Jkebxjunke
*Politically Incorrect*
thats how it starts... then its 40 then it 60 then its banned... what about all the other sources of pollution? busses, cars leaf blowers wild fires ect?
thats how it starts... then its 40 then it 60 then its banned... what about all the other sources of pollution? busses, cars leaf blowers wild fires ect?
question.. how do you stay warm in a blackout? if you heat with electric?
thats how it starts... then its 40 then it 60 then its banned... what about all the other sources of pollution? busses, cars leaf blowers wild fires ect?
Some people just want to be able to breath outside without falling over.
Note only 20 days of the year are expected to fall under the ban.
I like what the one fellow was pushing for.....only epa stoves allowed.(this option would also result in cleaner air on those days where the pollution level did not reach the ban level)
Everyone's right to breath comes before a wood heat users right to save money on home heating cost. Put on a sweater and use an extra blanket.
you mean the same people who complain about smoking, polution, fire place smoke, etc, yet jog daily down a busy highway along side cars and trucks?
or, those who ride bicycles "for their health" along busy highways too?
would those be the same "right to breath clean air" people?
All of the SF bay area counties have had a wood burning appliance ban for 10+ years now. No new houses can have wood burning appliances, of ANY kind. Only pre-existing houses with fireplaces are grandfathered to have wood fires. Smoke is REALLY bad in the SF south bay area in winter. I had to run a HEPA filter when I lived there in winter for smoke, and ran it in summer for smog. Cough cough...
This is why I would never consider california as my home of residence. Too much dictating how I live. This is not the country and freedom that I fight for.
Enter your email address to join: