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
Showing posts with label wood ash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wood ash. Show all posts
Would energy council address smoke issue?----Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada
Sunday, August 29, 2010
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
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
Burning is an option.... Breathing is not!
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Burning is an option.... Breathing is not!
By Shirley Brandie (Canada)
With all the information that is now available to everyone, via the press and the Internet, regarding the health and environmental effects of wood burning in residential areas, one has to wonder when the powers that be will step in and create the laws needed to end this nightmare that so many are living through.
Municipalities rarely step in to help when a complaint is sent to them and prefer to regard it as a 'civil matter' in an attempt to avoid dealing with the problem, for reasons known only to them. There is no reason why a bylaw cannot be created and enforced so that those that are having their homes and properties deluged in smoke from a neighbor's wood burning can finally breathe in their own homes.
I would think that the municipalities would want to keep their residents safe and not put this on the back burner... pun intended.
I have a web site at: http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net and also publish monthly newsletters regarding wood smoke. I no longer worry about wood smoke as I did take the legal route to obtain an injunction. But, what about those that do not have the monies to do the same? My web site was created in an attempt to give some guidance, suggestions and most of all empathy for those who so badly need it. I receive emails daily from people all over the US and Canada with stories and photos that would break your heart. What are they to do when there is no help, not matter where they turn?
It is the usual case that, when the neighbor is told that the smoke is getting into their house, the burner increases the burning. This leads to further distress and the burner knows that the only recourse for the victim is to seek lengthy and expensive legal help. This is just not right!
Breathing wood smoke is a very real danger and one that the victims cannot escape. They try everything they can to attempt to keep out the smoke but nothing works as the particles are so very tiny that they seep in through any minute space available. Headaches, nausea, heart rhythm problems, sinus infections, nosebleeds and other physical symptoms are what these people are forced to live with.
Burners, on the other hand, carry on with the burning and tell them that it is their 'right' to burn. What about the rights of the neighbors to breathe clean air in their own homes?
Burners will not stop burning unless forced to. For those that have never experienced living next door to a burner, imagine yourself in your house with smoke so thick that you can see it. What would you do? Who would you turn to? And, believe me, it could happen to you almost overnight as it did to us!
We need municipalities to pull up their socks and get bylaws created for the sake of all that are suffering with wood smoke invasion. We also need governmental agencies to help to put some pressure on all municipalities to get this issue moving before another winter begins and the wood burning increases even more than it is at present.
Shirley Brandie
Amherstburg, Ontario, Canada
Burning is an option....Breathing is not!
See---http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net
By Shirley Brandie (Canada)
With all the information that is now available to everyone, via the press and the Internet, regarding the health and environmental effects of wood burning in residential areas, one has to wonder when the powers that be will step in and create the laws needed to end this nightmare that so many are living through.
Municipalities rarely step in to help when a complaint is sent to them and prefer to regard it as a 'civil matter' in an attempt to avoid dealing with the problem, for reasons known only to them. There is no reason why a bylaw cannot be created and enforced so that those that are having their homes and properties deluged in smoke from a neighbor's wood burning can finally breathe in their own homes.
I would think that the municipalities would want to keep their residents safe and not put this on the back burner... pun intended.
I have a web site at: http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net and also publish monthly newsletters regarding wood smoke. I no longer worry about wood smoke as I did take the legal route to obtain an injunction. But, what about those that do not have the monies to do the same? My web site was created in an attempt to give some guidance, suggestions and most of all empathy for those who so badly need it. I receive emails daily from people all over the US and Canada with stories and photos that would break your heart. What are they to do when there is no help, not matter where they turn?
It is the usual case that, when the neighbor is told that the smoke is getting into their house, the burner increases the burning. This leads to further distress and the burner knows that the only recourse for the victim is to seek lengthy and expensive legal help. This is just not right!
Breathing wood smoke is a very real danger and one that the victims cannot escape. They try everything they can to attempt to keep out the smoke but nothing works as the particles are so very tiny that they seep in through any minute space available. Headaches, nausea, heart rhythm problems, sinus infections, nosebleeds and other physical symptoms are what these people are forced to live with.
Burners, on the other hand, carry on with the burning and tell them that it is their 'right' to burn. What about the rights of the neighbors to breathe clean air in their own homes?
Burners will not stop burning unless forced to. For those that have never experienced living next door to a burner, imagine yourself in your house with smoke so thick that you can see it. What would you do? Who would you turn to? And, believe me, it could happen to you almost overnight as it did to us!
We need municipalities to pull up their socks and get bylaws created for the sake of all that are suffering with wood smoke invasion. We also need governmental agencies to help to put some pressure on all municipalities to get this issue moving before another winter begins and the wood burning increases even more than it is at present.
Shirley Brandie
Amherstburg, Ontario, Canada
Burning is an option....Breathing is not!
See---http://WoodBurnerSmoke.net
Blog comment---No intent to walk backwards a hundred years!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Wood stove violations could result in fines
Monday, November 10 | 5:54 p.m.
BY:ERIK ROBINSON
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER
Columbian.com Serving Clark County, Washington
Below is a blog comment on the above story.
by Roger Wilco : 11/11/08
Our grandparents would have loved a little box on the wall you could turn a knob or push a button and have heat without the mess and hassle of a wood stove! Not being a Beverly Hillbilly I have no intent to walk backwards a hundred years and return to an inefficient and archaic heat source. My heat pump with electric forced air backup is great. I can't imagine still having an old wood burning, steam powered TV set either!
Monday, November 10 | 5:54 p.m.
BY:ERIK ROBINSON
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER
Columbian.com Serving Clark County, Washington
Below is a blog comment on the above story.
by Roger Wilco : 11/11/08
Our grandparents would have loved a little box on the wall you could turn a knob or push a button and have heat without the mess and hassle of a wood stove! Not being a Beverly Hillbilly I have no intent to walk backwards a hundred years and return to an inefficient and archaic heat source. My heat pump with electric forced air backup is great. I can't imagine still having an old wood burning, steam powered TV set either!
Feeling the burn over back-yard fires (Article)
Monday, October 13, 2008
Feeling the burn over back-yard fires (Article)
As more people enjoy sitting around the back-yard fire pit, some neighbors are up in arms over the health risks from the smoke. (excerpt)
By TOM MEERSMAN
Star Tribune-Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota
October 12, 2008
Below are some comments from the StarTribune.com blog on the above story...
Did you all miss the health hazard and toxic chemicals?
Maybe I should just hold you all down and stuff a cigarette in your mouth if you like it so much. We live next to "burners", and have family members with asthma, and it's a real problem. There is a reason smoking is banned, this will hopefully follow suit. It is not a "mind your own business" deal when what they do directly affects others. If it was a construction site spewing dust particulates everywhere, you would all be against it.
posted by bluebird74
What in the world are you thinking?
Campfires are irritants when you are camping. Remember the challenge of getting out of the way the smoke is blowing? If you or your child has asthma, you simply cannot have campfires, even when camping. The toxins released are worse than standing behind the diesel bus. If you think that people don't burn illegal brush etc just because someone at their house picked up a free permit once, you are naive. If you choose to have a campfire when you are out away from civilization and everyone breathing the smoke and pollutants is a part of your group, you have my blessing. However, I do not agree with my neighbors having the right to make my yard uninhabitable every weekend all summer and fall. Houses are so close and wind will do what it will, but I could sit on their decks and not get the smoke because it is blowing from both of their fires to my deck, away from their houses. No, we live too close in the suburbs for this to continue.
posted by georgina17
My son has asthma and because I live between three neighbors who, by the way, moved in two years after me, love their fires--day and night. We've been to the hospital several times this past spring and summer with each visit costing $50 plus the additional cost for his medicine, of which we did not use as frequently until they moved in. My neighbors have been told in a very kind manner that my son has asthma, but that has not been a consideration for them--they just keep burning and my son keeps suffering. How nice, NOT! Regulations come in when people start to show no considerations for others which cancels out the "MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS" statement. Just be considerate. Burn less often so we all can enjoy the outdoors!
posted by AdrienneBTW
These fires are just like 2nd hand smoke
They are awful. They stink. It's just a moron or two per neighborhood that keep having these fires. This is a city, not a campground. Our houses are too close together. I hope they ban the fires.
posted by dgb04
Warm your backyard and the globe
Improving air quality is an on-going and uphill battle, and Campfires are a significant source of air pollution in Minneapolis that is totally avoidable. In fact, a campfire produces signifcantly more greenhouse gases than a car. Benzene, C02 and other harmful pollutants are all produced by outdoor recreational fires. According to some studies, a wood fire can emit as many fine particles into the air in nine hours as does a a mid-size automobile traveling 11,000 mile in one year. (http://www.eauquebec.com/air/chauf-bois/index-en.htm) Many progressive cities such as Seattle have limited or banned outdoor fires during poor air quality periods, and sometimes banned them altogether. With air quality concerns in Minneapolis, it seems like an issue the city should be taking seriously. posted by styopr
Rednecks wanting their "rights."
What part of asthma isn't serious to those of you touting the constitution? It is a real medical problem, as are other respiratory diseases. Should we all still be able to smoke in the break room at work or maybe on a plane? C'mon, those in the vicinity of the toxic smoke should just "get over it." Burn all the smoke you want in your own house, but when it is making mine stink, you've invaded MY rights. posted by bluebird74
I just got back from Beijing where everybody burns everything, and even in the country the air looks like a forest fire is in progress. Yes, smoke is bad for you.
posted by betty6114
No place for campfires in the city.
Campfires belong at campgrounds not in your densely populated neighborhood in the city...
posted by phishe
Your Rights End Where Mine Begin!
No one has a right to case hardship and harm to others, especially if it is for something as trivial as their personal amusement. Ban the backyard fires, fireplaces, and the charcoal grills too! It is time to bring Minnesota out of the stone age.
posted by RogK
Not a problem until very recently...
I wonder if this was not a problem in the past because the medical profession failed to recognize asthma and its causes -- so asthmatic children and adults simply died and no one understood that the smoke and pollutants killed them off.
Now we know and understand the condition, and have the means to minimize or even prevent the situations that would harm these people -- this knowledge and understanding also forces upon us the responsibility to not harm our neighbors. As much as we may enjoy a fire, if it produces pollutants that harm our neighbors, it is our responsibility to move the fire to where our neighbors won't be harmed -- like large open parks, out in the country, or a campground away from civilization.
posted by Zarepheth
Outdoor wood boiler
We have a neighbor who can burn 3-5 cords of wood in a densely populated neighborhood. The stink fills the surrounding three homes and bothers maybe another 8-10 homes. This system supplies heat for his home and heats hot water..it used to heat his outdoor pool till city ordinance won't allow him to burn during the summer. He can burn Oct1 thru April. The smoke is rancid, smells like an outdoor fire that is smoldering or has just had water thrown on it to extinguish it. We had healthy, clean air before this boiler system was fired up...I'd like comments to maybe get the city council to regulate it more or only allow them in the country or where the owner has a certain amount of acreage or distances from neighbors. He has one neighbor who's house is within 100 feet of the smoke stack.
posted by bploushine
More..outdoor boiler
I didn't mention that the boiler burned for 180 consecutive days..24 hours a day. We live in suburb 30 miles from St Paul. The smoke is heavy, rancid and loaded with particulate. Why should I have to close my windows and not let my furnace pull in outside air...so he can heat his house and hot water.
posted by bploushine
NO FIRE PITS!!!
I hate the smell of a campfire in a city. It's inconsiderate air pollution. If you want to do it, you should have to get a permit or your should just go camping. Those people siting up several square blocks just so they can have a couple brews around a fire. And no, it's nothing like a fire in your fireplace. Chimneys ensure the smoke goes up and fireplaces are only used in the winter months when everyone has their windows shut.
posted by cartoonconn
Idiots!
The problem is not the increase in regulation... its the decrease (or total loss) of respect for others and accepting responsibility for your actions. A fire pit or outdoor wood boiler in a densely populated area is a problem because the smoke doesn't have space or air movement to adequately diffuse to levels that aren't a nuisance (or health risk, in some cases) to neighbors. Some posters are correct in that burning dry material under ideal conditions will provide a lower-particulate flue, which is less likely to bother neighbors, but still you need the air movement and room for diffusion. I'm so mad right now, I could spit!
posted by Juggernaut
We all have a right to comfortable living
Unless you suffer from asthma, you will never understand how dangerous it is to be breathing this smoke. I had a friend's parent die from asthma in her sleep, how would all you "fun" people feel about that consequence? If you want a campfire, go camping where people expect to smell them. And, as far as other sources being more of an environmental hazard, I cannot believe I'm hearing that in this day and time. We ALL need to do whatever we can to alleviate pollutants in our air - every step is a step in the right direction. Don't be selfish, be responsible.
posted by pruitttm
For the last 5 years I have called the Pollution Control Department of Minn., the police, the fire department, my Champlin City Councilman,and the Mayor.One of our neighbors were burning wet leaves. The other neighbors burn trash. One night, they were burning caustic materials. Our eyes were burning and my husband had to put on a mask. He was working in the garage. This same neighbor was burning something that was so strong, I had to go inside. I was planting flowers in my garden. I do have to close windows so my entire house does not reek. All of these Public Servants, told me that the neighbors were not breaking laws and there was NOT ANYTHING that they could do. But I told them they were burning illegal items. We have asked and asked them to quit burning. They start the fires in their pit and leave. I have called about unattended fires, but no one seems to care. When I enter into Champliin from another city, you can actually see the clouds of dirty smoke, and the smell is overpowering. I don't think We should have to breath in this terrible pollution. We have a right to breath clean air. However no one seems to take this seriously. I'm not a complainer, but when our health is in danger, I feel I have to try to stop this pollution
posted by KathyPeyer
City Officials Should Ban Backyard Burners
If I'm not mistaken, there has been a law against burning trash in the metro area for decades and these backyard firepit/burners seem to be a loophole on this law. It would be a good issue for the city councils of all metro areas to put on their agendas.
posted by Minnepeach19
Great if it didn't affect anyone else!
Unfortunately, burning is an activity that when engaged in by one neighbor may infringe on others. My mother has allergies and was sick with a severe headache for three days when a neighbor had a bonfire. Unfortunately, there is no way to keep the smoke just in the yard of those partaking. So, as much as people here want to make it about individual rights, it isn't about that. You can do whatever you choose in your own house/yard but when that activity affects others who are minding their own business in their own homes, you need to consider them. It's about being considerate to others! Something we need a little more of these days!
posted by karikd
My neighbors don't have any sense
I have asthma and my neighbor's fires do make me ill, especially because he burns garbage, yard waste, plastic, wet wood, etc. I keep my windows closed all summer but it still seeps in since the air conditioner has to take in air. When asked to stop or at least stop burning after midnight he tells me to call the police (which I will the next time). It's hard for nice people to understand that many peoples' neighbors are not nice and don't have sense.
posted by cloyd42
oops Hello all: To the firepit burners who are telling the recipients of their smoke pollution to "go inside and close their windows" A house is not hermetically sealed. There is always a certain amount of air leakage around even tightly-closed doors and windows. Within that air leakage are ultrafine particles (PM2.5) as well as significant amounts of carbon monoxide, from combustion. Indoor air pollution is a function of outdoor air pollution. When particulate levels rise outside, they rise inside too, to the extent that there can be up to 70% of the pollution indoors as there is outdoors.
posted by cleanair
Web master: Thank you for your comments on this story.
As more people enjoy sitting around the back-yard fire pit, some neighbors are up in arms over the health risks from the smoke. (excerpt)
By TOM MEERSMAN
Star Tribune-Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota
October 12, 2008
Below are some comments from the StarTribune.com blog on the above story...
Did you all miss the health hazard and toxic chemicals?
Maybe I should just hold you all down and stuff a cigarette in your mouth if you like it so much. We live next to "burners", and have family members with asthma, and it's a real problem. There is a reason smoking is banned, this will hopefully follow suit. It is not a "mind your own business" deal when what they do directly affects others. If it was a construction site spewing dust particulates everywhere, you would all be against it.
posted by bluebird74
What in the world are you thinking?
Campfires are irritants when you are camping. Remember the challenge of getting out of the way the smoke is blowing? If you or your child has asthma, you simply cannot have campfires, even when camping. The toxins released are worse than standing behind the diesel bus. If you think that people don't burn illegal brush etc just because someone at their house picked up a free permit once, you are naive. If you choose to have a campfire when you are out away from civilization and everyone breathing the smoke and pollutants is a part of your group, you have my blessing. However, I do not agree with my neighbors having the right to make my yard uninhabitable every weekend all summer and fall. Houses are so close and wind will do what it will, but I could sit on their decks and not get the smoke because it is blowing from both of their fires to my deck, away from their houses. No, we live too close in the suburbs for this to continue.
posted by georgina17
My son has asthma and because I live between three neighbors who, by the way, moved in two years after me, love their fires--day and night. We've been to the hospital several times this past spring and summer with each visit costing $50 plus the additional cost for his medicine, of which we did not use as frequently until they moved in. My neighbors have been told in a very kind manner that my son has asthma, but that has not been a consideration for them--they just keep burning and my son keeps suffering. How nice, NOT! Regulations come in when people start to show no considerations for others which cancels out the "MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS" statement. Just be considerate. Burn less often so we all can enjoy the outdoors!
posted by AdrienneBTW
These fires are just like 2nd hand smoke
They are awful. They stink. It's just a moron or two per neighborhood that keep having these fires. This is a city, not a campground. Our houses are too close together. I hope they ban the fires.
posted by dgb04
Warm your backyard and the globe
Improving air quality is an on-going and uphill battle, and Campfires are a significant source of air pollution in Minneapolis that is totally avoidable. In fact, a campfire produces signifcantly more greenhouse gases than a car. Benzene, C02 and other harmful pollutants are all produced by outdoor recreational fires. According to some studies, a wood fire can emit as many fine particles into the air in nine hours as does a a mid-size automobile traveling 11,000 mile in one year. (http://www.eauquebec.com/air/chauf-bois/index-en.htm) Many progressive cities such as Seattle have limited or banned outdoor fires during poor air quality periods, and sometimes banned them altogether. With air quality concerns in Minneapolis, it seems like an issue the city should be taking seriously. posted by styopr
Rednecks wanting their "rights."
What part of asthma isn't serious to those of you touting the constitution? It is a real medical problem, as are other respiratory diseases. Should we all still be able to smoke in the break room at work or maybe on a plane? C'mon, those in the vicinity of the toxic smoke should just "get over it." Burn all the smoke you want in your own house, but when it is making mine stink, you've invaded MY rights. posted by bluebird74
I just got back from Beijing where everybody burns everything, and even in the country the air looks like a forest fire is in progress. Yes, smoke is bad for you.
posted by betty6114
No place for campfires in the city.
Campfires belong at campgrounds not in your densely populated neighborhood in the city...
posted by phishe
Your Rights End Where Mine Begin!
No one has a right to case hardship and harm to others, especially if it is for something as trivial as their personal amusement. Ban the backyard fires, fireplaces, and the charcoal grills too! It is time to bring Minnesota out of the stone age.
posted by RogK
Not a problem until very recently...
I wonder if this was not a problem in the past because the medical profession failed to recognize asthma and its causes -- so asthmatic children and adults simply died and no one understood that the smoke and pollutants killed them off.
Now we know and understand the condition, and have the means to minimize or even prevent the situations that would harm these people -- this knowledge and understanding also forces upon us the responsibility to not harm our neighbors. As much as we may enjoy a fire, if it produces pollutants that harm our neighbors, it is our responsibility to move the fire to where our neighbors won't be harmed -- like large open parks, out in the country, or a campground away from civilization.
posted by Zarepheth
Outdoor wood boiler
We have a neighbor who can burn 3-5 cords of wood in a densely populated neighborhood. The stink fills the surrounding three homes and bothers maybe another 8-10 homes. This system supplies heat for his home and heats hot water..it used to heat his outdoor pool till city ordinance won't allow him to burn during the summer. He can burn Oct1 thru April. The smoke is rancid, smells like an outdoor fire that is smoldering or has just had water thrown on it to extinguish it. We had healthy, clean air before this boiler system was fired up...I'd like comments to maybe get the city council to regulate it more or only allow them in the country or where the owner has a certain amount of acreage or distances from neighbors. He has one neighbor who's house is within 100 feet of the smoke stack.
posted by bploushine
More..outdoor boiler
I didn't mention that the boiler burned for 180 consecutive days..24 hours a day. We live in suburb 30 miles from St Paul. The smoke is heavy, rancid and loaded with particulate. Why should I have to close my windows and not let my furnace pull in outside air...so he can heat his house and hot water.
posted by bploushine
NO FIRE PITS!!!
I hate the smell of a campfire in a city. It's inconsiderate air pollution. If you want to do it, you should have to get a permit or your should just go camping. Those people siting up several square blocks just so they can have a couple brews around a fire. And no, it's nothing like a fire in your fireplace. Chimneys ensure the smoke goes up and fireplaces are only used in the winter months when everyone has their windows shut.
posted by cartoonconn
Idiots!
The problem is not the increase in regulation... its the decrease (or total loss) of respect for others and accepting responsibility for your actions. A fire pit or outdoor wood boiler in a densely populated area is a problem because the smoke doesn't have space or air movement to adequately diffuse to levels that aren't a nuisance (or health risk, in some cases) to neighbors. Some posters are correct in that burning dry material under ideal conditions will provide a lower-particulate flue, which is less likely to bother neighbors, but still you need the air movement and room for diffusion. I'm so mad right now, I could spit!
posted by Juggernaut
We all have a right to comfortable living
Unless you suffer from asthma, you will never understand how dangerous it is to be breathing this smoke. I had a friend's parent die from asthma in her sleep, how would all you "fun" people feel about that consequence? If you want a campfire, go camping where people expect to smell them. And, as far as other sources being more of an environmental hazard, I cannot believe I'm hearing that in this day and time. We ALL need to do whatever we can to alleviate pollutants in our air - every step is a step in the right direction. Don't be selfish, be responsible.
posted by pruitttm
For the last 5 years I have called the Pollution Control Department of Minn., the police, the fire department, my Champlin City Councilman,and the Mayor.One of our neighbors were burning wet leaves. The other neighbors burn trash. One night, they were burning caustic materials. Our eyes were burning and my husband had to put on a mask. He was working in the garage. This same neighbor was burning something that was so strong, I had to go inside. I was planting flowers in my garden. I do have to close windows so my entire house does not reek. All of these Public Servants, told me that the neighbors were not breaking laws and there was NOT ANYTHING that they could do. But I told them they were burning illegal items. We have asked and asked them to quit burning. They start the fires in their pit and leave. I have called about unattended fires, but no one seems to care. When I enter into Champliin from another city, you can actually see the clouds of dirty smoke, and the smell is overpowering. I don't think We should have to breath in this terrible pollution. We have a right to breath clean air. However no one seems to take this seriously. I'm not a complainer, but when our health is in danger, I feel I have to try to stop this pollution
posted by KathyPeyer
City Officials Should Ban Backyard Burners
If I'm not mistaken, there has been a law against burning trash in the metro area for decades and these backyard firepit/burners seem to be a loophole on this law. It would be a good issue for the city councils of all metro areas to put on their agendas.
posted by Minnepeach19
Great if it didn't affect anyone else!
Unfortunately, burning is an activity that when engaged in by one neighbor may infringe on others. My mother has allergies and was sick with a severe headache for three days when a neighbor had a bonfire. Unfortunately, there is no way to keep the smoke just in the yard of those partaking. So, as much as people here want to make it about individual rights, it isn't about that. You can do whatever you choose in your own house/yard but when that activity affects others who are minding their own business in their own homes, you need to consider them. It's about being considerate to others! Something we need a little more of these days!
posted by karikd
My neighbors don't have any sense
I have asthma and my neighbor's fires do make me ill, especially because he burns garbage, yard waste, plastic, wet wood, etc. I keep my windows closed all summer but it still seeps in since the air conditioner has to take in air. When asked to stop or at least stop burning after midnight he tells me to call the police (which I will the next time). It's hard for nice people to understand that many peoples' neighbors are not nice and don't have sense.
posted by cloyd42
oops Hello all: To the firepit burners who are telling the recipients of their smoke pollution to "go inside and close their windows" A house is not hermetically sealed. There is always a certain amount of air leakage around even tightly-closed doors and windows. Within that air leakage are ultrafine particles (PM2.5) as well as significant amounts of carbon monoxide, from combustion. Indoor air pollution is a function of outdoor air pollution. When particulate levels rise outside, they rise inside too, to the extent that there can be up to 70% of the pollution indoors as there is outdoors.
posted by cleanair
Web master: Thank you for your comments on this story.
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!!!!!
Wood-Ash-The Unregulated Radwaste!
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Burning Issues: A project of Clean Air Revival, Inc.
http://burningissues.org
RADWASTE-Farber-1991
From: Science News: The Weekly Newsmagazine
A Science Service Publication
Volume 140, No.6, August 10. 1991
Wood Ash: The unregulated radwaste
"While cleaning ashes from his fireplace two years ago, Stewart A. Farber mused that if trees filter and store airborne pollutants, they might also harbor fallout from the nuclear weapons tests of the 1950s and 1960s. On a whim, he brought some of his fireplace ash to Yankee Atomic Electric Companies' environmental lab in Boston, Mass., where he manages environmental monitoring. Farber says he was amazed to discover that his sample showed the distinctive cesium and strontium 'signatures' of nuclear fallout-and that the concentration of radioactivity "was easily 100 times greater than anything (our Lab) had ever seen in an environmental sample."
Since then, he has obtained wood-ash radioactivity assays from 16 other scientists across the nation. These 47 data sets, representing trees in 14 states, suggest that fallout in wood ash "is a major source of radioactivity released into the environment," Farber says. With the exception of some very low California readings, all measurements of ash with fallout-cesium exceeded - some by 100 times or more - the levels of radioactive cesium that may be released from nuclear plants (about 100 picocuries per kilogram of sludge). Ash-cesium levels were especially high in the Northeast - probably because naturally high levels of nonradioactive cesium in the soil discourage trees from releasing fallout-derived cesium through their roots, he says.
Industrial wood burning in the United States generates and estimated 900,000 tons of ash each year: residential and utility wood burning generates another 543,000 tons. Already, many companies are recycling this unregulated ash in fertilizers. The irony, Farber says, is that federal regulations require releases from nuclear plants to be disposed of as radioactive waste if they contain even 1 percent of the cesium and strontium levels detected in the ash samples from New England. If ash were subject to the same regulations, he says, its disposal would cost U.S.A. wood burners more than $30 billion annually."
http://burningissues.org
RADWASTE-Farber-1991
From: Science News: The Weekly Newsmagazine
A Science Service Publication
Volume 140, No.6, August 10. 1991
Wood Ash: The unregulated radwaste
"While cleaning ashes from his fireplace two years ago, Stewart A. Farber mused that if trees filter and store airborne pollutants, they might also harbor fallout from the nuclear weapons tests of the 1950s and 1960s. On a whim, he brought some of his fireplace ash to Yankee Atomic Electric Companies' environmental lab in Boston, Mass., where he manages environmental monitoring. Farber says he was amazed to discover that his sample showed the distinctive cesium and strontium 'signatures' of nuclear fallout-and that the concentration of radioactivity "was easily 100 times greater than anything (our Lab) had ever seen in an environmental sample."
Since then, he has obtained wood-ash radioactivity assays from 16 other scientists across the nation. These 47 data sets, representing trees in 14 states, suggest that fallout in wood ash "is a major source of radioactivity released into the environment," Farber says. With the exception of some very low California readings, all measurements of ash with fallout-cesium exceeded - some by 100 times or more - the levels of radioactive cesium that may be released from nuclear plants (about 100 picocuries per kilogram of sludge). Ash-cesium levels were especially high in the Northeast - probably because naturally high levels of nonradioactive cesium in the soil discourage trees from releasing fallout-derived cesium through their roots, he says.
Industrial wood burning in the United States generates and estimated 900,000 tons of ash each year: residential and utility wood burning generates another 543,000 tons. Already, many companies are recycling this unregulated ash in fertilizers. The irony, Farber says, is that federal regulations require releases from nuclear plants to be disposed of as radioactive waste if they contain even 1 percent of the cesium and strontium levels detected in the ash samples from New England. If ash were subject to the same regulations, he says, its disposal would cost U.S.A. wood burners more than $30 billion annually."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)