U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-16-2013, 09:54 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,016,830 times
Reputation: 22370

Advertisements

My propane gas just cost me over $3/gallon this last fill up. For the last 7 years, it has cost me as much to pay for propane as it would cost me to pay for a wood stove in less than 2 years of use.

So maybe the rest of us have $1200-1500 to shell out on gas every winter, but many of us would rather use that money to buy a good wood stove, and fell our own trees (or use those that fell during storms) chop our wood and bypass paying for gas.

Pretty sad when the federal government is allowed to legislate such things as how people keep from freezing in the winter.

I agree with the original poster . . . we are moving towards wood stoves being totally outlawed. Let's see how precious everyone's "allergies" are when 10 years from now they can't afford the electricity to heat their homes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2013, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Oceania
8,623 posts, read 6,224,680 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
The issue is we have successfully fought forest fires for a century and these forests have a centuries worth of fuel on the ground, it's not natural. When a fire occurs it can be devastating. You have two choices, you can either log in an environmentally friendly manner or let nature take it's course with frequent but less damaging fires. Either way it's going to be consumed.

Natural forest fires have been around longer than man. the only reason man has any objection to them is we have developed lands in forests and built houses in them and on the fringes that are susceptable to burning. other than that who cares? It is nature being nature, plain and simple. Leaves fall from trees, tress fall after a while and lightening can spark a fire. The first two go unnoticed. Put someone's $$$$ McMansion into the mix and there is hell to pay. The first words out of said McMansion owner's mouth...'They ought to do something about this!' Who is 'they' and what should 'they' do about it? Did 'they' force you to buy a house that may be engulfed in flames?

Doesn't all of this come down to personal responsibility? How in hell did mankind exist up until the days when government started regulating how we do everything from eating to sleeping?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Volcano
12,971 posts, read 23,542,360 times
Reputation: 10573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse276 View Post
Burning green wood is dirtier than burning dry. The temps don't get as high with green wood, too many btu s are used up boiling off the water, leading to incomplete combustion. In that case, you don't just end up with CO2, heat & steam... If your smoke isn't nearly clear, your burning dirty and inefficiently. May as well leave a window open... Waste of btu s.
Exactly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
Green wood works fine in stoves with primary and secondary combustion chambers. It does get hot enough.
The reason that every reputable website concerned with using wood fires for heating advises using dry, seasoned wood, and conversely advises not to burn green wood or wet wood or trash, is that although green wood et al can be made to burn in a modern stove, it is less efficient as a fuel, and is more polluting, and in particular it builds up creosote much faster in the chimney. And since creosote buildup is the leading cause of chimney fires, obviously burning green wood is riskier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
Pretty sad when the federal government is allowed to legislate such things as how people keep from freezing in the winter.

I agree with the original poster . . . we are moving towards wood stoves being totally outlawed. Let's see how precious everyone's "allergies" are when 10 years from now they can't afford the electricity to heat their homes.
Although such sentiments are not uncommon, when you strip out the political views and look without bias, the facts suggest otherwise.

In contrast to the misleading title of this thread, the EPA has already been regulating wood stoves since 1988, across both Republican and Democratic administrations. And what has happened in that time? There has been a dramatic increase in the number of homes using wood stoves for heating! US Census figures show there are now more than 12,000,000 American homes using wood stoves as a primary heating source and it's still on the rise.

Where there have been laws or regulations put in place to ban or restrict the use of wood fires for home heating, they have been enacted on a local or state level, not federal.

The EPA is concerned with the level of toxic pollutants coming out of the chimney, not whether or not you can use a wood stove to heat your house. That's a state or local issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,638 posts, read 49,287,779 times
Reputation: 19019
Quote:
Originally Posted by armory View Post
Natural forest fires have been around longer than man. the only reason man has any objection to them is we have developed lands in forests and built houses in them and on the fringes that are susceptable to burning. other than that who cares?
There are some of us forest-dwellers who chose to build fire-proof homes.



