Print Version
Email this story
Comment
How tough should the county get on people burning wood in uncertified wood stoves?
Klamath County may be penalized by stronger restrictions on future economic development because of poor air quality, primarily caused by wood smoke in the south suburbs.
What should the county do to comply?
Should it send monitors door to door to check on what people are using for heat? Should it inspect wood to make sure it isn’t green? Should it just accept the penalties, even if it means a loss of jobs?
Please send us your comments.
—Opinion Editor Pat Bushey
What should the county do to comply?
Should it send monitors door to door to check on what people are using for heat? Should it inspect wood to make sure it isn’t green? Should it just accept the penalties, even if it means a loss of jobs?
Please send us your comments.
—Opinion Editor Pat Bushey
 |
 |
|
| Is a community center a good idea? | How would you prioritize money matters on the Nov. 4 ballot? |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of HeraldAndNews.com. Comment Disclaimer: The editors of heraldandnews.com reserve the right to refuse publication of any comment posted for consideration. We may refuse for any reason, including use of profanity, disparaging comments, libelous comments, etc. Any reader who notices a comment they believe is particularly offensive, should notify us at webmaster@heraldandnews.com.
America and not Russia wrote on Sep 20, 2008 6:19 PM:
" I agree with Lisa J. To think that our gov't would start going door to door to see if someone has an uncertified stove??!!!! We live in America and not the Soviet Union. How dare anyone woud suggest going door to door to clean up our air. Just educate people on how to burn clean!! The people of the Klamath Basin are not criminals. Especially in this time of economic troubles, people are doing whatever they can to make ends mean. The "dirty air" is from the forests and not from the average wood burner. I read in the paper where our elected officials are working hard to protest the EPA's new standard. Let's stand with them and help in anyway we can. "
Lisa J. wrote on Sep 19, 2008 4:00 PM:
" The air quality in the Klamath Basin is wonderful except for the forest fire smoke. But I would think this has happened for hundreds of years. The EPA keeps reducing the air quality standards until no one can comply with them. This is the real problem. I used to live in California and I know what dirty air looks like and the Klamath Basin air quality has never been better. Would anyone complain if the EPA wasn't in here testing our air?? Why rob people of the ability to heat their homes in the way they see fit?? Why rob the businessmen of income who harvest the dead or thrown away trees and make firewood out of it? This air quality business is just for the EPA top control our lives and we certainly need less government intrusion into our lives, especially these days........ As far as I'm concerned we don't have a problem with wood stoves. Mother nature is dirtier then we could ever be............ "
Dorre wrote on Sep 17, 2008 3:27 PM:
" The lessons of Fannie May and Freddy Mac (or Enron) is that if Governments don't oversee regulations, nobody looks after the community’s interest and things can get really messed up.
Woodsmoke is no different. You don't need to monitor electricity use (as Jon suggested), just talk to the owners of houses with large plumes of health-hazardous smoke coming from the chimney!!!
If the heater (old or new) isn't smoking, it isn't a problem. But if the smoke is enough to make a sensitive person cough or suffer eye irritation, it's in everyone's interest to solve the problem - ask the owner not to burn green wood, or damper the stove, or could they afford to use non-polluting heating?
Remember the Canadian lawsuit where a couple had to pay their neighbours $270,000 in legal costs and compensation for damages caused by their woodsmoke - http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/366455
Far better to consider the neighbours and the environment than damage people's health and end up in court. "
Woodsmoke is no different. You don't need to monitor electricity use (as Jon suggested), just talk to the owners of houses with large plumes of health-hazardous smoke coming from the chimney!!!
If the heater (old or new) isn't smoking, it isn't a problem. But if the smoke is enough to make a sensitive person cough or suffer eye irritation, it's in everyone's interest to solve the problem - ask the owner not to burn green wood, or damper the stove, or could they afford to use non-polluting heating?
Remember the Canadian lawsuit where a couple had to pay their neighbours $270,000 in legal costs and compensation for damages caused by their woodsmoke - http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/366455
Far better to consider the neighbours and the environment than damage people's health and end up in court. "
Sue wrote on Sep 12, 2008 5:29 PM:
" Jon,
So are you going to monitor our phone bills next, to see who we may be talking to, or are you going to use devices to see what we may be talking about in our homes too?
Too much governing is not a good thing.
i agree with the environmental issues -- but let's not get carried away.
Don't burn green wood. Let it season. It'll make the difference "
So are you going to monitor our phone bills next, to see who we may be talking to, or are you going to use devices to see what we may be talking about in our homes too?
Too much governing is not a good thing.
i agree with the environmental issues -- but let's not get carried away.
Don't burn green wood. Let it season. It'll make the difference "
Trish wrote on Sep 12, 2008 12:01 PM:
" I am a newer homeowner with an older house, and an old stove. While my husband and I make a good living, we don't have $3000 to replace our stove. We have looked into it, $3000 is on the low side. We do have antiquated electric heaters, but we also have toddlers and these heaters are not safe for them at all. It is fine and well to rail against people who burn wood, but what are we supposed to do? Pull money out of our you-know-what? "
Jon wrote on Sep 12, 2008 5:56 AM:
" Just a thought this morning. A good place to start looking for people either dependent or choose to use wood heat may be comparing utility records [gas and electric]. It shouldn't be difficult finding addresses with low utility bills during the heating season. Then the task would be learning why wood heat is being used. If the reason is financial or not available then help them through programs designed for this purpose. However, if a resident does have gas or electric and chooses to burn wood...fine them. "
SL wrote on Sep 11, 2008 10:51 PM:
" The County is being mandated to clean up its air. Environmentalists have pushed this issue and it is an important one. Let everyone know woodstoves that pollute are no longer permissible. In Lake Tahoe, a City ordinance was passed that didn't allow 2-stroke marine engines. Guess what? People had to buy 4-stroke engines. God bless the environmentalists. By the way, I'm voting for McCain and Palin; I don't like big government and micro-management of our lives. "
kgreulich wrote on Sep 11, 2008 2:39 PM:
" They should not be toough. 1.) We have a lot of wood rotting on the ground as well as blow down and trees killed by insects. 2.) With fire hazards and suppression costs rising annually taking the trees for heat is a good thing. 3.) Based on current rises in fuel and electricity costs this can save people money. "
pete wrote on Sep 10, 2008 7:58 PM:
" Yes we have lots of major, national problems bigger than bad winter air. So think it over and vote for true change this Nov....and that's not the elderly Washinton insider running to continue the "for the rich" Bush years! It is also a fact that people damper down their stoves, operate old style stoves and burn greeen wood...without much worry for their neighbors breathing. How long is this to go on? Times change and clean air will cut medical costs. Air pollution shouldn't be ignored. The County must enforce the burning rules and the violators that truely can not affort better wood stoves must be helped with the dollars to change-over. "
Caring citizen wrote on Sep 10, 2008 5:09 PM:
" I agree with Sue. We have such incredible issues to deal with, why is the government hounding a few older folks with old wood stoves? My guess is that these elderly have absolutely no way on earth to pay for a new stove and are simply trying to keep from freezing in a winter like last year. Where is the compassion for the struggling individual in our society now?
The nationalization of Fannie May and Freddie Mac, the destruction (sometimes self destruction) of the banking, auto, airline, manufacturing, natural resource industries and the incredible burdomsome regulations for wood smoke when we have about a trillion times greater chance of dying from riding in our cars than we do from dying from wood smoke in the Klamath Basin. Good grief! It is government oppression of the worst kind - ignore the crucial items and smother us with regulations.
Rome burned while Nero fiddled - that's pretty much a good description of this EPA/ODEQ issue with wood smoke in the Klamath Basin. "
The nationalization of Fannie May and Freddie Mac, the destruction (sometimes self destruction) of the banking, auto, airline, manufacturing, natural resource industries and the incredible burdomsome regulations for wood smoke when we have about a trillion times greater chance of dying from riding in our cars than we do from dying from wood smoke in the Klamath Basin. Good grief! It is government oppression of the worst kind - ignore the crucial items and smother us with regulations.
Rome burned while Nero fiddled - that's pretty much a good description of this EPA/ODEQ issue with wood smoke in the Klamath Basin. "
Sue wrote on Sep 10, 2008 1:17 PM:
" This subject is sooooo irratating! Are they talking about last winter -- or the smoke filled skies NOW -- pretty soon i really think they shoudl penalize the firefighters for allowing the air to be filled with wood burning smoke....
If you burn green wood or wet wood -- you are going to have a lot of "crap" in your stove pipe. If you only burn dry wood -- it shouldn't matter if it is a "clean" burning stove or an old stove that needs replaced.
A certified stove that is burning bad wood -- is going to have bad air quality coming out of the chimney....
Doesn't anyone worry about the economy, the gas prices, the energy costs, the presidential election, the fact that $50 worth of groceries doesn't even cover the bottom of your grocery cart?
Air quality is important -- certainly for people with breathing problems -- but we live in an area -- that is constantly filled with smoke -- worse in the summer than in the winter. "
If you burn green wood or wet wood -- you are going to have a lot of "crap" in your stove pipe. If you only burn dry wood -- it shouldn't matter if it is a "clean" burning stove or an old stove that needs replaced.
A certified stove that is burning bad wood -- is going to have bad air quality coming out of the chimney....
Doesn't anyone worry about the economy, the gas prices, the energy costs, the presidential election, the fact that $50 worth of groceries doesn't even cover the bottom of your grocery cart?
Air quality is important -- certainly for people with breathing problems -- but we live in an area -- that is constantly filled with smoke -- worse in the summer than in the winter. "
Jim wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:47 AM:
" The County should definately do something to clean up the air quality, just accepting it should not be an option. Raise the woodcutting permit fees if needed and yes non-certified stoves should be inspected and removed even if the county has to give a credit to help the homeowner purchase a clean burning stove or pellet stove use the higher cutting fees to offset the cost. "
RSS
Lynne wrote on Oct 8, 2008 5:25 PM: