“We diminished an effective air quality plan,” said Borough Mayor Luke Hopkins. “But we still have many portions of a plan.”
The ordinance weakened the mayor’s air quality plan passed in June to reflect a ballot measure passed by voters several months later. Proposition A banned the borough from regulating home heating devices. Everyone but Assemblymember Diane Hutchison voted for the ordinance; Assemblymember Mike Musick was absent.
Under the new plan, enforceable emissions standards were replaced with voluntary standards. But assembly members decided to maintain fines for burning prohibited fuel, including wood with more than
20 percent moisture content, after dozens of residents asked them to.
Burning wet wood is one cause of the air pollution the borough is grappling with. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has given Fairbanks until 2014 to reduce levels of PM 2.5, a tiny but toxic particulate.
Studies have shown wood-burning stoves in the Fairbanks area contribute to the PM 2.5 problem. The borough passed a plan in June that set limits on visible emissions and fines for using prohibited fuels and operating certain appliances, such as hydronic heaters.
The administration removed much of those regulations in order to comply with Proposition A. It deleted emissions standards, emissions fines, restrictions on emissions crossing property lines and restrictions on certain heating devices.
Hopkins also proposed removing the fine for burning wet wood ($30 for the first offense) because it would be tricky to enforce in homes.
“It would be very difficult to substantiate that wet wood is about to be burned in (a resident’s) stove,” Borough Mayor Luke Hopkins said.
He said it should be dealt with through education rather than enforcement.
“I’m approaching it as, why is it important to burn dry wood — for the benefits of more BTUs and less cost,” he said.
But many residents said education wasn’t enough.
“We have been told how to burn wisely. … Some keep burning green wood,” said Fairbanks resident Gary Schultz. “The bottom line is, these voluntary efforts work with some people but not with everyone.”
More than 20 others echoed this belief. The main concerns were that pollution would cause health and respiratory problems among children and asthmatics, drive residents out of Fairbanks and hurt the economy.
Schultz’s daughter, 9-year-old Linnea, also testified. She demonstrated how to test the moisture content of wood, sticking a moisture meter into a log and determining it contained about
20 percent moisture.
The assembly debated at length whether or not to include a ban that would be tough to enforce.
Some said it would better deter the practice simply by being in code.
“Once you pass a law,
90 percent of the public wants to comply. If we get 90 percent of the public that quits burning green wood, I don’t think we’re going to have a problem,” said Assemblywoman Nadine Winters.
Assemblyman Karl Kassel supported it partly because it could help neighbors of polluters file nuisance complaints.
If an offense is codified, a complainant doesn’t have to prove it’s a nuisance — it’s just assumed.
“I’m not crazy about this ordinance,” Kassel said. “I think we’ve improved what’s in here. This is just the beginning.”
The plan still prohibits burning materials such as trash, animal carcasses and railroad ties and from installing old, dirty stoves without borough permission. It also removes pellet stoves from the list of banned appliances.
Contact staff writer Molly Rettig at 459-7590.
You couldn't be more wrong and you are only fooling yourself if you think that "neighbors" will work things out amongst themselves. I have first hand experience with neighbors NOT getting along and it happens more often than I'd like.
My choices for coal heating would be a stove or an add on wood/coal furnace. Stove is cheapest but unless your house is quite small it will not heat your whole house. An add on wood/coal furnace is good but you must have enough room near your existing oil furnace. There are both forced air and boilers available. For more info google: harmon, hitzer, keystoker, yukon-eagle, and energy king.
I don't think outdoor units are practical unless you have a quite large building due to over all costs. They also should use a tall stack to keep the neighbors happy. They do keep the mess out of the house.
Any of these option are much cheaper than oil in the long run but do require more work than just setting the thermostat.
Alright this is the last post. Here is a link to some energy efficient indoor coal/wood boilers MADE IN THE USA designed to burn MADE IN THE USA COAL or WOOD. Just hook it up tandem with your oil boiler and use common sense on when to use if you don't mind putting in a little effort!
Fairbanksgas,
I'll see you next year in Hawaii!!!!!
http://www.energyking.com/wood-coal-hot-water_furnace.htm
To suggest that the pm2.5 problem would be solved if we upgraded our power plants - which would be much more expensive than responsible residential burning - is false.
There are no similar requirements for residential coal or wood boiler operation. Nor is there any operator training required like there is for power plants. And all that is before we've even started talking about the efficiency of residential heating devices, which are oversized during most of the heating season.
Watch the neighborhood for medical oxygen delivery vans. There were so many asthmatics at the burrough meeting last night, that someone had set up an oxygen vending machine.
