Posted on 11/17/2013 9:09:47 AM PST by rktman
A lawsuit filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by seven states is seeking to force the federal agency to impose stringent new regulations on residential wood-burning heaters, which they claim can increase particle pollution to levels that cause significant health concerns. (See EPA wood-burning lawsuit.pdf)
The lawsuit, filed last month in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by the attorneys general of Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont, is directed against currently unregulated indoor and outdoor wood boilers, which have become an increasingly popular way to heat homes, particularly in rural areas.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
I remember in the 1970s hippies and other whackos sported “Split Wood Not Atoms” bumper stickers on their VW mini buses. Now burning wood is an environmental crime.
BUMP
Oregon has had those green-yellow-red wood burning advisories in the upland valleys for years. The regulations have no teeth because the people won't sit down for it in a hundred years. Who owns Oregon anyway, that the governing class would end run around them, led by an elected attorney general?
It is a wrong on many levels and folks need to start looking in the mirror for the responsible parties.
Its a lot easier to regulate a company like a coal burning power plant than it is to regulate individuals.
What are they going to do, set up a federal chain saw registry?
Oregon will adopt it by executive action, because it is such a good idea.
Liberals demand the end of burning wood yet they demand to burn more pot.
Is it such a big problem that someone is likely to do that on a large scale? Doesn’t make sense to me to place a boiler outside and waste the excess heat. Likewise to make a lot of smoke for lack of an appropriately scaled system. Finally, when it comes to the inevitable smoky startup, tall chimneys make good neighbors. In Eugene the neighbor across my back property line would often feed burnable trash into an extra stove he had in a back room. The only reason it was a problem was because his chimney was below his roofline and the natural air currents forced the smoke down instead of up and away. Still, a wood fire which is hot as it should be will produce almost no visible smoke in any case. What you see in wood fire smoke is wood that didn’t burn (i.e. wasted energy).
This guy get fuels from the wood he burns!
Those ties are full of creosote. Talk about pollution!
Here, we are about 1/4 mile to a mile apart. Everyone burns wood. Amazingly, the ugly black snow is found in town along the roads. Out here, the snow around our homes is white and remains that way.
The dirt on the streets, oil residue, rubber particulate matter, and mud from the snow melting causes the roadways to be filthy.
We burned wood and the smoke went up, dissipated and probably returned to the ground over a miles long and wide swath.
It smells wonderful. When I go outside here in Glendale, CA, bordering Los Angeles, I can instantly tell when someone is burning wood. Man what a great smell...
BTW, good for you.
Some of it smells even better when you open the stove door to add more.
Not much snow out there in Glendale, is there? ;~)
No snow. I’d love to have some a few times per year.
Of course if does.
Anything you want solved is best solved by federal bureacrats via gubmint leviathon.
EPA SWAT teams need practice,too.
Local ordinances and state laws are so, like, 1940’s ,man.
Oh, I’m sorry, dude, but that was so, like, 6 months ago,
that my short attention span has completely forgotten
whatever the hell this may or may not have been about...
-
If it was that problems are best solved bottom-up
instead of top-down, then we are in agreement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.