EPA’s Wood-Burning Stove Ban Has Chilling Consequences For Many Rural People

Fire Burning Wood - Public Domain

It seems that even wood isn’t green or renewable enough anymore. The EPA has recently banned the production and sale of 80 percent of America’s current wood-burning stoves, the oldest heating method known to mankind and mainstay of rural homes and many of our nation’s poorest residents. The agency’s stringent one-size-fits-all rules apply equally to heavily air-polluted cities and far cleaner plus typically colder off-grid wilderness areas such as large regions of Alaska and the American West.

While EPA’s most recent regulations aren’t altogether new, their impacts will nonetheless be severe. Whereas restrictions had previously banned wood-burning stoves that didn’t limit fine airborne particulate emissions to 15 micrograms per cubic meter of air, the change will impose a maximum 12 microgram limit. To put this amount in context, EPA estimates that secondhand tobacco smoke in a closed car can expose a person to 3,000-4,000 micrograms of particulates per cubic meter.

Most wood stoves that warm cabin and home residents from coast-to-coast can’t meet that standard. Older stoves that don’t cannot be traded in for updated types, but instead must be rendered inoperable, destroyed, or recycled as scrap metal.

(Read the rest of the story here…)

***If you are a news addict, be sure to bookmark The Most Important News and visit on a daily basis for the very best breaking news, articles and videos from all over the Internet!***

1 thought on “EPA’s Wood-Burning Stove Ban Has Chilling Consequences For Many Rural People”

  1. The sad thing about the EPA is that it was legislated into existence by do-gooder legislators.
    It is for your own good. Only it is not.
    Many people out there would like the agency legislated out of existence.
    A writer contacted the agency over 10 years ago to get a copy of all the regulations the agency acts under.
    They sent him 10 semi-trucks full of regulations. On examining these regulations they found that many directly conflicted with one another.
    This puts the EPA in a position of selecting which regulations to enforce and which regulations to ignore.
    Many a congress person has written laws for the EPA when it was politically fashionable to do so.
    When is enough going to be enough? When will the courts strike down all the EPA regulation on the basis that it is discriminatory and possibly unconstitutional to have laws and regulations that directly conflict with one another?
    This agency is probably the most powerful agency in the US Government, seconded only by the IRS.
    Until our system of laws comes under the scrutiny of the Congress and the court system, we are living in a virtual dictatorship of bureaucrats.
    If city government wrote a discriminatory zoning law it would be thrown off the books eventually by a good lawyer.
    The question is Why doesn’t the same principle apply to agencies like the IRS and the EPA?

Comments are closed.