Woodheat ?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Freedom! self reliance : One Thread
Do you think there will come a day when heating by wood is outlawed? I remember some years back when the 'environmental people' were talking about how 'bad' woodheat polluted the air.
-- Cindy (SE. IN) (email@example.com), December 11, 2001
I think there would be massive problems in attempting anything like that. It's my only source of heat and I would give anyone who tried to enforce such a moronic law fits. They'd have to throw me in jail or be out here everyday it got into the thirties.
-- Doreen (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 11, 2001.
I know lots of people that heat with wood and even in states that are not "forrest" type states. I have dead trees waiting to age and get cut up for fires. Besides, even city folks have those "romantic" evenings in front of the fireplace. Fireplaces gave the house more value when we were looking for houses a few years ago. It would be too hard to distinguish between a recreational fire and heating the house fire. :o) "environmental people" will always throw a fuss over something. but I like my environment just as it is.
-- notnow (email@example.com), December 11, 2001.
Well, I know you're not supposed to use fireplaces inside the city of Denver on their high pollution days. But I doubt they would ever be able to enforce such a rule outside of a large city like that.
-- mary (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 11, 2001.
I hope not, but I admit to worrying over this one for years. Wood is our only source of heat too, and I have no intention of ever changing that!
-- Deena in GA (email@example.com), December 11, 2001.
Kind of a dumb law to be sure. That would put my parents in the can too!
I'm not so sure though. I'd hate to think of not having a nice,cozy wood fire to pull up to, I'd dread the idea of entire huge cites like New York and Chicago and Boston with everyone all burning wood at the same time. Europe's cities had a similar situation before and during the Industrial Revolution. According to accounts, it was a mess.
You see, I'm a greedy little sucker. I want to have my cake and eat it too. I want a comfortable lifestyle yet at the same time, I want it to be sustainable and environment friendly. Why can't we have it both ways? I'd like to strike a balance if at all possible. The choice of either having to live in an ugly, poisoned, waste-choked planet or having to go back to living as a caveman doesn't have much appeal to me.
-- Nexar (Arax7@mvn.net), December 11, 2001.
I've got mixed feelings about wood heat. Yes, it pollutes the air. But. It's renewable. It's solar power, basically; it's a solar storage battery.
I like it a lot better than burning coal or oil for electric heat.
On the other hand, my geothermal heat pump is almost five times as efficient as my very efficient wood heater.
Life's full of choices, isn't it? Since my heat pump's so efficient, I let it heat the house in the morning, while I sleep. Then, if I'm going to be home, I start a fire when I get up.
If I had to buy wood, instead of having forty-three acres of forest, with trees volunteering themselves to be firewood (dying of old age), I wouldn't buy it, though, probably, just due to the cost.
Wood heat (wood at $150 per dry cord of hardwood) puts out about twice as much energy per dollar as the nearest competitor.
But, with tthe geothermal heat pump, I get twice as many btu's per buck as by burning wood, if I buy it.
Nexar, you're right; NY city woudl be pretty grim if everyone burned wood heat. Unfortunately, they use coal and oil, and coal and oil fired electric plants. The electric plants produce more pollution than the wood would, but it occurs way outside of town, where the city folks don't have tosee or breathe it.
-- joj (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 11, 2001.
We heated w/ wood exclusivly for a long time and plan on doing it again in the not to distant future.
I have a question. Not trying to be a wiseguy either. If burning wood releases CO2, and trees use CO2 and release O2 in exchange, why is it bad to burn wood? I thought CO2 was one of the badguys in the greenhouse gases group. That never made any sense to me.
I've wondered this for awhile but frankly, was afraid of getting flamed to death by people for asking.
-- John in S. IN (email@example.com), December 12, 2001.
John---The CO2 issue you bring up is what I've heard called contemporary carbon. In that case its a zero sum situation. Not so with petro fuels.
-- john (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 12, 2001.
John, good question. John, good answer.
Wood burning doesn't really add CO2 to the atomosphere, just like you say. It does add lots of other ugly combustion products, though. Nothing's perfect.
Partial solution: build a solar water heater (cheap and easy for non freezing months); encourage building officials to require at least some thought to passive solar design. Cheap and easy; some design elements are even free. Write your congressmen (don't even bother writing Bushieboy), and insist that they subsidize photoelectric development to at least the same degree that other fuel sources are subsidized.
-- joj (email@example.com), December 12, 2001.
Hello Cindy, We use wood to heat our house, heat our water, and occasionally cook with. Many people around here do. It would be awefully hard to impose a law that would make it illegal.
Unfortunately, for us American citizens, we are so overwhelmed with LAWS that nearly all of us break one or two of them daily. It would just be another one that we would have to break!
-- http://communities.msn.com/livingoffthelandintheozarks (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 12, 2001.
-- Cindy (SE. IN) (email@example.com), December 12, 2001.
John & JOJ, Ok and thanks. I thought I was missing something really big here all this time. I had it but didn't really have it. Yeah, I wish we had learned our lesson in 1973. I was working at a Texaco station then, ugly time.
Good answer Ernest. Harder and harder all the time to avoid breaking some kinda law.
-- John (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 13, 2001.