Latest EPA Wood Stove News

[slowp]

That's because you have liberal tunnel vision. Have you even givin' thought to the idea that "regulation" may not be the best solution?? Have you even givin' thought to the idea that "regulation" (and the corruption it breeds) may actually be the worst solution?? Complaining without proposing a solution may be whining... but simply proposing a solution doesn't automatically make that proposal a good idea. And a fine example of that is the mess that came from many of the "solutions" enacted by both Roosevelt administrations... Teddy's and FDR's.

How 'bout congress just pass laws making the things you mention illegal?? Make them federal offenses?? (By-the-way, that would be constitutional... "regulation" ain't). Perpetrators would then be arrested, charged with criminal offenses, tried in criminal court, and, if found guilty, justly penalized appropriately (which could include fines and clean-up costs). But to "regulate" someone, or something, before they/it has done anything wrong is crap... and is strictly forbidden by the constitution except for a couple narrowly defined, highly restricted, empowerment. The best example is the corrupted, bastardized and prostituted "Interstate Commerce" clause. It may do you some good to study and learn why that was written into the constitution... it was never intended to be used the way it is now. Before the constitution was written, states could charge a tariff, tax or toll on any goods shipped across their state (i.e. regulate interstate commerce)... effectively they could "starve out" a state on the far ends of the trade routes. The "Interstate Commerce" clause was never intended allow all the BS "regulation" the Feds justify under it (and you allow)... it was intended to remove that specific taxing (regulating) power from the states (the power of one state to tax another) so goods could travel freely amongst them, thereby strengthening the nation as a whole. It sure-in-hell did not give the Feds power to create the EPA... yet they managed to corrupt the clause by convincing the sheep they needed protection from themselves. Nixon didn't create the EPA because he cared, he saw an opportunity and created it to expand his power, and you friggin' tunnel visioned liberals cheered it... you were played, and fooled, and you still don't see it (because your tunnel vision sees it as a good thing... the "right" thing to do). It's one of the biggest scams ever played and you friggin' refuse to see it because of blind ideology... sad, so very sad.


Not at all that interesting... this ain't about emissions, it's about money and power.
Open fireplaces are typically "built" during home construction, they ain't an appliance proper... except for a few (very few) exceptions, you can't load an open fireplace in your pickup and haul it home. Ain't enough potential money and power in "regulating" open fireplaces... kind'a like taxing earth worms for crappin' in the dirt. Stop thinkin' the EPA is lookin' out for you.
*

Nice rant, but reality is ignored.

Congress pass a law? They've had years to do it, why now?

You think that there has been no problem? No complaints? Regulating before there is a problem? That's why we have zoning rules, building codes, food and drug standards--Oh, that's right YOU don't follow codes. You are special.

The point is that there have been problems. Look at the past. Let me see, there was an air pollution event in Pennyslvania--not caused by wood smoke, but air pollution for sure. Didn't the Chicago River catch on fire? We have Butte, MT, Libby, MT, Idaho's Silver Valley, and our own Hanford Nuclear Reservation.

We do have folks being ticketed for burning during inversions. I haven't seen any letters to the editor complaining about only having certified stoves available to buy. You live in the flatlands and can't see beyond the cornfield. Pulling out an old stove to sell a house? That's small potatoes in the big picture of selling a house.

I don't care for the way you try to steer the conversation to Liberals Vs Conservatives. You try to simplify things into Them Liberals Are A Trying To Take Away My Rights (usually yer guns) and it isn't as easy as that. If I am a liberal, and in some places was called a conservative--it's a label that depends on what community you live in, by the way (another thing your try to simplify) that's OK. I stand by for respecting other folks RIGHTS to live in as little pollution as we can have.

I'd like to know how many EPA threads there are? They are amusing to read. They usually break down to the EPA is the gubmint, the EPA is tryin' to take away muh rights, and anybody who supports regulating muh right to spew smoke over muh neighborhood is a commie. And a few of us commies remind you good patriots that some of us live in topography and there are things caused by weather and topography called inversions, but that don't happen in Iowy so it is therefore non-existant.

The Olymon pipes in with, Yesh Yesh, Olymon like preshhhhus!

