Daily Herald Newspaper
Arlington Hts., Illinois
April 23, 2008
Associated Press
Scientists study haze of pollution over Arctic
FAIRBANKS, Alaska -- Visitors to Alaska often marvel at the crisp, clear air. But the truth is, the skies above the Arctic Circle work like a giant lint trap during late winter and early spring, catching all sorts of pollutants swirling around the globe.
In recent weeks, scientists have been going up in government research planes and taking samples of the Arctic haze in hopes of solving a mystery: Are the floating particles accelerating the unprecedented warming going on in the far north?
While carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that trap the Earth's heat are believed to be the chief cause of global warming, scientists suspect airborne particles known as aerosols are also contributing to the Arctic meltdown.
To prove their suspicions, they are analyzing the haze, using mass spectroscopy and other technology to identify what is in it, where it came from and how it interacts with clouds, sunlight and snow cover.
Their air samples have been found to contain dust from Asian deserts, salts that swell up moisture, particles from incomplete burning of organic material from forest and cooking fires, and all manner of nasties emitted by automobile tailpipes, factory smokestacks and power plants.
Collectively, they are a United Nations of pollution. Through chemical analysis, the particles can be traced to their sources throughout Asia, Europe and North America.
"The Arctic is a melting pot for mid-latitude pollution," said Daniel Jacob, a Harvard scientist taking part in the research. "We have signatures of just about everything you can imagine flying around in the Arctic."
The research is being conducted separately by NASA, the Department of Energy and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, and involves about 275 scientists and support staff and five aircraft.
The researchers are building on the work of a University of Alaska Fairbanks atmospheric scientist who arrived 35 years ago. Glenn Shaw took a light meter to Barrow, America's northernmost community, figuring he could document the clearest skies on the globe and perhaps get a mention in a scientific journal.
"I was expecting to set a record," he said, "because at the northern tip of Alaska, there's no industry, and the idea was that this must be the cleanest place, essentially, almost, on planet Earth."
He was wrong. Shaw detected a phenomenon later dubbed Arctic Haze that indicated the skies above Barrow and all the way to the North Pole collect pollutants.
"The important thing was, and is, this is aerosol material that is traveling over three or four thousand miles, which was unprecedented at the time," he said.
The focus on greenhouse gases has made it difficult to bring other possible agents of climate change into the discussion, Jacob said. But last summer's startling melt-off of Arctic sea ice has lent new urgency to the research blitz now under way.
It is well-established that soot that has fallen on snow can absorb heat from the sun and cause melting. But the researchers are also interested in what the soot does while it is still airborne.
Among other things, they want to know how the size and density of the particles alter the type and longevity of clouds, said Greg McFarquhar of the University of Illinois. Also, they want to find out whether the airborne particles reflect heat back into space or absorb it.
In most of the world, particles lead to cooling by reflecting light before it reaches the Earth's surface, partially offsetting the warming effect of greenhouse gases.
But A.R. Ravishankara of NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory said he suspects that's not the case in the Arctic, where ice and snow already reflect much of the light. Some particles may absorb the sun's energy and give off their own radiant heat, like blacktop on a summer day, he said.
"How much of this aerosol is there?" Ravishankara asked, summarizing some of things scientists hope to find out. "Do they absorb light? Do they scatter light? Do they make clouds brighter or dimmer? Are they getting to the ice surface? Because if you add these absorbing particles to the ice surface, it could actually enhance the melting."
If aerosols prove to be a major factor in warming, Ravishankara said, removing them could yield relatively fast benefits for the environment.
"It lasts only for a few days, and then it's removed from the atmosphere, unlike carbon dioxide, which stays with us for hundreds of years," he said. "Aerosols can be a way to do something very quickly."
Panel finds smog-mortality link-National Academy of Sciences
Daily Herald Newspaper
Arlington Hts., Illinois
April 23, 2008
Associated Press
A 50-kilometer race was held Saturday in Beijing. The runners in the background** are nearly obscured by the city's well-documented smog. A scientific panel concludes that even short-term exposure to smog can contribute to premature death.
Note...**Photo not included in posting.
Associated Press
Panel finds smog-mortality link
WASHINGTON -- Short-term exposure to smog, or ozone, is clearly linked to premature deaths that should be taken into account when measuring the health benefits of reducing air pollution, a National Academy of Sciences report said Tuesday.
The findings contradict arguments made by some White House officials that the connection between smog and premature death has not been shown sufficiently, and the number of saved lives should not be calculated in determining clean air benefits.
The report by a panel of the Academy's National Research Council says government agencies "should give little or no weight" to such arguments.
"The committee has concluded from its review of health-based evidence that short-term exposure to ambient ozone is likely to contribute to premature deaths," the 13-member panel said.
It added "studies have yielded strong evidence that short-term exposure to ozone can exacerbate lung conditions, causing illness and hospitalization and can potentially lead to death."
The White House Office of Management and Budget, which in its review of air quality regulations has raised questions about the certainty of the pollution and mortality link, did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.
"The report is a rebuke of the Bush administration which has consistently tried to downplay the connection between smog and premature death," said Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, a Washington-based advocacy organization.
Vickie Patton, deputy general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, said the Academy's findings "refutes the White House skepticism and denial" of a proven link between acute ozone exposure and premature deaths. Such arguments have been used to diminish the health benefits of reducing air pollution, she said.
The Academy panel examined short-term exposure -- up to 24 hours -- to high levels of ozone, but said more studies also were needed on long-term chronic exposure where the risk of premature death "may be larger than those observed in acute effects studies alone."
Ground-level ozone is formed from nitrogen oxide and organic compounds created by burning fossil fuels and is demonstrated often by the yellow haze or smog that lingers in the air. Ozone exposure is a leading cause of respiratory illnesses and especially affects the elderly, those with respiratory problems and children.
Editor's note...Wood smoke is one of the culprits of ground-level ozone.
Arlington Hts., Illinois
April 23, 2008
Associated Press
A 50-kilometer race was held Saturday in Beijing. The runners in the background** are nearly obscured by the city's well-documented smog. A scientific panel concludes that even short-term exposure to smog can contribute to premature death.
Note...**Photo not included in posting.
Associated Press
Panel finds smog-mortality link
WASHINGTON -- Short-term exposure to smog, or ozone, is clearly linked to premature deaths that should be taken into account when measuring the health benefits of reducing air pollution, a National Academy of Sciences report said Tuesday.
The findings contradict arguments made by some White House officials that the connection between smog and premature death has not been shown sufficiently, and the number of saved lives should not be calculated in determining clean air benefits.
The report by a panel of the Academy's National Research Council says government agencies "should give little or no weight" to such arguments.
"The committee has concluded from its review of health-based evidence that short-term exposure to ambient ozone is likely to contribute to premature deaths," the 13-member panel said.
It added "studies have yielded strong evidence that short-term exposure to ozone can exacerbate lung conditions, causing illness and hospitalization and can potentially lead to death."
The White House Office of Management and Budget, which in its review of air quality regulations has raised questions about the certainty of the pollution and mortality link, did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.
"The report is a rebuke of the Bush administration which has consistently tried to downplay the connection between smog and premature death," said Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, a Washington-based advocacy organization.
Vickie Patton, deputy general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, said the Academy's findings "refutes the White House skepticism and denial" of a proven link between acute ozone exposure and premature deaths. Such arguments have been used to diminish the health benefits of reducing air pollution, she said.
The Academy panel examined short-term exposure -- up to 24 hours -- to high levels of ozone, but said more studies also were needed on long-term chronic exposure where the risk of premature death "may be larger than those observed in acute effects studies alone."
Ground-level ozone is formed from nitrogen oxide and organic compounds created by burning fossil fuels and is demonstrated often by the yellow haze or smog that lingers in the air. Ozone exposure is a leading cause of respiratory illnesses and especially affects the elderly, those with respiratory problems and children.
Editor's note...Wood smoke is one of the culprits of ground-level ozone.
Wood-heat complaints push state to regulate
Monday, April 21, 2008
Wood-heat complaints push state to regulate
Monday, April 21, 2008 3:10 AM
By Mark Ferenchik
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
The silver smokestack is attached to a wood-fired boiler, used to heat this home on Hamilton Park near I-71. A neighbor, worried about the health effects, filed complaints with the city and state.
It's not too conspicuous from the street: a silver stack poking up from behind a backyard fence.
But John W. Waddy Jr. said it's a scourge on his Near East Side neighborhood.
This past winter, the stack belched smoke from a wood-burning boiler that warmed neighbor John Clarke's home but also, according to Waddy, polluted homes, cars and offices.
"This thing has a life of its own," Waddy said. He filed complaints with the city and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency in January.
Columbus officials said they don't regulate outdoor furnaces or boilers. But enough people have complained about the growing number of outdoor wood boilers statewide that the EPA is writing rules to regulate them.
The estimated number of Ohio homes that use wood as the principal heating source rose 27 percent in three years, to 71,711 in 2006, according to the U.S. Census. The estimate for Franklin County varies widely, between 300 and 900 homes.
Clarke installed the $8,000 system last year behind his 140-year-old stately stone-and-brick Hamilton Park house. He said it helped reduce the cost to heat his 5,200-square-foot house from $2,500 a month with a gas furnace to $700 a month, including the delivery of 12 cords of wood over the winter.
The wood boiler, housed in a shed, heats water that is pumped through insulated underground pipes into the house to the existing forced-air furnace. The furnace's fan blows air over the pipes to send heat throughout the ductwork.
Clarke still uses his gas furnace, but he estimated he used the wood furnace 95 percent of the time since last fall.
He wondered how the government could restrict the smoke. "How do you distinguish between this and chimneys?" said Clarke, a 37-year-old information-technology systems engineer.
Waddy, a lawyer who lives and works on Hamilton Park just east of I-71 and is also trying to sell 12 condominiums nearby in a refurbished building, said he's concerned the particulate-filled smoke is harming the community's health.
The proposed state rules are still under review. Officials probably will redraft them because of complaints they are too harsh, Ohio EPA spokeswoman Linda Oros said.
As written, the state would require new units to be at least 200 feet from property lines, essentially banning them from urban areas with small lots.
"Can you imagine one of these stoves in German Village?" Waddy said. It also would require smokestacks to be no less than 5 feet higher than the peak of any roof within 150 feet. That's so smoke can dissipate before anyone breathes it, Oros said.
Clarke's smokestack is about 15 feet tall, which is below the rooflines of the surrounding two-story homes.
The manufacturer's Web site recommends that in densely populated areas the stack height exceed the roofline of surrounding homes.
Ohio would limit emissions to 0.44 pounds of particles per million BTUs of heat, decreasing to 0.32 pounds in 2010. The U.S. EPA has set voluntary standards of 0.60 pounds, which manufacturers are working to meet.
It also would prohibit the use of a boiler from April 15 to Sept. 13 unless it met emission limits.
Copies of the proposed rules can be obtained by calling Carolina Prado at 614-644-2310. Written comments can be mailed to the Division of Air Pollution Control, Ohio EPA, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049.
EPA officials will review the comments, change the proposals if necessary, issue a draft proposal and take more comments, Oros said.
Other states and communities have prohibited or regulated the boilers. Maryland has banned them. And 62 counties, towns or villages in New York have passed restrictions, The New York Times reported. Suffolk County on Long Island in 2006 restricted their use to colder months until 2010, when they will be banned except for natural disasters.
mferenchik@dispatch.com
Monday, April 21, 2008 3:10 AM
By Mark Ferenchik
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
The silver smokestack is attached to a wood-fired boiler, used to heat this home on Hamilton Park near I-71. A neighbor, worried about the health effects, filed complaints with the city and state.
It's not too conspicuous from the street: a silver stack poking up from behind a backyard fence.
But John W. Waddy Jr. said it's a scourge on his Near East Side neighborhood.
This past winter, the stack belched smoke from a wood-burning boiler that warmed neighbor John Clarke's home but also, according to Waddy, polluted homes, cars and offices.
"This thing has a life of its own," Waddy said. He filed complaints with the city and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency in January.
Columbus officials said they don't regulate outdoor furnaces or boilers. But enough people have complained about the growing number of outdoor wood boilers statewide that the EPA is writing rules to regulate them.
The estimated number of Ohio homes that use wood as the principal heating source rose 27 percent in three years, to 71,711 in 2006, according to the U.S. Census. The estimate for Franklin County varies widely, between 300 and 900 homes.
Clarke installed the $8,000 system last year behind his 140-year-old stately stone-and-brick Hamilton Park house. He said it helped reduce the cost to heat his 5,200-square-foot house from $2,500 a month with a gas furnace to $700 a month, including the delivery of 12 cords of wood over the winter.
The wood boiler, housed in a shed, heats water that is pumped through insulated underground pipes into the house to the existing forced-air furnace. The furnace's fan blows air over the pipes to send heat throughout the ductwork.
Clarke still uses his gas furnace, but he estimated he used the wood furnace 95 percent of the time since last fall.
He wondered how the government could restrict the smoke. "How do you distinguish between this and chimneys?" said Clarke, a 37-year-old information-technology systems engineer.
Waddy, a lawyer who lives and works on Hamilton Park just east of I-71 and is also trying to sell 12 condominiums nearby in a refurbished building, said he's concerned the particulate-filled smoke is harming the community's health.
The proposed state rules are still under review. Officials probably will redraft them because of complaints they are too harsh, Ohio EPA spokeswoman Linda Oros said.
As written, the state would require new units to be at least 200 feet from property lines, essentially banning them from urban areas with small lots.
"Can you imagine one of these stoves in German Village?" Waddy said. It also would require smokestacks to be no less than 5 feet higher than the peak of any roof within 150 feet. That's so smoke can dissipate before anyone breathes it, Oros said.
Clarke's smokestack is about 15 feet tall, which is below the rooflines of the surrounding two-story homes.
The manufacturer's Web site recommends that in densely populated areas the stack height exceed the roofline of surrounding homes.
Ohio would limit emissions to 0.44 pounds of particles per million BTUs of heat, decreasing to 0.32 pounds in 2010. The U.S. EPA has set voluntary standards of 0.60 pounds, which manufacturers are working to meet.
It also would prohibit the use of a boiler from April 15 to Sept. 13 unless it met emission limits.
Copies of the proposed rules can be obtained by calling Carolina Prado at 614-644-2310. Written comments can be mailed to the Division of Air Pollution Control, Ohio EPA, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049.
EPA officials will review the comments, change the proposals if necessary, issue a draft proposal and take more comments, Oros said.
Other states and communities have prohibited or regulated the boilers. Maryland has banned them. And 62 counties, towns or villages in New York have passed restrictions, The New York Times reported. Suffolk County on Long Island in 2006 restricted their use to colder months until 2010, when they will be banned except for natural disasters.
mferenchik@dispatch.com
What's in that Smoke?--New Hampshire Dept of Environmental Services
Sunday, April 20, 2008
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
Website
April 20, 2008
What's In That Smoke?
For many the smell of wood smoke from a fireplace elicits fond memories of hearth and home. There is a lack of awareness, however, that wood smoke has become a major source of air pollution in the United States. Combustion of organic matter such as wood and yard debris releases a variety of harmful substances, including particulates, carcinogens, carbon monoxide, respiratory irritants and toxins. Many people--infants and children, pregnant women, senior citizens, and those suffering from allergies, asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, pneumonia, or other heart or lung diseases--are at risk from the pollution released by wood smoke.
Compounds released during the combustion process interfere with normal lung development and function. Indoor and outdoor air quality can be degraded significantly by the use of poorly designed, non-certified wood stoves. Poor burning processes, lack of maintenance, improper stove installation, and burning wet wood create excessive amounts of pollution. Fires left smoldering to keep a house warm during the night can also be particularly harmful. Smoldering wood burns slower and incompletely, thereby releasing more smoke and gas into the air.
Wood smoke contains tiny particles of creosote, soot, and ash that can remain airborne for up to three weeks. Small particles of solid and liquid matter suspended in the air are called particulate matter, or "PM." PM10 are those particles 10 microns or less in diameter. (In comparison, a human hair is approximately 70 microns in diameter.) PM2.5, or "fine" particulate matter, are those particles 2.5 microns or less in diameter. Inhaling fine PM causes coughing, irritation, and permanent scaring of the lungs. This type of damage decreases lung function, increases the potential for respiratory illness, and may contribute to cancer, heart disease, and changes in DNA, leading to auto-immune diseases. Because of the health threats associated with particulate air pollution, the federal government regulates all particulate matter as one of the six major air pollutants.
Particulate pollution from wood stoves is primarily produced in the winter when stagnant air and temperature inversions limit air movement. At this time smoke is unable to rise and disperse, and this pollution becomes trapped close to the ground in our breathing space. Areas with valleys and poor air circulation can be strongly affected. The small size of these particles allows them to seep into houses through closed doors and windows.
Many of the small particles from wood smoke are too small to be filtered by the nose or upper respiratory system. Therefore, they are able to penetrate deep within the lungs, and they collect in the most remote portions of the lungs called the alveoli, which are tiny air sacs where oxygen enters the blood stream. Due to their ability to evade the defenses of the body, these particles are efficient vehicles for transporting toxic gases, bacteria, and viruses into the lungs, and ultimately the blood stream. Some toxic compounds are cancer-causing and can attach to the smallest smoke particles and enter the lungs at the same time. Particulate matter can clump together, blocking tiny veins as well as invoking harmful structural and chemical changes in the lungs.
A report released by the Washington State Department of Ecology based on research conducted by the University of Washington in Seattle and the EPA in Boise, Idaho, found that indoor PM10 levels from wood smoke in homes without woodstoves can reach 50-70 percent of the outdoor PM levels. The PM released from wood heating can also cause biological mutations (chromosome defects and genetic damage) in cells of the lungs. Mutagens and carcinogens are not exactly the same and not all mutagenic substances cause cancer. Mutations brought about by wood smoke, however, potentially lead to cancer formation. In 1988 an EPA study found that biological mutations in bacteria exposed to winter air samples increased with higher concentrations of fine particulate matter and were most numerous at the times of coldest temperatures, weekends, and holidays when wood stoves were used the most.
The cancer threat from air pollution is another serious public heath concern. In 1985 the EPA started a research program to clarify the sources of air pollution and to estimate their future cancer risk (Washington State Department of Ecology 1997). Their research determined that motor vehicles and wood stoves were the major sources of particulate air pollution and associated cancer risk in the urban airsheds studied. According to the EPA, many of the substances identified in wood smoke are suspected human carcinogens or co-carcinogens. These compounds include many polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), such as benzo(a)pyrene, and various aldehydes, alkenes, and semi-volatile organic compounds.
[For information about the health risks from exposure to air toxics. See EPA's Health Risk Assessment brochure
(see http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/3_90_022.html)]
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas that is also produced when wood is burned. Once in the blood stream, it reduces the ability of blood to carry oxygen to body tissues. Respiratory toxins and irritants, including nitrogen dioxide, are also released during wood combustion. These compounds impair the respiratory system and reduce its ability to fight infection.
Wood Smoke vs. Cigarette Smoke
Although many people associate tobacco smoke with certain health risks, research indicates that second hand wood smoke has potentially even greater ability to damage health. A comparison between tobacco smoke and wood smoke using electron spin resonance revealed quite startling results (Rozenberg 2001, Wood Smoke is More Damaging than Tobacco Smoke). Tobacco smoke causes damage in the body for approximately 30 seconds after it is inhaled. Wood smoke, however, continues to be chemically active and cause damage to cells in the body for up to 20 minutes, or 40 times longer.
Some of the components in wood smoke are free radicals, which steal electrons from the body, leaving cells unstable or injured. Some of these cells may die, while others may be altered and take on different functions. These changes lead to inflammation, which causes stress on the body. EPA researchers suggest that the lifetime cancer risk from wood stove emissions may be 12 times greater than the lifetime cancer risk from exposure to an equal amount of cigarette smoke. (Rozenberg 2001, What's in Wood Smoke and Other Emissions).
What You Can Do
In order to mitigate the negative impacts caused by wood smoke, homeowners should consider converting their wood fireplaces to gas stoves. This type of heating is not only healthier for household members and the community, but it is a more efficient way to heat a home. Wood stoves often draw warm air from a room up the chimney along with smoke, resulting in less heat in a room. Gas stoves, on the other hand, provide a better, more efficient heating effect, with virtually no emissions.
Website
April 20, 2008
What's In That Smoke?
For many the smell of wood smoke from a fireplace elicits fond memories of hearth and home. There is a lack of awareness, however, that wood smoke has become a major source of air pollution in the United States. Combustion of organic matter such as wood and yard debris releases a variety of harmful substances, including particulates, carcinogens, carbon monoxide, respiratory irritants and toxins. Many people--infants and children, pregnant women, senior citizens, and those suffering from allergies, asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, pneumonia, or other heart or lung diseases--are at risk from the pollution released by wood smoke.
Compounds released during the combustion process interfere with normal lung development and function. Indoor and outdoor air quality can be degraded significantly by the use of poorly designed, non-certified wood stoves. Poor burning processes, lack of maintenance, improper stove installation, and burning wet wood create excessive amounts of pollution. Fires left smoldering to keep a house warm during the night can also be particularly harmful. Smoldering wood burns slower and incompletely, thereby releasing more smoke and gas into the air.
Wood smoke contains tiny particles of creosote, soot, and ash that can remain airborne for up to three weeks. Small particles of solid and liquid matter suspended in the air are called particulate matter, or "PM." PM10 are those particles 10 microns or less in diameter. (In comparison, a human hair is approximately 70 microns in diameter.) PM2.5, or "fine" particulate matter, are those particles 2.5 microns or less in diameter. Inhaling fine PM causes coughing, irritation, and permanent scaring of the lungs. This type of damage decreases lung function, increases the potential for respiratory illness, and may contribute to cancer, heart disease, and changes in DNA, leading to auto-immune diseases. Because of the health threats associated with particulate air pollution, the federal government regulates all particulate matter as one of the six major air pollutants.
Particulate pollution from wood stoves is primarily produced in the winter when stagnant air and temperature inversions limit air movement. At this time smoke is unable to rise and disperse, and this pollution becomes trapped close to the ground in our breathing space. Areas with valleys and poor air circulation can be strongly affected. The small size of these particles allows them to seep into houses through closed doors and windows.
Many of the small particles from wood smoke are too small to be filtered by the nose or upper respiratory system. Therefore, they are able to penetrate deep within the lungs, and they collect in the most remote portions of the lungs called the alveoli, which are tiny air sacs where oxygen enters the blood stream. Due to their ability to evade the defenses of the body, these particles are efficient vehicles for transporting toxic gases, bacteria, and viruses into the lungs, and ultimately the blood stream. Some toxic compounds are cancer-causing and can attach to the smallest smoke particles and enter the lungs at the same time. Particulate matter can clump together, blocking tiny veins as well as invoking harmful structural and chemical changes in the lungs.
A report released by the Washington State Department of Ecology based on research conducted by the University of Washington in Seattle and the EPA in Boise, Idaho, found that indoor PM10 levels from wood smoke in homes without woodstoves can reach 50-70 percent of the outdoor PM levels. The PM released from wood heating can also cause biological mutations (chromosome defects and genetic damage) in cells of the lungs. Mutagens and carcinogens are not exactly the same and not all mutagenic substances cause cancer. Mutations brought about by wood smoke, however, potentially lead to cancer formation. In 1988 an EPA study found that biological mutations in bacteria exposed to winter air samples increased with higher concentrations of fine particulate matter and were most numerous at the times of coldest temperatures, weekends, and holidays when wood stoves were used the most.
The cancer threat from air pollution is another serious public heath concern. In 1985 the EPA started a research program to clarify the sources of air pollution and to estimate their future cancer risk (Washington State Department of Ecology 1997). Their research determined that motor vehicles and wood stoves were the major sources of particulate air pollution and associated cancer risk in the urban airsheds studied. According to the EPA, many of the substances identified in wood smoke are suspected human carcinogens or co-carcinogens. These compounds include many polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), such as benzo(a)pyrene, and various aldehydes, alkenes, and semi-volatile organic compounds.
[For information about the health risks from exposure to air toxics. See EPA's Health Risk Assessment brochure
(see http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/3_90_022.html)]
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas that is also produced when wood is burned. Once in the blood stream, it reduces the ability of blood to carry oxygen to body tissues. Respiratory toxins and irritants, including nitrogen dioxide, are also released during wood combustion. These compounds impair the respiratory system and reduce its ability to fight infection.
Wood Smoke vs. Cigarette Smoke
Although many people associate tobacco smoke with certain health risks, research indicates that second hand wood smoke has potentially even greater ability to damage health. A comparison between tobacco smoke and wood smoke using electron spin resonance revealed quite startling results (Rozenberg 2001, Wood Smoke is More Damaging than Tobacco Smoke). Tobacco smoke causes damage in the body for approximately 30 seconds after it is inhaled. Wood smoke, however, continues to be chemically active and cause damage to cells in the body for up to 20 minutes, or 40 times longer.
Some of the components in wood smoke are free radicals, which steal electrons from the body, leaving cells unstable or injured. Some of these cells may die, while others may be altered and take on different functions. These changes lead to inflammation, which causes stress on the body. EPA researchers suggest that the lifetime cancer risk from wood stove emissions may be 12 times greater than the lifetime cancer risk from exposure to an equal amount of cigarette smoke. (Rozenberg 2001, What's in Wood Smoke and Other Emissions).
What You Can Do
In order to mitigate the negative impacts caused by wood smoke, homeowners should consider converting their wood fireplaces to gas stoves. This type of heating is not only healthier for household members and the community, but it is a more efficient way to heat a home. Wood stoves often draw warm air from a room up the chimney along with smoke, resulting in less heat in a room. Gas stoves, on the other hand, provide a better, more efficient heating effect, with virtually no emissions.
The environment demands attention-Letter to Editor
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Letter to the Editor
Fence Post
Daily Herald
Arlington Hts., Illinois
Published April 19, 2008
The environment demands attention
Despite all the recent press about global warming, the environment does not seem a pressing issue as long as we can see blue sky and trees and grass around us.
However, nature's peaceful beauty is deceptive; it masks a series of increasingly serious environmental issues that will likely intrude more and more onto our natural scenes.
Jared Diamond, in his startling book, "Collapse -- How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed," says our shrinking world has 12 types of environmental problems that will increasingly impact all citizens of the world:
1. Rapid destruction of natural habitats, including deforestation.
2. Depletion of fish stocks on a worldwide basis.
3. Extinction of species.
4. Soil erosion.
5. Depletion of fossil fuels.
6. Deterioration of freshwater supplies.
7. Diminished photosynthetic capacity -- sunlight being absorbed by manmade structures rather than absorbed by plants.
8. Toxic chemical build-up.
9. Introduction of alien species into new environments.
10. Release of manmade gases into the environment
11. Population growth.
12. High environmental impact of population in developing countries.
Diamond argues that all these problems are interlinked. We cannot solve just one. We must solve them all. And if we don't, nature will solve them for us -- in a very unpleasant way.
There are many environmental groups already working on these problems, but we desperately need political leadership -- and your involvement.
Jeff Kressmann
Palatine. Illinois
+++
Two Daily Herald blog comments are listed below:
posted by Richard Sustich on Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:32 AM
While many probably don't want to hear this, you are correct Jeff in that we need the personal involvement of every American, nay, every human, to protect our precious planet.
So much of the recent debate appearing in the Daily Herald, particularly on climate change, suggests many of us still believe we somehow stand separate (read "above") from the rest of nature, and that we have a divine imperative that justifies our domination of the planet, rather than our stewardship. Yet, at a more much more instinctual level, we all know that Mr. Diamond is indeed correct.
For my professional part, my focus has been clean and safe water. To that end, the Clean Water America Alliance, a not-for-profit educational institution, was recently created to bring much-needed attention to the coming water crisis in this country, to find innovative and responsible solutions to the issues, and to recognize the outstanding contributions of individuals and organizations in delivering clean water and protecting our water environment. Visit www.cleanwateramerica.org for more information.
Maybe others will join this discussion with opportunities for all to get involved.
+++
posted by Dion F Kendrick on Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:06 AM
The Divine imperative of Man's "dominon" over the earth and all that's in it does not mean "domination". It does mean stewardship. Which means we are charged by our Creator to husband all His gifts; the planet is but one of those gifts.
Not only should we not spoil our "nest" we should also keep holy our societies, our families and life itself. It is the "how" of our husbanding that gives rise to contentious debate and (sometimes) invective behavior.
If the initial orientation is that which flows from the Giver of all gifts the solutions would be easily discernible and readily attainable.
++
Note. The Breathe Healthy Air Coalition is trying its best to help save the environment, our quality of life, and lives.
Fence Post
Daily Herald
Arlington Hts., Illinois
Published April 19, 2008
The environment demands attention
Despite all the recent press about global warming, the environment does not seem a pressing issue as long as we can see blue sky and trees and grass around us.
However, nature's peaceful beauty is deceptive; it masks a series of increasingly serious environmental issues that will likely intrude more and more onto our natural scenes.
Jared Diamond, in his startling book, "Collapse -- How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed," says our shrinking world has 12 types of environmental problems that will increasingly impact all citizens of the world:
1. Rapid destruction of natural habitats, including deforestation.
2. Depletion of fish stocks on a worldwide basis.
3. Extinction of species.
4. Soil erosion.
5. Depletion of fossil fuels.
6. Deterioration of freshwater supplies.
7. Diminished photosynthetic capacity -- sunlight being absorbed by manmade structures rather than absorbed by plants.
8. Toxic chemical build-up.
9. Introduction of alien species into new environments.
10. Release of manmade gases into the environment
11. Population growth.
12. High environmental impact of population in developing countries.
Diamond argues that all these problems are interlinked. We cannot solve just one. We must solve them all. And if we don't, nature will solve them for us -- in a very unpleasant way.
There are many environmental groups already working on these problems, but we desperately need political leadership -- and your involvement.
Jeff Kressmann
Palatine. Illinois
+++
Two Daily Herald blog comments are listed below:
posted by Richard Sustich on Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:32 AM
While many probably don't want to hear this, you are correct Jeff in that we need the personal involvement of every American, nay, every human, to protect our precious planet.
So much of the recent debate appearing in the Daily Herald, particularly on climate change, suggests many of us still believe we somehow stand separate (read "above") from the rest of nature, and that we have a divine imperative that justifies our domination of the planet, rather than our stewardship. Yet, at a more much more instinctual level, we all know that Mr. Diamond is indeed correct.
For my professional part, my focus has been clean and safe water. To that end, the Clean Water America Alliance, a not-for-profit educational institution, was recently created to bring much-needed attention to the coming water crisis in this country, to find innovative and responsible solutions to the issues, and to recognize the outstanding contributions of individuals and organizations in delivering clean water and protecting our water environment. Visit www.cleanwateramerica.org for more information.
Maybe others will join this discussion with opportunities for all to get involved.
+++
posted by Dion F Kendrick on Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:06 AM
The Divine imperative of Man's "dominon" over the earth and all that's in it does not mean "domination". It does mean stewardship. Which means we are charged by our Creator to husband all His gifts; the planet is but one of those gifts.
Not only should we not spoil our "nest" we should also keep holy our societies, our families and life itself. It is the "how" of our husbanding that gives rise to contentious debate and (sometimes) invective behavior.
If the initial orientation is that which flows from the Giver of all gifts the solutions would be easily discernible and readily attainable.
++
Note. The Breathe Healthy Air Coalition is trying its best to help save the environment, our quality of life, and lives.
A'burg neighbours get legal order to stop man's wood burning
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Sarah Sacheli, The Windsor Star
Published: Tuesday, April 15, 2008
A'burg neighbours get legal order to stop man's wood burning
(Also, please read great Blog comments after the story!)
AMHERSTBURG -- Salvatore DeSantis has a barn filled to the rafters with firewood, but an injunction obtained by his neighbours prevents him from burning it at his Amherstburg home.
DeSantis, 73, has a wood-burning stove and a large, brick wood-burning oven in a greenhouse-like addition off the back of his Simcoe Street house. "I enjoy it," he said, referring to his ritual of throwing a log into the stove and taking a nap on the couch nearby.
But the smoke and soot from DeSantis's fires pollute the entire neighbourhood, neighbours complain. Worst affected are Shirley and James Brandie, whose ranch house next door is about nine metres from his chimneys.
Salvatore DeSantis, 73, invited The Star to check out his supply of clean, dry hardwood. DeSantis stores the firewood in a friend's shed close to his home on Simcoe Street. DeSantis's neighbour Shirley Brandie has an injunction preventing him from burning the wood.
Salvatore DeSantis, 73, invited The Star to check out his supply of clean, dry hardwood. DeSantis stores the firewood in a friend's shed close to his home on Simcoe Street. DeSantis's neighbour Shirley Brandie has an injunction preventing him from burning the wood.
In addition to logs and tree limbs, DeSantis was burning pressure-treated lumber, painted wood and composite materials, according to Shirley, who has photos she took over three years showing these materials heaped in DeSantis's backyard. Smoke would pour out of DeSantis's chimneys nearly every day, no matter the season, said Shirley.
"Even with the windows closed, fumes got in," she said. "My eyes were always burning. My throat was always sore. I was dizzy all the time."
When DeSantis ignored their pleas to stop, the Brandies and other neighbours complained to the town, the fire department and the Ontario Ministry of Environment, Shirley said.
DeSantis was made to disconnect some stove pipes and make adjustments to the chimneys, but the burning continued.
The smoke and fumes drove the Brandies from the sprawling ranch they purchased in 2000 as their retirement home. For eight months, they lived at a home vacated by relative who had moved into a nursing home. The Brandies finally hired a lawyer and turned to the courts. In May 2005, they got an injunction from a Superior Court judge that prohibits DeSantis from burning "any wood, waste or other matter leading to the release of smoke."
The injunction is in place until a judge says otherwise.
With the injunction in place, the Brandies were able to return home. The walls, carpeting, fabric blinds and furniture were covered in soot. The ductwork had to be replaced and the mattresses thrown out. The cleanup estimate was $58,000, but James did much of the work himself at a cost of about $30,000.
DeSantis said he doesn't understand his neighbours' complaints. He proudly offers a tour of his property, with a large garden and fruit trees in the backyard. A testament to his thriftiness, he got the materials for his addition as scrap from a greenhouse operation in Leamington and the logs he hopes to someday burn came from acres of woods cleared by a friend building a subdivison.
The greenhouse room helps heat the house, he says, and smells good from the dozens of pots of geraniums he stores there in the winter. The circular brick oven that dominates the space is perfect for roasting meat, he said.
"Where else are you going to find a room like this?"
DeSantis and the Brandies head to civil court in September, when the Brandies will try to get their temporary injunction made permanent.
++++++++++++++++++
Read Blog comments below on this letter---------
Gammj
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 12:55 AM
The injunction seems reasonable to me. Fireplaces and stoves in modern homes shouldn't be burning wood. Burning wood is NOT clean. There's been recent evidence that smoke from wood burning is just as bad, or worse, than inhaling cigarette smoke. It's time to get out of the dark ages and into the modern age. If you want to burn wood, go camping.
Marc & Rose B
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 07:43 AM
We feel sorry for the Brandies and their horrible situation. Mr. DeSantis isn't represented as a very nice man in this article. He seems to be a throw back to the times when there was more space between neighbors. To live so closely to someone and not realize that you are imposing the by-products of your enjoyment onto them and to not listen to their pleas for consideration is more than just being rude or a difficult neighbor. It's against the law. Shame on the police, fire department, bylaw enforcement officers and the ruling factions of the town for not stepping up and doing their jobs. Especially, with the proof being provided to back up their claims. We feel for the Brandies because we live in town and had all the similar circumstances. Dangerous chemically treated woods, paint, plastics, hair and any and all kinds of trash being burned by neighbors that lived less than twenty feet away from our home. Burning fires 24/7 all year long. Even lighting them to burn when they weren't there. The more stink and soot that came our way the more it pleased them. And we too could not get the governing factions of our town to do their jobs. The courts should force the towns politicians, police department, fire department and bylaw enforcement officers to take on the cost of having to take this to court. Impose additional fines for the Brandies suffering through all the time wasted trying to get them to do their jobs. Fine them in addition for wasting the courts time when it has much more important matters to deal with.
D.J.
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 10:55 AM
You should not be able to burn wood or have bon fires in any residential area....clear and simple!!!!! I'm glad this guy was forced to stop.
Marc & Rose B
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 12:59 PM
If you check, we're sure you'll find that many of the bylaws that were broken by Mr. Desantis have been in place and established years ago to protect citizens against selfish neighbours that don't consider other people's rights. We agree with "D.J.", you should not be able to burn wood or have bon fires in any residential area. But if you pay attention to what's being said, the complaint wasn't about an occassional bon fire or burning wood for warmth or food. It was about purposefully forcing your neighbours to breath smoke and chemicals to such a degree as to have damaging effects on their health. We enjoy the smell of fresh air more than the smell of burning wood. Also, the point of who was there first has nothing to do with it. We were here first and it didn't count for beans against our abusive neighbours. Certainly, we haven't seen anyone sqabbling about who's more important when it's tax time. They tax everyone the same, so let them apply the laws equally too. This may just sound like a "bitch" about bad neighbours or "controlling people" to some of you, but be sure; if you find yourself in a similar situation where a neighbour is forcing something on you to the degree of hindering your peace and happiness, you too will complain about it. As loud as need be to get it corrected.
Peter
Thu, Apr 17, 08 at 09:46 AM
Sorry to see that many people are ignorant and brutal in their comments. Wood burning in any sort is responsable for half of the winter smog in many of our cities. More then 20K canadians die prematuraly every year because of this effect. What you burn is what you breath !! Ever heard of climate change ? We are respnsable for that. Stop yelling and act properly and responsibly!
Great Blog comments!!!!!
Published: Tuesday, April 15, 2008
A'burg neighbours get legal order to stop man's wood burning
(Also, please read great Blog comments after the story!)
AMHERSTBURG -- Salvatore DeSantis has a barn filled to the rafters with firewood, but an injunction obtained by his neighbours prevents him from burning it at his Amherstburg home.
DeSantis, 73, has a wood-burning stove and a large, brick wood-burning oven in a greenhouse-like addition off the back of his Simcoe Street house. "I enjoy it," he said, referring to his ritual of throwing a log into the stove and taking a nap on the couch nearby.
But the smoke and soot from DeSantis's fires pollute the entire neighbourhood, neighbours complain. Worst affected are Shirley and James Brandie, whose ranch house next door is about nine metres from his chimneys.
Salvatore DeSantis, 73, invited The Star to check out his supply of clean, dry hardwood. DeSantis stores the firewood in a friend's shed close to his home on Simcoe Street. DeSantis's neighbour Shirley Brandie has an injunction preventing him from burning the wood.
Salvatore DeSantis, 73, invited The Star to check out his supply of clean, dry hardwood. DeSantis stores the firewood in a friend's shed close to his home on Simcoe Street. DeSantis's neighbour Shirley Brandie has an injunction preventing him from burning the wood.
In addition to logs and tree limbs, DeSantis was burning pressure-treated lumber, painted wood and composite materials, according to Shirley, who has photos she took over three years showing these materials heaped in DeSantis's backyard. Smoke would pour out of DeSantis's chimneys nearly every day, no matter the season, said Shirley.
"Even with the windows closed, fumes got in," she said. "My eyes were always burning. My throat was always sore. I was dizzy all the time."
When DeSantis ignored their pleas to stop, the Brandies and other neighbours complained to the town, the fire department and the Ontario Ministry of Environment, Shirley said.
DeSantis was made to disconnect some stove pipes and make adjustments to the chimneys, but the burning continued.
The smoke and fumes drove the Brandies from the sprawling ranch they purchased in 2000 as their retirement home. For eight months, they lived at a home vacated by relative who had moved into a nursing home. The Brandies finally hired a lawyer and turned to the courts. In May 2005, they got an injunction from a Superior Court judge that prohibits DeSantis from burning "any wood, waste or other matter leading to the release of smoke."
The injunction is in place until a judge says otherwise.
With the injunction in place, the Brandies were able to return home. The walls, carpeting, fabric blinds and furniture were covered in soot. The ductwork had to be replaced and the mattresses thrown out. The cleanup estimate was $58,000, but James did much of the work himself at a cost of about $30,000.
DeSantis said he doesn't understand his neighbours' complaints. He proudly offers a tour of his property, with a large garden and fruit trees in the backyard. A testament to his thriftiness, he got the materials for his addition as scrap from a greenhouse operation in Leamington and the logs he hopes to someday burn came from acres of woods cleared by a friend building a subdivison.
The greenhouse room helps heat the house, he says, and smells good from the dozens of pots of geraniums he stores there in the winter. The circular brick oven that dominates the space is perfect for roasting meat, he said.
"Where else are you going to find a room like this?"
DeSantis and the Brandies head to civil court in September, when the Brandies will try to get their temporary injunction made permanent.
++++++++++++++++++
Read Blog comments below on this letter---------
Gammj
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 12:55 AM
The injunction seems reasonable to me. Fireplaces and stoves in modern homes shouldn't be burning wood. Burning wood is NOT clean. There's been recent evidence that smoke from wood burning is just as bad, or worse, than inhaling cigarette smoke. It's time to get out of the dark ages and into the modern age. If you want to burn wood, go camping.
Marc & Rose B
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 07:43 AM
We feel sorry for the Brandies and their horrible situation. Mr. DeSantis isn't represented as a very nice man in this article. He seems to be a throw back to the times when there was more space between neighbors. To live so closely to someone and not realize that you are imposing the by-products of your enjoyment onto them and to not listen to their pleas for consideration is more than just being rude or a difficult neighbor. It's against the law. Shame on the police, fire department, bylaw enforcement officers and the ruling factions of the town for not stepping up and doing their jobs. Especially, with the proof being provided to back up their claims. We feel for the Brandies because we live in town and had all the similar circumstances. Dangerous chemically treated woods, paint, plastics, hair and any and all kinds of trash being burned by neighbors that lived less than twenty feet away from our home. Burning fires 24/7 all year long. Even lighting them to burn when they weren't there. The more stink and soot that came our way the more it pleased them. And we too could not get the governing factions of our town to do their jobs. The courts should force the towns politicians, police department, fire department and bylaw enforcement officers to take on the cost of having to take this to court. Impose additional fines for the Brandies suffering through all the time wasted trying to get them to do their jobs. Fine them in addition for wasting the courts time when it has much more important matters to deal with.
D.J.
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 10:55 AM
You should not be able to burn wood or have bon fires in any residential area....clear and simple!!!!! I'm glad this guy was forced to stop.
Marc & Rose B
Wed, Apr 16, 08 at 12:59 PM
If you check, we're sure you'll find that many of the bylaws that were broken by Mr. Desantis have been in place and established years ago to protect citizens against selfish neighbours that don't consider other people's rights. We agree with "D.J.", you should not be able to burn wood or have bon fires in any residential area. But if you pay attention to what's being said, the complaint wasn't about an occassional bon fire or burning wood for warmth or food. It was about purposefully forcing your neighbours to breath smoke and chemicals to such a degree as to have damaging effects on their health. We enjoy the smell of fresh air more than the smell of burning wood. Also, the point of who was there first has nothing to do with it. We were here first and it didn't count for beans against our abusive neighbours. Certainly, we haven't seen anyone sqabbling about who's more important when it's tax time. They tax everyone the same, so let them apply the laws equally too. This may just sound like a "bitch" about bad neighbours or "controlling people" to some of you, but be sure; if you find yourself in a similar situation where a neighbour is forcing something on you to the degree of hindering your peace and happiness, you too will complain about it. As loud as need be to get it corrected.
Peter
Thu, Apr 17, 08 at 09:46 AM
Sorry to see that many people are ignorant and brutal in their comments. Wood burning in any sort is responsable for half of the winter smog in many of our cities. More then 20K canadians die prematuraly every year because of this effect. What you burn is what you breath !! Ever heard of climate change ? We are respnsable for that. Stop yelling and act properly and responsibly!
Great Blog comments!!!!!
Fireplace smoke infringes on others-Letter to the Editor
Fence Post
Letter to the Editor
Daily Herald Newspaper
Arlington Heights, Illinois
Published-April 16, 2008
Fireplace smoke infringes on others
Vicky Hilden of Arlington Heights writes and says she believes burning wood in her fireplace is her right as part of her pursuit of liberty.
I was a child when I first heard the phrase "The liberty to swing one's arm ends where the other fellow's nose begins."
I haven't heard a clearer, simpler explanation of liberty since that day. I wonder which part of "Your stench is in my house" Ms. Hilden doesn't understand.
Art Dulan
Palatine, Illinois
Letter to the Editor
Daily Herald Newspaper
Arlington Heights, Illinois
Published-April 16, 2008
Fireplace smoke infringes on others
Vicky Hilden of Arlington Heights writes and says she believes burning wood in her fireplace is her right as part of her pursuit of liberty.
I was a child when I first heard the phrase "The liberty to swing one's arm ends where the other fellow's nose begins."
I haven't heard a clearer, simpler explanation of liberty since that day. I wonder which part of "Your stench is in my house" Ms. Hilden doesn't understand.
Art Dulan
Palatine, Illinois
An American Dream Goes Up in Smoke-article
Friday, April 4, 2008
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Illinois Sierra Club Newsletter
An American Dream Goes Up in Smoke
by Barbara Vrchota
Joel Laws has a problem. "My wife and I are a recently newly married couple and moved into our first home together in December of 2005. If you can, for a second, try to remember when you and your significant other first started out in the adult world. Imagine starting a chapter in your life of starting a family, moving into a new home and looking forward toward your future together."
"Now imagine having all that taken from you. This was our case, as we have had our clean air and enjoyment of our property taken from us without a choice. Additionally, we have been told by our community leaders and our state and federal public administrators that we don’t have a legitimate complaint for our clean air. This is what has happened to us by our neighbors’ actions by installing an Outdoor Wood Boiler."
What is an Outdoor Wood Boiler (OWB). According to Central Boiler and Outdoor Boilers of Michigan’s web page, it is an efficient way to provide your home with all your heating needs. A homeowner can eliminate problems indoors caused by the standard indoor wood stove. There is no more tending to the stove, or fire hazards. Outdoorwoodfurnace.com claims in its ad that it can lower utility bills, and heat water heaters, spas, pools, and garages.
Here’s another burning question. Is it an eyesore? Does it take up a lot of yard space? Surfing sites such as www.centralboilers.com, you’ll find photos of these heat sources, which resemble small aluminum or wood sheds.
It doesn’t sound too bad, does it? Well, shortly after Joel and Melissa moved into their home in Albers, IL, a neighbor installed an outdoor wood boiler. Soon came the smoke and soot. Joel says it killed the bushes around the house and turned their white-sided home yellow. Next, constant sore throats, coughing and headaches started. The only way to relieve the symptoms was to leave the house. They were sick of being sick, says Joel.
Sounds nightmarish, but it only gets worse. When Joel contacted his local municipality, he was told he has no complaint. He can’t do a thing to protect the air he and Melissa breathe in or around their house. Joel says, "I have become passionate about my freedom for clean air. I had this circumstance brought upon my wife and I without choice. I am looking for support in any way possible."
After the holidays, Joel and Melissa decided to move from their home. Their American dream has, unfortunately, gone up in smoke.
There is some good news in of all this. Joel and Melissa have created a web page on myspace to educate the public and hopefully make a change. "I want the state to at minimum require people to fall under what the U.S. EPA standards are for these things. Not within 100 feet of someone’s home, not be used as a primary heat source, and burn dry seasoned wood. If my neighbor did any of the above items, we may still be able to live in our home." Joel says.
Joel Laws is now the Central States Regions Director for the Clean Air Revival Now, a non-profit group in California. Learn more about OWBs at www.burningissues.com or myspace.com80/freedomofair.
This article was featured in the Illinois Chapter of the Sierra Club’s newsletter, Lake and Prairie, cited below:
Vrchota, Barbara. (2008). An American dream goes up in smoke. Lake and Prairie, 49(2), 34.
Note: The author accidentally cited the websites incorrectly in the final paragraph. They should read http://burningissues.org and www.myspace.com/freedomofair
Illinois Sierra Club Newsletter
An American Dream Goes Up in Smoke
by Barbara Vrchota
Joel Laws has a problem. "My wife and I are a recently newly married couple and moved into our first home together in December of 2005. If you can, for a second, try to remember when you and your significant other first started out in the adult world. Imagine starting a chapter in your life of starting a family, moving into a new home and looking forward toward your future together."
"Now imagine having all that taken from you. This was our case, as we have had our clean air and enjoyment of our property taken from us without a choice. Additionally, we have been told by our community leaders and our state and federal public administrators that we don’t have a legitimate complaint for our clean air. This is what has happened to us by our neighbors’ actions by installing an Outdoor Wood Boiler."
What is an Outdoor Wood Boiler (OWB). According to Central Boiler and Outdoor Boilers of Michigan’s web page, it is an efficient way to provide your home with all your heating needs. A homeowner can eliminate problems indoors caused by the standard indoor wood stove. There is no more tending to the stove, or fire hazards. Outdoorwoodfurnace.com claims in its ad that it can lower utility bills, and heat water heaters, spas, pools, and garages.
Here’s another burning question. Is it an eyesore? Does it take up a lot of yard space? Surfing sites such as www.centralboilers.com, you’ll find photos of these heat sources, which resemble small aluminum or wood sheds.
It doesn’t sound too bad, does it? Well, shortly after Joel and Melissa moved into their home in Albers, IL, a neighbor installed an outdoor wood boiler. Soon came the smoke and soot. Joel says it killed the bushes around the house and turned their white-sided home yellow. Next, constant sore throats, coughing and headaches started. The only way to relieve the symptoms was to leave the house. They were sick of being sick, says Joel.
Sounds nightmarish, but it only gets worse. When Joel contacted his local municipality, he was told he has no complaint. He can’t do a thing to protect the air he and Melissa breathe in or around their house. Joel says, "I have become passionate about my freedom for clean air. I had this circumstance brought upon my wife and I without choice. I am looking for support in any way possible."
After the holidays, Joel and Melissa decided to move from their home. Their American dream has, unfortunately, gone up in smoke.
There is some good news in of all this. Joel and Melissa have created a web page on myspace to educate the public and hopefully make a change. "I want the state to at minimum require people to fall under what the U.S. EPA standards are for these things. Not within 100 feet of someone’s home, not be used as a primary heat source, and burn dry seasoned wood. If my neighbor did any of the above items, we may still be able to live in our home." Joel says.
Joel Laws is now the Central States Regions Director for the Clean Air Revival Now, a non-profit group in California. Learn more about OWBs at www.burningissues.com or myspace.com80/freedomofair.
This article was featured in the Illinois Chapter of the Sierra Club’s newsletter, Lake and Prairie, cited below:
Vrchota, Barbara. (2008). An American dream goes up in smoke. Lake and Prairie, 49(2), 34.
Note: The author accidentally cited the websites incorrectly in the final paragraph. They should read http://burningissues.org and www.myspace.com/freedomofair
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)