights, we all can expect more regulation of stove emissions. If indeed you care about private property rights, and you want to protect your private property rights, then it would be wise to act to also protect your neighbor's private property rights to be free of your actions which destroy your neighbor's private property rights.

Regulation is not to limit private property rights, but it is to insure that we all can fully enjoy private property rights, and when some through their actions take away the private property rights of others, then the government should and must step in to protect private property rights.

 

[jimbojango]

I think I can support an individual's right to breathe harmful substances in the air, so if a person wants a wood stove/boiler that has emissions in excess of that permitted by local, city, state or federal regulations, the easy solution would be to pipe that stuff back into the person's house (or wall it off so it stays entirely within the property boundary), and then filter all the bad air coming out. That way the person could enjoy his/her private property rights to the fullest, and all others could enjoy their private property rights not to be polluted by a neighbor to the fullest. What I hear when sifting through the emotional comments is that people want their private property rights to the fullest, and this would accomplish that perfectly.

Don't forget that, unless preempted by federal law, your local town, city, county, state etc. can also regulate the emissions from your stove. This isn't just a federal question, in fact the EPA is lagging far behind local controls which are more restrictive, as many towns, cities, counties and states are regulating stove emissions already,and more are doing so as the smoke from inefficient stoves destroys the private property rights of citizens to be free of neighbors' smoking stoves. So, unless you live in an area where people don't care about their private property rights, we all can expect more regulation of stove emissions. If indeed you care about private property rights, and you want to protect your private property rights, then it would be wise to act to also protect your neighbor's private property rights to be free of your actions which destroy your neighbor's private property rights.

Regulation is not to limit private property rights, but it is to insure that we all can fully enjoy private property rights, and when some through their actions take away the private property rights of others, then the government should and must step in to protect private property rights.

I live a half a mile from the closest neighbor. The problem with almost ALL federal laws is that they are too short sided. This EPA emissions deal if for the townies that buy wood from wood sellers wanting a profit that sell crap to start with and then burn it in their fireplace so they can screw by the fire with their fat wives. If i lived in town i'd probably be more conscious of my neighbors and smoke.

On another note: Its highly doubtful my state will ever do anything until forced, and if they do i'll move the 11 miles back to oklahoma because they will NEVER conform to the EPA standards, hell they won't do it on vehicles even. No catalytic converters required after it leaves the dealer the first time....

 

[zogger]

Actually zogger, every US citizen, government employee or not, has "arrest and firearm authority".
It's called a "Citizen Arrest" in conjunction with the Second Amendment... unless, of course, you live on one of the left coasts and a few other "leftest" places..
*

I was just proving the epa is more than a regulatory agency. They can and do darth vader goon get in folks faces and make them have a very bad day "enforcement" stuff. Anything, apparently, connected to the executive branch has poleece, who, being armed and infused with some "authority" have not only arrest, but life and death powers over the peons. Lookout, he made a "furtive gesture"!

Let us know how a citizen arrest over a blatantly unconstitutional anything works out against a badged authority figure from the federal government. There's so called laws on the books, then real life. The "commerce clause" as noted above has been used for the feds to declare they got authority over anything, all of the above, and anything anyone can think up in the future. That they aren't doing it to the full extent they could, does not negate the fact that they constantly, daily, push it. and they have been on a cop hiring and ammo buying binge *deluxe*.

Feeling lucky? Go wave a copy of the tenth amendment in front of combat vet hired feds with guns, no matter what their patches or badges say, and defy them somehow...resist being "detained" let alone "arrested". Say "no" somehow....

Now, would they inspect and ban and seize older stoves, perhaps apply fines, whatever? Sure looks like they are creeping up on it. Not fully there yet, but..I wouldn't bet against it in the future either.

Here's one more up your alley a bit. I ran this by some HAMs...cyber deer in headlights... crickets...according to FCC regs, as you know, you need various licenses for some frequencies and power outputs and antennas and so on. but..right in their own rules, during a declared "emergency" anyone may "broadcast" with gear etc that normally requires their license.

Now, we have been under various national states of emergency like forever..

..so, does this mean you can grab a big watt ten meter rig whatever and go to town without a fcc ticket? Or will you get popped, detained, arrested, rig seized, etc?

theory, then practice, two different things a lot of times

Look at the second amendment, a restriction on the feds from passing any law yada yada...uh huh, plain english doesn't seem to work very well, it needs black robed "interpretation" which negates..plain english.. I met randy weaver once and talked to him for around 15 minutes. Spooky. It is one thing to armchair this stuff, it is another to experience it.

Go to a local shop and try to get a splined carb tool...few years ago, no problem, now..you can sometimes see them on epay, but you ain't getting one from a dealer, even with the model number.

 

[Whitespider]

jebatty,
That's some of the most fictional, leftest, load of drivel I've read in months.
Some points of fact about "rights"...

• FACT - Nowhere in the Constitution are you, or anyone else, guaranteed the right to clean air... but you are at liberty to move to a place with cleaner air if you so choose.
• FACT - There isn't anything wrong with a local government putting in place a law, ordinance or regulation if the majority of residents support it... those not happy with it are at liberty to move to a place more to their liking. But nowhere is the Federal Government authorized to do so.
• FACT - Although you do have certain private property "rights", nowhere in the Constitution are you, or anyone else, guaranteed the "right to be free of neighbors' smoking stoves". Neither are you, or anyone else, guaranteed the right to "enjoy his/her private property rights to the fullest... but you are guaranteed the right to pursue happiness. "Private Property Rights" are granted locally, not by the Constitution... the Constitution only leaves you at liberty to own property in your pursuit of happiness. If the rights of one property owner clash with the rights of another than it is up to local government to sort it out, whether by a compromise solution, enforcement of local code, use of the court system, or whatever... it flat ain't the job of Federal Government to protect property rights or preempt possible clashes of them.
• FACT - Your last sentence is nothing but flat ignorance of the differences between rights and liberties... you would be much more credible in your arguments if you took the time to learn the difference. Regulation, by it's very definition, removes liberties... any argument to the contrary is foolish. And that is the very reason why the Constitution strictly limits the Federal Government's power of regulation.

*

 

[mallardman]

The EPA is one of the agencies that purchased thousands of rounds of ammo last year. So maybe they do plan to have an enforcement arm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk