EPA targets families that generate heat off the grid using traditional

THEFAN

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
570
Reaction score
1
Points
98
Location
Northern Frontline
targets families that generate heat off the grid using traditional wood-burning stoves

Thursday, November 17, 2011 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Traditional wood-burning stoves are still one of the most cost-efficient, sustainable, and renewable sources of energy production that families can use to heat their homes. But the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is not a huge fan of them, as was evidenced by its recent decision to push those who use traditional models to convert to EPA-approved -- and oftentimes much more expensive -- alternative models.

Throughout history, civilizations have relied on the burning of wood to cook food, warm water, and heat places of dwelling. After all, trees are an abundant and renewable source of wood, which means that the costs associated with obtaining energy and heat from burning wood are minimal. This, of course, is why many cash-strapped folks today are turning to wood-burning stoves rather than their local utilities.

But the EPA is now expressing concern about the 80 percent-or-so of wood stove users that still rely on non-EPA approved models. Most of the wood stoves manufactured before 1990 do not contain the EPA's certification stamp of approval which, in the eyes of the agency, means they are an unnecessary contributor of excess environmental pollution.

This is debatable, of course, as EPA-approved models can still emit excess smoke just like the others, and may not necessarily provide any pollution-reducing benefits at all. Because of their altered designs, many of the new EPA-approved models do not work as well as the older models, either, especially when used in severely-cold weather http://www.energybulletin.net/51578

Most wood-burning stove companies in the US actually went out of business shortly after the EPA established its original certification requirements for wood stoves back in the 1990s. Many of the companies simply could not develop a complying product that actually worked. Today, the EPA is once again revisiting these New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) guidelines in order to push even more people away from the old stoves.

At the same time, EPA spokeswoman Alison Davis recently tried to whitewash the agency's position against wood stoves by claiming that the EPA is "not in the business of telling people how to heat their homes." No, it is actually in the business of restricting the types of wood stoves manufacturers are allowed to produce and sell, which ultimately does tell people how to heat their homes by robbing them of their freedom of choice.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034179_EP...#ixzz1dxu3kAKX
 

Beekissed

Mountain Sage
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
12,774
Reaction score
3,943
Points
437
Location
Mountains of WV
I had heard this many years ago and was wondering just when they would get around to actually outlawing wood burning stoves...only a matter of time. Wonder who(big utility)would be behind that lobby? :rolleyes:

If and when that goes into effect there will be some pretty ingenius ways of camoflaging your chimney smoke being implemented, don't you think? :D
 

me&thegals

A Major Squash & Pumpkin Lover
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
3,806
Reaction score
9
Points
163
Location
central WI
I would be one completely enraged homeowner. Since building our house, we've heated strictly with wood
the past 8 years. I cannot even imagine how much $ we would have spent on fuel all these years.

Sure, they pollute, but so does the entire process it takes to extract fuel oil and get it to my house!

eta: I believe our woodstove is a "double" or "triple" burning, meaning the smoke diverts back to the
stove to get burned a second time. Still, there's definitely smoke.
 

MorelCabin

Quilting Extraordinaire
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
3,163
Reaction score
3
Points
168
Location
Northern Ontario Canada
Actually hydro is the worst polutant, from what I have read...not when it finally gets to your house, the the process of making it sure does. Here in Canada they have pushed 'EPA' approved woodstoves for about the last 15 years...and they do it through your insurance company. If you heat by wood your insurance compay sends an inspector. Here though it is called CSA approved
 

Leta

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
401
Reaction score
0
Points
68
This is asinine. What about those rocket mass heaters, that Paul Wheaton linked to? Those are incredibly efficient, but will one of those get EPA approval? Of course not, because if an average joe can build one for under $100, there isn't massive corporate/crony money to be made.

And what about people who have their own woodlot? I live in the big woods. Sustainable forestry is a huge deal here- it's a major industry, and doing it the "right" way is one of those cultural things, like poaching- you take a deer out of season, or mishandle the woods, and you'll be an outcast. People are good about this. They are careful, they replant, they cull. Net, I'll be individual woodlot owners take more CO2 out of the atmosphere than what they put in. They have strong incentive to do it this way, because they want that good source of heat next year, next decade, for their children.

Where is the ghost of Thomas Jefferson when we need him?
 

moolie

Almost Self-Reliant
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
2,741
Reaction score
14
Points
188
MorelCabin said:
Actually hydro is the worst polutant, from what I have read...not when it finally gets to your house, the the process of making it sure does.
Um, excuse me?

Got any links?

I used to live in BC, where around 90% of the power is hydro, and considered very green.
 

FarmerChick

Super Self-Sufficient
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
11,417
Reaction score
14
Points
248
hmm...seems like some of the EPA changes can produce a more dangerous fire stove etc.

so to save some smoke emissions you compromise elsewhere. ugh
 

Beekissed

Mountain Sage
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
12,774
Reaction score
3,943
Points
437
Location
Mountains of WV
And then they outlaw them altogether because they are a hazard to use in the house. I see a plan emerging..... :p
 

~gd

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
3
Points
99
FarmerChick said:
hmm...seems like some of the EPA changes can produce a more dangerous fire stove etc.

so to save some smoke emissions you compromise elsewhere. ugh
And this really suprises anyone? That white stuff that leaves your smoke stack might be steam but all the other colors are caused by soot. which can be a two way polution. bad for lungs [remember when people were allowed to smoke?] and it also works like a greenhouse gas and even cause acid rain. The Green zombies are going to be coming for you because you also cut down trees for fuel. To clean up the smoke at each wood burner is going to cost big bucks, priced a catalytic converter lately?
 

walkaboutjacks

Power Conserver
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Points
34
Location
Lehigh Acres, Florida
:( Arrrgh! and just when I am looking to get a wood stove....of course! It seems really stupid ya know. Maybe they should add up all the smoke from back yard BBQs as well.
 
Top