EPA issue ban on wood stoves

[Sodo]

That may be the title, but the thread is under "Rural Living"....

Exactly. The thread needs a forum called "City Living" or "Undie Bundling" :laughing:

 

[dave1949]

I'm also in a rural part of Thurston County Washington and the stove regs are quite strict...

One of my friends was building a new family room and his brother had a new stove he had never installed and it could not be used...

I guess it has a future as yard art?

Did the stove meet the 1995 limits imposed by the state of Washington? In 1995 Washington set stricter limits than the 1988 EPA regs.

 

[Herkypilot]

Sodo,
You have an interesting although somewhat misguided slant on who this will affect. The EPA, a Federal organization has little regard for where people live when it comes to imposing rules and regulations. Your point that the EPA is really trying to clean up our cities and therefore this tightening of a standard really is aimed at them is irrelevant when it comes to the end user who has to buy a more expensive stove who lives in a rural area. There will not be a stove available which does not meet the "City" standard.
Also irrelevant is your multiple posts to say this thread is fear mongering by suggesting the EPA is banning wood stoves. The reason we pay attention and peel back the layers by talking about it is the EPA and the anti-second amendment crowd must be watched closely because if they are not, the next thing we know, things will be banned and we will have lost more liberty. Something I'm not willing to idly stand by and allow to happen.

HP

 

[Egon]

Wood stove replacements help clear the air for Montana town

One town in Montana.

http://www.harmo.org/Conferences/Proceedings/_Garmisch/publishedSections/4.16.pdf
And over in Sweden.

I got a wood burning insert in my house?.

 

[Sodo]

Sodo,
You have an interesting although somewhat misguided slant on who this will affect. The EPA, a Federal organization has little regard for where people live when it comes to imposing rules and regulations. Your point that the EPA is really trying to clean up our cities and therefore this tightening of a standard really is aimed at them is irrelevant when it comes to the end user who has to buy a more expensive stove who lives in a rural area. There will not be a stove available which does not meet the "City" standard.
Also irrelevant is your multiple posts to say this thread is fear mongering by suggesting the EPA is banning wood stoves. The reason we pay attention and peel back the layers by talking about it is the EPA and the anti-second amendment crowd must be watched closely because if they are not, the next thing we know, things will be banned and we will have lost more liberty. Something I'm not willing to idly stand by and allow to happen.

HP

Not sure how that makes me "misguided" or "irrelevant". I was trying to get to the bottom of the matter, why the fear mongering was so accepted. Peeling back the layers is a good way to put it. And why the right to pollute seems to be a liberty problem that the gov't should NOT tackle on behalf of its citizens.

I get that you're saying: while the EPA is NOT BANNING WOODSTOVES, they probably will change the document and they will ban woodstoves later if we let them have this document now. OK we agree that the title of this thread is not true.

It says "EPA issue ban on wood stoves" but how people read it is "EPA (to) issue ban on wood stoves (next)" a prediction (not truth).

But you are saying that the good folks here are just digging their heels in, getting ready for a show of force for the case where the 2nd amendment is attacked. So, they are OK with spreading BS (on other subjects) as long as it rallies support for the 2nd Amendment. I can see that. It's BS, but thats how politics are done, always been always will. Even industry who doesn't want EPA to cut into their NOW profits can jump on that bandwagon and may be welcomed by some.

Agreed we'll be in deep s*** if the 2nd Am comes down but it pains me to think of how backward the USA could become by that time.

Anyway I think you hit it on the head…..

 

[KSinWI]

Okay Soda, we get you think it's all BS and where you stand politically. You have now stated that opinion about 30 times on this topic. Were you named message board police by someone? What you are missing is that people are not spreading BS for the most part. They are expressing concern and their opinions on the topic (especially in the last several days of this thread). I'm not understanding how an opinion or a concern where this may lead can be called BS. You may disagree with assertions but that doesn't make them wrong or right.

 

[Sodo]

Okay Soda, we get you think it's all BS and where you stand politically.

This is where I stand. I think its important that people are given the truth, and not hammered with un-truth. Un-truth is solely for confusion, and manipulation and you may never really know why they picked YOU to serve it to.

What you are missing is that people are not spreading BS for the most part. They are expressing concern and their opinions on the topic (especially in the last several days of this thread). I'm not understanding how an opinion or a concern where this may lead can be called BS. You may disagree with assertions but that doesn't make them wrong or right.

Agreed, concerns are not true or false. "BS" just means "a load of crap" it doesn't mean something is untrue, it means you don't like it. If you think it's reason is to confuse you, you might call it BS. Agreed it's not the best way to describe the un-truths stated.

It says "EPA issue ban on wood stoves" but how people read it is "EPA (to) issue ban on wood stoves (next)" a prediction (not truth).

The EPA did NOT issue a ban on woodstoves, so this is UNTRUE. It's reason is to confuse people.

I don't believe woodstoves will be banned, ever. I do believe that woodstoves will become controlled in cities and near cities, based on the affected air quality in the region. If the cleaner stoves prevail, more stoves and more burning will prevail. If the dirty stoves (or dirty wood) prevails then less burning will be allowed.

I suspect this will be happen in the building dept's permitting process. The number of controls on building is unbelievable already, this will be just one more. Many Americans are highly supportive of the building permitting processes as it protects their home values, prevents shacks, groundwater, and allows them some control over their neighbors habits too. And the parts that don't suit you are a PITA I know that part WELL. I agree that at some point local building depts in some cities will no longer allow addition of a woodburner. But it won't affect rural people.

 

[KSinWI]

I don't believe woodstoves will be banned, ever.

So you feel the need to tell people over and over again that their OPINION doesn't match yours and that their wrong??? I understand you have this great trust in govt and love regulation but many of us are skeptical and for good reason as the track record clearly gives us reason too! (Remember, you do not have to ban something directly to effectively ban it)

 

[Sodo]

Nope, opinions that don't match are OK. Un-truth presented as truth is not OK.

I am a skeptic too. I don't have a great love for gov't or regulation. I've see many blunders, I wasn't born yesterday.

But I'm NOT in denial that almost everything that is good in this country is due to successful gov't and successful regulation, that requires constant interest and constant upgrading. Do you like highways? Safe cars that go fast? Monitoring of gas pump delivery? Warranties on tractors? Game department to prevent poaching? DOT to prevent bridges from collapsing? How about a constitution?

There are far more successes than failures, as everybody knows. Nobody would fly a flag if they didn't think things are pretty good in the USA.

The Forbes article called: EPA's Wood-Burning Stove Ban Has Chilling Consequences For Many Rural People is an intentional effort to mis-lead people, and it seems to be quite successful.

If you are willing to permit me to do some scaremongering? In addition the article misleads people that Forbes might care about rural people…….. beyond getting ahold of their land. As if rural people need something more to be afraid of than THAT.

 

[ultrarunner]

The fact is the 9 Bay Area Counties banned wood heat on only the coldest winter days.

I can burn all I want in July... even asked why the bans never happen in summer and was told burning is not an issue in summer.

The thing to remember is all the different jurisdictional level often do work together and the reality for the end user is it doesn't really matter which agency comes up with the rules.