Residential woodsmoke a top carcinogen, according to EPA study

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
But that's how our government operates. It completely ignores the obvious and focuses on the insignificant as the cause or solution to a problem. It's utterly incomprehensible how they can get it so wrong so much of the time.

Now California wants to add to their air pollution by letting everyone spark up a joint. Yep, more potheads on the road, but look at all the tax revenue they can generate. Lives for dollars.
It's a mess, isn't it? I remember that a few southwestern states also restricted cooking food with grills outdoors, the biggest joke in the world.

So, we ban grill cooking and wood stove burning so that we can better allow forest fires to rage out of control? As Tiny Tim said, "Tip toe through the tulips...":dizzy:
 
Problem is THEY CAN'T FIGURE HOW TO TAX US UN IT!
Man has been burning wood from day #1 to eat and cook!
AND we are all dead now HUH!
 
It's true wildfires produce far more smoke than wood burning stoves, but it's mostly just for a few weeks/months a year, and mostly in relatively unpopulated areas. There are exceptions, of course; some years (like last year) it gets pretty bad.

The thing is, the "green" folks seem to want to slam every energy source; oil and propane produce carbon emissions, newly designated as a 'pollutant' by the ninjas at the EPA. Electricity is just as bad, the vast bulk of it coming from burning coal, the single largest source of greenhouse gases in the world.

Wind power kills birds, raptors at a disproportionate rate.

Solar, well, that's the dream, but at this point it's expensive and inefficient and likely to remain that way for a long time, absent a massive de-centralization of production (think of most houses going 'off the grid" with solar cell shingles on their roofs).

The one source of "clean" power around, that produces virtually no pollution or emissions is our good buddy Nuclear. Yeah, right, ask the folks in Oregon where they want their nukes.

or we could just all bundle up and shiver in the cold and swelter in the heat, and move into energy efficient apartments in the middle of the city, like spam in a can.

I'd rather stick needles in my eyes.
 
They do tax firewood.

Problem is THEY CAN'T FIGURE HOW TO TAX US UN IT!
Man has been burning wood from day #1 to eat and cook! AND we are all dead now HUH!
Actually, they have figured it out, but only indirectly. Gasoline and oil are taxed to death and you can't bring in firewood without it. Then there's the real estate the trees are growing on and that's taxed to high heaven. All of your equipment gets sales taxed before you buy it and every year you register and license your truck.

Nobody escapes taxes.
 
We have a small fire going on here and the smoke it's producing is enormous. But it's nothing compared to the California fires from last year. They were hundreds of miles away yet the smoke was so thick here we couldn't see the freeway a half mile away.

The ironic part of this is that a lot of California fires are burning from wood that they won't let people pick up and burn in their fireplaces and stoves. It gets burned anyway and causes a lot of damage in the process. Go figure.
 
Actually, they have figured it out, but only indirectly. Gasoline and oil are taxed to death and you can't bring in firewood without it. Then there's the real estate the trees are growing on and that's taxed to high heaven. All of your equipment gets sales taxed before you buy it and every year you register and license your truck.

Nobody escapes taxes.

Can't speak to the fed gas tax, but here in NH, we amended our constitution some years back, mandating that all gas tax revenue be used to maintain state roads.

Since I don't own my own woodlot (obviating the real estate tax), I need to use the road system to transport my firewood. So it's more of a pay as you go thing for us in the Granite State.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top