Olymon, somehow I have this picture of a little troll like critter, kinda like the Precious critter in The Lord Of The Rings, hopping up and down and clapping gnarled hands hissing out, "Yes, Yes." A troll- like sycophant?

 

[Whitespider]

Congress pass a law? They've had years to do it, why now?

Because it's their job... the constitution says so.

I don't care for the way you try to steer the conversation to Liberals Vs Conservatives.

Not so... Nixon was a conservative.

...EPA threads... They are amusing... They usually break down to the EPA is the gubmint, the EPA is tryin' to take away muh rights, and anybody who supports regulating muh right to spew smoke over muh neighborhood is a commie. And a few of us commies remind you good patriots that some of us live in topography and there are things caused by weather and topography called inversions, but that don't happen in Iowy so it is therefore non-existant.

"Non-existent"?? (notice I spelled it correctly)
I never said "non-existent"... ever‼ Just because your locality requires an action of some sort does not give Federal government the power to "regulate" the rest of us... and that's what you're incapable of seeing. Why should I have to live under "regulations" designed around "inversions"?? I don't live where inversions happen. If your state or community wants, or needs, to enact some sort of legislation (or even regulation) to address problems unique to it... fine, let them (states and communities have the constitutional authority to do so). But no matter how much you defend it, it ain't the job of Federal government... never was... they are not authorized... the constitution strictly forbids them from such overreach.

Yours is a mentality of liberalism... you believe that government should protect us from ourselves.
Calling a spade, a spade, is simply telling it like it is... not name calling.
I'm certainly not the one using childish crap like "gubmint", "commie" and "Iowy" to make my point... again, that's a typical liberal tact, the attempt to marginalize anyone who disagrees with the your ideology.
*

 

[pro94lt]

Slowp do you support the new regulations on wood stoves? If you do where do the regulations end? Tell me a good stopping point.

 

[taskswap]

One man's progress is another's evil regulatory overlord. People complained about safety-glass windshields, seatbelts, unleaded gas, mufflers, and rear-view mirrors on cars when each of those was mandated. "Pure gubmint regulators out of control." But nobody wants a car without them NOW...

People complained about regulations on banks and then acts all surprised when they do naughty things that lead to meltdowns.

People complained about OSHA safety regulations killing jobs, but they sure are sad at the funerals, and they wear their hard hats now. And nobody wants to work for a guy that won't put a safety-rail on the edge of a platform, or an emergency-stop button on a machine. NOW we think it's only third-world countries that do that.

I wish I could buy an older stove for less money and burn partly seasoned wood because my new EPA-certified stove is harder to light. But it uses half as much wood and the emissions are lower. Comparing them by the smoke you SEE coming out of the chimney is bogus - particulate counts are higher or lower whether you see them or not. Until you stick a particulate counter on top of a chimney you aren't having an objective discussion about what you're doing. Smoke colors don't count.

So yeah, I'm more conservative than liberal but I have to admit I'm finding it hard to complain here. My new stove is just better, period, and although I regret having to pay the money to get it, now that I have it, I'm glad I do.

Not that anybody needed my 2c, but we're all just talking here, right?

 

[Whitespider]

People complained about safety-glass windshields, seatbelts, unleaded gas, mufflers, and rear-view mirrors on cars when each of those was mandated. ....nobody wants a car without them NOW...

Speak for yourself... I couldn't care any less if my car had safety-glass, I don't use seat belts, I think today's fuel sucks sour owl crap, those restrictive monstrosities are not "mufflers", and when exactly did rear-view mirrors need mandating?? Heck, my dad's 1929 Model A has a factory installed rear-view mirror.

People complained about regulations on banks and then acts all surprised when they do naughty things that lead to meltdowns.

Ummmmm.... better check your facts. It was the decades of regulation on banks that led to the meltdown... starting in serious earnest with the Carter administration.

...nobody wants to work for a guy that won't put a safety-rail on the edge of a platform, or an emergency-stop button on a machine.

Nobody?? Did you ask me??
Heck, I disable most all that crap whenever I can. I figure if I don't stick my finger where it don't belong... well... my finger is safe.
C'mon man‼ I climb towers without fall protection... I figure if I always keep one hand on the tower... well... see... only an idiot would let go of the tower.
Idiot buttons are for idiots... and it ain't the job of government to protect the idiot from himself.
Idiots should stick to wrapping lollipops for a living (maybe... I guess an idiot could still poke himself in the eye with the stick).

...my new EPA-certified stove is harder to light. But it uses half as much wood...
My new stove is just better, period...

Half as much??
Either you have no clue how to run an older firebox, or your statement is pure BS... but I've covered that in enough other threads. It's that magic thing ya' know??
And better for who... or what?? Never mind, I've argued that enough before also.
*

 

[zogger]

One man's progress is another's evil regulatory overlord. People complained about safety-glass windshields, seatbelts, unleaded gas, mufflers, and rear-view mirrors on cars when each of those was mandated. "Pure gubmint regulators out of control." But nobody wants a car without them NOW...

People complained about regulations on banks and then acts all surprised when they do naughty things that lead to meltdowns.

People complained about OSHA safety regulations killing jobs, but they sure are sad at the funerals, and they wear their hard hats now. And nobody wants to work for a guy that won't put a safety-rail on the edge of a platform, or an emergency-stop button on a machine. NOW we think it's only third-world countries that do that.

I wish I could buy an older stove for less money and burn partly seasoned wood because my new EPA-certified stove is harder to light. But it uses half as much wood and the emissions are lower. Comparing them by the smoke you SEE coming out of the chimney is bogus - particulate counts are higher or lower whether you see them or not. Until you stick a particulate counter on top of a chimney you aren't having an objective discussion about what you're doing. Smoke colors don't count.

So yeah, I'm more conservative than liberal but I have to admit I'm finding it hard to complain here. My new stove is just better, period, and although I regret having to pay the money to get it, now that I have it, I'm glad I do.

Not that anybody needed my 2c, but we're all just talking here, right?

OK, I see your points. Now let's apply capitalism and libertarianism to it (I am neither liberal nor conservative, I am hard core constitutionalist) to it.

You want better mileage, lobby for it, vote with your wallet.

If people get sick of the laid rock fireplace and burning ten cord a winter to heat a little cabin, they can get a Franklin stove. Want more wood fuel mileage, later on, they could switch to a jotul, no laws were necessary for that evolution, it was consumer demand and people inventing a better way to do things. And the better ways to burn wood automagically reduce pollution.

Smart guys scratching an itch, inventing cool stuff, then others want it, that's what drives society, the economy, social evolution.

Now, I run a dragon, but..no exhaust damper and hot fires. Only adjustment is quantity/size/species of wood. That's how I get the burn I need.

People want to ride around in deathttraps, let their insurance rates reflect that. No insurance, swell, they get convicted of bad driving, causing an accident, jail time, big fines, the word will get out. Local ordinances. No need for fed regulation, except on their roads. That leaves a lot of local and state roads.

People want to live..wherever. ALL areas have environmental and economic tradeoffs. Folks want to live in beautiful but closed mountain valleys with the smoke lingering, well, that's their choice. If enough want stricter burn rules in that area, they can do that. They want to live in an oceanside megalopolis that butts up to mountains and the pollution just hangs there, fine, their local government can sort out what needs to be done. Feds don't need any input. the people right there know full well what the problem is and they can cuss and discuss how to fix it just swell.

The feds have an expensive top down bureaucratic army of very well paid and tax payer paid pensioned employees. They insist on a one size fits all approach, which slap doesn't work. It just doesn't. And it costs a heap to notice that. It costs so much, all economic projections point to..ain't happening, bankruptcy.

It has to be trimmed severely, or that's it, USA down the tubes, second or third world status, and air pollution will be way down the list of stuff that is important.

So, this and that regulations, fine..at the local and state level, not restricting born with rights. The purpose of the federal government is primarily protect the borders, defend the nation, the union of sovereign states, and they sure as heck aren't doing that, not even close. If they can't do that, well..no trust in anything else.

 

[Whitespider]

Well said zogger ... very well said.

