What's the deal with EPA phase 2

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
WS can be confounding and likes to state what I see as opinions as if they were documented facts. He also likes to make up new definitions for terms that were not lacking them to begin with. He and I approach things very differently and would likely disagree on most things. But not all things - which means there is common grounds for discussion, and I find it worthwhile to have discussions with people I don't share all views with. WS listens more than he pretends to, and (now and then :rolleyes:) makes me go back and think things through more carefully. He generally does not step too far over the limits of acceptable discourse - though no doubt we all do at times.

So challenge what you find to be incorrect assertions - you might find it fruitful, even if frustrating.

Fair enough. Like you, I think it's worthwhile, even necessary, to hear other views on important matters. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, considered or not. Everyone is not entitled to their own facts, something missing in the WS definition of debate. You don't just get to make things up and further, when you are called on your BS, restating your previous nonsensical bellowings, only louder and with misspelled curse words, is not a meaningful means of making your point.

And that's what is so tiresome about all of this. I'm all for debate, discussion, what have you. What this is isn't any of that. This is one guy, waiting for any little reason to interject and impose his particular brand of, as Mel Brooks said in Blazing Saddles, "authentic frontier gibberish" on every discussion, as though droppin' his g's and drinkin' his beer out o' a box makes him an authority on any and all subjects to a bunch of guys who are on a site dedicated to cutting firewood. It's pandering, and worse, it presupposes that nobody here is smart enough to see through it. As I've said before, the most depressing part about it is that it's at least partially correct: there's always support for it, a small or large amen chorus of nitwittery saying "Yeah! What he said!" no matter how patently false or obviously malicious his BS.

And then, as in this discussion, when finally confronted directly, he suddenly stands above the fray, complaining of the uncivil behavior of everyone else.

It just gets old, after a while.
 
Ever had lungs that crackle when you breathe? Ever had to sit up to breathe because you were having an asthma attack? Carry an inhaler around?
Maybe we should just weed out those people, cuz they'd interfere with your liberty, if they could, to burn whatever you want. They are probably elitists and Oly wouldn't like the way they vote so lets just smoke it up and get rid of them.
Don't worry Obama Care will do that for you as an unwelcome financial burden to the system... Go GUBMINT!

Yeah, maybe, but at least I can make my elitist EPA communist stove heat the house easily. (1)

Power to regulate air pollution to individual states? I think not.(2) Some of those good ol' boy states might not care about the air quality of the downwinders. Pollution is an interstate problem, not local, not state--federal.(3) Constitution or not. (4) Pollution and population have drastically changed since the 1700s.(5) Call me a dumb ass, I've been called worse, but I'll stand by having the feds in charge of pollution standards. I don't want a tea bagger (6) in charge of deciding what I have to breathe or put up with in my water. Nuff said? (7)
1. As could almost any stove from the sounds of it it by your previous claims of household efficiency.
2. Have you heard of the 10th Amendment?
3. Except that the sources and reasons for said pollution vary from state to state. Refer to line two. Also, this is what the legal and judicial processes are for AS established by the Constitution.
4. Therein lies the problem as you have no respect for that document when it doesn't serve your purposes as most Socialists and Communists don't... In fact, how many times have you bragged about haveing a "Warshintgon Approved" stove in your house? If the state is allowed to deviate from the Nat'l standard (more or less restrictive regardless) that only nullifies and strengthens the 10th Amendment argument. Again, see line two.
5. I'll wager that St. Hellens put off more pollution than all stoves in the US combined for a number of years at that...
6. That wasn't Elitist, Judgemental, Bitter or petulant at ALL...LMAO Teabaggers? Do you honestly believe that you hold the morally superior High-ground Labeling Tea Partiers as tea baggers? That's no different than conservatives referring to the liberal Dumb-masses as such.
7. You said enough a long time ago but it still didn't make you right nor will it. Thanks for playing!
 
