Aug. 25, 2011
To the editor:
I love the whole process of heating with wood. Scouting out the trees on my land that have blown down, watching someone saw it up into manageable rounds, splitting it into chunks and stacking it for seasoning. Is there anything more satisfying that a neatly stacked pile of firewood, cracking in the warm summer air ?
And then I wait for cold winter temperatures to split the chunks into quarters and then my favorite part, slicing it thinner and thinner for kindling, trusting my steady hand to hold each stick and seeing the results grow into a big pile.
On that first snowy day of winter, the ritual of laying the fire, striking the match, seeing the fire take off and smelling the poignant scent of spruce smoke that sweetens the room. The heat radiates from the stove and soon the cabin is toasty. I love this ritual of heating with firewood. And I don’t want to lose it.
If Fairbanks doesn’t clean up our act, the feds (who may not have a clue about the ritual I just described) could just take the easiest way out and ban all wood stoves, not just the polluting ones.
So for my selfish reasons I am supporting Proposition 2. for Healthy Air Now on Oct. 4.
And more importantly than that, I support the right of everyone to breathe clean air, especially growing kids who have no control over where they live and for pioneers who may not have options to get out of town.
If you love to burn firewood and you love to breathe clean air, please support Prop. 2 on Oct. 4.
This is what people call "political science" that is science that pushes a political agenda. Another example of misusing science is when religion uses science to promote the belief in imaginary friends and supernatural deities who visit this planet and roll women in the hay.
This approach – appeal to authority argument – is used to sway unsuspecting voters and to con gullible politicians.
I would suggest, finding some other cause such as proving UFOs have visited the Earth for perhaps global warming caused by humans.
The one I think this deserves your attention would be to prove that global warming caused the Japanese earthquake.
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/121/21/2331
The American Heart Association Statement, "Particulate Air Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease"
The American Heart Association statement says the following:
On the basis of the findings of this review, several new conclusions were reached, including the following: Exposure to PM <2.5 μm in diameter (PM2.5) over a few hours to weeks can trigger cardiovascular disease–related mortality and nonfatal events; longer-term exposure (eg, a few years) increases the risk for cardiovascular mortality to an even greater extent than exposures over a few days and reduces life expectancy within more highly exposed segments of the population by several months to a few years; reductions in PM levels are associated with decreases in cardiovascular mortality within a time frame as short as a few years; and many credible pathological mechanisms have been elucidated that lend biological plausibility to these findings. It is the opinion of the writing group that the overall evidence is consistent with a causal relationship between PM2.5 exposure and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. This body of evidence has grown and been strengthened substantially since the first American Heart Association scientific statement was published. Finally, PM2.5 exposure is deemed a modifiable factor that contributes to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/121/21/2331
The American Heart Association Statement, "Particulate Air Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease"
"On the basis of the findings of this review, several new conclusions were reached, including the following: Exposure to PM Reduce pm2.5 air pollution. Vote YES on 2.
Regarding my comment:
"If it were not for the intellectuals, Phd-s, doctors, lawyers, scientists show businesses, industrialists the Holocaust would not have been possible."
The above comment was made in the context of other other statements relating to the appeal to "authority argument" as a method to convince others to accept your cause. Which also was to rebut the scientific claims about wood stove smoke 2.5s affecting health in Fairbanks.
The appeal to authority argument is very often exploited with malevolent intent. Especially when you have authority figures stating a fact which is an out right lie to promote the persons political agenda.
The people, I cited in my initial comment, were the leaders of society back then ie in the 1930's – and were of authority figures.
At that time, Social Darwinism was taught in the schools and in the universities.
It was the religion of the day – and endorsed by the academic community, the medical profession, the legal profession, the political establishment, the newspapers of the time including the Catholic Church and other religions.
If one looks at history they will find the intellectual community leading any society is highly prone to fad thinking.
Now days, the most common intellectual fad thinking today is Utopian environmentalism.
----------
1)It's creed requires the true believer to accept the argument: the humans are the root of all evil on this planet.
2)Secondly, only the government as the ability to create a perfect world. [historically referred to as Utopian socialism/communism]
Regarding item 1 – this is why no one has explained why wood smoke my wood stove is more dangerous than wood smoke from a forest fire. When in fact the exposure to wood stove smoke in Fairbanks during the winter is a minuscule fraction of the time. Less than 10 min. I wrote a 1440 min. day. Versus forest fire smoke which is continuous for several months out of the summer. Also, people who smoke are continuously exposed to 2.5s from the burning cigarettes plus carbon monoxide and other combustion products from such things as chocolate.
Regarding item 2, that is the effort through never ending government regulation reflected in this ballot proposition.
------------
The wood stove 2.5 issue here in Fairbanks is part of a national campaign against 2.5 particles.
The absurdity is we live with smoke and dust particles all the time and have done so for tens of millions of years.
---------
I hope these comments have clarified my remarks.
Fair enough but how about pumping my outhouse out right at my property line, uphill right next to the road or my neighbor? or someones septic tank?
That is illegal and are you arguing that we should be "Free" from government stopping your neighbor from doing so?
It is not a cosmetic issue or one lacking overwhelming scientific evidence showing huge negative effects to many, many parts of the healthy human body.(side note: dogs also, in Mexico City, with same ppm 2.5 pollution, dogs brains show very measurable degeneration)
With our inversions it's like having a very low permanent ceiling and with our cold we have a lot of heat we need to produce.
Imagine a guy who drank lots of cheap beer and pigged out at a free all you can eat been burrito feed last night. Now imagine using a small, unvented public restroom after he does.
That's whats we have, only it's not just offensive to the nose but harmful to many human body systems.
Estimates? Actually using Las Vegas is a good one as everyone knows, including statisticians and science proves, that on the whole most people will leave with less money than they came with. That's why big business has moved in as there is no 'chance' involved when one looks at the overall results. Just like ppm 2.5, on the whole, most all will be negatively affected in any or many number of ways, thus we FNSB residents or the "Big Losers". Unlike gambling though there are no winners. Some might be less affected but all will have some or many negative effects. Like smoking cigarettes they will certainly not help your health even if you don't notice the negative effects they are there each and every breath you take.
Your further 'reasoning' is way too far out and to say 'This is exactly how the Holocaust began' is funny, right out of Monty Python.
What I smell here is BS.
Here is an example:
"Emission estimates are from a report by Fairbanks-based Cold Climate Housing Research Center (page 15). The number of devices was estimated by Sierra Research, in the 2010 Fairbanks Home Heating Survey (page 4)." from the vote yes on BALLOT PROPOSITION 2 website.
[When someone uses and appeal to authority arguments it's a good idea to stay away from estimates because it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool; than, to open it and confirm you are a fool beyond any reasonable doubt.}
Estimates??? Give me a break. Every time I went to Las Vegas I "estimated" I would leave town with more money than I took in. Yes believe it or not, I was right and left town with $2 more in my pocket than I had when hit the strip.
Estimates are not science there are political rhetoric used to buttress a bogus political argument – BS.
I certainly hope some of the advocates have enough intellectual integrity to at least read the EPA documents on indoor air pollution and check the American Lung Association's comments.
By the way your are pissing into the wind with your appeal to authority arguments.. Just like the bible thumping bigots who used the Bible justify hanging of blacks in the south.
If it were not for the intellectuals, Phd-s, doctors, lawyers, scientists show businesses, industrialists the Holocaust would not have been possible.
Here is a current example of what the doctors are doing to the sick, disabled, and elderly in England.
------- Government action "for the good of the people"
Notice how they cover themselves and deny what they are doing.
Medicare was cut 500 billion to fund Obama care with the approval with AARP who had clause in the bill to help their Medicare supplemental business. Watch their commercials on TV! for verification.
NHS is what Obama care IS in reality and it is the "free medical care equal to congress" the hired Obama bots supported in the News Miner chat rooms.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/7533996/Basic-surgical-procedures-denied-to-thousands-amid-NHS-cost-cutting.html
They don't say that hydronic heaters don't matter because there are also indoor air contaminants. Instead, they recommend banning or restricting them.
I don't get what you want, other than to keep your hydronic heater. If there are no studies, you say that it isn't scientific enough. If studies are cited, you say someone is appealing to authorities and you don't like that either. The language of science IS one of estimates, theories, and conservative speech.
Hundreds of studies show that increased PM2.5 is a serious health issue. I read the indoor air quality information. But PM2.5 is worse, because there's no escape.
See C. Arden Pope's talk on fine particulate pollution: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3665914907157343039
The air sensors don't lie. Neither does the filter paper. Our air is bad, it's caused by woodsmoke, and hydronic heaters create the lion's share of the pollution.
http://www.stateoftheair.org/2011/health-risks/health-risks-particle.html
"Short term exposure to particle pollution can kill. Peaks or spikes in particle pollution can last for hours to days. Deaths can occur on the very day that particle levels are high, or within one to two months afterward. Particle pollution does not just make people die a few days earlier than they might otherwise—these are deaths that would not have occurred if the air were cleaner.
Researchers from Harvard University recently tripled the estimated risk of premature death following a review of the newer evidence from fine particle monitors (PM2.5) in 27 U.S. cities.
Particle pollution also diminishes lung function, causes greater use of asthma medications and increased rates of school absenteeism, emergency room visits and hospital admissions. Other adverse effects can be coughing, wheezing, cardiac arrhythmias and heart attacks. According to the findings from some of the latest studies, short-term increases in particle pollution have been linked to:
death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes;
increased mortality in infants and young children;
increased numbers of heart attacks, especially among the elderly and in people with heart conditions;
inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults;
increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes and congestive heart failure;
increased emergency room visits for patients suffering from acute respiratory ailments;
increased hospitalization for asthma among children; and
increased severity of asthma attacks in children."
There are many, many scientific studies that show that breathing air polluted with pm2.5 makes people sick and it kills people. To pretend otherwise is contrary to the known facts.
For more information about the health hazards of breathing fine particulate air pollution (pm2.5) see: http://www.healthyairnow.org/learn-more/science-health/
Also, watch this informative presentation on the health dangers of particulate air pollution by air pollution expert C. Arden Pope III on Air Pollution and Health. Dr. Pope is a professor at Brigham Young University and a respected authority on this topic. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3665914907157343039
Protect yourself and your family from the damaging health effects of breathing fine particulate air pollution. Vote Yes on 2.
What I smell here is BS.
Here is an example:
"Emission estimates are from a report by Fairbanks-based Cold Climate Housing Research Center (page 15). The number of devices was estimated by Sierra Research, in the 2010 Fairbanks Home Heating Survey (page 4)." from the vote yes on BALLOT PROPOSITION 2 website.
[When someone uses and appeal to authority arguments it's a good idea to stay away from estimates because it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool; than, to open it and confirm you are a fool beyond any reasonable doubt.}
Estimates??? Give me a break. Every time I went to Las Vegas I "estimated" I would leave town with more money than I took in. Yes believe it or not, I was right and left town with $2 more in my pocket than I had when hit the strip.
Estimates are not science there are political rhetoric used to buttress a bogus political argument – BS.
I certainly hope some of the advocates have enough intellectual integrity to at least read the EPA documents on indoor air pollution and check the American Lung Association's comments.
Especially the one about indoor pollution being 5 times more than what is outside.
Also, it would not hurt to go to the web M.D. website and type in the symptoms you attribute to people inhaling 2.5s in the wintertime while they're inside their home.
Thank you for this afternoon's entertainment.
I was here in summer 2004, 2005, and 2006. I remember them. And the summer of 2005, there were more bad air days in the winter than in the summer.
Go about 1/3 of the way down this page to see: http://www.healthyairnow.org/learn-more/graphs-charts-and-photos/ . The chart doesn't have full-year data for 2004. But North Pole has had winter concentrations measured of greater than 2000 micrograms per cubic meter. Rivals ANY forest fire smoke, and it happens all winter, not just for a few weeks of summer.
Just because you claim you can't smell it doesn't mean that it isn't harming others. I'll take the Borough's study over your "word" any day.
Or any one of these studies:
http://www.healthyairnow.org/learn-more/science-health/
Your arguments are eerily similar to the tobacco industries'. And just as harmful.
saidso, you must not drive by the intersection of Steese and Farmers Loop. The smoke produced at that intersection by one outdoor heater (I have no idea what is being burnt in there- it isn't wood!) is unmistakable.
----- I have driven by that one several times. Funny thing I can't smell any smoke because it is steam.
And one thing for absolute certainty you're not smelling it in the North Pole because the wind blows down the Steese highway from the Northeast.
Also, to the west of that location and to the south is uninhabited swamp.
If you lived around here in the summertime or were around here in 2004 5 and 6 you would know that the smoke reduced the visibility to several hundred feet or less and it was here for most of the summer – not just a few days.
There are pictures of the smoke on the Internet – try YouTube.
Anyone who was concerned with their health turned the kitchen stove vent on to clear the air inside the house. Or purchased some type of air cleaner.
The health problems that this smoke causes people is not a hallucination. It is very real, and has harmed many. There have been days when more than one child has been sent home from Woodriver Elementary because of an asthma attack brought on by smoke.
Some summers have a few days of intense smoke. And we spend millions and millions of dollars fighting those fires. But in the winter, we have many more smoky days (and in north pole, it's often just as smoky as any forest fire day), yet we are doing almost nothing to stop that smoke.
From State of Alaska Epidemiology, August 30, 2010
What a bunch of nonsense.
"Limitations to this evaluation include the following: 1) the sample size was small as compared to similar studies performed elsewhere, limiting the power of the study; 2) air quality data came from one station in downtown Fairbanks, and may not be representative of air quality throughout FNSB; 3) several hospital visits were excluded from the analysis due to missing 24-hour PM2.5 data, 4) potential confounders, such as temperature and humidity, were not included in the model, though they were somewhat controlled for by the case-crossover study design,5 and 5) this study focused on hospital visits for the selected conditions,"
------
"limiting the power of the study; 2) air quality data came from 1 ONE STATION IN DOWN TOWN FAIRBANKS , and MAY NOT [YOU BETCHA IT IS NOT] REPRESENTATIVE of air quality throughout FNSB; "
Ha! you got to be kidding! There are more than 7,000 square miles in Fairbanks which were not sampled where the 80,000 plus residents live ie in an approximate 55 to 60 mile radius of "down town Fairbanks"
By the way, for You folks in NORTH POLE, "down town Fairbanks" is heated with steam AND up wind "2.5s" come from natural gas or oil and down town is down wind.
The "study" did not list the physical address of those people going to the hospital.. for all we they could have flown in from the villages because the had the flu and smoked cigarettes. Many, people smoke cigarettes go the hospital ER.
Not one word about indoor pollution!
Nor is there ANY{!!!!!!} peer review of the "study".
Also, correlation, linked to, related to, etc does not constitute CAUSE AND EFFECT.
I saved the "study" as an example of "quack" environmentalist "science" designed to sway voters and gullible politicians.
Reading the studu reminded me of the environmentalists who claimed the the Japan earth quake was cause by global warming.
------
Credible science requires ALL other possible explanations MUST be discredited before anything is "proven".
---------
I hope you're being paid to go from chat room chat room posting dribble. Just like Tea Party patriot was paid to make hostile Joel Miller posts.
http://www.epi.alaska.gov/bulletins/docs/b2010_26.pdf
Association between Air Quality and Hospital Visits — Fairbanks, 2003–2008
"These data indicate that increased concentrations of ambient PM2.5 levels in FNSB were associated with increased risk of hospitalizations due to cerebrovascular disease in all persons and respiratory tract infections in persons aged less than 65 years during the study period."
Protect yourself and your family from the harm caused by breathing fine particulate air pollution. Vote YES on 2.
Seems to me, folks are suffering from hallucinations. And imagine that their neighbors are harming them because???
Sounds like an overdose of environmentalist utopianism and paranoia.
In the summer during forest fire season visibility is only 200 feet or less compared to being able to see the University which is about 6 or 7 miles away.
Even in the winter, when this alleged air pollution takes place the University remains clearly visible.
What about the freedom of people not to have their property smoked out and not to become sick from smoke that other people's activities are creating?
What about the freedom of people to use public roads and other public places without getting sick from hazardous smoke pollution?
A person should not have the absolute "freedom" to create a situation that harms other people and limits other people's freedom.
Reduce smoke pollution. Vote Yes on 2
-------
I'm just curious. And exactly what have you done in the last year to protect yourself, aside from posting and voting to sick the borough government on to people who live 30,40 or 50 miles from where you live over what amounts to a personal problem with one of your neighbors.
By the way eliminating your neighbor's wood smoke has absolutely nothing to do with the effects of indoor air pollution from household allergens such as dirt, dog dander, dust, cooking smoke, cigarette smoke and whatever else happens to be inside the house such as formaldehyde.
What about the freedom of people to use public roads and other public places without getting sick from hazardous smoke pollution?
A person should not have the absolute "freedom" to create a situation that harms other people and limits other people's freedom.
Reduce smoke pollution. Vote Yes on 2.