Safety-glass, seat belts, unleaded gas, mufflers, and rear-view mirrors do not prevent accidents. All they do is absolve the manufacturer of liability (that should be attached to the driver at fault)... and cost all of us a ton of cash.
OSHA regulations, hard hats, safety-rails, and emergency-stop buttons do not prevent injuries when someone screws up. All they do is absolve the employer of liability (that should be attached to the idiot who screwed up)... and cost all of us a ton of cash.

Maybe... here's an idea... maybe it's time for people to once again take responsibility for themselves.
*

 

[taskswap]

Well, gentlemen, I don't agree with your points, but I'd defend to your death the right to have them and speak your mind. At least we're all wood burners.

 

[Whitespider]

I don't agree with your points, but I'd defend to your death the right to have them and speak your mind.

With that we're in 100% agreement
*

 

[olyman]

Because it's their job... the constitution says so.

Not so... Nixon was a conservative.

"Non-existent"?? (notice I spelled it correctly)
I never said "non-existent"... ever‼ Just because your locality requires an action of some sort does not give Federal government the power to "regulate" the rest of us... and that's what you're incapable of seeing. Why should I have to live under "regulations" designed around "inversions"?? I don't live where inversions happen. If your state or community wants, or needs, to enact some sort of legislation (or even regulation) to address problems unique to it... fine, let them (states and communities have the constitutional authority to do so). But no matter how much you defend it, it ain't the job of Federal government... never was... they are not authorized... the constitution strictly forbids them from such overreach.

Yours is a mentality of liberalism... you believe that government should protect us from ourselves.
Calling a spade, a spade, is simply telling it like it is... not name calling.
I'm certainly not the one using childish crap like "gubmint", "commie" and "Iowy" to make my point... again, that's a typical liberal tact, the attempt to marginalize anyone who disagrees with the your ideology.
*

having been a gov worker,,explains it all.....

 

[Dirtboy]

Reading this thread made me realize why I cant get a decent gas can anymore .

Has anyone paid attention to their ridiculous school tax bills? Back when I was a young-un there was a small line of administration in charge. Now you have superintendents., assistant supts., aides to the supts., aides to the aides of supts., principals, asst. principles, grief counselors, guidance counselors, school board members, asst. school board members, etc. etc. etc. You would think that with all that money flying to education that we would have children that were smart enough to burn dry wood.

 

[zogger]

Reading this thread made me realize why I cant get a decent gas can anymore .

Has anyone paid attention to their ridiculous school tax bills? Back when I was a young-un there was a small line of administration in charge. Now you have superintendents., assistant supts., aides to the supts., aides to the aides of supts., principals, asst. principles, grief counselors, guidance counselors, school board members, asst. school board members, etc. etc. etc. You would think that with all that money flying to education that we would have children that were smart enough to burn dry wood.

But...you don't understand! We have to have diversification! That's what they teach! Some dry wood, some soaking wet, some just sorta green, some semi wet with the ends dry, etc. And we can't have any of that wood bullying the other wood, or discriminating, it's up to the wood to decide what it wants to be! It can even be..homecoming wood! Use any bathroom!

fed dept of education should be completely eliminated, right up there with most ridiculous waste of money evah...

 

[Chris-PA]

And what did we learn today? We learned that the public has no ability to have a rational discussion about something so simple as woodstove regulations without veering off in every direction imaginable, so that people can grind axes and jump on soapboxes to shout about all their various agendas. The schools of decades past apparently failed to teach the skills of discourse and debate, and all we're left with is people trying to find out who to blame, rehash old battles and show off which team they're on.

Meanwhile the world is changing rapidly, and no one can get past their various prejudices and divisions to look and see what is wrong - and lack the ability to make any rational decisions anyway - and the bureaucracies grind on trying to solve the problems of yesterday (that have since become irrelevant) and justify their continued existence.

How many threads have there been about these proposed new regulations? Every one of them has degenerated in exactly the same way.

 

[olyman]

Reading this thread made me realize why I cant get a decent gas can anymore .

Has anyone paid attention to their ridiculous school tax bills? Back when I was a young-un there was a small line of administration in charge. Now you have superintendents., assistant supts., aides to the supts., aides to the aides of supts., principals, asst. principles, grief counselors, guidance counselors, school board members, asst. school board members, etc. etc. etc. You would think that with all that money flying to education that we would have children that were smart enough to burn dry wood.

wayyyy much truth!! just hire another college dufus,,and all will be well. esp if they are totally indoctrinated in leftist dogma...