Of course most of the loudest winers have their heating bills paid for by welfare so they could care less what it costs.
Of course breathing in used motor oil and transmission fluid is perfectly healthy even though the borough's own studies show this to be the main pollutant on the south side of town.
Also research what has happened in other areas with bad air. Things get banned, eventually, like outdoor boilers. Bad investment. A better investment would be to improve your home's energy rating and turn your thermostat down. Don't keep your garage the same temperature as your house. Use dry wood in a stove to supplement oil heat.
I would be willing to bet that if these things are done, in the long run, you will save more money than you would with an outdoor boiler or with coal.
After all that's what this is about, right? Saving money until we get gas. For others it's about the air, but what ever. Energy efficiency and dry wood in a supplemental stove will save money and give us cleaner air.
http://burningissues.org/outdoor-wood-boilers.htm
"From Washington State EPA: Are OWBs Worse Than Indoor Woodstoves?
Yes. Newly manufactured indoor woodstoves are required to meet strict Washington State particle emissions standards, 2.5 grams per hour for catalytic stoves and 4.5 g/hr for noncatalytic stoves. Certification tests are conducted in EPA approved laboratories. In contrast, tests done by the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) found that
the average fine particle emissions (a particularly harmful pollutant) from one OWB are equivalent to the emissions from
22 EPA certified wood stoves,
205 oil furnaces,
or as many as 8,000 natural gas furnaces.
One OWB can emit as much fine particle matter as four heavy duty diesel trucks on a grams per hour basis. The smallest OWB has the potential to emit almost one and one-half tons of particulate matter every year. Although older style indoor wood stoves emit more than new certified stoves, they are still several times less polluting than OWBs. Due to the poor combustion conditions, it is also probable that OWBs emit proportionately more benzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, formaldehyde and other toxic partial combustion products which have been linked to asthma, heart attacks and cancer.
The entire report can be found here: www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/air/AOP_Permits/Boiler/Outdoor_Boilers_home.html"
With the additional coverage this issue has received since Prop A passed, I think a proposition to effectively reverse it would pass next time around. With Joe Miller (sorry, I feel bad for mentioning his name) and then Prop A sneaking in like thieves, people woke up a bit about the importance of voting.
Regulating the sale of firewood would be a lot easier than testing the moisture content of individual homeowners' wood (not that I'm against it; some people cut their own wood). In addition to easier enforcement, there is the argument to be made that a business transaction shouldn't involve dishonesty. To sell a wet less-than-a-cord as a dry cord of wood is dishonest or fraudulent.
aurorawatcher
How many more years do you think people should wait for all this neighborly problem-solving to occur?
Thank you for being a responsible citizen and respectful to your neighbors. A few months ago I researched coal boilers, talked to different people, and seen for myself the actual coal boiler I had my eye on and decided to purchase. It won't be up and running until next year but I made a few observations for next year and here they are.
1. Outdoor Boilers will save you money but are mainly a temporary quick fix due to the easy install and large combustion chamber. These work well when used to heat large areas when the dampner stays open all the time and dry wood is burned or a hot coal fire. Unfortunately the smoke stacks are short so if you live in the area where you have inversion then you probably will $iss of your neighbors. I passed on these models and ordered an Energy King with a blower draft system that acts similar to a turbo on a diesel. Example.. (My TDI jetta burns much cleaner than that old 6.2 with no turbo.)
2. When purchasing a boiler (wood/coal) it's best to go a little small so you don't need a heat dump zone, your fire stays hot, and your getting a better bang for your buck due to the efficient steady hot fire.
3. Put the stack as far in the air over your house as you can. The outdoor boilers are bad about this and cause lots of complaints.
4. On super cold days when it's -40 or colder save a little oil in your tank and use your oil boiler to limit the nasty wood/coal smells. We have our fair share of cold weather but not very often these days do you have the heavy inversion.
Just a few things I've researched and discovered. Any other ideas or haters of this concept?
I asked Mayor Hopkins about the coal stoves because they irritate me far more than the wood smoke because of the disgusting smell. He told me they were not going to be dealing with anything but wood stoves, I thought that was weird, but that was his reply. If coal stoves can be made to operate without that horrible stench I would be interested in getting one because they would be more efficient than even my Blaze King wood stove.
As it is, he has unnecessarily created many serious political enemies out of residents unnecessarily who would have been either neutral towards him or being included part of the creating the solution one of his supporters. But now he has forever framed himself as the typical politician of the Progressive genre, with their noses in the air "We know what is best for you so obey" elitist mentality.
If he enjoys dictating so much there is the military option, perhaps he can become a commissioned officer.