![epa-logo[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/epa-logo1.png?quality=75){kind=logo}
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
As Alaskan winter temperatures drop below -30F, the EPA is considering fining and prosecuting entire towns for breaching clean air laws, because of smoke from residential fireplaces.
Alaskans’ Cost of Staying Warm: A Thick Coat of Dirty Air
…
“That guy has got an old stove, right there,” Dr. Jeanne Olson, a veterinarian and air quality volunteer, said on a recent afternoon, pointing from the cab of her four-wheel-drive Toyota toward a spiraling column of thick gray smoke from a homeowner’s chimney. The thermometer inside Dr. Olson’s cab said it was 30 below zero outside, which meant that lots of people in the vicinity were probably putting another log on the fire, or thinking about it, even as she spoke.
…
But here in one of the coldest parts of the coldest state, there is an only-in-Alaska pollution story: At about minus 20 Fahrenheit — a fairly regular occurrence here in winter — smoke that goes up comes right back down, to linger at ground level and, therefore, lung level. The average from 2013 to 2015 for dangerous small-particle pollution, called PM 2.5, which can be deeply inhaled into the lungs, was by far the highest in the nation in North Pole, just southeast of Fairbanks, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency.
“It’s all one thing — when you most need the heat is when you’re most apt to create a serious air pollution problem for yourself and the people in your community,” said Tim Hamlin, the director of the office of air and waste at the E.P.A.’s Region 10, which includes Alaska.
And forces are now converging to heighten the tension in this seemingly unlikely pollution story. Civil fines by Fairbanks North Star Borough — which includes the cities of Fairbanks and North Pole, with a total population of about 100,000 — could be assessed in coming days against residential polluters. The E.P.A. could declare the entire area to be in “serious” noncompliance of the Clean Air Act early next year, with potentially huge economic implications, including a cutoff of federal transportation funds.
…
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/25/us/alaskans-cost-of-staying-warm-a-thick-coat-of-dirty-air.html
Let me see if I have got this right – if you try to escape President Obama’s skyrocketing energy prices by burning wood stay warm, on the very coldest winter nights you risk being fined by mobile EPA air quality inspectors.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“The average from 2013 to 2015 for dangerous small-particle pollution, called PM 2.5 […] was by far the highest in the nation in North Pole, just southeast of Fairbanks, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency.”
Nonsense. The highest PM 2.5 are found in underground subway. e.g. : http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es504295h
And much more people use subways, than Alaska has inhabitants.
I am waiting forward EPA harass cities’ underground networks the way they do alaskans. But for some reason, i bet this won’t happen
interesting … thanks
Both times this story has hit the news they state that, “At about minus 20 Fahrenheit — a fairly regular occurrence here in winter — smoke that goes up comes right back down, to linger at ground level”.
What is the physical mechanism that causes this? Air that is at -20 degrees F with no water vapor must be incredibly dense. Why does the smoke come back down?
Or (as usual) is it the journalist (writing the original article) that is incredibly dense? Is there some other mechanism (like a temperature inversion) that causes the smoke to come back down to ground level?
Probably a temp inversion. Happens all the time in Eugene, and wood use is stopped on those days.
Prb’ly temp inversions during calm winds, where the very coldest air hugs the surface & slightly warmer air above it traps anything coming from the ground. See it occasionally here in east US but prb’ly alot more common in some arctic and valley areas.
Small population red state communities are fair game for this EPA. Wait for the next (rifed) EPA for the real story.
Why do they burn all that wood? When I lived in North Dakota and it would get that cold, we only needed one log for the whole winter. Crazy you say? Naw, easy. Grab your log of firewood, run up to the second floor, thow it out the window run down the stairs and go get it. Repeat all winter.
Yes, air pollution must be a big concern for Alaska, sarcasm! Just wonder, what’s the population density of that state?
The mistake in Alaska is in burning raw wood. They should instead pay to import Green-certified pellets from the UK even if it originates from lower 48 state wood pellet plants and associated clear cut sites there. In other words they are not wasting enough money on appearances and Green money changers and enviro media consultants.
Worrall, please learn to read.
.
“Civil fines by Fairbanks North Star Borough ” does not imply ” being fined by mobile EPA air quality inspectors.”
.
You see Eric, the EPA is a federal authority, and the Borough is a local authority.
Is the local authority levying the fines for non-attainment of the federal standard?
True the civil fines would be coming from the local authorities, who are being pressured by the federal government to impose changes. The guy holding the gun to the head of the of the executioner is the perpetrator not the executioner. According the your logic its the gun that kills, not the one who pulls the trigger.
rocket, that is the logic behind “gun” control.
Gun control means hitting your target.
Any PM2.5 generated in a 747 travelling from Washington D.C, to Alaska for a photo op? How about eight years of globe trotting in personalized comfort at taxpayers expense?
Got no sympathy for guys toughing out a brutal winter in the frozen tundra, while you enjoy another Hawaiian vacation?
The hypocrisy is reaching epic proportions.
Okay, one more thing:
Now that is what we really do need…an agency dedicated to protecting the United States Climate Funds from those in other countries that would seek to deplete it
Alaskans are resourceful. They should respond with fake DIY solar panels on their roof and some old paddles as fake windmill blades.
EPA has regulated PM Emissions from wood burning stoves since 1990. All stoves on the market since have been 80 to 90% cleaner than stoves produced before the regulations. But they have also been more expensive and many of the stoves sold in the 1970s and 80s were very poor in emissions. EPA and industry have supported many change out programs to get consumers to replace old stoves with clean burning models (e. g. Missaula, MT). EPA revised the regulations in 2015 to cover all types of wood burning residential heating appliances which further increases the cost and might result in new stoves being 95% cleaner than pre-regulation designs. But prices are now high enough that clean heating with wood is not much of an option for low income households.
@Rich
So you are saying that it is okay for low income people to kill their children while saving a buck on energy?
This happens all too often. Of course rich people do it too.
One of things that drives me nuts while working in nuclear power is reading the local paper about the inevitable fatalities that cold weather and power outages bring.
Quality wood burning equipment is more expensive than the junk taken off the market by EPA regulations. Good residence!
Recommend smoke and carbon dioxide detectors in any case. Also check out stuff before it is needed.
**Recommend smoke and carbon dioxide detectors in any case. Also check out stuff before it is needed.**
Carbon dioxide from combustion or any other source is not poisonous.
Did you mean carbon monoxide?
Ret. Kit P:
I don’t get your comment. How did I advocate low income folks harming anyone? Maybe rather than fining people for trying to find an affordable way to stay warm, Alaska could find a way to help these people replace their crappy old stoves with new clean burning ones. Given the fuel cost savings of wood v. oil or propane they could pay back a low or no interest loan in a few years. I spent $3500 on a very clean very efficient wood stove a few years ago and it saves me around $1200/yr in WI. I live in the country and get all the firewood I need just cutting up trees that die and fall down around my house. Technically I guess I could sell the 2-3 cords I burn each winter for a few hundred bucks, but it feels free to me.
And yes, everyone should have a smoke/CO detector no matter what fuel they use.
They’ve become so expensive around here that places that did sell them have pretty much quit because most people can’t afford them. It’s cheaper make one out of an old barrel and say to hell with the store bought wood stoves.
After getting out of the navy in 1980, I moved to the boondocks and bought log house in the mountains. It had wood and oil hot water heat. My neighbor explained the good bad of heating with wood. His cousin made a homemade wood boiler and had the habit of burning green wood.
At the recommendation of my neighbor, I replaced the wood boiler with a quality air tight unit that burned more efficiently. More importantly, the cleaner burning stove reduced the chimney fire hazard which was a common event in that poor rural area.
Another neighbor like to explain the dangers of nuclear power at the plant I worked at. “Had any chimney fires lately Glen?” Glen did not want to discuss safety anymore.
If you heat with wood, stupid can get you killed. The problem with the EPA, there brand of stupid can also get you killed.
yesterdays post was British paying people to burn biomass, heating empty buildings. we should send a bunch of Washington EPA peopke to remote Alaskan villages to observe globul warming first hand. We will outfit them with sunblock and other such useful items.
I spent a good stretch of my childhood hauling in coal and chopping wood for heating the house. I used to play in the coal bin — loads of fun for a kid, who thinks nothing of pollution. Consequently, had some official walked up to the house back then and mentioned a fine for burning wood, it would have been the equivalent of an evil outer-space alien landing in the backyard, speaking in some foreign tongue. And we all know what can happen to evil outer-space aliens landing in people’s backyards.
Let’s just say that I would not want to be one of the enforcers of this measure.
@Robert
The good old days were not so good. You would certainly would not want be to be an enforcer.
Let them try this here in Kansas City. No more wood smoke for barbeque ribs? That’s heresy.
Fiction is becoming reality! https://sputniknews.com/world/2007040362999935/
“Experts said that between 50 and 100 grams of CO2, a so-called greenhouse gas, is emitted during barbequing. Beginning June 2007, residents of Wallonia will have to pay 20 euros for a grilling session.
The local authorities plan to monitor compliance with the new tax legislation from helicopters, whose thermal sensors will detect burning grills. “
The homo sapien experience is defined by using brainpower and then fire to overcome the challenges given to a hairless ape, without the fangs and claws to compete with other predatory animals for food and shelter. We have evolved sitting around the source of our power, the ability to create fire. The idea that a bit of smoke from a wood fire, will kill us is ridiculous and shows how we have forgotten the struggles of past generations, just to provide food, clothing, and shelter for themselves.
Exposure to smoke on a daily basis is not good for us, but it is also something we have a genetic disposition to tolerate. To the point where we are the only species on the planet, that has individuals who have mastered the behavior, of intentionally breathing in smoke.
Next thing you know there will be bans on burning flags and EPA director in effigy. Well those might be a stretch.
C’mon, the idiots who will be burning Trump in effigy on Inauguration Day will be getting a special dispensation from Shadow President Al Gore.
DOWN! DOWN with campfires!!!
I mean it’s coming right?
In CA they wanted to ban campfires in the state beaches that provided fire pits, because some nearby residents were complaining about air quality.
It’s a puzzle. My nation has survived despite of repeated and multi-generation exposure to smoke saunas built without a chimney. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoke_sauna
Pull over and show some ID.
Can’t do Resourceguy. My ancestors succumbed to obscure lung complaint before puberty.
Classic example of a Progressive elitist making decisions that he will never suffer from. Honestly, has there ever been a President in America who brought so much deliberate pain to his own people? And then practically breaks his arm patting himself on the back?
All you city mice that have been deciding how us country folk have to live – mostly out of positions of ignorance bordering on enemy action – all to suit your sensibilities and fan your warm fuzzy – should remember the old adage of ‘when they came for me there was no one left’ – because it was actually YOU who was coming after everyone else all along.
So the question is why are they burning logs to keep warm?
A. They are poor and can’t afford the alternative methods to warm a house.
B. They don’t have access to alternate methods to warm their house.
C. They don’t want to warm their house with other methods.
D. Add your own excuse here
I am amazed that some of the comments above would rather the people freeze to death as opposed to keeping warm the way they always have in that area. Odds are those who are the ones complaining about this issue are not long term residents and want everyone to conform to their progressive desires. Just sayin….. who is gonna go hang outside in -30 conditions in the smoke anyhow?
Oh wait, maybe the snowflakes do? Sarc/
Wait… What? This isn’t an Onion headline?
I’ve bemoaned the smoking Nazis but I have similar disdain for the smoke Nazis. Ironically, my finding about smoke Nazis is many of them are former smokers who now suffer COPD. Therefore, they have the right to make me cease burning, right? NOT!!!!
http://www.alaskareport.com/science10059.htm
“Fairbanks temperature inversions are so consistent that meteorologist Rick Thoman, also of the Fairbanks office of the National Weather Service, once calculated how much firewood he saved by living in the hills west of town.
He lives at about 1,600 feet elevation, and he compared his average temperatures with those of a Weather Service observer who lived at 590 feet. In one winter, his home averaged 16 degrees warmer than the low site. Thoman figured that, thanks to Fairbanks’ persistent temperature inversion, he burned 20 percent less wood by living up high.”