To: george76
Hey! Hasn’t there been an argument AGAINST burning wood per
a fireplace because it is too polluting? bwahahahahahahahahaha
MV
2 posted on
11/09/2007 8:33:26 AM PST by
madvlad
(A republican at age 20 has no heart; a democrat at age 50 has no brain. Brains are better.)
To: madvlad
Yeah!!! It eats up our carbon credits too fast to burn dead / diseased timber. We must spend money for ethanol manufacturing to burn fuel in our autos at $7/gal. It doesn’t use up carbon credits because the greenies say so.
4 posted on
11/09/2007 8:36:23 AM PST by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: madvlad
Pellets burn much, much cleaner than logs. I had a pellet stove for several years & it produced next to no smoke. Previously, I had an airtight log stove & learned how to burn with minimum smoke — the pellet stove burned cleaner all by itself. Pellet stoves use an auger to feed the pellets in at just the rate they burn — they also pump in combustion air, so that there is never any smoke caused by a lack of sufficient oxygen. Also, pellets are several times dryer than even well seasoned, air-dried logs.
To: madvlad
Hey! Hasnt there been an argument AGAINST burning wood per a fireplace because it is too polluting? bwahahahahahahahahahaColorado has some pretty scrict restrictions on fireplaces, but the pellet stoves are usually designed to be low emmission.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson