Bowsite.com

Heating your bow hunting cabin illegally

Camp, this isn't trying to make wood burning illegal at all. In fact, even if approved (it's a very long shot with this Congress) it would not affect the 12 million or more wood burning stoves already in use.

The EPA standards would require all NEW stoves to burn 80 percent cleaner than those manufactured today. All stoves already in use have only to comply with the pollution standards set in 1988. The new rules would be phased in over five years.

The proposed rule would not affect existing woodstoves and other wood-burning heaters currently in use in people’s homes. The proposal also would not apply to new or existing heaters that are fueled solely by oil, gas or coal, and it would not apply to outdoor fireplaces, fire pits, pizza ovens or chimeneas.

The EPA says for every dollar spent to comply with the new standards, Americans will see between $118 and $267 in health benefits — eventually adding up to $1.8 to $2.4 billion in annual health and economic benefits. In other words, for every dollar spent to comply, America will see fewer heart attacks, strokes, and asthma attacks — and less CO2, methane and black carbon emissions.

Same thing is just around the corner with water heaters.

"On April 16, 2015, there will be significant changes to water heater energy factor (EF) requirements as the result of updates to the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act (NAECA). These new requirements call for higher energy factor (EF) ratings on virtually all residential gas, electric, and oil water heaters, completely altering the water heater landscape. NAECA also affects some light-duty commercial water heaters."

I spoke to a plumber and 75 gallon units will cost around $2000. To replace it today is $979.75

Apparently my current water heater that uses less than $100 a year uses too much energy??

WTF

Link is to story on new water heater rules. This also dates back to standards set when Ronald Reagan was president (1987 Department of Energy law called the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act). Congress set the initial efficiency standards at the start of the act then set a schedule for the United States Department of Energy to review them.

According to energy.gov, energy conservation standards for more than 50 categories of appliances and equipment have saved consumers on utility bills (but up front cost on this one sounds like a lot more than usual! Glad I got a new one this year so should be good to go for 10-20 years).

Sounds like homeowners take it on the chin more than big business?

"As a result of these standards, energy users saved about $55 billion on their utility bills in 2013. Since the beginning of 2009, 25 new or updated standards have been issued, which will help increase annual savings by more than 50 percent over the next decade. By 2030, cumulative operating cost savings from all standards in effect since 1987 will reach over $1.7 trillion, with a cumulative reduction of 6.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions, equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of 1.4 billion automobiles. Products covered by standards represent about 90% of home energy use, 60% of commercial building use, and 29% of industrial energy use."

Stop electing democrats...next issue?

What about other countries like China? When will they be accountable for their emissions? With legislation like these we lose jobs and our freedom erodes daily.

When these other industrial countries are brought up to "our" current standings I then can see establishing newer guidlines for America. Otherwise they're just _______ in the wind with feel good policies.

Just my $0.02

O.K. but what about lower emissions meaning more efficient burning of wood. Meaning more heat from the wood.

They should also eliminate the uniform code for dwellings of a minimum of 900 square feet. If a guy wants to build a 600 square foot cabin on a lake or in his 40 he should be allowed to.

10, Many would love to be able to build over an 800sf cabin.

"BUILDINGS ON MFL LAND Construction or building on MFL land may require withdrawal from the program and assessment of a withdrawal tax and fee. Buildings “ developed for human residence ” are prohibited upon MFL lands. A building is considered, “ developed for human residence ” if it has at least 5 of the following 8 characteristics: 1. Living space totaling 800 square feet or more. Use exteri or dimensions, include each level but exclude porches, decks, or un-insulated screen porches. 2. Indoor plumbing. 3. Central heating or cooling, including electric heat, furnace or other heater with a circulation system. 4. Full or partial basement. Exclude crawl spaces and frost walls. 5. Electrical service by connection to the lines of a power company. 6. Attached or separate garage associated with the living space. This does not include buildings that store vehicles used primarily for work or recreational activities on the property. 7. Local telephone service. 8. Building Insulation"

Nov. I had a small lake property back in 2001 in Vilas County. Had all the plans for a 600 square foot log cabin with a stone fire place and stained glass windows on each side. Included a loft and nice porch. Nothing big, but, nice and affordable on a half acre with 200 feet of frontage. Wisconsin went to the uniform building code that required a minimum of 900 square feet, lobbied for by the realtors in this state. Township would not budge even though I had the land well before they made the 900 foot requirement, and I ended up selling the property. Could not afford to go bigger and didn't want to in the first place. Their reasoning was it didn't meet the 900 square foot minimum. Fact was, it would have been nicer than 90% of the other manufactured crap surrounding the lake. Complete B.S. The property had power and telephone already on it. The guy that bought it from me built a 4000 square foot house and nearly every person on the lake wishes he never would have come there. The place looks ridiculous on that small lot. It's three stories and ruined a very pristine little piece of land.

I'm fully aware. No guarantee this will pass with a Republican-controlled Congress. Even if it does, the key line for most is this: "All stoves already in use have only to comply with the pollution standards set in 1988." In other words, even if you needed/wanted a different one, you could buy any model prior to 2015 and be legal. It's not the burning of trees they want to stop, if that's what you're implying.

"All stoves already in use have only to comply with the pollution standards set in 1988."

Does this mean I need to replace or upgrade the wood burning furnace in my house? The furnace was built and installed in 1983.

Simple fact is small wood burning equipment manufactures are going out of business because they cannot afford to pay for the testing and retooling that is required to keep up with these ever changing regulations.

"Simple fact is small wood burning equipment manufactures are going out of business because they cannot afford to pay for the testing and retooling that is required to keep up with these ever changing regulations".

BINGO-Hence the new regulations.

Jeff, no, yours was grandfathered in as well in the past law. Net effect is all the stoves out there NOW are and will continue to be LEGAL.

I can remember driving to Green Bay and the Fox Valley as a child and seeing black smoke coming out of every chimney of every paper mill on the Fox River. Now it's white "smoke." Should we have left them continue to pollute the way they did back then in the name of saving $?

HF, a conspiracy to drive the little guys out of business (even though the big guys will remain)? I don't think so.

Around here and in Northern Wi. There are a lot of outside wood burning furnaces. They burn 4 foot logs,We might get one as we have an unlimited supply of wood. I know towns that don't want them.

It's rare that I see any smoke at all from my pellet stove. Only at start up. Even at max burn I see no smoke. Heats my whole house on 1 40 pound bag a day. 1500 SF. 2 story home.

who cares, the world is not going to end with some wood stoves going, for those who are concerned, get a life

Take away my woodstove and I'll have to go back to burning old tires to keep warm! Take your pick..

Nobody is asking to take away the wood stoves, not even the oldest, least efficient. And SF, my neighbor burns the worst crap you could ever ask for in his burn barrel, and his wood burner blows some junk you wouldn't want to breath, either. DNR has no teeth for rule breakers like this, and county board/township seems to be afraid of stepping on toes too.

I agree there is no conspiracy against small time manufacturers but it would be nice if they at least gave them a chance to make some profit. One good step might be to do something like giving them a guarantee that they can manufacture and sell a particular unit for at least 10 years after they got it certified.

Register here to reply to this topic