Proposed EPA Regulations

I would like to chime in on the seasoned wood piece. Most wood stove manufactures and the EPA suggest that 20-25% moisture content is sufficient for seasoning.

With burning up all my 11-14% seasoned wood, I am forced into burning 20-22% moisture wood. I wish I could measure particulate matter and organic compounds, but my nose does not lie nor does the color of my stack from burning this wood. That is after the fact that I am pretty sure the fireview is right on the line of passing the newly proposed EPA regulations.

 

FYI, if you wondering how I can get wood that low of moisture, after a year to two years stacked outside on pallets with the top covered in single row, I stack the wood inside the corn crib. Works wonders.

I measure moisture by splitting the wood down the center and taking cross measurements down the face of a fresh split and take the highest reading.

 

I really dislike the one size fits all nature of the proposed regulation.

Wood is dirtier than fossil in terms of particulates. But it is close to carbon neutral and a renewable resource! This seems to have been completely and conveniently ignored. I find that disingenuous on the part of the EPA and the groups that colluded with the EPA to stop meaningful public comment and perform an end run around democratic principles.

Deep breath and I will stop now.

 

How many other countries are on board with cleaning up the air?
I know the US does things to help (and not always in the best way), but if we aren't all doing it, it's like having a peeing section in the swimmy pool.
A really big peeing section.

 

The EPA's "end run" is before the Supreme Court right now. Prolly too much to hope anything good will come of it.

 

What exactly is the "end run", has something changed from what has been published lately?

 

http://bangordailynews.com/2014/02/...will-drive-up-costs-thwarting-desired-effect/

Jotul is arguing if need to redesign the stove, cost of production goes up, less people will buy new stoves, and more older stoves will stay in use, and therefore more pollution.

 

One article I read said that they (manufacturers) can make stoves that pass the emissions but the consumer might not like the product.

 

Hey, maybe they'll start an Affordable Stove Act… (Hoarders can fill in all of the rest)… could be kind of funny… you know, you'll have to buy a stove even if you don't want to, and it'll have to be of the "higher" standards set by the EPA… no matter that your old stove was fine, you'll have to upgrade or pay a penalty… gawd, I could go on for hours… BUT… no politics… yuk, yuk…

 

There was a period of time where you could qualify for a tax credit on solid fuel upgrades.

 

Hey, if you like your stove, you can keep your stove. Period!

 

And, you can get guvmint help so you can have that stove you don't want or need…

Why there's no end to the wonderful Affordable Stove Act… good thing they passed that law before they read it, huh? …

 

i just noticed the stove in your avatar, thats an 18-tr or 18-trd. kool! one of my stoves

 

It works pretty good in our cabin. We "stole" it from our old house before the house sold. Glad we did.

 

Hot off the press today:
http://forgreenheat.blogspot.com/2014/08/new-paper-undermines-stove-industry.html
Worth reading!

 

Thanks, Savemoney. Very important article. I would comment, but then this post would get vaporized.

 

I think if they are going to go extreme with the emissions rating that it should be held off for the next round. That for this round of making stoves cleaner they should just set the standards to be the best level that each technology can obtain. Setting the level to one set standard looks like the end of non-cat stoves.

I think there is fear that is running in the back of some industries peoples minds that wood stoves could be banned all together. So its the we have got to clean up our own act or we might not even be able to burn wood in the future. It seems like in everything in the United States the radicals make the most noise and the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

I think the real issue is not the clean stoves we are currently burning but its all the smoke dragons out there still being burnt today. I think there are a higher number of smoke dragons out there than there are clean burning stoves. Thus the main objective would be to get stoves changed out with bigger incentives.

Banning the more economical non-cat stoves is actually gonna make people keep their old smoke dragons even longer. You can catch a non-cat stove on sale for $600 and if we can get the government to raise their incentive from $300 to like $500 thats gonna get some people changing out those old stoves. But to tell them to change out their stoves and they need to go out and buy a $2000 to $3000 stove, I just dont think thats helping the cause. I would much rather get people burning a 4 grams emissions non-cat stove than burning a smoke dragon . To take the leap and say its vitally important to get them into a 2.0 gram stove rather than a 4.0 grams stove is to me is not a practical idea. As a 4 gram stove burns so clean you cant even see smoke coming from the flue or smell anything. Its all those stoves smoking like a freight train thats getting most people bent out of shape and wanting wood burning banned completely.

I am not saying ban the smoke dragons but we should promote affordable solutions for change out, as putting our money were its most effective.

 

i just sat here and went down through the entire 31 pages of "listed" stoves on the EPA site's PDF out of those 31 pages i found 65 units which meet the 1.3GPH threshold (of those almost all of them were pellet stoves).
as for the new standards they are working towards, i really doubt they will end up where they seem to want to push them to , though they will be tighter than they are today and probably tighter than the Washington state levels.
furthermore, i think its wonderful that Woodstock has designed their hybrid stove to test out as clean as it did, but at the same time i think that if they believe that reducing emmissions in new stoves by a few GPH is going to make any measurable difference in the overall amount of particulate emmissions nationwide compared to what we would realize with the phasing out of exempt and non phase 2 stoves will produce then the particulates coming from what they are smoking when they came to this conclusion are definately much higher than whats coming out of their stoves.

its my opinion(note i am NOT speaking for my company but my own PERSONAL opinion) is that a far better result would come from more agressive funding and subsidies (tax credits and such) pointed towards taking old tech stoves out of use and replacing with newer stoves which meet a cleaner burning standard (even the Washington state standard) while closing the "furnace loophole" by setting a standard for currently exempt devices such as indoor and outdoor furnaces .

also thought should be put towards a standard for "commercially marketed" cordwood could be explored. now this doesnt mean that the guy who sells "firewood" out of the back of his pickup truck would have to take his wood to be tested, but companies which sell firewood as a staple product could be expected to meet a certain moisture level before being able to market it as "seasoned"

lastly , funding towards public education on proper wood burning practices is somthing i could get behind as well. infomercials websites and such which geared towards public awareness. there are plenty of practices brought on mostly from older methods of squeezing overnight burns out of old tech woodstoves and fireplaces which are still seen as "gospel" by a large part of the woodburning community things like adding green wood to the overnight load to extend the burn overnight or simply choking down a stove to a level which though it may last overnight , its simply not going to burn clean at all.

there's nothing wrong with "responsible" regulation, but too often those who champion regulation tend to over reach and in the process could actually do more harm than good.

just my 2 cents

 

I think there were some great points made in the last two posts.

 

I guess one idea that might help is like a hunter safety course but require persons burning wood stoves to take a stove safety course which would also train people in the importance of clean burning practices