 

[olyman]

And what did we learn today? We learned that the public has no ability to have a rational discussion about something so simple as woodstove regulations without veering off in every direction imaginable, so that people can grind axes and jump on soapboxes to shout about all their various agendas. The schools of decades past apparently failed to teach the skills of discourse and debate, and all we're left with is people trying to find out who to blame, rehash old battles and show off which team they're on.

Meanwhile the world is changing rapidly, and no one can get past their various prejudices and divisions to look and see what is wrong - and lack the ability to make any rational decisions anyway - and the bureaucracies grind on trying to solve the problems of yesterday (that have since become irrelevant) and justify their continued existence.

How many threads have there been about these proposed new regulations? Every one of them has degenerated in exactly the same way.

doesn't matter..anything the epa wants,,they believe they should get,,because they have zero oversight................and its ran by those of a communist persuasion

 

[Chris-PA]

doesn't matter..anything the epa wants,,they believe they should get,,because they have zero oversight................and its ran by those of a communist persuasion

Right on que...........

 

[slowp]

Liberty!!!

S

Slowp do you support the new regulations on wood stoves? If you do where do the regulations end? Tell me a good stopping point.

I'm going to talk real world here. I expect that wood stoves will be outlawed in the future. I might just support that too. Our populatiou is booming--at least out here and folks are living closer together than ever. Wood heat is not made for use in population clusters. Real world: Voter power is in the cities. How King County (Seattle area) votes is what wins here. I expect other states are the same. That's self explanatory. I expect the regulations will end when stoves are illegal. I'm telling you what you don't want to hear. But you asked.

Do I support it? If it makes our area healthier I do. I like clean air. Maybe there's some sort of technology out there that'll help. Like affordable, longer distance electric cars. Affordable electric or hybrid pickups that'll pull loads and go around on woods roads. Maybe even another source of fuel that is non-polluting will be found.
Wood and coal are going to be fuels of the past, unless the technology exists to make them non-polluting. Oil? We've already got folks lying down on the railroad tracks to stop oil trains. I don't support that. I like cheap gas and we have no reliable substitute to use---yet. I hope smart folks are working hard on that.

I'm thinking about moving to town. Will I heat with wood there? Probably not. I might have a stash for emergency use or have a propane fake woodstove for power outages installed. I've had one of those before and they are nice. Wood heat is not a good thing to have in town.

Oh, doing away with wood heat isn't anything new. Back in the 1960s or 50s there was a town by Grand Coulee Dam. They named it Electric City. Their claim to fame was that there were no chimneys in Electric City. Electric heat was the modern way to heat your house. It wasn't law, they were just proud of being modern.
Electric City never got very big, but it still exists. I imagine it has chimneys, although wood might be hard to come by without a lot of driving. Sagebrush doesn't grow very big.

There is an air quality testing site up on the White Pass Ski Area. According to the guys who take the readings, it is either the cleanest or second cleanest air in the country. You easterners ought to be glad. Sometimes, you are downwind.

 

[slowp]

Well said zogger ... very well said.

Safety-glass, seat belts, unleaded gas, mufflers, and rear-view mirrors do not prevent accidents. All they do is absolve the manufacturer of liability (that should be attached to the driver at fault)... and cost all of us a ton of cash.
OSHA regulations, hard hats, safety-rails, and emergency-stop buttons do not prevent injuries when someone screws up. All they do is absolve the employer of liability (that should be attached to the idiot who screwed up)... and cost all of us a ton of cash.

Maybe... here's an idea... maybe it's time for people to once again take responsibility for themselves.
*

Yes, take responsibility. When the boss tells you to do something unsafe, tell her/him no. You'll get fired and somebody else, who will take risks, and not bother with safety equipment will be hired. Let's go back to those good old days with zero regulations. The race to the bottom will get faster.

The Jungle. That's a good book which is written about that topic.

 

[Sandhill Crane]

'The world is divided into people who are right." unknown

 

[pro94lt]

Thanks slowp