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.
Of all the problems in the world, a fireplace doesn't amount to much. The UK has bigger problems which it obviously don't want to handle. It's using the environment to deflect from serious issues.
It seems with the Russian natural gas lines and rise in oil prices, a country would want a backup system for heating?
NO. Here in the US, they want to ban natural gas and make us go all-electric. As in, no gas cooktops or ranges, no gas water heaters, no gas clothes dryers.
For years now, we have only been able to buy wood stoves that recirculate the air and recombust any emissions. Some states are stricter than others. But there is a ready market for older non-EPA wood stoves.
It’s the UK. They’ve always been heavy on regulation.
The U.S., other than some municipalities, don’t care if you run electric, NG, propane or wood. The town of Helena restricts wood burning when there is an inversion ( which I can understand because they are quite nasty), but in the county- no.
I’ve owned non-epa ‘certified’ wood burners and certified. I actually liked my old Dutch West XL stove with a cat- it was a clean burning heat generating monster.
But to answer your question- no, the U.S. isn’t regulated like the U.K.
Of all the problems in the world, a fireplace doesn't amount to much. The UK has bigger problems which it obviously don't want to handle. It's using the environment to deflect from serious issues.
It seems with the Russian natural gas lines and rise in oil prices, a country would want a backup system for heating?
Couldn't disagree more. Yes those that own them love them but the rest of us that live even remotely close hate those horrible stinky pieces of trash.
Anyone with a wood burning anything also smells really really bad. They are used to the smell so they don't notice it. To the rest of us it is like someone that chain smokes cheap cigarettes is to non-smokers.
Couldn't disagree more. Yes those that own them love them but the rest of us that live even remotely close hate those horrible stinky pieces of trash.
Anyone with a wood burning anything also smells really really bad. They are used to the smell so they don't notice it. To the rest of us it is like someone that chain smokes cheap cigarettes is to non-smokers.
Couldn’t disagree more. The smell of oak burning on a crisp fall day with crunchy leaves on the ground is tantamount to heaven.
Try living in a western state when the wildfires start. A wood stove, all of them, is a literal drop in the bucket when looking at smoke emissions.
Couldn't disagree more. Yes those that own them love them but the rest of us that live even remotely close hate those horrible stinky pieces of trash.
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Threerun
Couldn’t disagree more. The smell of oak burning on a crisp fall day with crunchy leaves on the ground is tantamount to heaven.
I suppose some people wouldn't like the smell of oak burning. Kinda like a vampire wouldn't appreciate a sunrise
Oddly, I have the opposite problem, that any kind of fire whet's my appetite.
Quote:
Try living in a western state when the wildfires start. A wood stove, all of them, is a literal drop in the bucket when looking at smoke emissions.
This issue is more along the lines of the thread. Most of the really onerous regulations (the subject brought forth by the OP) are the product of the Pharisees of the Environmentalist movement.
Those who have environmentalism phariseeism as a religion almost always do more damage to the environment than more practical minded people. If most of that underbrush and some wood fall was gathered, every year and either burned in a bonfire or wood stove, there would be a lot fewer wildfires, and they would be less damaging.
I suppose some people wouldn't like the smell of oak burning. Kinda like a vampire wouldn't appreciate a sunrise
Oddly, I have the opposite problem, that any kind of fire whet's my appetite.
This issue is more along the lines of the thread. Most of the really onerous regulations (the subject brought forth by the OP) are the product of the Pharisees of the Environmentalist movement.
Those who have environmentalism phariseeism as a religion almost always do more damage to the environment than more practical minded people. If most of that underbrush and some wood fall was gathered, every year and either burned in a bonfire or wood stove, there would be a lot fewer wildfires, and they would be less damaging.
There are not enough people in Montana that could burn all the understory bio-fuel available to lessen the effects of wildfires.
There are not enough people in Montana that could burn all the understory bio-fuel available to lessen the effects of wildfires.
In that case, I will just pray that you can stay our of their path.
But, in most other areas, burning brush and gathering firewood would have an effect.
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.
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.