Quote:
... Doesn't all of this come down to personal responsibility? How in hell did mankind exist up until the days when government started regulating how we do everything from eating to sleeping?
Personal responsibility? Be careful there. With that kind of talk folks may think that you are a Right-wing Tea-party conservative terrorist.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,638 posts, read 49,287,779 times
Reputation: 19019
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD View Post
... The reason that every reputable website concerned with using wood fires for heating advises using dry, seasoned wood, and conversely advises not to burn green wood or wet wood or trash, is that although green wood et al can be made to burn in a modern stove, it is less efficient as a fuel, and is more polluting, and in particular it builds up creosote much faster in the chimney. And since creosote buildup is the leading cause of chimney fires, obviously burning green wood is riskier.
The 'problem' with green wood is creosote, not pollution.

Steam is not pollution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 01:25 PM
 
672 posts, read 642,854 times
Reputation: 1198
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD View Post
The EPA has no interest in controlling you.
LOL, That was really funny.

Then it it is followed by post after post of why the EPA should and wants to control you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 02:44 PM
 
Location: Volcano
12,971 posts, read 23,542,360 times
Reputation: 10573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
The 'problem' with green wood is creosote, not pollution.

Steam is not pollution.
Agreed. And creosote from firewood is a clear or yellow viscous liquid that goes up the chimney as a clear vapor. Some of it condenses on the walls of the chimney, then carbon particles stick to it, making up the black mass familiarly referred toascreosote buildup. It's a fire hazard. But not all condenses out. Invariably some goes up and out as toxic vapor, contributing to air pollution in the vacinity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,638 posts, read 49,287,779 times
Reputation: 19019
Perhaps you need to use a stove with a secondary combustion chamber so you burn the creosote.

That is what we use. We burn the creosote.

It had not occurred to me that someone would want it released in the air.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 05:35 PM
 
2,159 posts, read 1,717,100 times
Reputation: 1445
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
My propane gas just cost me over $3/gallon this last fill up. For the last 7 years, it has cost me as much to pay for propane as it would cost me to pay for a wood stove in less than 2 years of use.

So maybe the rest of us have $1200-1500 to shell out on gas every winter, but many of us would rather use that money to buy a good wood stove, and fell our own trees (or use those that fell during storms) chop our wood and bypass paying for gas.

Pretty sad when the federal government is allowed to legislate such things as how people keep from freezing in the winter.

I agree with the original poster . . . we are moving towards wood stoves being totally outlawed. Let's see how precious everyone's "allergies" are when 10 years from now they can't afford the electricity to heat their homes.
What the arm-chair desk-bound bureaucrats can't ever fathom is that there is a large group of people who are willing to help themselves and lend a helping hand to neighbors. These people are willing to go take a tree that was tipped over by a spring storm, cut it into logs, split the logs, and season it because they know winter will be coming. To bureaucrats, these people need to be regulated, controlled, and become walking ATMs for another group of people who are unwilling to do anything for themselves and fawn at the hand of government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2013, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Volcano
12,971 posts, read 23,542,360 times
Reputation: 10573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuptag View Post
What the arm-chair desk-bound bureaucrats can't ever fathom is that there is a large group of people who are willing to help themselves and lend a helping hand to neighbors. These people are willing to go take a tree that was tipped over by a spring storm, cut it into logs, split the logs, and season it because they know winter will be coming. To bureaucrats, these people need to be regulated, controlled, and become walking ATMs for another group of people who are unwilling to do anything for themselves and fawn at the hand of government.
Where do you get that? All the EPA is doing is setting limits for how much air pollution new wood stoves can release into the air. That's in the public interest, because such smoke can adversely affect the health of the people living downwind.

All this other stuff getting said about it is simply overblown and illogical rhetoric, with no basis in reality, which is why nobody is providing any proof for any of their claims.

Turning people into walking ATMs? Good Lord, how do you think the EPA is doing that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top