Latest

Wood-Burning Heaters In Your Home To Become Illegal In The US

Heating your home with a wood burning heater/stove could soon be illegal in the US

Next year it will be illegal for Americans to install wood-burning stoves and heaters in their homes. 

The banning of wood-burning devices will be rolled out in San Francisco initially, and will include wood stoves that are certified as low emission by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

A spokesperson for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Kristine Roselius, justified the ban saying, “We are serious about reducing the health risks associated with our residents’ exposure towood smoke”.

Offthegridnews.com reports:

All 22 members of the district’s board of directors voted to amend regulations to bar the installation of wood-burning heaters in new homes starting November 1, 2016. The district consists of the nine counties that surround San Francisco Bay and includes: San Francisco County, Alameda County (Oakland), Contra Costa County, Napa County, Santa Clara County (San Jose), San Mateo County, Southwestern Solano County and Southern Sonoma County.

Fireplaces Already Illegal

Wood-burning heaters will still be allowed in existing homes, the Contra Costa Times reported, although sellers must give buyers a form explaining the “health risks” or burning smoke.

A ban on traditional fireplaces already was in place in the region.

The board also voted to end all automatic exemptions to its existing wood-burning ban, including one that exempts people who live in areas with no natural gas lines. Currently, such residents are exempt on high-pollution days. People living in areas with no natural gas will have to file for an exemption.

Some members of the board wanted to go farther. Earlier this year a measure that would have required home owners to get rid of old-fashioned fireplaces and wood stoves before placing a home on the market was rejected.

An Overreaction

John Crouch, a spokesman for the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, criticized the new rule.

“I think this is an overreaction,” Crouch told the newspaper. “I don’t think other pollution boards will take this approach.” (Listen to Off The Grid Radio’s in-depth interview with Crouch here.)

The district’s action is part of a growing movement to ban or restrict wood burning in the United States and Canada. Ban proponents believe that wood burning fills the air with fine particle pollutants that can cause health problems such as asthma, bronchitis, heart attacks and strokes. The installation of new wood-burning heaters has been illegal in Montreal since 2009.

Critics say such laws are government overreach lacking common sense – and note that people have heated their homes with wood for thousands of years.

“It seems that even wood isn’t green or renewable enough anymore,” columnist Larry Bell wrote onForbes.com “… [It’s] the oldest heating method known to mankind and mainstay of rural homes and many of our nation’s poorest residents.”

About 12 percent of all homes rely primarily on wood, Bell said, quoting census data.

It looks as if burning wood for heat could soon become an endangered species in many parts of North America.

  • Nick

    stop publishing shit

  • MegaYacht

    As a 5th generation Californian (our daughter is the 6th) I gave up on the state in 2005 just before the real estate market collapsed. We took our money and left for Texas. With income, property and school taxes out of control it was time to go. The schools were (and are) 3rd world at best, political correctness rules everything, not to mention the illegals taking over.

    The liberals have all but done away with the 1st and 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, it was time to go and we have not looked back.

  • Jack Listerio

    ………….their all FOS……………THAT SMOKE IS AS SAFE AS ANYTHING

    The EPA standard is to be used for OUTSIDE ambient air quality and it is the average over a period of 3 years.

    The proper standard to compare to is the OSHA standard for indoor air quality for respirable particulate (not otherwise specified) for nuisance dusts and smoke. That standard is 5000 ug/m3 on a time-weighted average (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) and is intended to be protective of health over an average working life of 30 years!

    • Jack Listerio

      A fireplace or woodstove is not a forest fire emitting millions of tons of smoke and debree that are a threat to people with respiratory problems. Home fires aren’t going to do you any harm……..all their studies are junk science to begin with. Thye give you oxygen and release for smoke inhalation and that’s it.

  • Jack Listerio

    …..OSHA also took on the passive smoking fraud and this is what came of it:

    Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition

    This sorta says it all

    These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one.

    So OSHA standards are what is the guideline for what is acceptable ”SAFE LEVELS”

    OSHA SAFE LEVELS

    All this is in a small sealed room 9×20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.

    For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes.

    “For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes.

    “Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

    Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.

    “For Hydroquinone, “only” 1250 cigarettes.

    For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time.

    The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.

    So, OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :

    Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)…It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded.” -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec’y, OSHA.

    Why are their any smoking bans at all they have absolutely no validity to the courts or to science!

  • 143jeanne

    In the meantime planes spray our skies with poison!

  • Robin Mitchell

    Stay out of Alaska. Please, we smoke, we burn wood and peat for heat, coal too. You wouldn’t like living there, And, I will not stop.

  • WhoCares

    Fukkkk the goverment. To bad we cant riot and get what we want. The reason why we cant riot and have big gathering figting for what we believe in, is because we have to go to work everyday. People are scared to burn the wood soon because it is goig to be illegal but if everyone burned wood they cant do anything they dont have enough room in the jails for everyone. I mean seriously show me a county jail or prison that holds 10,000 people… we need to make an example out of these stupid laws that are stripping our rights away. So are camp fires wih our kids illegal? No more smores? I mean seriously people lived to be 100+ years old now we are knocking off and dieing in there late 20’s early 30’s prottect us from all the damn genetically modified foods (GMO’s) but most of all government protect us from you!

  • Thomas Dana Wagenhoffer