Clean Air By Law - Go After The Average Home Owner - Opinion 250 - News for Northern and Central Interior of British Columbia, Canada

Clean Air By Law - Go After The Average Home Owner

Thursday, February 04, 2010 03:45 AM

We are about to get a go round of the clean air by law in the City Of Prince George.

Several things come to mind immediately when you look at the By law now before City Council. It doesn’t deal with industry, because quite frankly the city has no control over industry. That in itself makes any move to try and get the general public to buy into the idea of putting their best foot forward to clean up the air quality a sham.

I recall a Councilor who was running for the position of Mayor saying that he would sit down in front of industry leaders and look them in the eye and challenge them to do a better job when it comes to air quality. Bold words, no teeth mind, you, but bold words. Industry works on the premise that unless you’re standing at my door with an order to change my ways, our bottom line comes first.

That has been played out time and time again in the city and so the city has taken it upon itself to go after the only people that it can, the average home owner.

Yes the city will allow back yard wiener roasts, (albeit with some restrictions and guidelines)they simply couldn’t get that by the public. They also seem to have lost that survey which indicated that one of every six homes in the city used wood for its main source of heat. That study went south with the people who wrote it.

So if the city wants to see the quality of air improve, start by admitting that the only people they have control over is the average Joe As we all know they are not the major culprits when it comes to air quality in Prince George.

I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, February 04, 2010 03:45 AM in Views by Ben Meisner

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: drivechain on February 4 2010 5:31 AM

It is interesting to see that hydronic heaters are not allowed even though there are new EPA approved models avilable with low emissions and high efficiency ratings that rival or surpass EPA approved indoor wood stoves. It is understanable that one would not want install one within the bowl area but there are several residences in rural type settings on acreage within City Limits that are suitable locations for hydronic heaters.

Posted by: prov1 on February 4 2010 7:06 AM

I understand people who say the heat generated from a wood stuff is so nice but what about the poor neighbour who has to breath the smoke coming from their chimney. I myself think that people with wood stoves really don't care about anyone but themselves. How can you tell me it is cheaper to use wood over gas.First you have to run your truck to go get it, your saw-oil-gas etc. You then must do all your laundry as you are filthy when you have finished cutting and stacking it, but the bottom line is I have a neighbour who has a woodstove and loves it even though we cant breath from all the smoke billowing out his chimney.

Posted by: gus on February 4 2010 7:43 AM

Just for the record

Hydronic – adjective of or pertaining to a heating system for a building in which the medium for carrying heat throughout the structure is circulating water

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hydronic

A hydronic "bopiler" may be designed to use any of the normal fuels, including wood.

Posted by: drivechain on February 4 2010 8:04 AM

prov1 – I can fully sympathize with you. You probably live in a residential area on a normal sized city lot where the residences are to close together and may not suitable for any wood burning appliance. The City in all its infinite wisdom never included any setback distances from residences not served by the appliance or chimney stack height requirements. I am an avid supporter of Outdoor wood furnaces and in fact own one, but they are suitable only in a rural setting on acreage, eg 5 acre lots, inside or out of city limits. One still has to burn responsibly and be considerate of your neighbors. Improper operation of any wood burning appliance can result in excessive smoke.

Posted by: diplomat on February 4 2010 10:49 AM

prov1 -I know what you are talking about. I have one woodburning neighbour close by and there are others on the street. When they burn wood all night I have to hold my breath when I open the frontdoor in the morning to get the newspaper from the mailbox as one could cut the thick woodsmoke with a knife!

It stinks like hell!

BTW, I have sinus problems and woodsmoke worsens my condition.

The whole neighbourhood is on hydro and natural gas!

Air advisories are also regularly ignored.

One can only hope that the City seriously clamps down on this - it's 2010 and not 1910!

Posted by: taxinapothole on February 4 2010 12:12 PM

all smoke, no fire!!! Spend our tax dollars on something that real counts, like the crap coming out of industry!!

Lets get real, they can't shut a pulp mill down, but they can make me stop burning wood, so they think! That is the reality of it all.

However, my reality is, burning wood has heated peoples lives since the beginning of time, industry has not. The wood burning stoves of today, pump out very little pollutants! I will continue to burn wood to heat my home, and the rest of you can kiss my Royal Canadian you know what. It is time people looked after their own problems in life, and stay out of mine! In short neighbour, MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS. Don't feed into this propaganda that over payed politicians feed you.

Posted by: kagee on February 4 2010 12:51 PM

People should be able to have wood furnaces or fireplaces, if they are use correctly they give off very little smoke. I too have sinus problems and it is the industry pollution that causes me to have trouble with woodsmoke.

prov1 - what about people who have problems with natural gas (yes some do) and when I used my old furnace my neighbour would have problems.

Wood smoke has a smell, natural gas smoke has no smell, both are carbon base with natural gas having sulpher - so correct wood burning is really cleaner.

Posted by: Harbinger on February 4 2010 2:06 PM

After they start sweeping our highways, I shall earnestly try to not drive over the pile of dust and grime and dirt along side a lane. After sweeping commences on Highway West just passing by fire station and looking towards the west, it (the dust in the air)in the sunset is awe inspiring. Cough cough hack hack.

Posted by: diplomat on February 4 2010 3:34 PM

"...if they are use correctly they give off very little smoke."

That's the rub! Obviously, the smoke that I am complaining about comes from woodstoves that are being used incorrectly!

Now what??? Got any SAFE ideas?

Posted by: Quaddin on February 4 2010 5:38 PM

Posted by: NMG on February 4 2010 6:49 PM

I vote to ban the use of all wood heating appliances within the city limits for homes that have the capability of running gas. There will never be a compromise that will please everyone, so why bother? You can also never guarantee that woodstoves will be used properly, so don't even make it an option. The overwhelming majority of people in town use gas and I'd hazard a guess that this same majority of people find wood stoves to be a complete annoyance whenever they get fired up. Majority rules. Take a stand already. The city should stop pussyfooting around the issue, make a decision and move on. Just like they should with any air quality related item. I'm sick of the constant indecisions and indecisiveness.

People that currently use wood who don't like it can either move out to the sticks or fire up the gas furnace.

Posted by: diplomat on February 4 2010 7:10 PM

Thank you, NMG, drivechain and prov1.

Posted by: drivechain on February 4 2010 9:31 PM

NMG- I don't propose banning all wood burning within City Limits, the bowl area of the City is the area most impacted by all forms of emissions regardless of their source, i.e. Industry, road dust, vehicle emissions. So why don’t we bane all drive throughs in the City to counteract unnecessary vehicle idling, sell that to Tim Hortins, Mcdonald’s, Burgerking, Local Bank branches and all other established business that utilize drive throughs. The Local and Provincial Governments band wagon is Bio-Energy and wood burning is a form of that, but it must be done responsibly. If the City chooses to bane wood burning in the bowl area, I don’t have a problem with that, but that also means no more back yard weenie roasts. There are several areas of the Cty that are rural settings on acreages where wood burning is acceptable and will not impact the bowl area. Here is food for thought, the Outdoor Wood Pellet Hydronic Furnaces have lower emission levels and higher efficiency ratings than any EPA indoor wood stove accepted by the City for installation, so why are they banned? Current Wood Stove retailer’ opposition or maybe the agreement that the City of Prince George entered into with Terasan Gas has any bearing on this, the more gas we burn the more money the city makes.

Posted by: NMG on February 4 2010 10:19 PM

I could live with a compromise of no wood burning in the bowl or any lot within city limits under a certain predetermined size. And yeah, no weenie roasts or drive thru's in the bowl is fine wth me as well. Heck, let's get Aircare up here as well. If we want to improve the air quality, let's get serious and lead by example.

Posted by: floger on February 4 2010 10:27 PM

I personally live in College Heights And on more than one occasion phoned city staff and have complained about wood burning stoves fire places burning what ever they can put in them and back yard burning of garbage . I strongly believe that if we have a clean air bylaw it should be imposed have any of these aldermen or the Mayor ever tried to go for a walk and breath in all the crap thats in the smoke i see city trucks driving around all day up here do their staff not see the same thing i see or smell it. Clean air should be for everyone the entire city limits not just the bowl area is a law not a law ?