Like many, I enjoy a good fire. It gives warmth and a fascination like few other things.
And now in the state of California, there is a headlong rush to ban fireplaces, because the state doesn’t dare to really, and immediately, address the tailpipe, which is the fundamental driver of climate change in the North Bay.
And natural gas is a fossil fuel. Fair game for a regulatory bureaucracy.
In addition, wood burns particulates and smoke can permeate a neighborhood, but for how many thousands of years have we lived with such smoke.
A hundred years ago, a wonderful brick fireplace was developed in Rumford, Maine, and is appropriately called the Rumford. It is unique in that it is shallow and narrow and tall and radiates heat into a room unlike any other. Additionally, it burns cleanly, and approximates emissions from an EPA stove. It is outlawed.
I am an architect and am rebuilding a house I had built some years ago, and which burned in the Glass Fire.
It had a wood-burning fireplace with a glass door that was to heat the house. In the rebuild, we cannot replace it with anything but a ventless gas stove.
With impacts from an energized atmosphere, there will come a time, not in my lifetime, but relatively soon; natural gas will be unobtainable. Then there will be these absurd stoves, with the wrong flue, and that are useless.
Allan Nichol
"wood" - Google News
April 18, 2021 at 09:00AM
https://ift.tt/32oP9Gt
Why the rush to ban wood-burning stoves? - Napa Valley Register
"wood" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3du6D7I
No comments:
Post a Comment