Well, this thread has certainly gone to the crap pile. Though I can only read between the lines, because many here have been in my AS iggy list for a long time now. Back on topic... if there is one... some comments I will make regarding the OP and what I have observed regarding my wood stoves and boilers over the past 10 years:

The Central Boiler non-EPA classic that we installed hardly smoked at all. The ex and I were scratching our heads over that one. We had read all these horror stories about them, the Ohio "environmental disaster" that the New England and New York DEQ/EPA had screamed so much about. Which obviously had to be staged. Our CB classic smoked for about 30 seconds after the damper opened, and that was it. Once the fire re-started the smoke was gone. When the damper closed, there was no smoke. Read: there was little or no smoke 99% of the time. No one ever complained about it around us, or even knew or noticed that it was there. We never had any smoke in the yard or in the house. I posted many photos of that stove in operation before on this site, and discussed this before (before the days when these threads have gone so far off topic that it is pointless to post here any more). That stove was non-EPA, but it worked fine. Not the most efficient being an OWB; it made charcoal when it was off. But we had over 100 acres of trees there, and windthrow to burn a plenty. But all OWB and IWB units are banned in this state now. I called the Oregon DEQ and asked why they banned them, and they said they were bad for the air. I asked if they had had any complaints about OWBs or IWBs in Oregon, and they said no. There were and are actually few of them here. There are supposed to be none in operation in this state now that they are banned. Basically it boiled down to the fact that the EPA had not come up with a standard means of testing them, and Oregon is involved in a multi-state legal suit suing the EPA for not having a measurement standard for IWBs and OWBs. The state level EPAs are suing the federal level EPA. Keeps lawyers paid at the tax payers expense, I guess. Meanwhile Washington State has come up with their own standards, and being more restricted than the EPA, are basically ignoring the federal standards for wood burning stoves and boilers.

My supposedly superior EPA-II/WA approved Englander 30 NC smokes as much as my old 'smoke dragon' Earth Stove did. Both smoke more than our classic CB OWB did. The 30 NC also puts out about the same amount of heat as the ES did, and I am going through the same amount of wood using it. I have about the same amount of creosote buildup, and the same amount of ash. I mean, there is near zero difference. But the old stove was not EPA approved, and banned by the state (well, not completely banned like the OWBs, but I could not sell this house with a non-EPA or DEQ approved stove in it). Resulting in? Much to do about nothing in my case. I burn clean dry wood though, all below 20% moisture as measured with my digital meter. Which is the real issue in many of these EPA smoke cases and a lot of these regulations. People burn green, wet and unseasoned wood. There is little that the EPA can do about that. Or they exacerbate the problem further. Case in point, the Oregon DEQ recommends that people dry their hardwoods here for ONE SEASON before burning. That is simply not enough time to get the moisture down to 20% here. But they are the experts making the standards, banning the wood burning appliances, and then they recommend that people burn 30+% moisture wood? Testing my black locust and white oak here, it took over 2 seasons to get it to 20%. And I split my wood and stack it on pallets that are over tarps to keep the ground moisture out, and I cover them with 2 layers of rubber roofing material in winter to keep the rain and snow off.
Few people here do any of that.

As I said before, people also tend to burn wood with the dampers closed down. That will usually result in the most heat in the house. However, when the burn temps drop below about 400 degrees the cats and air injectors simply shut off, and these fancy EPA certified stoves become smoke dragons. All the EPA built-in design features go to nil at that point. If you add to that the fact that most people burn wood that is too wet, you do not get a lot of improvement (if any), even with all the endless list of regulations. Burning dry wood and running your wood burning appliances properly would go a lot further than all these regulations imposed on us by the government regarding wood stoves.

I know, TLDR, so what... who cares... why bother... its all a pile of political ********...
 
Anything that burns is going have some smoke. The government just wants to crawl up our azzs.
 
And then, as in this discussion, when finally confronted directly, he suddenly stands above the fray, complaining of the uncivil behavior of everyone else.
Perhaps you could point out exactly where, in this discussion, I complained of anyone's uncivil behavior??
I went back and skimmed over the last few pages, the only person I found complaining was you (and maybe Del_ a tiny bit)... you complaining about me.

Hey, if'n my style and presentation leaves such a bad taste in your mouth... why put yourself through the displeasure?? Just pass over my posts (shrug)... that's what I'd do if I felt as strongly about someone as you do me (but, I don't, thankfully... it ain't worth sweatin' the small $h!t). For that matter... there is an ignore function ya' know?? Really, it ain't gonna' hurt my feelings or any such.

Your apparent hatred and venomous attacks on my character make me wonder though... wonder if there ain't at least a thread of truth in what olyman says at times.
Do I represent some sort of threat to you??
*
 
Don't worry Obama Care will do that for you as an unwelcome financial burden to the system... Go GUBMINT!


1. As could almost any stove from the sounds of it it by your previous claims of efficiency.
2. Have you heard of the 10th Amendment?
3. Except that the sources and reasons vary from state to state. Refer to line 2. Also this is what the legal and judicial process is for also established by the Constitution.
4. Therein lies the problem as you have no respect for that document when it doesn't serve your purposes as most Socialists and Communists do...
5. I'll wager that St. Hellens put off more pollution than all stoves in the US combined for a number of years at that...
6. That wasn't Elitist, Judgemental, Bitter or petulant at ALL...LMAO
7. You said enough a long time ago but it still didn't make you right nor will it. Thanks for playing!
:clap::clap:
 
I didn't know that he had professed belief in anything. If you have something to say, why don't you grab a dictionary, a second-grade grammar book, and a handful of the anti-psychotic medication of your choice and spit it out? There are some of us who don't speak your native tongue, whatever it is.
you've got 95 posts, so I presume,,you know NOTHING of the person im speaking of...butt out...ive been here a while...
 
I called the Oregon DEQ and asked why they banned them, and they said they were bad for the air. I asked if they had had any complaints about OWBs or IWBs in Oregon, and they said no. There were and are actually few of them here. There are supposed to be none in operation in this state now that they are banned. Basically it boiled down to the fact that the EPA had not come up with a standard means of testing them, and Oregon is involved in a multi-state legal suit suing the EPA for not having a measurement standard for IWBs and OWBs. The state level EPAs are suing the federal level EPA. Keeps lawyers paid at the tax payers expense, I guess. .




I know, TLDR, so what... who cares... why bother... its all a pile of political ********...[/QUOTE]
a political pile,, led by the extremeist elitist leftists in gov positions.....and ill bet 50 to a buck,, not a damn one of them own a woodburner....they don't want you to own one..it aint on their agenda...
 
Thread starting statement
Just got a letter from local central boiler dealer and he said that classic stove only available until april 15th due to the epa and phase 2. Then only the more environmentally friendly stoves will be produced. I am so sick of stupid government regulations that pad pockets while pretending to protect the environment............Sorry just had to vent.
And when I posted in the thread my whole point was ANYTIME and EVERYTIME a federal agency introduces new regs in public safety/health/monetary ect. (456 gov agency's if you didn't know) for the supposed good of the citizens, environment,economy ect. it NEVER works out, the only beneficiary's are current and past administration cronies, lobbyists, and politicians, the gubbimints touch is the polar opposite of the Midas touch- instead of everything turning to GOLD- BIG GOV touches it and you get big steaming piles of ****!!!!and if you can see admit/realize that Federal Government involvement in MOST of what they were NEVER supposed to be controlling/manipulating is dangerous to what the US was meant to be then you have your head in the sand or you are suffering from oxygen deprivation because your head in buried in your ass

Well, I'll just keep my dumbass head below ground level. I appreciate a few things like our NATIONAL forests and grasslands-- where I can cut firewood for $5 a load if I want and can manage to educate myself as to the rules. I like not having fences and No Trespassing and those other tacky signs surrounding me to keep me out of the woods and wilderness. I appreciate that Teddy Roosevelt set aside The Lands Nobody Wanted. I appreciate the highway system, although it seems to be a little more potholy than it used to be. I like clean water and being able to boat on it, or catch fish. I like my clean and cheap socialist energy from dams built under the auspices of the Bureau of Reclamation and eating food from the irrigation overseen by that agency. I bank in a federally insured bank. I imagine many of you enjoy collecting some sort of subsidy for your farm and have insurance from the feds. The Army Corps of Engineers keeps waterways open. The Coast Guard saves a lot of lives and keeps folks from doing stupid things, or tries to.

Nothing is perfect. It was frustrating to work for them at times. At other times, I would not have worked at anything else. That's how it goes, that's how government is.
I appreciate how the feds at least have made an attempt to help the underdogs get a foot in the door and try to act as a watchdog for our civil rights. I don't think the Feds were ever given the mission to make us all rich--your golden touch reference. They have allowed some of us who were excluded to enter the game and at least have a chance at success. This seems to have been forgotten, along with a heck of a lot of reasons for a fed overseer. The "gubmint" just happens to be a handy force to blame every little thing that goes wrong on, but we'd be in a worse place without it.
 
Burning dry wood and running your wood burning appliances properly would go a lot further than all these regulations imposed on us by the government regarding wood stoves.
Sure, to a point. There are a lot of designs out there, and maybe some of them simply don't work well, but in general I think if you use a stove properly/responsibly, it's not going to be a obvious smoking problem. And conversely it doesn't matter if the stove has a secondary combustion system, you can make it a smoking pig if you use it improperly. How does a community deal with that problem?

Visible smoke is only one measure, and the tests were intended to be more sensitive than that, and to quantify the particulate emissions under controlled conditions. I'm not aware of any manufacturer that has passed the existing tests without secondary combustion or a cat of some sort, which tells me there are still particulates, and energy to be extracted from the flue gases even if you don't see smoke. But it only tells you the device is capable of burning cleaner, it still needs to be operated properly.

And no matter how clean the stove is capable of operating, wood burning appliances still won't be appropriate in all places. I think that should be a local decision, but I'd bet a good beer that even if their own town was the one deciding to ban something, many would still be shouting about socialism, etc.
 
Sure, to a point. There are a lot of designs out there, and maybe some of them simply don't work well, but in general I think if you use a stove properly/responsibly, it's not going to be a obvious smoking problem. And conversely it doesn't matter if the stove has a secondary combustion system, you can make it a smoking pig if you use it improperly. How does a community deal with that problem?

Visible smoke is only one measure, and the tests were intended to be more sensitive than that, and to quantify the particulate emissions under controlled conditions. I'm not aware of any manufacturer that has passed the existing tests without secondary combustion or a cat of some sort, which tells me there are still particulates, and energy to be extracted from the flue gases even if you don't see smoke. But it only tells you the device is capable of burning cleaner, it still needs to be operated properly.

And no matter how clean the stove is capable of operating, wood burning appliances still won't be appropriate in all places. I think that should be a local decision, but I'd bet a good beer that even if their own town was the one deciding to ban something, many would still be shouting about socialism, etc.
their own town.... yah.....im not going to type,, what happened in this town....jackasses knew squat about woodburners....socialists they are...like all of that ilk,,they LOVE.....C O N T R O L !!!
 
Read up on Fairbanks, Alaska. They had previously passed a rule to ban enforcing EPA standards. They tried local control. This year, they repealed their ban of the EPA standards and are trying to clean up their winter air. It is a case of too many people using wood for heat in a populated area prone to inversions.
 
Read up on Fairbanks, Alaska. They had previously passed a rule to ban enforcing EPA standards. They tried local control. This year, they repealed their ban of the EPA standards and are trying to clean up their winter air. It is a case of too many people using wood for heat in a populated area prone to inversions.
That's not true slowp. In 2010, the people of Fairbanks (North Star Borough) voted to ban local government from "regulating" heating appliances (any heating appliance)... they did not vote to ban the enforcement of EPA "standards". It was not a rule passed by local government... it was enacted by popular vote. The latest October vote simply rescinds that ban... nothing more. And, it's worth noting, Proposition 2 failed by a mere 3 points. Also worth noting, any "regulations" or burn bans imposed would not apply to homes with only wood/coal-fired heating appliances (2000 homes by North Star Borough estimates), or those unable to afford alternate heating fuel (an unknown number at this time).

There was fear-mongering used on both sides of the Proposition 2 issue, and your misrepresentation of it does not help matters in any way... it's same as throwing gasoline on the fire (pun intended).
*
 
Excuse my glitch. I was driving... and misunderstood.
Well... how many times do you have such glitches, how many times do you misunderstand??
Just six weeks and a day ago you posted the exact same thing about the exact same place... and I corrected you then also.

http://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/latest-epa-wood-stove-news.264291/page-7#post-5000669

They're getting sued to force them to make even more absurd regulations. That's how they justify their actions.
It's called "Sue and Settle" or sometimes "friendly lawsuits", it's collusion of what amounts to crooks rippin' off the taxpayer... and it costs us (taxpayers) a friggin' bundle.
It's a backdoor screwin' of the public. It's about the money and power. And, an excuse to add more regulation without mandate.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...e-collusion-with-environmental-organizations/
*
 
Check out China for pollution. We are probably the cleanest we have ever been. But go ahead enforce laws that will wreck our economy.
 
Back
Top