No More Singing Around the Campfire: Too Much C02

From the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, word of insanity afoot in local government there. I wonder if the board members at Parks and Recreation will give up their cars, or maybe their home furnace?

Mike Urban / P-I
Robert Drucker (not shown), of the Sunset Hill Community Association, says of bonfires, such as this at Golden Gardens being enjoyed several years ago: “It’s a longstanding tradition. I think people would be upset to see it go.”

Beach bonfires may be banned

They fuel global warming, parks department says



Even with the skies overcast and threatening rain, Khang Nguyen, 18, and Joel Juan, 19, kicked back after school at Alki Beach.

“It’s just a relaxing way to hang out with friends,” Nguyen said of the bonfire crackling in front of them one evening earlier this week.

But Seattle Parks and Recreation might do what even this week’s chilly weather couldn’t — douse the long tradition of beach bonfires at Alki and at Golden Gardens.

Park department staff is recommending reducing bonfires at the two beaches this summer and possibly banning them altogether next year.

The park board will hear the recommendation Thursday, and the city plans to run public-service announcements and hand out brochures later this month about the effects of bonfires on global warming.

According to a memo to the park board from the staff released Thursday, “The overall policy question for the Board is whether it is good policy for Seattle Parks to continue public beach fires when the carbon … emissions produced by thousands of beach fires per year contributes to global warming.”

Under the proposal, the department in July would reduce the number of fire rings at Alki from six currently to three and at Golden Gardens from 12 to seven.

Then later this year, the department would consider banning bonfires or requiring fees and permits to reduce the number of bonfires next year.

It’s the second time in the past few years the tradition of lounging by a fire at the beach has run up against the environmental ramifications of bonfire smoke.

Parks and Recreation recommended banning the fires in 2004, after a violation notice from the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to the city after someone set a couch on fire at Alki Beach. However, 1,200 people signed a petition to save Alki’s bonfires, and 100 others signed a petition to save the ones at Golden Garden.

Instead, park staff said the department should do more to regulate what people burn and make sure the fires are out by 11:30 p.m.

“I think people still feel the same way (about preserving bonfires),” said Larry Carpenter, treasurer of the Alki Community Council. “Old-timers see bonfires as a tradition that they did as children and growing up. It’s a nostalgia thing.”

At Alki on Wednesday night, Linda Garcia, a 56-year- old West Seattle resident, walked her dog and made a slightly rose-colored argument for preserving her beloved bonfires. “It’s so windy around here it probably doesn’t pollute that much.

“They have to try to take everything away,” she said.

Sara Russell, 34, who also was walking her dog, rolled her eyes at the idea of banning bonfires to stave off global warming.

“If they really wanted to do something, they could enforce the no-cruising law, because in the summer you see so many cars cruising around here,” she said.

Russell’s neighbor, Debbie Nichols, said that last July Fourth, she got up at 5:30 a.m. to grab one of the fire pits. “I wrapped myself in a blanket and sat there all day,” Nichols said. “We use the fire pits all year round.”

Since the park board last heard the issue, the department assigned more staff to the two sites. The number of fires using illegal materials has dropped by two-thirds, according to the park memo.

The memo also noted that restrictions could cause illegal fires and fights over the limited number of fire pits. Charging fees to use the pits could disproportionately bar youths and low-income people from having bonfires, the report said.

But Mayor Greg Nickels’ plan to reduce climate-threatening pollutants “begs the question of whether Seattle Parks is acting responsibly … to systematically reduce controllable contributions to global warming,” the memo said.

“I can certainly understand it. (Global warming) is a legitimate concern,” said Robert Drucker, vice president of the Sunset Hill Community Association.

Still, he said of the bonfires at Golden Gardens: “It’s a long-standing tradition. I think people would be upset to see it go.”

But at Alki, Nguyen said he’d be OK with banning bonfires.

“By all means, I’d rather not have bonfires than have global warming,” he said.

As a sliver of silvery sky shrank under the growing clouds, Nguyen played a guitar, and maybe for the last year, the flames licked the salt air.



The Seattle Board of Park Commissioners will hear the bonfire ban proposal at its next meeting, Thursday at 7 p.m. The meeting will be at the park department’s offices at 100 Dexter Ave. N.



0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steve Stip
June 6, 2008 2:32 pm

Hahahahaha! Seattle is supposed to have one of the most highly educated populations in the country. I feel good about myself.
If stupid people can just be persuaded to hold their breath…

June 6, 2008 2:47 pm

When wood rots, it is only oxidizing more slowly. The same amount of gasses are released when it burns, except in a shorter time.
More and more people believe that environmentalists are either crooks or morons.

June 6, 2008 3:00 pm

Why didn’t they try to get Al to give them carbon credits for banning the bonfires? That would be double plus good. Anything that causes misery should qualify for carbon credits.

June 6, 2008 3:01 pm

So they ban the fires, which burn wood, which grows from photosynthesis, which takes carbon out of the air. That is the perfect “low carbon footprint” fire.
Why don’t they ban planting trees, because trees could later be burned in fires, which would contribute to global warming?

June 6, 2008 3:03 pm

You know if they switched to nuclear campfires it would eliminate the CO2. Or perhaps they could gather around a CFL.

Vic Sage
June 6, 2008 3:03 pm

It’s amazing how much control the regulation of CO2 can give to a government.
I’m sure I’m the only one who has noticed this.

Leon Brozyna
June 6, 2008 3:04 pm

What a pile of overripe h*******. Mr. Gore exploits AGW to make himself rich. What’s the Parks & Recreation folk doing? The skeptic in me is thinking that they’re doing this to stop having to clean up after the bonfires ~ and they’ll probably ask for a raise to boot!

June 6, 2008 3:07 pm

But how much C02 is released when the brain of a Parks Department official rots? That looks like a significant factor at work here.

June 6, 2008 3:10 pm

“More and more people believe that environmentalists are either crooks or morons.”
I have believed that for a long time. People are also beginning to realize that environmentalist really aren’t very nice:
Do you have an army of people that help you find stuff like this? Thanks for all you do.

June 6, 2008 3:13 pm

Shouldn’t they do something useful with their time, like banning forest fires?
Ignorance, the most expensive commodity produced by mankind. In Seattle, they each have a double helping. Crooks or morons, tough choice, decisions decisions, so many choices.

June 6, 2008 3:15 pm

I had a bonfire last week to get rid of the branches pruned from the trees around the house. Perhaps I should feel guilty but I don’t. I offset my emissions by making sure that most of the things I buy are made from plastic or at least wrapped in plastic. Then, instead of wasting precious power recycling the plastic, I take it to the local rubbish dump where it is subterraneanly sequestered. No Guilt at all. Might sound stupid but then Al Gore says some pretty stupid things and look how rich he is getting.

Diatribical Idiot
June 6, 2008 3:17 pm

I have become more and amazed at how unbelievably stupid supposedly smart people can be. The “fueling global warming” hysteria has truly reached proportions that are utterly laughable, except that it has actually been considered legitimate by enough elite thinkers in government to influence policy. It’s scary that common sense and reason have so unimaginably destroyed our ability to just enjoy a campfire without someone either feeling guilty or angry about it.
I want to hit something.

June 6, 2008 3:20 pm

You can probably see the stacks of a power plant from that beach. That plant generates in about one minute the same amount of CO2 that has been released from all the bonfires ever held at that beach.
What a bunch of morons.

Jim Arndt
June 6, 2008 3:25 pm

You remember here in Cali they tried to ban BBQ’s. Same old idiotic stuff

Andrew Upson
June 6, 2008 3:29 pm

And to think I’m moving to this city more or less volutarially (under the Happy wife, happy life theory). I miss Arizona ever more when I read these stories.

Robert Wood
June 6, 2008 3:35 pm

I trust they will ban jogging in the parks; it generates unecessarily large amounts of CO2.

David Walton
June 6, 2008 3:36 pm

Why give a sucker an even break?
There is a simple solution — the Seattle Parks and Recreation department can sell bonfire carbon credits and require that all bonfire participants use Bloomsberry Climate Change Chocolate to make their Smores.
And thus, the planet will be saved.

June 6, 2008 3:41 pm

Holy smokes!!! That “bonfire” is almost as tall as a human! No wonder they have a problem, if there’s “thousands” of fires like these (according to the article).
Oh wait. Either: a) the Seattle-PI photog is playing camera games by putting a normal “campfire” as a close-up with people some distance in the background; or b) the Parks department should be subject to endless public ridicule for providing “fire pits” so large that huge fires can be built in them.
I vote “a)”, even though I’m sure that a Seattle-based journalist would never intentionally try to exaggerate anything to do with AGW.

Jeff Alberts
June 6, 2008 3:43 pm

Being highly educated doesn’t make one more or less gullible, apparently.

June 6, 2008 3:45 pm

This is what I mean when I say that insane draconian laws will be proposed and inevitably put into law the majority of the time due to blind zombies that call themselves environmentalists demanding them ever more enthusiastically as they sense increasing danger to their “theory”. They have completely religiously devoted themselves to their “theory” and will not go down without kicking and screaming bloody murder, no matter how insanely communist it is. Instead of saying “Flowers for Stalin” (like the Soviet painting), they want us saying “Flowers for Gore”.

June 6, 2008 3:49 pm

The painting is actually called “Roses for Stalin”, painted in 1949.

June 6, 2008 4:01 pm

I was under the impression that wood was a renewable energy source generally called BIOMASS – therefore it doesn’t contribute to Global Warming when used an as energy source. Or have the rules changed?

June 6, 2008 4:09 pm

I think of them as morons more often than crooks. I live outside of Seattle and work with folks from there, most of whom consider themselves as environmentalists.
As an environmental scientist I have no choice about who I interacts with, so when they spew on about CO2 I generally just smile and remember the proper way to think of their name – environ(mental)ists.

June 6, 2008 4:30 pm

There’s no reason why environmentalists can’t be BOTH crooks and morons.
That’s funny, though. I wonder if they’re going to ban using the fireplaces in the condos at the beach.

steven mosher
June 6, 2008 4:33 pm

Moshpit humor interlude.
We should compel people to dress in white to raise the earth’s albedo.
I fought global warming today. I took a sheet of white paper and put it out in the back yard. I sat there and started to calculate. what if everyone did this?
what if we all worked to increase albedo. !
albedo mania.
Then I thought. remember when I was a kid.
And every back yard had acres of white undies flapping on clotheslines?
rememeber that? ( hehe)
Think of the lost albedo! We used to dry our tighty whities on the clothesline.
For free! Acres of white surface! we were saving the planet! Now we build nasty coal plants to dry tiny thongs in nasty appliances.
Every inch of white surface diminishes global warming. It’s true. Google it. albedo. Everyone should wear white clothes, and dry giant white granny panties on clotheslines . or go commando.
Next I put a reflector in the bed of my pickup truck. By my calculatons
the Truck is now carbon neutral. It’s carbon emissions are offset by its albedo contribution. I did the math. Phil Jones has the data. ask him for it.
The tin foils hats some people wear also offset global warming.
This ends todays humour.

Patrick Hadley
June 6, 2008 4:56 pm

Off topic.
I notice the RSS May figures have been released. Your prediction, after seeing the UAH figure, that RSS would also be below the zero line has come true.
May is -0.083. This is 0.163 lower than the April figure of 0.08. Not quite as big a drop as the UAH figure, but still pretty cool.

June 6, 2008 5:00 pm

I left Seattle this morning on a flight to San Diego. The temp was 58 degrees F and it was raining heavily. I can’t stand the terminal stupidity of the politicians and bureaucrats any longer.

Vic Sage
June 6, 2008 5:09 pm

albedo mania.

We could white wash everything and call it the White Planet.

June 6, 2008 5:09 pm

I think outlawing bonfires in Seattle is a great idea since the liberals in that state get a dose of their own medicine concerning the global warming fraud. Next, I hope they outlaw (or severely increase taxes on ) cars in Washington state. It would serve the citizens right. Ha ha ha!! I just love it when the liberal and refuted idea of man-made global warming, which was designed to destroy capitalism and take away citizens’ rights, BACKFIRES and takes away their rights!!!
Let’s also shut down the space program!!! Did you see all the pollution that the space shuttle made on takeoff the other day!!! Shut’er down!!!!

June 6, 2008 5:15 pm

Hunh. When 600,000 acres of the Okefenokee swamp and surrounding area (plus some other fairly significant acreage in other sloughs and swamps in Florida and Georgia) burned last year, it didn’t seem to affect the world temperature at all.
Perhaps Seattle burns more than 1,000 square miles or so of forest on those beaches every year?

Diatribical Idiot
June 6, 2008 5:31 pm

“I was under the impression that wood was a renewable energy source generally called BIOMASS – therefore it doesn’t contribute to Global Warming when used an as energy source. Or have the rules changed?”
You see, comments like this just prove how incapable of solid reasoning skills deniers are. You see, when you burn wood, it creates fire. Fire is hot. Hot things generate heat. Heat makes things warmer. Thus, it only stands to reason that all these fires have contributed to global warming.
Please try and think all these things through before posting.
(And lest I be reprimanded, yes that was sarcasm)

Joe S
June 6, 2008 5:36 pm

Mosh, I hate to confess this in such a public way…I had a load of whites out on the line just yesterday. Today, jeans and sweats.

steven mosher
June 6, 2008 5:36 pm

nobody got the albedo mania joke.
REPLY: I haven’t made my post yet on cow albedo

June 6, 2008 5:37 pm

I just cut down a HUGE China Berry tree.
I’m going to burn it all Winter long ….. I might cut down a few more too.

June 6, 2008 5:47 pm

I was under the impression that theory stated that it was the release of CO2 from using ancient sequestered hydrocarbons that was the cause of AGW – not the heat released that did the damage. Using Biomass is touted as a responsible approach to energy production i.e. renewable. Have I missed something here? Or should just go back to being a luking skeptic of all things AGW?

Tom in Florida
June 6, 2008 6:05 pm

A long time ago, in a century far, far away, it was the concensus that cats caused bubonic plague. So the learned people of those days decided to kill cats to solve the problem. The idea that the problem had been identified and was being corrected blinded those same learned people from finding the real cause and then taking a more proper course of action. Could CO2 be the medival cat for our time?

June 6, 2008 6:27 pm

I suppose every little bit helps.
I suspect what is the environmental extremists are doing is getting us use to just shrugging our shoulders and going along with their demands, or at least not tossing the demanders in the looney bin. Eventually they hope to get us to accept demands that will really have impact — eliminating heavy industry and government mandated population reduction and control.

June 6, 2008 6:53 pm

Hmmmmm. Perhaps the albedo of those 25,000 polar bears may cause the next ice age. I say why take chances?

Steve Stip
June 6, 2008 7:14 pm

Al Gore could be whitewashed and Capt Ahab summoned.

Jim Arndt
June 6, 2008 7:20 pm

Think BIG WHITE hats. I got it. Made me laugh I like that idea lets all put 10 white sheets of paper on our roofs and the government should mandate white hats for all. Now if we get everyone in the world to do it, then global waring is solved.

Jim Arndt
June 6, 2008 7:18 pm

Think BIG WHITE hats. I got it. Made me laugh I like that idea lets all put 10 white sheets of paper on our roofs and the government should mandate white hats for all. Now if we get everyone in the world to do it, then global waring is solved.

J. Peden
June 6, 2008 7:45 pm

I was under the impression that wood was a renewable energy source generally called BIOMASS – therefore it doesn’t contribute to Global Warming when used an as energy source. Or have the rules changed?
Well, I sure hope not! But just to ensure that I can get my retroactive carbon credits for burning so much wood for heat over the last 30+ years, everyone please chant with me now: “wood is not fossil fuel. It is natural!” A few demonstrations involving naked women and gigantic paper mache’ puppets wouldn’t hurt, either.
Yes, with your “tough and principled” diplomatic support, I just might-could be rich.

June 6, 2008 7:53 pm

Seattle doesn’t have thermal electric. Remember the Columbia project in the 1930’s with Bonneville and Grand Coolee? Well, about 1/2 of Seattle’s power comes from there and the rest from local hydroelectric plants in the mountains of the Puget Sound region and adjacent projects in Canada.
Oh, and the Governor here just recently rejected a coal plant because we don’t have cap and trade. That power though would have gone mostly to the Portland area.

Frank K.
June 6, 2008 7:58 pm

I’m sorry, this is just too much!! The global warming nonsense has really gotten out of hand, and it’s a shame to see people who are supposedly of normal intelligence fall for what is amounting to a great scientific hoax – perhaps * the * greatest of my lifetime.
Anthony – I appreciate you bringing these kinds of stories to light. I have decided now that one of my life’s missions will be to speak out forcefully against this stuff whenever I have the opportunity. I can no longer remain silent while this insanity infects both the climate science community (which I once had some respect for) and the population at large. I just hope it’s not too late…

Mike Bentley
June 6, 2008 7:59 pm

Crosspatch –
Sorry to burst your bubble, but in the Northwest, hydro is the big thing. The Green folks want all the dams removed to restore the “wildness” of the Northwest. Nuclear is also there as well, untill it was shut down in the ’70’s’.
A native Washingtonian, I moved to Colorado about 13 years ago, and have never looked back. I knew I made the proper move when some supposedly intellegent members of my family told me that Bush masterminded the attack on the Twin Towers in New York….
Uh yea, that day was pink…

Graham H
June 6, 2008 8:20 pm

We should ban campfires, bbqs, stogies, sternos, mosquito-repelllent candles, all manner of nefarious summertime evils.
I can see it now, St Nickels …the patron saint who saved xmas in July.

June 6, 2008 9:23 pm

[snip] And the nightmare begins in police city of Seattle….as the last scroll of liberty was destroyed, an old dying English citizen (who was denied Avastin for her brain tumor, as Kennedy got) whispered, “The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions.”
Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, as per The New York Times, “Every week to 10 days, another coal-fired power plant opens somewhere in China that is big enough to serve all the households in Dallas or San Diego.”

Jeff Alberts
June 6, 2008 9:36 pm

Well, I sure hope not! But just to ensure that I can get my retroactive carbon credits for burning so much wood for heat over the last 30+ years, everyone please chant with me now: “wood is not fossil fuel. It is natural!” A few demonstrations involving naked women and gigantic paper mache’ puppets wouldn’t hurt, either.

Umm, aren’t fossil fuels natural too?

June 6, 2008 10:21 pm

Diatribical Idiot:
> I want to hit something.
Don’t do that! It causes global warming!

June 6, 2008 10:22 pm

Geez, don’t you people know? Believing in Santa Claus causes global warming:

June 6, 2008 10:42 pm

Let’s see:
Cutting down trees increases albedo.
Building houses from them sequesters CO2.
So let’s cut down every last tree now & build lots of houses and legally require everyone to use whitewash & chlordane to kill the termites.
And wait! Solar panels are dark! They decrease albedo. We’ve got a bigger problem now.

June 6, 2008 10:47 pm

The world is heating up bad… Misery
I’m the kind of guy
Who never used to cry
The world is heating up bad… Misery!
We’ve doomed her now for sure
We can’t live here no more
It’s gonna be a drag… Misery!
Sorry Mosh I was away.

June 7, 2008 12:23 am

By my calculations the 750,000 acres of forest fires in Oregon in 2007 produced 60 million metric tonnes of GHGs, as much as all anthropogenic sources in the state put together. So yes, some reduction in forest fire acreage would go a long ways toward meeting the erstwhile goal of reducing GHG production, without any impact on transportation, industry, heating, etc. Plus averting environmental degradations of water, air, habitat, scenery, recreation, etc. generated by forest fires.
In contrast, banning beach bonfires would have an absurdly minuscule effect. Moreover, beach bonfires in the Pac NW are a tradition that goes back at least 13,500 years, one that pre-dates all other traditions known or conjectured.

Dodgy Geezer
June 7, 2008 4:06 am

“But how much C02 is released when the brain of a Parks Department official rots?”
Not a lot. It may be mainly carbon, but there isn’t a great deal of it……

June 7, 2008 5:16 am

I keep saying Global Warming is the 21st Century McCarthism.
“Have you ever or do you plan to in the future light a bon fire??”
This is absolutely getting out of hand….

Steve Keohane
June 7, 2008 5:36 am

When I moved to Colorado in ’72 we could get a permit to cut and remove any deadwood in the forests, and I heated my home that way until we weren’t allowed to cut deadwood because the human traffic caused ‘damage’ to the forests, even though it helped mitigate forest fires. Now, the same wood and more burns in place due to forest fires.

Pamela Gray
June 7, 2008 6:05 am

Pendleton, Oregon, that bastion of redneck republicanism, has declared they plan to restrict wood burning stoves when weather causes air stagnation. If stagnation gets very bad, all wood burning stoves will be shut down. Burn all the oil and gas you want, turn up the electric heater, but don’t light a fire in your wood burning stove.
It’s what I’ve been sayin and sayin. Red or blue, GW mania can infect both sides of the isle.

steven mosher
June 7, 2008 6:16 am

I thought you would say that the ‘white album’ was alebedo mania.
ringo would laugh at that pun.

steven mosher
June 7, 2008 6:43 am

Jim ardnt,
white hats is a great idea! I’m suprised this hasnt been touted on RC!
also if you are big fat and white you should be forced to lay naked in the sun and make an albedo contribution. ok, bad idea.

Bruce Cobb
June 7, 2008 7:11 am

I believe there is actually an issue with wood burning, but it has nothing to do with the fact that it emits C02. The issue would be if, and how much it contributes to smog, if indeed that is a problem in that area. And yes, Pam, air stagnation could be a very real concern when it comes to wood burning stoves. We need to be mindful of the fact that air pollution is still a very real issue, clouded as it is by the AGW idiots calling C02 pollution.

June 7, 2008 7:46 am

If you do not comply, the new Puritans will Burn You at the Stake!!!
Anyone ever watch Arab TV? They always talk about the will of Allah.
Western TV is no different – they always insert “Save the Planet” into every hour of TV in some way. The Green propoganda is everywhere.

June 7, 2008 7:51 am

258 AM PDT SAT JUN 7 2008
258 AM PDT SAT JUN 7 2008

Steve Stip
June 7, 2008 9:28 am

Mrs. Gray
I miss your point about wood burning. How is smog a GW issue?
This is no flame or a burn
I just want to learn.

June 7, 2008 11:19 am

I could lie out in the sun. As I am fairly pasty white, I have a high albedo. Thus, I reduce global warming.
But, wait, the longer I lie out there, the more tan I get, thereby reducing my albedo. Man, I can’t win.
Ah, sunscreen. That is the secret. Clearly a high enough SPF can reduce AGW.

June 7, 2008 1:17 pm

SPF!! Of course. We need SPF helicopters spraying the entire land surface: plants, animals, houses, people, everything. Coat the planet in SPF. That’ll do the trick. Or bleach. Or maybe tinfoil?

June 7, 2008 1:27 pm

Last time I looked, Washington did have a coal power plant. In Centralia.
And if we all painted our roofs white, used white paving, and drove white cars we could probably start an ice age.
But what if the greatest source of greenhouse warming is the millions of parked automobiles that act as little greenhouses in the sunshine?

June 7, 2008 2:32 pm

[quote] I thought you would say that the ‘white album’ was alebedo mania.[/quote]

Alan S. Blue
June 7, 2008 4:15 pm

I have a sketchy note that indicates that a human produces 15L/hour of CO2 ‘at rest’, and 45L/hour ‘moderate activity’. Does anyone have an actual reference for this sort of information, particularly if it goes into more detail? (Sleeping vs sitting vs walking vs triathalon etc.)

Gary Jones
June 7, 2008 5:56 pm

Take a close look at the data…the earth has not warmed in a decade and I recently read that Dr. James Hansen of NASA (Gore’s science advisor) has been “cooking the books” on surface temperature change.(
Congrat’s to all of you who have your eye’s wide open, there’s surly more falderal to come.

Bruce Cobb
June 7, 2008 5:56 pm

According to this site we exhale about 21L C02/hour at rest (468L air x .0445% C02), and 213L during vigorous exercise: the car and save the planet.
Singing tends to require quite a bit of air, particularly if you like to ‘belt’ them out, so figure at least 100 – 150 L/hour of C02 produced for that activity. According to AGW theology, it would be best for Gaia if everyone just stayed home, and did nothing whatsoever (unless we decide to take the ultimate sacrifice), and most especially, nothing remotely vigorous (yes, none of that, you know what that leads to – more of us!).

G.R. Mead
June 7, 2008 6:27 pm

Jeez wrote: … The world is heating up bad… Misery …
Reminds me of the song from the old country music/humor show “Hee-haw”:
“Dooooom, despaaair,
and agony on me …
[sliding wail] OoowOOoooooooo
Deep, dark depression,
excessive misery …
[sliding wail] OoowOOoooooooo
If it weren’t fer bad luck
I’d have no luck at all …
[sliding wail] OoowOOoooooooo
Doooom, despaaaair,
and agony on meeeeeee …

June 7, 2008 6:48 pm

In the PNW cities are dem whether on the west or east side of the Cascades. On the East side, this is largely a result of demographics with Hispanics being in greater numbers in those urban areas.
In Yakima, Pendleton, Spokane, and Bend its much the same. As second and third generations of Hispanics have reached voting age they support the party that provided them with support.
So don’t be too surprised to hear of these stories. They will become more common as more Hispanics reach voting age.

Pamela Gray
June 8, 2008 9:36 am

The ban on wood burning stoves include DEQ stoves. No ban on driving though. No ban on factory exhaust. No ban on anything other than private citizen wood burning. Think about it. This seems a political move.

Steve Stip
June 8, 2008 11:45 am

So what is extraordinary about a one-size-fits-all government rule? And if you are in favor of big government then don’t complain when it bites you.
Still, pollution is a community concern and could be properly addressed by government. Perhaps if government quit concerning itself about things it has no proper business in then it could do its proper jobs better. And think of all the money private citizens would have to by non-polluting wood stoves.

Bruce Cobb
June 8, 2008 2:22 pm

Even with the more modern wood stoves, the amount of air pollution they emit is very much dependent upon the operator, and on their choice of material they burn. Sad, but true. No easy answers, I’m afraid.

Fred Middleton
June 9, 2008 6:54 am

Incite a riot. Mob mentality. Green is good. Crooks and morons. Burn the witches. Government.
Professional politicians have caused the Parks to think ‘funding’ first, common sense last.

Steve Stip
June 9, 2008 7:57 am

Yes burning wood properly is tricky. I am no expert but I can thing of a few things: catalytic converters, exhaust recirculation, computer control, and exhaust filters.
My chief point is that life is far too complicated for a few people at the top to be making decisions for the rest of us. It wastes resources and discourages innovation. Government is FORCE. There is a need for force sometimes but let’s keep this to a minimum.

pablo an ex pat
June 9, 2008 10:44 am

Now if the camp fires burned tropical hardwood which had been cut down to make room for Palm Oil Plantations needed to feed the European demand for Bio Diesel that would be OK wouldn’t it ? Bio Diesel is green isn’t it ?
Burning the Indonesian forest, and more especially the peat layer underneath, to make way for Palm Oil Plantations creates so much CO2 that Indonesia is now the worlds 5th largest emitter of CO2. More CO2 comes from Indonesian forest burning alone than comes from the tail pipes of all the automobiles on the planet combined.
The ridiculous restrictions, laws and penalties do serve a purpose however, they really tick off ordinary people. Which is what we saw in the recent Mayoral Election in London. The two term incumbent Red Ken was rejected in favor of a more pragmatic Conservative.
In the UK their are moves to ban outdoor propane heaters. Many bars bought these to keep the smokers warm when they dashed out for a smoke between beers. The heaters create CO2, a miniscule amount when considered against all other sources but that’s not the point in gesture politics. And it has a double benefit as the smokers can be further punished by being made to be cold while indulging their habit.

June 10, 2008 9:35 pm

[…] organizations like NOAA. Last week is was bonfires on the beach in Seattle being considered for a ban due to “CO2 concerns”, this week it’s fishing on the open ocean. For me, this is a tipping […]

June 11, 2008 1:56 pm

It’s hard to believe that we as a society allow people with such little common sense have so much control over our lives.
I’d like to just say “what a bunch of half-wits” but then, we allow them to do it so who’s really stupid here?

June 20, 2008 9:59 am

[…] campfires today contribute to GW so I gues we’d all be singing around a dim solar walkway light. No More Singing Around the Campfire: Too Much C02 « Watts Up With That? The founder of’s resignation posts: […]

June 23, 2008 11:02 am

[…] campfires today contribute to GW so I guess we’d all be singing around a dim solar walkway light. No More Singing Around the Campfire: Too Much C02 « Watts Up With That? Additionally, The founder of’s resignation posts: […]

%d bloggers like this: