Trending >

Should burning wood be illegal for health reasons?

burning wood illegal

burning wood illegalShould burning wood be made illegal for health reasons?

It’s a part of a Canadian vignette that lives in so many of our memories; the crunch of sharp blades on pond ice, the brace of morning air, the smell of wood smoke from a distant chimney promising warmth for soon-to-be frozen fingers and toes.

But our children, it seems, will have different memories.

Across the country, the burning of wood for heat is under fire. In Montreal, it is already illegal to install a new wood burning stove, except for those that use energy efficient wood pellets, like the ones that have caught on in parts of Europe.

In smaller municipalities like Parksville, on Vancouver Island, the subject is contentious. Earlier this month, councilor Kirk Oates argued for the ban of wood-burning appliances. But the town’s director of community planning, Blaine Russell, offered an alternate view.

“Many residents in Parksville are on fixed incomes and heating a home with wood is one of the most cost-effective methods available when compared to other options,” wrote Russell in a report.

Other towns, like Prince George and Revelstoke, are taking a different approach, offering rebates to those who upgrade their old stove to a pellet, gas or electric one.

Should burning wood be illegal? The issue is a sticky one…

The case against wood fires is at once clear and complex.

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency has already banned the sale of the majority of wood burning stoves. New standards that will be introduced in May of this year will lower the limit for fine airborne particulate emissions to 12 micrograms per cubic metre, down from 15 micrograms per cubic metre.

“Particulate pollution from wood heaters is a significant national air pollution problem and human health issue.” said the EPA in its own recent regulatory impact analysis. “These regulations would also significantly reduce emissions of many other pollutants from these appliances, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, hazardous air pollutants and black carbon. Emissions from wood stoves occur near ground level in residential communities across the country, and setting these new requirements for cleaner stoves into the future will result in substantial reductions in exposure and improved public health.”

But a report from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health says the issue is not only a matter of the type of stove, it is as much about the type of wood that is being burned, and its chemical composition, solubility and size.

“The physical and chemical properties of particulate matter from wood-burning have great influence on how these particles may affect our health. Worsening of cardiovascular diseases and respiratory diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are the main concerns,” noted the institute’s Anette Kocbach Bølling.

In Paris, a proposed ban on wood fireplaces that was to take place on January 1st of this year, was reversed. A campaign led by ecology minister Segolene Royal was successful after doubts were raised about a report from air quality monitoring network Airparif that claimed fireplaces were responsible for 25% of fine-particle emissions.

Another issue with data used in arguments against wood as fuel is the error of omission made when the harmful impacts of its emissions are considered without accounting for the source of power they are replacing, which is likely to be fossil fuels such as propane and heating oil.

What is clear is that, going forward, home heating from wood will not be the most efficient method available. But what is equally clear is that that day has not yet arrived for everyone. In the meantime, incentives like rebates should be combined with an education campaign from the like of the EPA and Environment Canada.

Anyone who has enjoyed the warmth of an aged hardwood fire knows there is a world of difference between a green softwood fire started with cardboard and broken down shipping pallets and the warm, smoke free glow of seasoned oak with a moisture content under 20%. There’s also a huge difference in emissions.

In Canada, and across the board, a legislated ban of wood fireplaces would be a decidedly Draconian measure. The use of wood as an important secondary source of heat is illustrated by a provision in Montreal’s legislation that allows anyone with any stove to burn wood during electrical blackouts of longer than three hours. A full scale ban would almost certainly affect a demographic that skews poor and/or rural. Until a reasonable alternative is widely available Canadians, many of whom have learned proper techniques for drying, storing and burning wood, should have the right to continue to do so to keep themselves warm.

We Hate Paywalls Too!

At Cantech Letter we prize independent journalism like you do. And we don't care for paywalls and popups and all that noise That's why we need your support. If you value getting your daily information from the experts, won't you help us? No donation is too small.

Make a one-time or recurring donation

About The Author /

Cantech Letter founder and editor Nick Waddell has lived in five Canadian provinces and is proud of his country's often overlooked contributions to the world of science and technology. Waddell takes a regular shift on the Canadian media circuit, making appearances on CTV, CBC and BNN, and contributing to publications such as Canadian Business and Business Insider.
insta twitter facebook


  1. (But the town’s director of community planning, Blaine Russell, offered an alternate view.“Many residents in Parksville are on fixed incomes and heating a home with wood is one of the most cost-effective methods available when compared to other options,” wrote Russell in a report.)

    Russell Blaine needs to see the whole picture ,there is an enormous cost to the heath care system, there is a cost to the downwind neighbour either financially or reduced heath or both. Also when one of the City Counselors asked the City of Parksville if there had been any complaints about wood smoke , The Town replied that there hadn’t been .I know for an absolute fact there has been complaints . What is going on !!!

  2. No they should not have a right to pollute. ALL solid fuel burning should be banned in residential areas. What people should have is a right to unpolluted air.

  3. The myth that dry, clean wood burns clean is just that, a myth. If you believe that you are deluded. There is no way to burn wood cleanly. It is hundreds of times dirtier than it would need to be to be objectively called clean. Poverty is not an excuse. Real poverty is having polluted air.

  4. (But
    the town’s director of community planning, Blaine Russell, offered an
    alternate view.“Many residents in Parksville are on fixed incomes and
    heating a home with wood is one of the most cost-effective methods
    available when compared to other options,” wrote Russell in a report.)

    Russell Blaine needs to see the whole picture ,there is an enormous cost to the
    heath care system, there is a cost to the downwind neighbour either
    financially or reduced heath or both. Also when one of the City
    Counselors asked the City of Parksville if there had been any complaints
    about wood smoke , The Town replied that there hadn’t been .I know for
    an absolute fact there has been complaints . What is going on !!!

  5. I would suggest a rough rule until stricter bylaws come into effect. If no one objects to your outhouse in the backyard, then no one is close enough to complain about wood smoke. If no one objects to your having a horse, then burn wood. But if you live in crowded places that have access to gas, then use gas. And if anyone nearby complains about your smoke, be considerate and responsible, and butt out.

  6. No, there should be no ‘right’ to burn when burning affects others as wood smoke does. Residential areas should be smoke-free for the health of everyone. Back when we didn’t know what damage could be done by wood smoke nobody thought about it. Now we know the harm it causes. We also know of people who have developed cancer attributed to wood smoke. It is far past time to end this pollution.

  7. Perhaps Blaine Russell could move in next to a burner and see for himself. Many of you could offer him a night or two to stay with you and get the real picture. I hope he will accept and make sure that he is not harassed while visiting with you as the point is to be able to show him how it feels to live with wood smoke.

  8. Why not make it a ‘Challenge’ to all council members? It would make a great newspaper article. I don’t see how they could refuse if the press helps to start this challenge.

  9. Excellent idea Shirley280 then maybe the town would reconsider covering up the fact that there is a problem

  10. Frankly, Mr. Waddell, you paint a charming vignette. “The smell of wood smoke from a distant chimney,” if that were the issue at hand, probably wouldn’t be a problem. The reality nowadays is more like the stench of garbage and damp or moldy wood burning permeating your property and front street. The only heater change-out programs that should be subsidized in urban and suburban communities should be from wood burning to lower emission fuel such as gas or electricity. Even oil burns an awful lot cleaner than the lowest-emission wood pellet burners so acclaimed by the industry. It is almost criminal to pretend that wood burning is OK where dense populations reside. Please see the emissions chart here: http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/energyefficiency.html

  11. Every wood burner near me has a big house, big truck and big attitude. They can easily afford gas, which is in the area, and they probably do use it when convenient, yet smoke us out on the weekends,…. for ambiance? Poverty in my area is a poor excuse.

  12. Prince George banned the backyard bonfire, and after a few complaints, no big deal anymore, and we have cleaner air. Ditto should apply to wood stoves in any crowded place!

  13. Wood stoves are being made more and more efficient and cleaner burning. If they have an EPA-certified stove they should be allowed to use it. Check out the following links on cleaner burning wood stoves:
    https://www.facebook.com/AllianceforGreenHeat http://www.forgreenheat.org









    The Cape Cod stove
    produces only 0.45 grams of emission per hour, which is substantially lower
    than all other large capacity wood stoves. And at over 80% efficient you get
    more heat from less wood saving money on your heat bill. http://www.lopistoves.com/product-detail.aspx?model=364





  14. Doug is in the business of selling wood stoves Profit before Health ignoring the science of wood smoke.

  15. I don’t know what you are talking about. I lived next door to a house heated with wood for 10 years and never noticed a thing. It’s effect on my life was zero and I don’t think I ever would have wondered how my neighbour heated their house had they not told me.

  16. hmmm Tell you what… in the next -35 below zero weather. You stick to your electric heat and pay hundreds and in some case thousands of dollars for it. And when the power lines go down because of ice or car accidents. That renders all electric heat useless. Including your highly efficient heat pump or whatever you have. Unless you have a back up generator. Which many towns or cities also have bylaws on. I guess your going to have to leave your house and find warmth. But be prepared before you leave to to take precautions for when all your water lines freeze and then burst. This can cause a great deal of damage to your house.

    Or you can Burn some wood stay warm and fed in your own home and help those whom need it and sleep well in your own beds. And yes you can cook on a wood stove. For those simple minded folks. And if you don’t think this happens then please explain to me why every year people die needlessly in sever cold weather spells. While trying to BBQ in there houses or using there BBQ as a heat source. Yes I know they are dumb for doing that… But I guess when your freezing to death your not thinking to well.

  17. The idea of prohibiting the use of wood burning fireplaces, wood stoves, or burning wood in a fire pit in the back yard is absolutely ludicrous. If you want to truly look at the issues then start looking at big businesses that not only pollute our air the also contaminate our waters making places like The Fraser and Red Deer River so toxic you ‘can’t’ eat the fish from it. The emissions from vehicles, both gas and diesel add to the carbon emissions, and when you consider the population in North America, it is all going to have a definitive adverse effect on the population, especially when you add in the companies along waterways that pour toxins into the water instead of properly disposing of them or the lovely black grey smoke coming from the smokestacks of those same and other companies. Then you add in other countries from round the entire planet, some who just don’t care about the emissions of their plants and add that into the mix. Finally but certainly not least, you look to our mountains throughout Canada and down into the US, places that are being clear cut (I know this because I’ve been documenting since 1993) the logging companies cut down entire mountain sides of trees, there is no “selective” logging anymore. They leave small blocks of trees behind pretending that it will do some good, keep the top soil from being blown away in the wind when in actual fact within one year up to two those small blocks they leave behind have been blown over roots and all, some snapped in half as though a giant hand reached down snapping it like a toothpick so those trees are left to die and the winds from the mountain tops blow the topsoil away making it near impossible for anything new to grow. Oil field toxins are another thing that no one ever wants to mention because hell knows we all own vehicles, some a little wiser built but most not and instead of running a pipeline, Obama vetoed it in his ignorance and the people’s demands to not take the risk, they too out of ignorance not realizing that yes of course there will always be risk but there are so many checks and safety valves that if there were a part of the line that was damaged by anything those checks and balances would go to work right away stopping the flow immediately whereas at the moment we continue to pump all kinds of crap into the planet to be able to get at the oil that all the companies seek for big business not to mention the “tailing ponds” the place like a pool that is supposed to be lined by thick rubber, a hole in the ground that some companies can’t be bothered to even line and so those toxins soak into the ground or are bulldozed in at the end of a job and no one is ever the wiser until some poor family in the future decides to build a home there and then can’t figure out why each one of them is getting ever and ever more ill. The oil companies pricing it so that their profits are in the billions of dollars and we are left with them using big tanker trucks, that go off the road or are in accidents causing punctures to the trucks pouring whatever toxic load onto roads, and whatever may be along said road including creeks and rivers, granted a truck is not the most we have to worry about given their limited quantity, but then we have railroad tankers that are consistently derailed, in my small part of the world there have been more than a half dozen derailments causing massive spills requiring hazmat professionals to come in and clean up the mess and finally we have to look at the offshore rigs and tanker boats who have lost millions of litres of oil causing so much damage and no amount of good measures to try to secure the leakage and damage will ever be enough. But then back to burning wood in our own homes, a non=toxic way to warm our homes to enjoy a summer’s eve or to enjoy responsibly while out camping in the wilderness, though even that is dwindling by the year, sad because the animals are displaced here and the Animal Control don’t see the worth in tranquilizing a creature and putting it back into the wild where it belongs but instead just shoots it no matter how little damage it does. Now back to the logging my biggest point because that is what they are telling us is causing so many problems health related, and environmentally devastating. I know for a fact there are many people who are city dwellers, some that have never seen the mountains except to fly over them or possibly drive through them. I’ve spent years living out in them in an outfitter’s tent and yes I cut down standing dead wood which in the wild is nothing more than a wild fire waiting to happen so it does no harm to cut down something already dead and dry enough to burn. I grew up in foster homes but my own father worked building roads for logging companies may he rest in peace, and the truth is that in one season they can cut down an entire mountainside of trees leaving it all but barely barren. They say the small lots of trees left behind will be enough to help with regrowth and keep the topsoil from blowing away. What a joke. The trees left behind end up falling over, roots and all, or because there are so few left the winds will pick up and snap them off. Then after four or five years depending on how conscientious the company might be they may or may not replant. When they do there’s no one there to over see how bad the job being done might be. For instance 4 trees in one hole won’t ever grow to any size if they survive at all. Before they do this, some companies will do a clean up, something they are supposed to do by law but come up with all kinds of excuses not to. So through that entire mountain side they will have dozens of “burn piles” usually done in the winter when it’s safer but other times done whenever they feel like because apparently they can buy their way out of anything like oil companies (fines? why would they care about them when they get a $250,000.00 when making billions in profit) I’ve seen and photographed the mountainsides with all these burn piles and seen the amount of smoke that goes up into the air when they burn, using oil and gas to accelerate (more toxins) we don’t use these for the fires in our homes. The final topper is that with so much destruction being done by the logging companies and the great fires they produce when they get around to their cleanups, the piles are massive, not just of branches but full grown trees. Trees that could be used for pulp and paper products though in this day and age with all the recycling going on there is no need of having to cut down a tree for paper. The age of the computer was supposed to change all that now though everything is backed up onto paper as a “hard copy” in case the computer crashes. Don’t you see? They instill fear about animals that they are going to come onto your property, eat your pets, harm your children but that fear spreads like a wildfire and the animals that have been displaced by logging and oilfield companies are slaughtered because of that fear. Now they bring up this crap about how detrimental to the environment our fireplaces are even though they save us a fortune in oil or electricity, how difficult is it to see that if they ban the use of wood burning anything that they then make that much more money off each and every one of us because we will have no choice but to use natural gas, oil, or electricity all conveniently taxed by the government so once again they add that much more to their bank accounts straight from your pocket are you truly willing to let them do this? If after reading all of this I invite you to actually go to the mountains. I live in Alberta and though I know the environmental laws are a little more sticky I know in Alberta that if people started taking drives out to the mountains to see for themselves the damage being done by logging they might actually find tears in their eyes, This is the planet we are leaving for our children, a planet that will have no mature trees, no wild animals because out of fear they’ve all been slaughter or because big ranches with loads of money, contributors to those in power have had the wild life killed to make way for their cattle. It started out killing wolves because they were supposedly depleting the elk populations, then they had a cull on the female elk knowing full well those females would be pregnant by the time they did the cull, and then of course the cougars / mountain lions were seen in towns, not hurting anything but there and fear rose up and they were killed, like the young moose that was more terrified than anything. They tranquilized it twice and had they stood back and give the medication time to take effect the animal could have been relocated back to the mountains. They say it’s open hunting on mountain lions in the Sundre area yet if you go west from where they came from and saw just how much forest has been and is still being cut down you’d know from just one drive that these animals weren’t starving as we saw over 30 deer including about half being yearlings so no matter how bad last winter was, the deer population was still enough to maintain the wild life. Wild life conservation officers told me to my face they were afraid that that the bears were disappearing yet on the same stretch of road we had seen 7 and a mother with 3 cubs. There is no way that it was lack of food that drove the cougars into town we saw their food source on the Trunk Rd. It Has to be the logging and displacement forcing them into towns they would normally stay clear of. To say they were starving is an outright lie. I know this was supposed to do with how bad fireplaces or wood burning stoves are but if you truly look at the truth of it all you will know to your very core that once again the government is trying to “scare” people to bend to their will. Are we going to actually believe their crap. You’d inhale more toxins on your way to work every single morning than living in a house that has a wood burning stove….I hope this makes sense and those playing ignorant to get people to do their bidding should hang their head in shame. What will it take to make people see????

