|2011 Sept. 12: AK Fairbanks: (Vote on Oct. 4) Support Prop. 2 & Comments
Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
Is Proposition 2 on the Oct. 4 ballot for or against wood burning? Fine particulates in the air, emitted from different combustion processes, …
Support Prop. 2
Some may say nothing will happen if we keep on as before. Something already is happening: kids in school and others are suffering from the effects of severe air pollution. We should not unfairly put the burden on our little ones, our elderly, or those with asthma who are most at risk. The faster something can be done the better. I encourage you to visit http://www.healthyairnow.org and support Proposition 2 with your vote Oct. 4. Tomorrow I will go get that same car sign.
Yes on Prop. 2 | 1 day 5 hrs agoby David F. DeLong, Fairbanks Fairbanks Daily News Miner Copyright 2011 Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. All rights reserved.
Support Prop. 2 | 1 day 5 hrs agoby Melissa Simpson, Fairbanks Fairbanks Daily News Miner Copyright 2011 Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. All rights reserved.
Support Prop. 2 | 14 days ago by Gary Schultz, Fairbanks Fairbanks Daily News Miner Copyright 2011 Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. All rights reserved.
Yes on Prop. 2 | 13 days ago by Mary Shields, Fairbanks Fairbanks Daily News Miner Copyright 2011 Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. All rights reserved.
Supports Prop. 2 | 13 days agoby S. Lee Zirnheld, Fairbanks Fairbanks Daily News Miner Copyright 2011 Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. All rights reserved.
« OneDad wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 02:28 PM »
It is easy. If you make no smoke, there is no chance of a fine. I burn wood and make no smoke. It is not that hard. The borough wants to help you if you don’t know how yet.
If you are looking for a law that says “you can burn whatever you want, and make as much smoke as you want” then you will hurt your neighbors, and Fairbanks, because the EPA will come in and take over when our PM2.5 numbers go even higher due to your smoke.
Prop 2 is moderate regulation, and supports clean burning wood heat. Vote for Prop 2 to save your wood stove from the EPA.
« OneDad wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 01:21 PM »
Actually, it is a wood chip boiler, installed inside, using moisture monitored wood chip fuel, much more similar to a pellet boiler. And Prop 2, You guessed it, Protects and supports wood pellet boilers!
That’s right! Prop 2 supports clean burning wood heat appliances! Many pellet boilers have lower PM2.5 emissions then oil boilers! The Borough already supports pellet boilers. In fact, right now today you could get $7,500 to replace your cord wood HH with a state of the art pellet appliance, which would save you money, time, and save all our health!
Cord wood HH’s however Are the horrors that produce toxic pollution.
Wow! Your home and shop must have thin walls! The borough has a weatherization program, you might want to look into it! 550 gallons of oil/month is really outrageous. So is 3-4 tons of coal a month! There is something wrong and fixing that will save you much more money even then burning coal instead of oil.
And why not have everyone burn coal? Well, in Dublin Ireland they studied the effects that banning coal had on health. In a rigorously controlled study, they saw that burning coal was causing 359 extra deaths a year. Extrapolated over your 10 years that is 3,590 people that would be dead in order for Fairbanks to follow your lead and burn coal for heat for ten years. Would you really be happy to send your child to college on the backs of your dead neighbors?
Medical Research linking particulate pollution to increased death rate in Dublin from coal smoke
from the study: “FINDINGS:
« BS.detector wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 11:53 AM »
In regards to Silka Schiewers letter-
Bravo. She avoided name calling, excessive rhetoric and used facts in an honest and sincere way. This is unlike many of the commenters on this site, who don’t appear to have good factual information and often resort to name calling. A good rule of thumb is when you see an individual that resorts to name calling, that’s usually a good indication of a weak position.
In regards to Fairbanks air pollution, the fact is that in terms of small particulate (PM 2.5) which is a very nasty form of pollution because they lodge so deep in your lungs your body can’t ever expel them, we have some of if not the worst air pollution in the entire country. Our health is being damaged, the health of our children is being damaged. This must be addressed and corrected.
« oldowl wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 11:15 AM »
Environmentalists DO “count the real cost” and that is why it is necessary to pass this proposition. The costs to us of allowing our air to become even more polluted are far more than your personal fuel bill, especially when your children get sick with asthma or respiratory problems or you personally get these problems because of what your neighbor does. It would be nice if we could do as the poster below says but reality is that we can’t because going to a neighbor in cases like this (or other things) will only get rude remarks, laughed at, or told to go fly a kite. Unfortunately not all people are reasonable or unselfish. I am happy we have the EPA and sorry it is not being allowed to do what it was created for and provided for in laws like the Clean Air Act.
« FbksTruckDvr wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 10:12 AM »
I don’t need a breathalyzer to tell me when I shouldn’t climb into my cab.
It is clear you don’t even burn wood. You try to make something easy sound hard.
Avoiding smoking out our neighbors isn’t rocket science. Stick with dry wood in an indoor wood stove. No rubber, plastic, treated lumber, or pig manure.
I’m voting yes on Prop 2 because I burn wood in an indoor stove and breathe. I’m prepared for the cold winter. I dry my wood and always have.
« FBX79 wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 08:34 AM »
Fairbanksgas, thanks for bringing this up.
Sierra Research did an inventory of heating devices last year. They found that there are 90 wood hydronic heaters in the non-attainment area. There are about 340 coal stoves. Now, some of these may already have been changed out. Lets assume there are 400 of these devices left. $7,500 tims 400 = $3,000,000. Great! The legislature just gave the borough $3,000,000 for the stove change-out program! We have the money, we get healthy air, and those who have the stoves get $7,500 each. Win, win, win!!!
And those employees you talk about? When those dirty stoves go away, so does 50% of the smoke. Don’t need those employees now! And we can all cut back on the doctor visits!
But what if we vote no on Prop 2? Eventually EPA comes in and we lose our highway dollars. We could lose Eielson during the 2013 BRAC process. People lose jobs, Seekins doesn’t sell as many cars, our economy crashes. And we get burn bans when none of us can heat with wood. And lots of wood police!
No matter how you look at it, Prop 2 makes sense. I’m voting yes!
« FBX79 wrote on Monday, Sep 12 at 07:38 AM »
Mr. Roberts, dick tracy, and others who keep trying to say the the Phase 2 heaters are “clean”, EPA states these heaters are “cleaner”, not “clean”. Using a “cleaner” heater may make sense if you are using one on a 200 acre farm in Wisconsin where the wind blows. The “cleaner” heaters are still big polluters and don’t belong in our area, where the air is stagnant for months.
Pictures don’t lie. Here is another picture of one of the “cleaner” heaters operating here in Fairbanks. It may be better than the older models, but it is still a big polluter. You never see an EPA “Certified” stove putting out smoke like this!
The big polluting devices make up less than 5% of the stoves in the non-attainment area, yet put out over 50% of the smoke. We can fix our air and protect our ability to use wood stoves responsibly.
Read more: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner- Support Prop 2
- 0 Smog Blog – daily PM counts across U.S.
- 1. Take Action
- 2. RAWSEP WEEKLY
- 3. Meetings about wood smoke pollution
- 4. Wood Smoke Activist Newsletter
- Air Monitoring & A.M. Equipment
- Air Purification
- Air Quality (Particulate) announcements
- Bag House, to capture Industrial soot
- Biomass Particulates Questioned (Industrial Biomass)
- Comments against wood burning
- fires caused by wood burning for heat (residential destruction)
- GRASSROOTS anti-woodburning groups
- Industrial Wood Gasification with fluidized bed reactors
- LINKS to other anti-woodburning sites
- News – International – Selected
- News – Local U.S. – Selected
- News – States of U.S. – Selected
- News – U.S. National – Selected
- NSPS for wood burning appliances
- Outdoor wood boiler changeouts (natural gas is an alternative)
- OWB regulations
- Photos, selected
- RAWSEP Brochures
- RAWSEP Groups of the Week
- RAWSEP Quotes of the Week
- RAWSEP View
- Scientific Paper
- U.S. EPA
- U.S. Executive – President
- U.S. Judiciary
- U.S. Senate & House of Representatives
- Wildfires and particulate pollution
- Wood burning bans – temporary (based on air quality)
- Wood burning bans – voluntary (no fine)
- Wood stove changeout (natural gas is an alternative)
- Wood Stove regulations
- Woodsmoke Complaint Forms