The Wood Smoke Activist Network

The Wood Smoke Activist Network
June 2011 Newsletter
Educating the world about the health and climate impacts of wood smoke and combustion aerosols.
Editor: Shirley Brandie
Ontario Director of Canadian Clean Air Alliance http://canadiancleanairalliance.ca

Web site: http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net

Co-editor: Julie Mellum
Web site: Take Back the Air

Mission Statement
Our mission is to educate public officials, government and all citizens about wood smoke as a major form of hazardous air pollution that affects our health, use of our property, water, crops, livestock, the environment and climate change. We urge citizens everywhere to press for legislative changes to call wood smoke a public nuisance under state health codes and to ban all wood burning.”

Welcome!
We hope that this newsletter will give you the information and inspiration you need. Regain clean air to breathe and eliminate the wood burning that is affecting your health and your home environment. (http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net)

Please pass this issue on to others in need of help and suggest that they send an email to s.brandie@sympatico.ca to be added to the mailing list.


Webmaster----Check out this great organization for help, advice, and information on how to ban/end deadly woodsmoke in your community. You can also receive (via e-mail) a free monthly newsletter filled with great facts, successes, and assistance.

http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net
s.brandie@sympatico.ca

Letter to Member of Parliament-Canada

April 2nd, 2011

Mr. Guy Lauzon
Member of Parliament
621 Pitt Street
Cornwall, Ontario
K6J 3R8

Dear Mr. Lauzon,

Today, Saturday, you were campaigning in the neighbourhood where I live. You came by our house and asked for our support and also permission to place a campaign sign on our front lawn. I said no to the sign.

The reasons I declined your request are as follows:

Woodsmoke is a public and private nuisance that continues to harm our residential neighbourhood. You have not, and are not, addressing this very serious concern.

You have taken absolutely no pro-active action in the previous two years to assist the Air Is Precious Coalition in prohibiting Woodsmoke and Woodburning in the community via a by-law and regulations.

Fire pits, and all Woodburning devices, continue to saturate our neighbourhood air doing grave harm to our health and our quality of life. You have taken no action to support ending this air pollution.

Many city residents are suffering, becoming ill and dying from Woodsmoke-related diseases. You have done nothing to assist ill and suffering residents who are subjected to endless hours breathing Woodsmoke.

Since you have shown no concern, regard, compassion or support and no hope of future support, I see no need to support you by way of placing a sign on my property. Unless you publicly support before the election, action to end Woodburning, my husband and my vote will not be cast for you and other members of your political party. Other members of the Air Is Precious Coalition will also join me in not voting for you.

Woodsmoke must be addressed and supported by each community leader and by all elected officials and parties. Sadly, that has not happened. This is not my opinion. This opinion is echoed by many residents who suffer in Cornwall from Woodsmoke Pollution.

It is deeply disappointing and deplorable to think that our leaders have pathetically failed their fiduciary duty to protect us from harm, yet expect us to offer them support!

Woodsmoke must be given the same respect and laws that are rightfully given to Tobacco smoking. Tobacco smoke is a Public Health issue. Woodsmoke is also a Public Health issue. Woodsmoke is even worse for our health than tobacco smoke.

Any form of Woodburning from all Woodburning devices in Cornwall that pollutes our air, make us ill, destroys our environment and does grave harm to our quality of life is not acceptable. Woodburning in urban areas such as Cornwall, and all residential areas in our Nation where our homes are in such close proximity is unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted.

The goal of the Air Is Precious Coalition is to see that every Canadian Citizen has the right and common decency to breathe healthy air—woodsmoke-free. You have not and are not supporting this issue.

We are very disappointed. You and your political party have failed us on this issue. I am saddened that you may be remembered by many in our community as the Member of Parliament who remained silent, apathetic and uncaring regarding Woodsmoke Pollution in Cornwall.

The end of Woodsmoke and outdoor open air burning needed your support Mr. Lauzon. We need Province-wide by-laws adopted to ban Woodsmoke Pollution. By doing so would have saved the health and lives of millions, just as prohibiting Tobacco smoke did. But, sadly it was not on your agenda as the priority issue it should have been. You offered us nothing in support.

My sincere hope is that you Mr. Lauzon and your family members never are made ill by Woodsmoke or made to endure the suffering that so many sick and ill city residents are presently coping with and have been for years.

You will find enclosed a letter regarding The Black Rose, which has been adopted as the International Symbol of Woodsmoke Pollution. Please take time to read it.

You, along with many other leaders are most deserving of this Black Rose that will explain in detail the suffering caused by Woodsmoke Pollution. The Black Rose can be placed in water and will live for a while. We, the Victims of Woodsmoke Pollution sadly may not have a long life expectancy due to the deadly, noxious, poisonous, toxic air we are subjected to breathe each day.

We who suffer from residential Woodsmoke Pollution in Cornwall have lost our belief in the political process that was supposed to represent each Canadian and be there for us. We, sadly, lost our belief when your support was not to be found..

But, I leave the door open to see if you will walk through it with us and support an end to Woodburning in our community. Will you join us or wait outside in the Woodsmoke?

Sincerely,

Linda Baker Beaudin
Founder, Air Is Precious
Cornwall, Ontario, Canada


Note...A Black Rose was delivered to Mr. Guy Lauzon's office on April 5, 2011.


Webmaster...The above is a copy of a letter delivered to a Member of Parliament-Canada. The frustration from this writer due to the apathy by this elected official (and other elected officials) is very sad. Let's hope action is taken soon to end woodsmoke emissions in Cornwall, and all other Canadian cities.

Wood Burning--Major source of black carbon soot

Wood-Burning Is Another Cause Of Pollution
Letter to the Editor

The March 30 front page article, "Air pollution down sharply," brought good tidings that industrial pollution has plunged to lower levels. That is great news for asthmatics, the environment and for community health and livability.

Yet for every industrial smokestack that is shut down by the flailing economy, residential pollution seems sharply on the rise.

Recreational wood-burning and the proliferation of restaurant wood grills are blanketing our city streets, parks and neighborhoods with the caustic fumes of wood smoke more than ever before.

Isn't it time that restaurants and residents also help control air pollution by not burning wood for food and for fun? Our health and our planet cannot sustain these behaviors. We must spread the word that wood smoke is a major source of black carbon soot.

It is far more concentrated than tobacco smoke, while containing legions of the same toxins. It travels farther and remains chemically active in the body up to 40 hours longer.

Wood smoke that drifts onto the property of others deprives them of using and enjoying their own property. Please don't burn.

Julie Mellum, Boca Raton

Source:
Sun Sentinel (Florida)
April 2, 2011

Where there's smoke, there's trouble

Where there's smoke, there's trouble

Excerpted from: Burlington County Times February 13, 2011
By: JO CIAVAGLIA

Where there is wood smoke, there is fire - as well as invisible toxins you could be inhaling.

A little soot exposure probably isn't harmful to most people, pulmonologists say, but a new Danish-led study suggests regular exposure could damage DNA.
Local doctors call the findings interesting, though the implications in the United States are unclear since wood-burning stoves and fireplaces are generally used only a few months of the year.

Short-term health effects of wood-smoke particles on people with airway problems are well-known, the doctors said, as are other potential health hazards such as carbon-monoxide gas buildup, which is also invisible and dangerous.

A decade ago, Dr. Ira Horowitz, a pulmonologist with Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center in Camden, treated six patients whose respiratory illness was triggered by a major forest fire in Florida. A few drove through the area where the fire occurred, but others were bothered when winds carried the smoke hundreds of miles into South Jersey, Horowitz said.

"There is clearly a hazard with this," said Dr. Sandeep Dhand, chief pulmonologist at Holy Redeemer Medical Center in Abington, Pa. "It's a problem all around."
Wood-smoke particles are the fine powder containing mostly carbon, left after wood is burned.

Long-term exposure increases the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to equal that of a cigarette smoker, Dhand said. Recent medical literature has found that smoke from burning solid fuels like wood worsens respiratory diseases.
But since fireplaces and wood-burning stoves are used mostly during the fall and winter in most parts of the U.S., Dhand said wood-smoke particle exposure is more limited so it likely presents a lower lung cancer risk.

But some doctors said the latest study appearing last week in the American Chemical Society's journal, Chemical Research in Toxicology, raises new questions about potential long-term exposure. The study found the particles may cause negative health effects.

Considerable scientific evidence has linked inhaling fine particles of air pollution from car exhausts and coal-fired electric power plants and other sources to respiratory problems, cancer and heart disease, but little information exists about the same fine particles associated with burning wood.

In the study, scientists analyzed and compared airborne wood-smoke particles from the center of a Denmark village, where most residents used wood stoves, with a neighboring rural area with few wood stoves, as well as to pure wood-smoke particles collected from a wood stove.

Airborne particles in the village and pure wood-smoke particles tended to be the most potentially dangerous size - small enough to be inhaled into the deepest part of the lungs, where they could cause disease. Scientists also showed that the tiny particles damaged DNA when tested on human cells.

The scientists further found that wood-smoke particle matter contained higher levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which include "probable" human carcinogens. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are chemicals formed during the incomplete burning of coal, oil, gas, wood, garbage or other substances, such as tobacco and charbroiled meat.

The wood-smoke particles were found to be as harmful as the small particles created by car exhaust and coal-burning plants, the study found.
About half of the world uses solid biomass fuels such as wood and coal for indoor heating and cooking. A number of studies have associated indoor solid fuel combustion with health problems, including low infant birth weight, and lung and eye problems in adults.

The American Lung Association warns that burning wood emits harmful toxins, such as dioxin, arsenic and formaldehyde, and fine particulates into the air that can worsen breathing problems and lead to heart and lung disease.

In 2008, the lung organization recommended replacing wood stoves manufactured before 1995 with ones certified by the Environmental Protection Agency that meet stricter emission standards. Modern wood stoves also burn off less particulate matter than older stoves.

The newspaper was unsuccessful in reaching a representative with the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, the North American trade group for manufacturers, distributors and specialty retailers of all types of hearth appliances, fuels and accessories, including stoves and fireplace inserts.

But statistics on the group's website show a steady and, in some cases, dramatic decline in popularity of wood-burning equipment in the United States.
Shipments of fireplaces, free-standing wood stoves and inserts declined about 30 percent from a high of 795,767 in 1999 to 235,647 in 2009. Pellet stove and insert shipments showed a pattern of dramatic one-year increases and decreases over the last decade, but most recently experienced a 67 percent decrease between 2008 and 2009.

Air quality indoors can be worse than outdoors in the winter since people spend more time inside. Homes tend to be sealed up and, over time, pollutants can become concentrated, said Dr. Chris Christensen, a pulmonologist at Abington Memorial Hospital in Pennsylvania. "Those conditions, where the airways are irritable on a good day, are made worse when it's indoors," Christensen said. "The idea that these could potentially be carcinogenic is something we never thought of being an issue. It's fascinating."

Currently there is no way to test for the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in wood-smoke particulate, so "it's a risk hanging out there," Christensen said. The potential long-term effects of hydrocarbons in wood-smoke particulate could possibly be the next asbestos situation, where the harmful health effects of exposure don't appear until decades later, Christensen said.
"I'm glad they are bringing attention to it," he added.


Source: The Wood Smoke Activist Network
April 2011 Newsletter
Web site: http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net

City has responsibility to protect residents

City has responsibility to protect residents

Letter to the Editor

Sunday, 23 January 2011
Lethbridge Herald


Regarding the Jan. 16 letter, "Base wood smoke argument on local numbers" as with issues like second-hand tobacco smoke and food allergies, perhaps Mr. Forster might consider, with some compassion, people who are at risk.

Wood burning does present a threat to the environment and public health, and wood smoke impacts individuals nearby directly, as smoking does in public spaces. Information on the health effects of wood smoke is available from the Lung Association, the Washington State Dept. of Ecology, and similar authorities.

From the first time I heard my daughter coughing late at night because of a wood fire pit, I knew that should not be part of urban life. My children have each had allergic reactions triggered by neighbourhood smoke, and last winter it gave them burning eyes, irritated, stuffy sinuses, frequent sore throats and coughs and me, a pained chest and terrible, chronic cough. Sometimes two or more neighbourhood chimneys were smoking at once.

We've so appreciated how much better neighbourhood air has been this winter. But on this Monday morning (Jan. 17), we awoke to find smoke blowing in through our registers.

In response to my Nov. 11 letter, a resident phoned to tell me about smoke in their neighbourhood, and said at that time that informing the city had not helped.
No one should ever be forced to breathe neighbourhood wood smoke: not one adult, young or elderly; not one vulnerable growing child. I believe that locally this is not an issue of numbers or of lengthy data collection, but of the city's responsibility to protect residents from harm.

Wood smoke contains harmful compounds and gases, and large amounts of particulate matter. The fine particles cannot be kept outside. Once inhaled, they penetrate deeply into the lungs, where they can injure cells, worsen heart or breathing problems, and may cause permanent damage to lungs. Those are not opinions; they are documented facts.

Cities already have enough pollution, and less-polluting alternatives to wood fires are available. I sincerely hope there is at least one present or future city council member who would advocate protecting clean air, by helping Lethbridge to become wood-smoke free.

Cathy Baiton
Lethbridge


Source:
Lethbridge Herald
Alberta, Canada
Sunday, 23 January 2011


Webmaster: Yes. A by-law to prohibit/ban all wood burning is needed...and soon.

Grief of Time Lost----Poem----Anonymous

Grief of Time Lost

Heavy hearted and filled with toxic Woodsmoke

The small weakened child began to choke

The days grew long and the sky was grey

The weakened child could not play

He watched from inside looking out

He could not call, he could not shout

His lungs were filled with the heavy smoke

His lungs were filled as he began to choke

The darkened sky and the Mothers tears

Confirmed the worst of any Mothers fears

Her child was dying from smothering smoke

Her child had suffered from deadly Woodsmoke

It filled all the cities and it filled all the towns

It filled all the rooms and amused all the clowns

Who doubted and laughed and mocked and denied

The horror, the sorrow of all the sad cries

That echoed so deeply from mountain to vale

That left all the people dead in its trail

Of the deadly dark plumes and the toxins that filled

All the suffering and sorrow and all those it killed

Grief of time lost never again to be found

Not in life, not in death, not in tears, and not on the mound

Of the child that was buried on the sorrow filled day

Oh the child, sweet child that died in that May

And the trees bowed in reverence to pay their respect

For the child that died from the leaders neglect

But the Woodsmoke continued to cover the towns

The Woodsmoke brought death and sorrow and frowns

More children were buried and more parents did weep

They mourned in the daytime and they mourned in their sleep

But the Woodsmoke continued and the clowns they did dance

Till the Reverend came forth from his home in the Manse

And pleaded with leaders to end all the hell

So children could laugh and so children could yell

So children could play and love and live life

Free of suffering from Woodsmoke and all the strife

Oh think of the children and his eyes filled with tears

And he raged with anger and his soul filled with fear

If you do not stop this and end all of this smoke

More children will die and more children will choke

The clowns hung their heads and considered his thought

But we want the money and we can be bought

For a price and a slice of the cake or the pie

Then they turned their backs and avoided his eyes

And the raven stood silent and bluebird did weep

No Robin called and no sweet sparrow cheeped.

The rain fell from the sky like a soul in despair

And the Reverend was saddened by the smoke in the air

That had killed all the children and taken their life

While the clowns neglected Father, Child and wife

And the silence was deafening without the bird call

No children did skip, or play with a ball

Their bodies were weakened and filled with such pain

While the clowns counted money and added their gains

Oh the sorrow and grief of time lost now becomes clear

That life has no value to the clowns and their peers

The greed filled their pockets and their laugher was heard

No sorrow, no sadness, no repentance or word

And the tall willows did weep and the wings did not flutter

No joy filled the hearts and no sweet songs were uttered

The birds flocked at the graves and bowed their sweet heads

To honor the living but pay respect to the dead

The world became silent without the sound of birdcall

The world became silent as each child did fall

To their death from the Woodsmoke and such sad neglect

No sorrow, no protection and not even respect

But in time the clowns toppled each one by one

And the gains they had made were burned by the sun

The fires that raged all out of control, no trees could be found

No birds and no souls

The greed and the sorrow and grief of time lost

All mankind did pay and oh what a cost.

Anonymous


Webmaster...The writer of the above sincere, caring, and oh so true poem wishes to remain anonymous. We thank the writer for this heartfelt and beautiful poem.

Elected officials and leaders in our towns and communities need to adopt laws to ban woodsmoke to save our children, and ourself too. We also should speak-up and take action to end the horror and death caused by woodsmoke where we live. If not, the legacy we leave will be that we let others harm and kill our children, and we did nothing. Is that the legacy you want? Don't be passive about ending woodsmoke. If we do nothing, as the poem above says...."All mankind did pay and oh what a cost".......our children!

Outdoor wood-burning stoves are unhealthy to public

Outdoor wood-burning stoves are unhealthy to public

By By NANCY ALDERMAN
Norwich Bulletin

Posted Jan 12, 2011

Although New York has tried to get outdoor wood furnaces under control, its new regulations will not protect people who live in the vicinity of one.

The newer phase II units have not gone through field testing, and only the industry is claiming that they burn 90 percent cleaner. Environment and Human Health Inc., a nonprofit organization that receives no funding from business or corporations, has monitored the inside air of homes near outdoor wood furnaces and found that homes as far away as 850 feet have wood smoke levels way above Environmental Protection Agency standards.

So far, only Washington state has banned outdoor wood furnaces. It’s now time for other states, such as Connecticut, to follow. If people’s health and property values are to be protected, then a ban must be enacted.

The Farm Bureau fights regulations in every state so farmers can save a few thousand dollars on heating bills. But neighbors lose the entire value of their homes and their health. Outdoor wood furnaces emit as much smoke as 22 indoor wood stoves. Outdoor wood furnaces are not certified by EPA. Indoor wood stoves are.

New York’s new regulations require that units be 90 percent cleaner, but that does not apply to those already in existence. So, 90 percent clearner than what?

The industry claims phase II units are 90 percent cleaner than the old ones, but these newer units have never been tested in the field and people living near them say they’re almost as polluting as the old ones. The technology is the same — and it’s flawed.

Exposures of two hours or more — peak exposure — is enough to cause serious health effects. The 90-percent-cleaner claim is based on a 24-hour average, not peak exposure, which causes the greatest harm. The industry’s 90-percent-cleaner claim will not bring those peak exposures down to levels that will protect health or home values.

Not enough

New York requires only a 100-foot setback. Smoke from these furnaces, whether new or old, forms in a plume up to 1,000 feet — and sometimes a half mile. One hundred feet will in no way protect neighbors.

New York established stack-height requirements, but it doesn’t matter how high because the wood smoke that comes out of the stack falls toward the ground.

New York mandates “only good wood” can be used. Burning even the best and driest wood in the world will still give off toxic emissions. This is like saying when you smoke a cigarette, be sure to use “only good, dry and clean tobacco” as if that would keep the cigarette smoke from being toxic.

When an agency tries to regulate a product that is harmful, the agency often tries to please both the industry and the public. When this happens, too often, the public good is sacrificed.

These devices do not lend themselves to regulation. They must be banned until better technologies are found — and they have not yet been found.


Nancy Alderman is president of Environment and Human Health Inc. in North Haven.
Copyright 2011 Norwich Bulletin. Some rights reserved

Clean Air: Just What the Dr. Ordered

Clean Air: Just What the Dr. Ordered
What is the U.S government doing to stop air pollution?

Post by Woodnyet » Fri Dec 10, 2010
Source: BurningIssues.org


Public health and medical organizations are urging Congress to support the experts at the US Environmental Protection Agency who are working to update the safeguards that protect public health from pollution, and to resist pressure from polluters trying to stop them.

Visit NRDCs Switchboard BlogA letter signed by the American Lung Association, the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and nearly 300 other organizations outlined that while the EPA has been successful at protecting Americans' health, there is more to do:

Forty years ago, Congressional leaders from both parties wrote and passed the Clean Air Act. This law directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to protect public health and the environment. Since then this wise congressional legacy has saved lives and improved the quality of life for millions of Americans.

But the job is not yet done. Far too many of our communities still suffer from poor air quality. Too many families, particularly those of lower income, face the impacts of toxic air pollution every day. And far too many of our nation’s children, elderly, and people with asthma, cardiovascular and lung diseases and diabetes live under added threats to their health from breathing polluted air and the impacts of global warming.

And continues:

Over the coming years the EPA will be fulfilling its duty to reduce the smog and soot pollution, air toxics, and global warming pollution that are the cause of these public health threats. We urge you to fully support the EPA in fulfilling this responsibility. Doing so is quite literally a matter of life and death for tens of thousands of people and will mean the difference between chronic debilitating illness or a healthy life for hundreds of thousands more.

The groups also rolled out a new ad campaign for hill publications, reinforcing the central message of the letter. You can see the ad here. The pressure from health groups is in response to polluter efforts to halt creation of new air pollution safeguards.

As Charles D. Connor, President and CEO of the American Lung Association said, “We urge members of Congress to reject the pleas from polluters and continue to support the Act and the EPA’s ability to protect the air we breathe.”

Now, what exactly are the polluters trying to do? Persuade Congress that this is all just expensive, pointless rule-making that will cost the government money and kill jobs. The Edison Electric Institute has been presenting the new safeguards as a complicated and frightening parade of regulatory over-reach; but the World Resources Institute blew that to pieces with a powerful analysis that you can find here.

And the US Chamber of Commerce went the way of kindergartners with a knock-off of the game Candyland to show how awful protecting public health would be for business. And I've blogged on some of the other efforts by polluters to hold back the EPA.

Fortunately, our nation’s leading health organizations are reminding us what's at stake. As Cynthia Bearer, MD, PhD, Board Chair of the Children's Environmental Health Network says

"Children are especially vulnerable to harm from polluted air. Air pollutants have been linked to asthma attacks, infant mortality, and even DNA damage to the fetus. Dirty air can be, quite literally, a killer."

What's the bottom line? As O. Marion Burton, MD, FAAP and president of the American Academy of Pediatrics put it,

"There is a compelling need to move forward, not back, on efforts to ensure clean air for all."

There you have it, Congress: Uphold the Clean Air Act. Doctors' orders.

source
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pete-altm ... 94168.html
The Surgeon General has determined that there is no safe level of ambient smoke.

If you smell even a subtle odor of smoke, you are being exposed to poisonous and carcinogenic compounds.

Join us in the fight for smoke-free neighborhoods. Your family's health and safety are at stake!


Source: BurningIssues.org
http://burningissues.org/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=4019#p9983

Webmaster: Readers----Please go to the BurningIssues website for more information. This website is great.

Let's ban all woodsmoke!

Press Release Source: Environment and Human Health, Inc.

Press Release Source: Environment and Human Health, Inc.
Monday October 25, 2010, 12:00 pm EDT


WOODBRIDGE, Conn., Oct. 25, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Environment and Human Health, Inc.'s (EHHI) newly released report, The Dangers from Outdoor Wood Furnaces, shows that current regulations for outdoor wood furnaces (OWFs) are not sufficient to protect human health.

Wood smoke contains many of the same toxic compounds that are found in cigarette smoke. Just a few of them include benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene, all three of which are carcinogenic.

Currently, some states have OWF "set-back" regulations of 100 feet, others have "set-backs" of 200 feet and some states have no regulations at all.

EHHI measured two particle sizes found by EPA to be contained in wood smoke and designated to be the most dangerous to human health. These particles are PM 2.5 and PM 0.5.

The study showed that a house 100 feet from an OWF had 14 times the levels of PM 2.5 as houses not near an outdoor wood furnace and 9 times the levels of the EPA air standards.

A house 120 feet from an OWF had over 8 times the levels of PM 2.5 as the houses not near an outdoor wood furnace, and 6 times the levels of the EPA air standards.

A house 240 feet from OWF had 12 times the levels of PM 2.5 as the houses not near an outdoor wood furnace and 8 times the levels of the EPA air standards.

And a house as far away as 850 feet from OWF had 6 times the levels of PM 2.5 as the houses not near an outdoor wood furnace and 4 times the levels of the EPA air standards.

High levels were present in every 24-hour period tested inside homes neighboring outdoor wood furnaces. All houses tested had particulate exposures well above the EPA ambient air quality standard. Levels of PM 2.5 that exceed the EPA standards are associated with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) attacks and hospitalizations, and are also associated with increased risk of cardiac attacks.

Particles of wood smoke are so small that windows and doors cannot keep smoke out. A study by the University of Washington, Seattle, showed that 50 to 70 percent of outdoor wood smoke entered homes that were not burning wood.

Because wood smoke particles are so small, they are not filtered out by the nose or the upper respiratory system. Instead, these small particles end up deep in the lungs where they can cause structural damage and chemical changes. Carcinogenic chemicals and wood smoke irritants adhere to the small particles and enter the deep, sensitive regions of the lungs where toxic injury is high.

Public Health Toxicologist David Brown, Sc.D., an expert in wood smoke, says, "Some of the health effects reported to EHHI include awakening at night with coughing, headaches, inability to catch breath, continual sore throats, bronchitis and colds requiring children to stay home from school. In some cases the breathing difficulty has gone into asthma attacks requiring emergency-room treatment. Even episodes of short-term exposures to extreme levels of fine particulates from wood smoke and other sources, for periods as short as two hours, can produce significant adverse health effects."

Oncologist D. Barry Boyd, MD, says, "In addition to the fine particulate matter, wood smoke contains a number of organic compounds that are potential or recognized carcinogens. Exposure over time may raise the risk not only of chronic lung disease but also of lung cancer. As well, wood smoke interferes with normal lung development in infants and children. It increases children's risk of lower respiratory infections such as bronchitis and pneumonia. Wood smoke exposure can depress the immune system and damage the layer of cells in the lungs that protect and cleanse the airways."

Outdoor wood furnaces create emissions different from either fireplaces or indoor wood stoves. The Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) found that the average fine particle emissions from one OWF are equivalent to the emissions from 22 EPA-certified indoor wood stoves, 205 oil furnaces or as many as 8,000 natural gas furnaces.

The short-term health effects of wood smoke exposures are burning eyes and throat, sinusitis, bronchitis and pneumonia.

The long-term health effects are asthma, COPD, cancer, cardiovascular problems and carbon monoxide poisoning.

Dawn Mays-Hardy of the American Lung Association, New England, says, "Because wood smoke has many of the same components as cigarette smoke, and because wood smoke emissions from outdoor wood furnaces are so thick and pervasive for all those who live near them, American Lung sees them as dangerous to health."

President of Environment and Human Health, Inc. Nancy Alderman says, "EHHI has now shown that wood smoke from outdoor wood furnaces enters neighboring houses in high enough amounts to cause serious health impacts to these families. States can no longer ignore this science and should ban outdoor wood furnaces until safer technologies are found."

For seeing or downloading the full report go to http://ehhi.org

The Environment and Human Health, Inc. logo is available at http://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=7516

Would energy council address smoke issue?----Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

Would energy council address smoke issue?
Written by Cathy Baiton

Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

Friday, August 27 2010


Regarding the energy-environmental council proposed in the Aug. 7 guest column, it may be helpful to have some concrete examples of specific issues and ideas the group would hope to advance for our community. As the column indicates, this council would desire complete independence in promoting its perspective, reinforced by what it would deem the best information.

If granted the privilege and public trust of a council like this, would it be fully receptive to information and suggestions from all citizens? As I’ve written before, one problem deserving attention is air pollution from the use of wood for heating and cooking, and wood-burning fire pit emissions. What sort of position or advocacy might the proposed council seek to provide on this issue?

Internationally, a movement supported by concerned citizens as well as environmentalists, researchers, scientists and physicians is opposing biomass burning on an industrial scale, and the use of wood as a residential energy source. Some experts are challenging the claim that wood burning is carbon-neutral, and science confirms what a lot of people have discovered through experience: the combustion of wood — even in new, “certified” wood stoves — is considerably more polluting, and far less kind to human lungs, than cleaner energy alternatives.
At times my children have coughed in their beds at night, while toxic second-hand wood smoke, from which our current bylaws offer no protection, seeped into their rooms. Should people really have to tolerate any needless wood smoke in our urban environment, where everyone is sharing the air? I think cleaner and more socially compassionate energy options can and should be encouraged, with the most polluting and harmful practices best left behind. Would the existence of an energy-environmental council help to ensure clean, smoke-free air for better community health?

Perhaps our local officials may become willing to provide informed and caring leadership on the wood smoke problem. It may help if more residents voice concerns about the importance of fresh, clean air.

Whether or not a council like the one proposed will be formed over the long term, wood smoke pollution is affecting parts of our city now. With outdoor wood burning occurring often in some neighbourhoods, and another season of harmful wood stove and wood fireplace emissions on the way, I’m sure many share my hope that positive change on this specific energy and environmental issue can come soon.

Cathy Baiton
Lethbridge

From:Lethbridge Herald
Box 670 T1J 3Z7
504 - 7th Street South
Lethbridge, Alberta
Canada

Ban Wood Burning Fire Pits! Calgary, Alberta

Firepits writ large

By Heather Berestiansky, Calgary Herald August 27, 2010


Re: "B. C. wildfire haze stirs health fears in Alberta," Aug. 20.

The smoke from the B.C. fires has shown to all Calgarians why those of us who are sensitive to wood smoke want to see firepits outlawed. With healthy people feeling the effects of the smoke, imagine what it is like if you suffer from asthma, or other respiratory conditions. We live in a dense urban environment and wood-burning firepits should not be allowed, especially when clean burning alternatives such as propane or natural gas fire pits exist.

Heather Berestiansky, Calgary
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

Smoke signals-Canada

Smoke signals

By Cathy Baiton, Calgary Herald July 11, 2010

Re: "Backyard burning. Ban firepits!," Letter, July 8.

It was good to see the recent letter supporting the wisdom of banning urban firepits. A growing number of communities in Canada -- and elsewhere -- have already banned wood-burning firepits, to prevent the unnecessary fire risk, and to help protect the air and residents' health. More people now recognize that wood smoke just doesn't belong in residential areas, where everyone is sharing the air.

There is simply no way to burn wood without creating pollution and smoke. Even the burning of clean, dry, seasoned hardwood, emits a considerable amount of pollution.

In cities across Alberta, people now have much more protection from secondhand cigarette smoke, but no protection from unwanted second-hand wood smoke, which is no less hazardous to health. If Calgary were to successfully pass a bylaw banning wood burning firepits, it would relieve the needless suffering from firepit smoke that many people are now having to endure in their homes, yards, and neighbourhoods. It would also set an excellent example of concern for public health and environmental stewardship that other Alberta communities would hopefully be encouraged to follow, for the good of their own air quality and community health.

Cathy Baiton, Lethbridge
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

Biomass Busters-Newsletter

Biomass Busters
June 2010

From the Editors:
Meg Sheehan & Josh Schlossberg


The ground has been shifting under the biomass industry since the publication of our first issue of Biomass Busters last month! A few significant developments include: the EPA’s decision not to exempt biomass emissions from its greenhouse gas regulations; a letter from ninety scientists to Congress urging our Legislature to close the “biomass loophole;” and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s suspension of the Biomass Crop Assistance Program, following pressure from forest advocates.

Scientists and medical doctors continue to be galvanized by the public health and climate change threats from biomass incinerators, communities across the country keep fighting against incinerators proposed for their towns, and a national grassroots campaign is bringing together biomass opponents from sea to shining sea. Read on to find out more!

For submissions and feedback contact us at stopspewingcarbon@gmail.com.
Biomass Busters is a project of the Biomass Accountability Project, Inc., Energy Justice Network, Biofuelwatch, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, and Save America’s Forests.

From: http://www.mce3.org/BiomassBustersJune2010.pdf
Biomass Busters
June 2010-Newsletter

More from newsletter below...

American Lung Association vs. Biomass

The American Lung Association is a leading voice on the health impacts of biomass incineration. In 2009, the Association wrote to Congress: The Lung Association urges that the legislation not promote the combustion of biomass. Burning biomass could lead to significant increases in emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and sulfur dioxide and have severe impacts on the health of children, older adults, and people with lung diseases.

Doctor’s Orders

The Massachusetts Medical Society, publisher of the New England Journal of Medicine, insists that “biomass power plants pose an unacceptable risk to the public’s health by increasing air pollution.” Jefferson Dickey, M.D., internist at the Community Health Center of Franklin County, states that air pollution from biomass is associated with an increased risk of a broad range of medical problems, from asthma attacks and decreased lung growth in children to increased lung disease exacerbations, emergency room use, hospitalization rates, heart attacks, and death rates in adults.

Check out...http://www.mce3.org/BiomassBustersJune2010.pdf

World Asthma Day, May 4th--Canada Needs To Take Action...Now!

World Asthma Day, May 4th

World Asthma day will happen on May 4th. Around the globe we will become more aware of those who suffer with Asthma.

One confirmed and definite known trigger of Asthma is Woodsmoke Pollution. Exposure to the toxic emissions from Woodsmoke can worsen or even cause a life threatening reaction. Over 5,900 Canadians die each year due to air pollution. Six million Canadians will experience some form of lung disease. One Canadian dies every 20 minutes due to lung disease. Childhood asthma rates continue to soar world-wide. Millions depend of the use of their puffers (or inhaled medications) which enables them to breathe freely. These statistics are alarming and soaring.

Sadly, even with scientific evidence available, documented research that validates the claims that Woodsmoke is a deadly silent killer, Woodsmoke pollution still continues in many urban areas to destroy health and the quality of life of millions.

A few Canadian cities are becoming informed and taking action to end all outdoor open air burns and Woodsmoke in their community. Most cities have done absolutely nothing to help those with Asthma. These cities and communities sit idly by and silent instead of taking action to end outdoor open air burns and Woodsmoke. These elected officials are neglecting the health and safety of all their residents. One outdoor open air burn can affect an entire neighbourhood and contribute to the suffering and severity of Asthma patients and those with other respiratory disease.

The Canadian Lung Association states: “Do your part to reduce air pollution and encourage others to keep the air clean” Now, if only our political leaders, City Mayors and Members of council would follow the wise words of our Lung Association, many would be able to breathe the fresh unadulterated air so needed in order to stay healthy.

The American Lung Association goes further in their advice stating: “Avoid burning wood. Avoid use of wood burning in indoor and outdoor fireplaces. Just like tobacco smoke, wood smoke pollution is harmful to your health. Wood burning comprises 33 percent of particle pollution during the winter in some areas. Cleaner burning alternatives such as natural gas and electric fireplaces are available for the glow without the smoke!”

Take the steps needed to end Woodsmoke Pollution in your community. Taking action will help those who suffer daily trying to breathe. We all deserve the right and common decency to breathe healthy air—woodsmoke-free. Become Informed about Asthma and Woodsmoke Pollution!

Make ending Woodsmoke Pollution Your Number One Priority! Your life and breath depend on it. Whether you have Asthma or not, we all need to breathe air that is not polluted with woodsmoke emissions. To take action to end Woodsmoke will be the best way to recognize and support World Asthma Day! Don’t sit idly by and silent like too many of our local and national leaders in Canada are doing right now. Tell them to Ban Outdoor Open Air Burns and Woodsmoke....Now!

Submitted by:
Linda Baker Beaudin
Founder, Air Is Precious
975 Brookdale Avenue
P.O. Box 22049
Cornwall, Ontario
Canada
K6J 4P5
e-mail airisprecious@gmail.com

Air Quality Monitoring Is A Charade-Canada

Air quality monitoring is a charade

Red Deer Advocate

By Advocate news services

Published: April 07, 2010 8:49 AM

No sophisticated air quality studies are needed to realize that Red Deer has a serious air pollution problem.

The air stinks of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals in acres of the city where residents are burning wood in their stoves and fireplaces.

The smoke and fumes are a threat to the health and lives of neighbours but dissipate before reaching an air quality monitor.

Even if emissions reach a monitoring unit, only a few simple chemicals are being monitored and the complex toxins and carcinogens produced by burning wood are not detected.

Surprisingly, only Toronto, which also relies on basic, Alberta-style monitoring, has checked to see if the Air Quality Index (AQI) is an effective indicator of the health impact of air pollution.

It is no surprise that 92 per cent of the pollution related illnesses and deaths are on days when, according to the air quality data, the air quality is “good” to “very good.”

Similarly about 12 years ago, the Suzuki Foundation identified the obvious: neglect of the Big Three sources of urban air pollution — domestic wood burning, automobiles and commercial trucks, was resulting in pollution-related deaths in Edmonton and Calgary (Red Deer was not included.)

Instead of seeing these findings as a need to start addressing urban air quality issues, the findings were rejected as there was no correlation between the AQI and the number of pollution-related deaths.

It is puzzling that so many people are prepared to believe that monitoring a few simple chemicals in a few locations will identify the health implications of urban air pollution.

Monitoring is even too basic to identify the source of pollutants and, in the absence of normal environmental data, several studies have shown that Albertans are most concerned about industrial pollution.

In reality, for urban residents, it is the pollution sources a few metres from your home that are the greatest threat to your family’s health — a busy road or a neighbour’s wood burning stove or fireplace.

The level of toxins and chemicals that cause cancer and birth defects was increasing rapidly in wood-burning areas.

There is nothing surprising about these findings as the emissions from wood or coal burning stoves and fireplaces are a world-wide concern and have been since historical times.

Unfortunately, most cities in the U.S. and Canada use basic Alberta-style monitoring which provides no protection from the most dangerous source of urban pollution — wood burning stoves and fireplaces.

In the seventies, when families found their health affected by the smoke and chemicals from a neighbour’s fireplace, politicians would point out that the data from the monitoring unit, possibly a kilometer away, “proved,” that the city had clean air.

Then as the number of wood burning appliances increased and finally air quality standards were being exceeded, politicians invariably decided that so many residents (voters) were burning wood, that it was now too political to do anything.

Several hundred North American urban centres have already followed this path and there are more every year.

Once fouled by woodsmoke, no city as been able to correct this situation and it will take a future generation that cares for the urban environment for cities to, once again, be healthy places in which to live.

Hopefully, city politicians will institute burning bans along the lines of U.S. cities when calm conditions are forecast and smoke is not expected to disperse.

In addition, the city needs to ban further installation of wood burning appliances and borrowing an idea from the British, all levels of government should cover the cost of converting existing dirty-fuel appliances to burn natural gas.

Allan Smith is a former member of the Urban Environmental Study Group of the Environmental Council of Alberta


From: Red Deer Advocate website
By Advocate news services
Published: April 07, 2010

North St. Paul, MN - The Most Polluted City In The World

Recreational Fires Must Be Eliminated
WELCOME TO HELL ON EARTH
http://northsaintpaulresident.blogspot.com/

The air is smoky from burning wood in North St. Paul, MN, all the time. It is a nightmare. What used to be a nice place to live has become a living hell.

Fresh air is very rare around here. If you are considering moving to North St. Paul or buying a home here, I strongly recommend that you do not do it no matter how good of a price you get. The only way you will be happy in this town is if you love breathing smoky air almost every day.

The air was smoky 25 out of 31 evenings in July 2009. We had 37 hours of continuous wood smoke in the air Aug. 29th - 31st. There was wood smoke in the air 19 consecutive evenings from Aug. 21st to Sept. 8th. It rained heavily on Aug. 20th, providing the only relief we got from wood smoke for almost three weeks.

Is this a good way to live? No. It is a horrible way to live. Take it from someone who knows. Breathing smoky, polluted air every day is misery.

Every day in this city several people are having recreational fires. Every evening the air is filled with the stench of burning wood. I am one person sick and tired of breathing smoky air every day. Is it too much to ask to be able to breathe fresh air in your own home?

Who is responsible for this wood smoke nightmare? The four city council members are responsible. Council members Jan Walczak, Bob Bruton, Terry Furlong, and Dave Zick support wood smoke. They don't care if you have a child with asthma. They don't care if you have to live like a shut-in because the air is so polluted. They don't care if your sinuses burn because the wood smoke is so heavy.

Our four Council members have defended the rights of a small percentage of households to burn wood daily over the rights of all the rest of us to breathe.

You have no right to breathe under Walczak, Bruton, Furlong, and Zick. Burners have the right to burn wood 49 hours a week recreationally. The rest of us have no rights at all.

If you are considering purchasing real estate in the city of North Saint Paul, Minnesota (55109), factor this blog carefully into your decision. Buying a home in this city means that your kids will breathe smoky air while playing in the yard almost every day. Your baby will breathe smoky air in her crib should you leave the windows open around your house. If you leave your windows open you will wake up in the middle of the night choking on smoky air.

Perhaps worst of all, your utility rates will be high because you will have to run the air conditioner instead of leaving the windows open on a cool summer evening. You have no other choice because almost every night the air is too smoky to breathe in this city. Consider this blog your warning.

North St. Paul, Minnesota, is a wonderful community other than the wood smoke. If we could restore fresh air like we used to enjoy, life would be happy again.

Tell others about this blog!

http://northsaintpaulresident.blogspot.com/


Webmaster comment----Visit this great blogsite. Day after day woodsmoke terror is faced by these residents.

Keeping the air clean-Letter to the Editor-ALA

Times-Herald
Serving Solano and Napa Counties since 1875

Keeping the air clean
Posted: 11/29/2008 07:05:48 AM PST

Thank you for the excellent article on the new wood burning regulation. The American Lung Association of California has been advocating for controls on harmful wood smoke pollution for more than a decade. Breathing particle pollution -- or soot -- can literally shorten life and send our most vulnerable residents to the emergency room. For asthmatic children, breathing wood smoke can lead to immediate harm, including asthma attacks and respiratory distress. Burning wood emits harmful toxins and fine particles in the air that can worsen breathing problems and lead to heart and lung disease and even early death and should be actively avoided by those with lung disease.

The American Lung Association 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.

This new regulation will provide much needed protections to millions of Bay Area residents, particularly those people who have serious breathing problems.

For more information about the health effects of wood burning and cleaner burning alternatives to heating, please visit our Web site at www.lungusa.org or call 1-800-LUNG-USA. When you can't breathe, nothing else matters.

Jenny Bard

Regional Air Quality Director

American Lung Association of California

Santa Rosa

All Fired up: the urban fire pit dilemna-article

All fired up: the urban fire pit dilemma
By Lisa Albert for Sunset Magazine
July 17, 2008

I fall in love easily—with gardens and plants, that is. When touring a garden, admiration and joy grows with each step I take and with each plant I discover. Unfortunately, that bliss fades abruptly when I stumble upon the latest must-have garden addition: the wood-burning fire feature.

The haze of second-hand smoke obscures the view.

I have asthma, along with 22.9 million other Americans. It is the leading chronic childhood illness in the U.S. Although asthma can be fatal, thankfully deaths are infrequent. But it is an expensive disease, costing the U.S. economy around $19.7 billion each year (American Lung Association).

Smoke is a powerful trigger; avoidance of it shapes my life. I’ve given up activities that brought me joy, including camping with my family, for what is camping without a campfire? I’ve accepted these limitations but I’m struggling with those imposed by smoke from recreational fires.

In the last four years, I’ve had to give up time in my garden and shut my windows to cool night breezes due to wood smoke in the neighborhood. I can’t see the fire burning in someone’s backyard whether it’s next door, down the street, or two blocks over. I have no warning that my next breath will include smoke’s deadly particles, and then it’s too late to prevent an attack. Four weeks ago, a neighbor’s smoky fire triggered an attack so severe I thought I’d need hospitalization. It took me four miserable days to recover.

Most people aren’t aware of wood smoke’s impact on air quality, its effect on health and wellbeing, or that these inefficient wood-burning features are a growing source of pollution throughout the U.S. “Each fire emits close to one pound of smoke pollution, with 90% being in the deadly smaller than one micron range.” (Clean Air Revival). Municipalities are banning these polluting features. In many areas, when a fire or its smoke endangers another’s health or property, it is deemed “hostile” and local authorities will extinguish the fire (enforcement agencies vary by region). That certainly would put a damper on an evening of fun around a fire with family and friends.

The good news is that there are cleaner-burning alternatives, including natural gas, propane, denatured alcohol, and Java-Log. Even better, the first three options open up a world of design possibilities for our gardens. Instead of the ubiquitous metal bowl with last night’s charred remains, imagine an artful piece crafted of metal and stone. By day, it is a stunning, creative garden feature. When lit at night, it surprises, pleases, and warms guests without masking intoxicating garden fragrances, such as star jasmine, gardenia, and angel’s trumpet.

Fortunately, we can have our fire and clean air, too.

source article
http://freshdirt.sunset.com/2008/07/all-fired-up-th.html

Change in fire ordinance will open door to pollution, smell

TheTimesHerald.com
Letter to the Editor
January 30, 2008

Change in fire ordinance will open door to pollution, smell

I was distressed to read the Port Huron City Council found it advisable to approve changes in city ordinances - ones that banned "recreational" fires in residential neighborhoods. I can best explain my objections by relating my personal experiences with the sort of recreational fires the council approved.

Last summer, some of my neighbors started using one of those clay-pot fire pits. In the hottest weeks of the summer, these people burned wood and laid down an insufferable blanket of wood smoke. The surrounding neighbors (who did not have central air conditioning) were forced to endure the late-night blanket of ground-hugging smoke (no chimney required!).

The lady living next to me, (the immediate neighbor of the party people) had young children prone to a common respiratory problem, asthma. I am a recovering heart-attack victim.

Eventually, the party people discovered it was convenient to use the dying embers of the recreational fire to consume paper plates, plastic drinking cups, and eating utensils left over from the late-night drinking and eating binge. My home smelled like a trash incinerator.

Why, after all the efforts to stop smoking in public places and restaurants, would the council find it in anyone's best interest to approve what will become a troublesome, unregulated source of recreational pollution? What were council members thinking?

A plague on all their houses.

JAMES MEYER
Port Huron, Jan. 30
http://www.thetimesherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080204/OPINION03/802040315/1014/OPINION

Editor's note—--Yes...I agree...”A plague on all their houses.”

This is what Elk Grove Village, Illinois did (lifted a ban) in 2004, and even with receiving overwhelming information on the deadly effects of wood smoke, and pleas and personal testimony from people, EGV will NOT reinstate the ban on outdoor wood burning fireplaces and fire pits as of today, February 2, 2008. Amazing, isn't it!!!!

Let's also remember that Lake/Cook/DuPage/McHenry counties and our elected Illinois state senators and representatives have totally ignored this deadly air pollution and anti-health crisis-wood smoke-which involuntarily enters our homes and lungs. Their inaction to not help the millions of people in Illinois being affected by wood smoke emissions is very, very sad.

Wood Smoke-Asthma and Breathing-Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor
Fence Post
Daily Herald
Paddock Publications
Arlington Hts, Illinois
January 28, 2008



To the editor: I read Rosemary Glaubitz's recent letter in your newspaper regarding wood smoke and it gave me the courage to write also.

I realize that people have the right to do what they want in their own homes, but the problem is that wood smoke does not stop in their homes or yards. When it drifts to my house and yard, it makes it impossible to breathe.

I have asthma and cannot breathe around wood smoke.

Each day I venture outside, I take a small breath of air to see how bad it is today. I ask myself is today the day I get rushed to the hospital wheezing because I cannot breathe.

On my block, I am aware of at least one person who has asthma and another person who has emphysema and requires oxygen.

Unfortunately, one of our neighbors heats his home exclusively with wood.

In the suburbs, the houses are too close together to allow wood burning.

I understand that people enjoy a fireplace. I pray though that these people would compromise and use gas fireplaces instead.

Please consider your friends, family and neighbors with breathing problems and the suffering that could be alleviated.

Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Editor's comment---We must ban wood smoke emissions for everyone's health, and especially for those with existing illnesses, children, COPD, etc..