  18. How did people heat their homes for the last few thousand of years prior to electricity and natural gas?
    Air pollution? Really? I would think car emissions are far greater a threat to peoples health than smoke from a wood stove. Correct me if I’m wrong, please.
    I find this “No right to pollute” trend to be a complete farce. Do you drive? Are you a consumer? Pick the boulder from your own eye before you worry about the speck in someone else’s.

  19. Oh one final bit, The governement made a decision to let wild fires burn themselves out. One in particular started out to be about 10,000 hectares of land to the west of Red Deer by the time it was done it in the hundreds of thousands. The stupid thing is that with the logging in place and the cutting and burning so much of our mountains, where “man” has become concerned letting wildfires burn themselves out is more of a hazard to health especially when the logging companies are burning that same amount of land each year after they rape it for everything they can get that’s easy then leave massive amounts of waste that needs to be burned in the end. We let people far back into the mountains now on quads and side by sides, riding through the creeks leaking from their small engines scaring animals and foolishly starting fires for not caring what time of year or how dry it might be. The fires caused intentionally and unintentionally by man cause far more physical damage to people than a wood stove in your neighbor’s house. This is supposed to be a country of freedom. How many of you have noticed that the rights we once had a dwindling by the day? How sad… So many are worried about having clean air where they live, until you get rid of big companies, vehicles of every type, drilling, mining, logging, it simply won’t happen. and don’t get me wrong I’d love to see it but there are simply too many money minded people on this planet that there will never be enough of the environmentally friendly people for this to change. Money has become the God and we are the slaves to it. Personally I should have been born a few thousand years ago before the damage even started….Eat what you kill and live in harmony with the planet not infect and infest every square inch of it. We have it good in Canada but that is changing every day too, governments that make over $200,000.00 per annum and after just four years in office can retire with a full pension while every other Canadian has to work to the age of 67. We all know how bad the system has become, that the rich will continue to gain and the middle and lower classes will continue to lose. We have the right to vote but for what? The lesser of two evils. Who would want to given our choices?

  20. do not not make anying chage and give us are rights to burn wood its been like that for yaeers leve it a lone.

  21. lol…i will burn wood as a back up heat ….but i hugged the tree before i cut it down for all the tree huggers.

  22. If you want to live smoke free life you can move underground or live in the city. in the winter everyone s windows are closed so get over it . the government would love this and gas ,hydro too money money for them. I use mine when we get the cold whether when my heat pump goes to the goes to electric element part then I use wood.people need to stop crying

  23. Should I have a choice damn right and I burn only wood no furnace in my place and I pay about 500 bucks a year to heat my place roughly 3 cords of wood! To think this is any more harmful than oil gas and wood pellets is a load of crap . Bottom line is I’m not getting oil gas electric bills in the thousands every month let’s stop the real people from bullying the little guy! For all those who say it’s a health risk remember those great nights by the camp fire burning wood !

  24. Absolutely agree. The day someone tells me I can’t heat my house with wood … WOOD !!! Has anyone taking an overview look at Canada? I live in New Brunswick, the province is 90 percent woodland. I know of a lot of families that can’t afford to heat their place electrically … and where does that electric heat come from? Burning coal? Every source of energy takes something from the earth. Everyone. Wind power, well you need to build those things and that takes energy, hurts bird migration. Oil? Should I go there. Burning the most abundant, self creating resource we have in this country shouldn’t even be considered an issue. I just can’t believe this has even come up. The day someone says I can’t heat my house with a wood stove … let them come into my home to arrest me. I don’t own a gun, I won’t need one.

  25. I just can’t imagine this is being discussed. Every form of energy takes something from the earth and leaves something behind. Wind farms? U have to build them. Energy. Solar ? You have to build something, takes energy. Where does that energy come from. Burning coal? Nuclear?

    We have an abundance of trees in Canada. They are a precious resource. There is no way that the wood burning community could ever burn enough trees to make a 1% dent in the number of woodlands we have. The output of even the worst type of burning stoves would have the same effect to our environment and air breathing Canadians as one forest fire that happens naturally each and every year in every province in Canada and we have a lot of forest fires. I just don’t get this topic … omg

  26. I live on one income I burn wood and always will . I have a right to be warm in the winter .not everybody can afford the high cost of heating oil or the high cost of electricity for heating . bylaw or not I will burn wood , somepeople just cannot afford oil or electric heat only . if you don’t like it oh well I have a right to be warm in the winter to

  27. so tell me, will the city of Montreal ban forest fires next?

    This is stupidity. Burning wood for heat is the most environmentally friendly way to heat ones homes. Everybody is up in arms over using fossil fuels and now they are raising the hue and cry over wood.

    For gods sakes people.

    What do human beings breathe to live? Oxygen!!
    What do trees and other plants breathe to live? CO2 primarily
    What do trees emit as waste? Oxygen primarily

    So go on .. ban burning wood. Keep fighting fires … Make sure we don’t emit any CO2 at all. And if you live long enough you might see the damage your stupidity is going to create. No trees – which means no Oyygen which means NO PEOPLE, NO ANIMALS, NO BIRDS ..


    Try to legislate away my right to heat my home the way I want.

    I am also a Respiratory Therapy patient. I am on a sub cutaneous vaso-dilator and an oral vaso-dilator plus inhalers. I have huge respiratory issues. But we heat with wood. It causes me no issues and a number of homes in our neighbourhood heat with wood. Not as many as 20 years ago .. but still a large number. Their use of wood does not bother me either nor does it affect the air quality.

    However the lumber mill next door in the last couple years has changed the air quality when the wind blows towards our homes. So much so that we have to actually leave our homes to be able to breathe. Yet the mill passes NB Environment laws .. and no matter how much we complain we cannot get them to fix it.

    But sure – bring in a law to ban home owners from burning wood.

    Rocket scientists for sure…. Oh yeah .. we are talking politicians now aren’t we?????

  28. Sounds like Green Energy is on a kick to totally bankrupt and control everyone. You know what??? F.Off.

  29. Should every child have a right to grow up breathing clean, healthy, smoke-free air?

    Yes, they should.

    Wood burning should not be done in any residential neighbourhood.

  30. And the elderly residents with heart trouble? The expectant mothers? The children with asthma? Do you believe, Leonard Harrison Jr., that they “need to stop crying,” too?

  31. If everyone bought the products you are trying to keep selling, Doug, the air would soon be completely unbreathable.

  32. you and the people who liked your post are poor excuses for human beings….poverty isn’t an excuse ? oh really? obviously you don’t live in Ontario or you wouldn’t have said such an assanine statement

  33. If everyone ONLY heated with electricity there would be a lot of dead people in the winter if only for cost and black outs not to mention places where there is NO electricity. If everyone ONLY heated with oil there would be so much more toxic air and roads to get places that have NO roads. . if we only heated with gas the entire country would have to ripped up and roads built to get to every singles area. WE NEED multiple sources of heat . Cities have access to ALL forms of heat Rural areas do not . If you think otherwise you need to get out and experience life to understand. While you are doing that Breathe and be happy .

  34. Air pollution impoverishes communities. It affects their health, their economic wellbeing.

    Here is a list of chemicals found in wood smoke:

    Here are the diseases woodsmoke causes:

    If you are an extremist who thinks woodsmoke belongs in any community then you are completely insane.The scientific evidence of the harm of woodsmoke is overwhelming. It is undeniable. You are not allowed to deny the facts.

  35. This is a joke, right? I mean seriously. The VAST majority of Canadians live in large cities and do not have the ability to heat their homes this way in the first place, and for the comparative handful that do, it is not only a great source of heat at a fraction of the cost of any other method, it is also an excellent woodlot management tool. By taking out the dead wood, you leave more room for healthy trees to grow and the results can be amazing. Whoever thinks that banning wood stoves is a good idea, is a world class champion sized idiot.

  36. Sorry, If I am paying to heat my home, and you can bet your last dollar I am, then I will decide how it will be done. Until someone else wants to take that financial burden off my plate, my advice to my neighbours is “Suck it up buttercup. This is Canada. We burn wood for heat.”

  37. Might I suggest that Australia is a completely different scenario? I don’t think they have the same issues of FREEZING to death during the winter as we do. Thanks for the advice, but we have done fine up until now and I have no doubt we will continue to do so in the future.

  38. You are totally and utterly wrong. The most dangerous air pollutant most closely linked to heart attacks, strokes and lung diseases is PM2.5. Even an EPA-certified stove emits on average as much PM2.5 per year as 2,200 passenger cars – http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/woodheater-car-comparison#USEPA.

    You should pick the boulder that is 2,200 times more polluting from your eye before worrying about people who drive and create less than 1 thousandth of the pollution of a wood stove.

  39. The UN Environment Program and World Meteorological Association (UNEP/WMO) recommended phasing out in developed countries because it causes excessive global warming compared to other forms of heating, as well as creating significant health problems – http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/greenhouse

    Why is something that is so bad for the environment and our health that the UNEP/WMO recommended phasing it out “environmentally friendly”? Is this a form of George Orwell’s NewSpeak where everything is claimed to be the opposite of what it really is?

  40. Why not support the right of people to breathe?

    Support the right of everyone to breathe clean air.

    Support the development of clean energy – which begins with moving away immediately from the dirtiest sources of energy like coal and wood.

  41. Actually, Parksville has a milder climate than where I live, yet I wouldn’t dream of using filthy, polluting heat that damages our health and causes excessive global warming when there are affordable, environmentally-friendly alternatives.

    Montreal has a much colder climate than Canada’s west coast. Why do the residents of Montreal care about their health, their children’s health and the environment, but not other Canadians?

    Health and environmental experts such as the American Lung Association http://www.lungusa.org/press-room/press-releases/cleaner-alternatives-for-winter-heat.html and the UN Environment Program & World Meteorological Organization http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/greenhouse recommend against use of domestic wood heating.

  42. Do you not realize, Nick, that people need to breathe clean air no matter where they live? Do you not realize that air pollution is a global issue, as well as a localized one?

  43. Actually, Parksville has a milder climate than where I live, yet I wouldn’t dream of using filthy, polluting heat that damages our health and causes excessive global warming when there are affordable, environmentally-friendly alternatives.

    Montreal has a much colder climate than Canada’s west coast. Why do the residents of Montreal care about their health, their children’s health and the environment, but not other Canadians?

    Health and environmental experts such as the American Lung Association http://www.lungusa.org/press-r… and the UN Environment Program & World Meteorological Organization http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/green… recommend against use of domestic wood heating

  44. Why would you expect someone else to pay for your living expenses? Why do you suppose you have a right to pollute the air that other people breathe?

  45. Perhaps you might try doing a bit of research about the issue in order to learn why wood burning bans are needed in order to protect air quality and health.

  46. If you don’t understand the topic, doing some research about the issue can help you to become better informed.

  47. I live in Prince George, and every wood burner near me has a big house, big truck and a big attitude. We have access to gas and every one of them could easily afford gas for heat. Some have RV’s, boats, lots of money for everything, even donating to worthy causes, EXCEPT CLEAN AIR. Pathetic.

  48. Tammy, you are in very good company, as per the following….. yet just try butting out, the air gets cleaner……Who burns wood? It seems almost everyone. God burns through the “burning bush” or the “pillar of smoke and fire”. Nature, with lightning and oxygen burns whole forests. Neighbors down the street burn wood.

    The cavemen and pioneer burned for heat and food. The hunter and mother
    burns at campfires and kitchen stoves. The monarch and peasant maintained a blazing hearth and humble coals. The lost hiker burns to signal rescue.

    The teacher burns wood to save for foreign travels. The university
    president supports a biomass unit that heats the campus. The chair of
    the local health authority burns wood to set a green example. The
    worker, student, and farmer all burn wood.

    Who doesn’t burn? The very young who can’t light a match, the very
    old who can’t lift a log anymore and the very sick who have had
    enough of it all. And the few who want clean air while neighbors down
    the street fill the air with smoke.

  49. I love the forest fire season here in Prince George. The whole air gets filled with smoke and thus shows everyone just what it is like to live the whole winter right beside some bully burner, who even increases their smoke to somehow get back at anyone who complained!

  50. I cost the taxpayers $200 000 in 2010 to get saved from cancer, most likely caused by 30 years living among wood burners, and now the wood burners say they hope that I had just died. Love it, as I get maybe a few more years to tell them to BUTT OUT.

  51. The most health-hazardous air pollutant is PM2.5 – tiny particles less than 2.5 microns (millionth of a meter). PM2.5 are so small they behave like gases and seep into houses when all doors and windows are closed, just like the air we need to breathe.
    Telling people to “get over it” when it’s not possible to keep the toxic chemicals in wood smoke out of the neighbour’s house is as insensitive as Marie Antoinette telling starving people who had no bread to eat cake.
    Except that Marie Antoinette’s insensitivity is considered to be a myth. Yours is for real.

  52. So burn your oil and rip up the land to send oil and gas thousands of KM to your house or go out back to your own personal wood lot cut your own trees manage a healthy forest that provides O2 that YOU breathe and heat your home and cook your food without any middle man. Still don’t get it? Pull your fingers out of your nose and support yourself . Would you live or die,? YOUR choice.

  53. The UN Environment Program and World Meteorological Association (UNEP/WMO) recommended phasing out in developed countries because it causes excessive global warming compared to other forms of heating, as well as creating significant health problems – http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/green

    The best way to “have it good” is to respect other people’s rights and needs, including the right to clean air. The smoke from forest fires is dispersed over a wide area so makes a much smaller contribution to the pollution in air people breathe than the neighbor’s wood stove. The same applies to industry. Even living near power stations that provide electricity for 3.25 million homes and the mines that provide the coal to fuel the power stations, the biggest source of pollution, year round, was the small proportion of homes (perhaps 10-20%) of houses using wood stoves in a town of less than 12,000 people http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/mining

    When people think of dioxins in fish, they imagine it’s from industrial pollution. Yet the City of Palo Alto explains that 39% of dioxins in the air come from wood smoke and that “woodsmoke can become a water pollution problem all too easily. Some of the particles and related toxics in the air fall back into the Bay and into our watersheds, where it washes into waterways. The toxic effects of this transformation of air pollution into water pollution are now documented. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently listed San Francisco Bay as impaired due to the buildup of dioxins and other contaminants in the tissues of fish” http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/3689

    Similar advice was offered by the American Lung Association. They “strongly recommends using cleaner, less toxic sources of heat. Converting a wood-burning fireplace or stove to use either natural gas or propane will eliminate exposure to the dangerous toxins wood burning generates including dioxin, arsenic and formaldehyde” http://www.lungusa.org/press-room/press-releases/cleaner-alternatives-for-winter-heat.html

  54. I must say, Tammy, that I am very impressed with your writing and passion. In my opinion with some guided fine tuning, like spaced paragraphs, you have a lot of potential. Keep at it.

  55. What toxic chemicals tell you what stop fires fires first asshole tired of you telling me how to live

  56. The link from the American Lung Association says: Converting a wood-burning fireplace or stove to use either natural gas or propane will eliminate exposure to the dangerous toxins wood burning generates including dioxin, arsenic and formaldehyde” see http://www.lungusa.org/press-room/press-releases/cleaner-alternatives-for-winter-heat.html

    There are many other dangerous chemicals including PAH – http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/pah and other known human carcinogens such as benzene – the average wood stove emits more benzene than the average car – http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/cancer

    Instead of calling people names, why not check out the facts?

  57. Are you flippen kidding me! We are becoming a Hitler type regime ( if proper word). Burning a wood stove has far less emissions than the Dumb Smart Meter installed on my house and the gouging cost of hydro electricity. Seems to me the way things are going in general with our so called government they will be putting a charge on using our own bathroom. my opinion

  58. I understand the topic. If the guy next door to me doesn’t burn wood for heat he dies. Simple. I’m not sure where u live … but everything you have at your fingertips was produced in ‘green’ place I’m sure. Look … I’m all for being a better person for the planet and leaving less behind then I used, I totally agree. But to take the ability to heat your house with wood away to me is just, not in my mindset so to speak. Makes me angry actually. There are better topics to discuss.

  59. I just love playing “Plaisir D’Amour” by G Martini on piano, pipe organ or to accompany singers, …. we did it recently at a concert, and I get the MC to tell the romantic story of her wanting only that piece of music, with cake, even while they were cutting off her head! By the way, no more real candles in the sanctuaries, I got them to go to those LED ones, less smoke! Look up the research on how priests in smokey cathedrals have more lung problems than usual.

  60. Life has ironies and my area of central Prince George recently presented a cruel example. Our young and healthy neighbors did not care about how wood smoke affects others until their first child arrived. This neighbor was also a firefighter for our city, and generally a real nice, friendly and respectful guy. He recently got promoted and even investigated the recent explosion at the Lakeland mill, caused by too much pipe beetle dust. Years ago they put in a burner, built a fine woodshed and gathered wood every season. At times I even helped move wood from his truck to the shed.

    I had never complained about the smoky conditions during the calm, cold times. Silence is often best for good relations with neighbors. But your respirator thing reminds me of my wood burning neighbor. We could hardly breathe at times when he burned.

    Now after years of burning wood they have to move out of the bowl because their child has serious breathing problems and cannot handle the bad air. How ironic! It reminds me of all the smokers who spend their last gasping days warning others not to smoke. More of us should be considerate and stop burning wood in the bowl.

  61. In my experience it is the wood burners that are the Hitler types, as others nearby have no rights, while they burn as much as they want, selfishly with no though for consideration and responsibility to others, like the comment from Ted or Wally.

  62. Wally, over and over, we get the same comments from wood burners……The most popular is to point out all the pollution from vehicles, industry, forest fires or dust. Wood burners seem to transfer blame and ignore their own smoke.

    Second, is to claim “humans have natural health defenses, so a little bit of smoke doesn’t matter”. They sometimes mention relatives who lived long lives and burned wood. Like many cigarette smokers, wood burners seem to downplay health effects. Some have regrets later when health fades.

    Third, is to say “the current laws allow burning wood” and also the
    cavemen and pioneers burned wood. They ignore how modern society has changed and also ignore modern heat technology. They point out how bad coal is when wood produces even more smoke per unit of heat.

    Fourth, is to plead poverty, while actually having a house or driving around in a big truck to haul wood. They tell any complainers about their smoke to pay their gas bill.

    Fifth, is to say “wood smoke smells nice like cooking so it must be safe”. They ignore research studies that show wood smoke has many polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that damage health.

    Sixth, like you, is to belittle anyone who complains about wood smoke and then point out that there are more pressing concerns like drugs and crime. They say “Get a life”.

    Seventh, is to say “wood burning reduces CO2 emissions”. The stove industry also tells us that using wood is clean, green, safe and cheap. But burning wood actually produces more CO2, soot and methane per unit of heat than natural gas.

    Eighth, is to tell people “just move away”. Fine for the cavemen, pioneer days or rural areas but modern society has too many crowded areas than need cooperation and consideration.

    Ninth, is to say “Show me the science that wood smoke is bad”. Then wood burners do not actually read the reports and some say that they will use the research reports to light their next fire.

    Tenth is to complain about too many laws, nanny state governments, the meddling clean air agencies and that people can govern themselves. Well, no abuser likes the law.

    Finally, wood burners often say “I have the right to heat my home with wood” or “I will die with a poker in my hand” or “Just try and
    stop me from burning”. This is not responsibility or consideration to others.

    All the above comments have decent replies. In general, anyone who still burns wood in crowded areas is inconsiderate to others. If you burn wood in a crowded area shame on you for the smoke abuse.

  63. Tammy I could not agree more I stand by your side and am ready to fight to the death as we are no longer a socialist society but becoming a dictatorship and communist country whats next. ‘Archie Cobourg Ontario

  64. Cleanairmatters… You don’t sound like someone who would need to burn wood.. So ofcourse you would to be understanding or considerate to people who do as you think there is no need… Well not everyone lives like you do, but yet you try to shit on them anyways! It’s retarded to attack something as a basic necessity like fire.. I suppose campfires are to be outlawed too… I burn wood because it’s practical and never fails, don’t have to wait on a service man to repair a problem while I freeze or for him to even show up, I don’t wait for something to be delivered while I freeze.. Or if it even shows up on time.. I burn wood in my stove. Your an ass hole for attacking my basic right to ensure I have life’s necessities in a efficient way…

  65. Fortunately a growing number of caring and concerned people are standing up for the right to breathe.

  66. Toxic pollution from industrial biomass burning is also a serious problem.

    The topic of the article and the topic being discussed is residential wood burning.

  67. All people have the right to breathe clean air. The right to breathe must never be usurped by the desire to burn solid fuel in a residential area.

  68. Try doing some research. You will soon realize that the serious lung damage inflicted by forced wood smoke exposure, which is now known to include cancer, is no “joke.”

  69. I’m pretty sure body heat is just as essential. Please do not act like there is only one central aspect to survival. There are different ways to survive and different environments that require different methods. There are many worries that must be dealt with in a variety of ways due to various circumstances.

    Personally, I’ve lived in an old house where the central heating method was an old wood stove. I do not live in one now. I take public transit and don’t even have my L. Not everyone is or can be in the situation I find myself in and for that I feel fortunate.

    I am sure beyond any shadow of a doubt natural forest fires every year will damage your health far greater than wood stoves. Yet there is no way of completely preventing forest fires or stopping them immediately. So far I’ve never seen anyone mention natural forest fires where the same toxins are spread.

    You don’t immediately choke to death just because there are a few pollutants in your breath. The body is stronger than that. Not to say we shouldn’t keep our air clean. We should. But to bitch like this is very distasteful.

  70. Nothing is more important than breathing. Many things, including water, are just as important as air. But nothing is more important than air.

    Forest fire smoke and smoke from wood stoves are equally harmful. The difference is that residential wood burning smoke can be avoided completely, through much-needed bans that will prevent residential burning smoke from happening.

    Particulate matter, a major component of wood smoke, is now classified as a Group 1 human carcinogen. That means it is in the same category as other cancer-causing substances including tobacco smoke and asbestos. So contrary to your stated assumption, no amount of exposure is actually known to be safe.

    You say that you find calls for clean air protection “distasteful.” Smokers and supporters of the tobacco industry used to say the same sort of thing about the dedicated efforts of anti-smoking advocates, not so long ago. Actually, calls for clean air protection are calls for environmental justice. It’s smoke that is not only “distasteful” – but also potentially lethal.

    For the same reasons that you take public transit, please also support the protection of smoke-free air for everyone to breathe.

  71. It might be difficult to prevent or slow forest fires, but, duh, wood stoves can be addressed decently, like with these comments…… And that is why some who get smoked out by others are complaining! You complain, we complain, tit for tat, duh, all OK.

  72. Wood burners “dictate” to all their neighbors, what those neighbors should be breathing, like it or not!

  73. It seems another Canadian tradition is being threatened. Admittedly, this may not register in urban circles, but in rural climes where self-sufficiency still survives, it is a very big deal.

    Governments hate it because it threatens their dominance; Oil companies hate it because it threatens their bottom line, Kathleen Wynne hates it because it cuts into her gold mine of inflated hydro income; and Insurance companies hate it while raising their premiums on wood-burning homes.

    Meanwhile, wood is a renewable source of affordable heat that is a safe as the users who use it.

    Now back to the debate surrounding the niqab.

  74. I happen to be a clear-eyed bicyclist and know that cars are getting cleaner while
    wood-burning remains the same. Now there are more wood-burners because
    people like fire-pits and wood-fired barbecues. Wood smoke sucks the air out of
    you like a passing car doesn’t. As for all those “extreme” stories of people freezing to death, the truth is more banal. Ignorance.

  75. The real joke is going to be the “Blue Dot” movement of Suzuki which declares that every person has the right to clean air, water and food….and I’ll bet for wood burners, clean air means that while natural gas fumes are bad, their wood smoke will be safe, green, cheap, healthy, renewable, sustainable, eco-friendly, traditional, historical, and their gramma lived to 99 while cooking on a wood smoke, COUGH, GASP, GAG.

  76. you cant breath when your frozen solid… and ive seen -17C in Parksville for over a week… without wood heat people would have died…. There may be places where restrictions come into effect on air inversion days when pollutions hangs in the air.
    I wonder if you have ever even been in the cold???
    The right to make fire should always be the last right compromised in cold climate countries.

  77. Duh Montreal is a city….. tell someone in the north they cant burn wood and they may just string you up… just sayn that blanket rules don’t work for everyone.
    For those that have a problem with smoke from fires maybe you need to start smoke free communities??? Why should I pay for your problem?

  78. I haven’t seen the government make smoking illegal yet, have you? Simply because they profit from it. They don’t profit from wood fires. Interesting how they pick and choose.

  79. I think in my mine there is a lot bigger polutions isues then wood smoke there is enough pollution in alb to kill the rest of Canada & more from the plants I,am sure you ask anyone who worked there would strongle agree

  80. When smoke is in, say, a child’s home, and consequently in their lungs, that is a big pollution issue. Ask anyone who has experienced having smoke come into their home and I’m sure you’d find that “they would strongly agree.”

  81. Snow: Smoking is banned in many places. For the same health reasons, wood burning in neighbourhoods also needs to end.

    Re. your assertion that governments have no financial interest in their affiliation with the wood burning industry: please provide factual evidence that backs up your claim.

  82. The USA is promoting coal as clean energy and you are mouthing off about wood being filthy.

  83. The same could be said of cigarette smoke, except that it’s a lot less damaging to health. Tests in mice showed that wood smoke caused 12 to 30 times as many tumors as the same amount of cigarette smoke.

    Burning 10 kg wood emits as much PM2.5 as in the smoke from 5,000 cigarettes and as many PAH (the main toxic chemicals in wood smoke) as in the smoke from a quarter of a million cigarettes http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/pah

    Generating electricity from renewables is cheaper than building new coal-fired power stations, so by following the UN Environment Program recommendation to phase out log-burning stoves to reduce global warming and improve health, the result will be cleaner, healthier, environmentally friendly and affordable home heating!

  84. Where I live, it often gets to -15C on winter nights. Home insulation is cheap compared to the cost of a stroke, heart attack, cancer, children with restricted lung development, or lower IQs.

    Just look at how damaging the leaded gasoline turned out to be – http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4174798.htm
    Why repeat the mistakes with other substances that we now know can have a similar effect on our health?

  85. I would like to thank all those who care so much for well being of our earth, our families and our neighbours. My opinion for what its worth.
    The issue seems to be the same with so many things in our society. Debating facts or ideals will not change the minds or hearts of anyone who feels convicted on any one side or another. One key thing we learn when you have been married for any amount of time is “you cant change the other person” We can make them change behaviours but for real change to happen it has to be a personal conviction. We are all “married” to our environment, Communities, Families and our Ideals. But not all marriages are the same. What works for one place may not and is most likely not the the solution for another. For example My parents burn wood for heat in their rural town. They harvest wood from clear cuts that will be burned in the fall anyway. That is where everyone in the surrounding communities gets their wood from. They have an old house with poor insulation and can not afford to use electric heat. The clear cuts have to burn all the wood anyway. It produces proper fertilisation for the soil and deals with the debris at the same time. On the other hand picture just after the industrial revolution in Europe with high density living and all solid fuels being burned for heat and work. It would most likely be unbearable for us today. I live in suburbia. If all of us burned wood everyday all day for heat it would most likely be uncomfortable for some people. If my neighbour has issues with smoke from my fire. Then the least I can do is consider his/her position and aid them in anyway I can. If I can make my neighbours life easier and more comfortable because of a disability they have then isn’t that my compassionate responsibility as a neighbour to do so? After all this is Canada. I am not talking about catering to whining. But if you have a need and your neighbour can aid you in that then ask for help. People respond to aid and not demands appeal to compassion not pride.

    There are always exceptions. Most people in urban areas don’t burn wood any more. But I understand if it is freezing cold and you have to burn to keep the house warm then why not. I can not think of anyone who would complain if the power is out and it is -20 about you burning wood for a week. Who is outside breathing in all that smoke anyway. And if a week or two a year of burning wood in your neighbourhood is that medically damaging to someone I honestly think they should be in assisted living or be wearing a respirator might be the answer. I wear one when I need to. If my neighbour is burning mattresses in his back yard, I should probably go over and see if I can help in some way. Maybe he didnt want to ask to borrow a truck, or didnt have the 20$ to pay for the dump fee. Maybe I could offer to take it for him. Maybe I could give him the 20$. But if I truly believe in the issue I will do what it takes to resolve it at no cost to the persons significance or personal value. I believe its called social responsibly.

    I really feel that the issue can be dealt with on a personal level. We are all Human. That is to say we all have different needs and gifts. We can work for the benefit of what truly matters, what really has significance, relationships. The world will never be perfect. There is no perfect implementation of any ideal. Life will not go unchallenged by disease or hardships. By serving each other daily, having pride in our ability to work together and and show the world that Canadians hold the value of our community over any obstacle then we can succeed in obtaining the real goal, a meaningful significant life. The key is to set the example of how we want others to live, not dictate.

  86. I like your philosophy about “can only change your own behavior” but then what should reasonable people do when presented with new discoveries, like DNA, evolution, neuroscience, or new research on the hazards of smoke? I am reminded of the philosopher who just said, “Too bad for the facts, my mind will not change”. Often an older generation has to die out before new ideas take hold, at least those who will never change their minds. I agree with your “It depends on the place, and the idea of location, location, location” and as with so many issues, the time also is crucial. I am never bothered by wood smoke in the warm times, duh, and our city has banned backyard burning. That is also why I try to mention, “no wood burning IN CROWDED PLACES that have access to gas” since in my experience all my wood burning neighbors have big houses, and big everything including attitude. And I like your “deal with issues at the personal level” since now 4 of my wood burning neighbors see it my way, and have stopped burning, …..only one left. I suppose that is why I try to help others who are smoked out, because of my little bit of success. Then there is also my cancer, and being given a second chance, I feel that I should try to do something to make this world a little bit better, even if wood burners don’t agree. I am not involved with other serious social vices so the only thing that really affects me is wood smoke, and then only because it is forced on others. I love the outdoors and a campfire as much as anyone else. For “whatitsworth” your writing is very inspirational.

  87. That’s nice to hear a little of your story. It appeals to the understanding of the situation. So many people have amazing stories of how they got to where they are in life and it usually never gets heard in a debate. But that’s really what everyone no matter their position on things want I think. Just to be heard, recognised.
    I have had some tough neighbours. I have found that calling the city or the police was just the worse thing I could have done – at first ( some things are just illegal, and for good reason) .But later I found serving them made it easier for them to adopt change and understand who I am and where I am. It takes courage. And for me too, I want to be approached when I am hurting someone. “Change is slow. If it comes at all”
    This is kind of grey area. My grandpa working in the coal mines from the age of 13. Smoked rolled cigarettes, drank like a fish his whole life. Died at 83 no cancer. Died of a stomach complication. My friend died of lung cancer at 38 never smoked or drank. worked on the west coast, on the ocean, pretty much the cleanest air in the world. So who makes the rules on that I dont know. 🙂

  88. I invite you cleanairmatters to come with me to northern Manitoba in February next winter and you can stay in the shed at the remote cabin I vacation in up there and try to stay breathing all night long in -40C. You WILL change your tune quickly!

  89. This is not an attack but you could consider using a wood burning device that is more efficient (less smoke and particulates). Such stoves do exists.

  90. You’re talking about a remote cabin that you use while on vacation, and that sounds like it’s far from any other homes.

    – Most clean air supporters, including me, are fighting for the right of people to breathe smoke-free air in crowded towns and cities. That’s where bans are urgently required. Try to understand the vital difference, and please don’t oppose the struggle for clean air in neighbourhoods. Thanks.

  91. Parents of children with conditions like asthma also hate it because when their children are exposed to smoke, they cough and it’s hard for them to breathe.

  92. yes they should burn wood . If they want to go after something why don’t they go after all the chemicals that they are spraying .

  93. I didn’t even read more than the first sentence of this junk…but I can’t help but think…are you for real????

  94. I believe it is more the chemicals found in today’s foods than the threat of would burning stoves that cause many cancers. My parents grew-up in Nova Scotia with would burning stove, fire place and furnace. Neither of my parents died from cancer just old age 83 and 90. They lived on farm fresh food and clean drinking water with no fake food.

  95. How about if your niebour puts in a hassa boiler and the smokes comes over to your yard and smokes you out all day even getting sucked into the house by your gas furnace intake . does he still have the right to burn wood . what about our right to clean air ?? not to mention he probably spends as much in gas time and chainsaw parts as i do for clean gas heat. i dont have a problem with wood burning but i should have the right to clean air.

  96. My pellet stove is 78% efficient, my oil furnace was 78% efficient. I realize there are more efficient furnaces nowadays, but they all burn non-renewable fossil fuels! With the cost of electricity nowadays, it is no longer an option.

    Wood is carbon neutral and renewable for God’s sake. New wood stoves have efficiencies in the upper 80% range. If you live near a smoke dragon, then more likely than not they are burning green wood.

    Cancer my arse, the only reason govt wants to clamp down on wood burning is because they cannot tax it. Don’t joke with yourselves, it is nothing to do with constituent ‘s health, no matter how much you wish it was.

    We should be promoting wood burning, and de-escalating the use of fossil fuels. It is the only long term solutions.

  97. lol people are saying wood stoves are the cause of cancer lol and strokes lol and heart disease lol. think for yourself do u really think smoke frickin smoke is causing all the cancer look what u are eating GMO and the list gos on and on and look what your government is spraying over you everyday aluminum titanium barium. its ok your in a state of hypnosis but now its time to wake up. this is just a bid to take away rights. everything and every study that comes out of the governments mouth is a lie when u do your research. you can spend a weekend get some good oak when its seasoned its smokeless, or you can pay 500 to a 1000 a month ill use the stove and pay the fines when they ban them and it will still be cheaper then using anything else.

  98. I will not move where it is cold. My allergies are bad enough. In L.A. the air pollution is in the summer months when people barbecue.

  99. There are billions more people now.They cannot all be burning wood, or no one will breathe.

  100. Canadian Guy I couldn’t agree more!!!!!! My toughs are we apparently live in a free country and this to me is the government taking away once again our freedom of rights. I live in a rural area and I heat with a pellet stove which is a renewable energy source. I love it!!! Its clean burning, more then efficient, and really safe with very little carbon build up which builds in the burn pot not in the chimney. I clean it every week and have it cleaned out by professionals once a year.

    I use it as my primary source of heat and power to it is through a inverter with two deep cycle batteries giving me 16 hrs of burn time before the generator kicks in to charge the batteries.I had propane at one time and got rid of it due to the expense and age of it. But I must say yes it is a little work but burning solid fuels are the way to go and the safest way to go.

    When I changed over I had a huge fight with my insurance company wanting to charge me an arm and a leg more in premiums saying pellet stove are unproven therefore unsafe, and my rebuttal back to them was storing two tanks of a volatile fuel against my house is??????? As a result they backed down once I took an adjuster through a tour of the stove showing all the benefits and safety features of the appliance.

    with that said I can understand reducing carbon emissions, but they should be going after the other 75% of carbon emissions before they take away the other 25% which is mans rights to survive with the one primitive resource we have left in this world to maintain life with is fire.

  101. I agree that maybe in more dense populated areas some regulations should be had.

    How about some funding from the government to develop a self sustaining heat source where one does not have to purchase the fuel?

    Is there any comparison to wood stoves vs the emissions cause by the refinement of fossil fuels plus logistics to get it to the consumer plus the actual consumption of the fuel?

    All the comparisons i have seen are just the emission caused by using oil/electricity/gas vs burning wood.

    People talk about public health like we are going extinct. Why no regulations on birth? over population is also having an effect on public health. More people means more consumption. Which means more pollution.

    Banning wood stoves is not going to save the planet.lol

  102. HAHAHA oh my -15C in the evening? Try -30 all day long and then drop to -45 for the evening.There is no amount of insulation that will help in these temperatures you mindless wanker that has obviously had their IQ lowered due to wood smoke. What help is stopping the wood stoves? One forest fire puts more into the atmosphere then 10000 wood stoves burning half the year. You are just another one of those mindless global warming alarmists?

  103. You can’t get a heart attack or stroke from air pollution unless you breathe it in. Forest fires create a lot of pollution, but most if it disperses into the wilderness, so it doesn’t affect human health anything like the average wood stove in a town or village.

    Take the example of a small town with 277 houses that over a 20 month period had 99 days when the pollution was worse than the air quality standards. Despite being surrounded by forests that are burned regularly, chemical fingerprinting of the pollution collected on filters showed that wood stove emissions were responsible for 77% of the pollution, compared to 11% from smoke plumes from forestry burns, 4% from waste combustion and 8% from other sources.

    If you live in a village or town, even one surrounded by forests that are burned, stopping wood stoves will turn dangerously unhealthy air into something that’s clean and healthy most of the time.

  104. Pretty ironic to call someone an “ahole” when you are treating the air like a sewer.

  105. Air is important, so is water. Our Canadian government has no limitations or reasons for what they do. They ban wood stoves but dump raw sewage into the St. Lawrence? Montreal may not be able to burn wood, but they can dump feces into a living river?

  106. Have you ever experienced the smoke from a forest fire blowing into town ? everywhere you go, all day, all you can smell is smoke from the burning trees, the same trees that people burn in their homes. some of those fires are easily thousands of Hectares in size. (1 hectare is ~ 2 football fields). You say that that smoke “dissipates” yet shouldn’t the same principal apply to people burning wood? after all it is the same material. also, on the boreal forest, fire is a natural part of the ecosystem, fire is needed to “renew the forest” and currently we do not allow fires to burn naturally, they are suppressed by fire crews, and the “renewing” of the forests is done by harvesting the trees adn replanting them. so one could argue that the fires that we are not allowing to burn, by suppressing them thus, not releasing smoke is of set by a few people burning wood to heat there homes

  107. Where was the fancy electric baseboards during the ice storm of the 90’s? Dead in the water is where it was at, I was heating my house with electric at the time, I had an old pot belly stove in the basement that wasn’t used for 30+ years, I sparked that up with some wood I had for camping and used it for 4 weeks while the electricity was out. Some areas didn’t have electricity for 10 weeks. How many people would of frozen to death if it wasn’t for wood stoves. They are simple, easy to maintain, if you have a large enough property you can grow your own wood and save thousands of dollars on Hydro One delivery fees of 48%-300%. People in the country don’t have the extra money to toss around buying new stoves or living the high life like the GTA does, This Wynne SOB needs to go. Could you imagine if we had no stoves and another ice storm, how many deaths would be? 10,000 maybe more. No way, People need to picket down Toronto streets with picks and forks and shovels to make a statement. Wynne is at a ridiculous 20% approval rating lets bring that down to 0% and get her own party to give her the boot and change leadership mid term!!

  108. Many small towns and villages are located lower ground e.g. valley floors and the smoke from wood stoves gets traps and builds up to very unhealthy levels – as bad as the 1 day of smoke from a forest fire. But the trapping of smoke from the wood stoves builds up to dangerous levels night after night. If people use wood stoves for 4 to 6 months, that’s 120 to 180 times worse than the 1 day people were exposed to the forest fire. It’s the continuous exposure to unhealthy pollution that increases the risk of heart attacks, strokes, Alzheimer’s, lung diseases, cot deaths, asthma, genetic damage in babies, reduces IQ when children start school etc. It ‘s pretty unfair to inflict that on the people living nearby.

  109. “In the limited amount of studies”……….
    Call me after the peer review. P-Hacking can manupliate data to show what ever you want it to.

  110. Here’s a quote from apeer reviewed study: “Across four US cities, among the primary PM2.5 sources assessed, biomass burning PM2.5 was most strongly associated with respiratory (ill) health”. Associations between Source-Specific Fine Particulate Matter and Emergency Department Visits for Respiratory Disease in Four U.S. Cities. Environmental Health Perspectives. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP271

  111. Townships are having open meetings right now about this proposed legislation. Please call your area and go to the meetings before it has gone too far.

  112. Nice post , I was enlightened by the insight ! Does anyone know where my assistant could possibly find a template Eversource 2200-35 document to use ?

Leave a Reply