Are chimneys really that bad?

Seriously?

There are a million and one other things that can/will eventually kill us. It's always about the pros vs cons, risk, and how much you enjoy the product in question.

I say "pooh pooh", as I LOVE my fireplace and will continue to use it anyway!

 

I'm not a fan of buying firewood to burn for ambiance sake.
But I do enjoy a fire in the cold of winter as a way to use up the results of my much needed trim trimming. Mmmmmhh... toasted marshmellows and a nice reisling after the kids are in bed.....

And wood ashes are an excellent source of phosphorus in the garden.

 

This is one occasion that I'm thankful I don't life in California. I have a wood burning fire place and use it several times per winter. I say "pooh pooh" too. There are certain activities that provide an immense quality of life and a wood burning fire place is one of them for us. We had friends over that had never used theirs and after seeing ours said that they're now going to indulge.

Since I'm conscientious about wood sourcing, I never buy Oak or Hickory. The weedier cherry and maple woods burn just as nice and the cherry really lends to a nice red, warm color.

I just have to condition my husband to open the flue before lighting the fire and our health risks will be reduced significantly.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Jun 1 2007, 02:43 PM) [snapback]453448[/snapback]</div>

I had read this as a suggested use when one cannot burn the native prairie around ones home. I haven't tried this yet, but my next round of ashes is definitely going in my prairie.

 

It doesn't help grasses as much as it helps flowering plants. Grasses need mostly nitrogen and wood ashes are mostly phosphorus. Though throwing the ashes (cold of course) into the woods or prairie is far better than throwing them out.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Jun 1 2007, 02:53 PM) [snapback]453456[/snapback]</div>

Sweet! Thanks!

I think I will finally clean out my fireplace from the last winter's fire, and put the ashes on my plants. They need a lil extra somethin somethin to recover from the "surprise" freeze we had in early May...

 

A light just went on for me. The north side of my house has trouble facilitating any plant life whatsoever. Even plants that can handle full shade die, as my one Viburnum just did. Sniffle. This is a perfect place to experiment with a soil amendment of ashes. Though I have no nitrogen fixing plants there, I'm sure at least one nutrient would be helpful. Hugs to you Darwood, if this works!

 

I know several people that have wood burning stoves. They're very efficient and with the newer catalytic converters in them they burn pretty clean. They can really heat a house well. Chimney's just suck warm air out of your house. We have a wood burning fireplace wit a blower but we never use it because in Denver there are burning restrictions during the winter (many days anyways, not all the time). If everybody burned wood the air quality would be horrific, we'd have to import a lotta wood for that though (though with the pine beetles annihilating the lodge pole pines in the rockies, we'll have plenty of local wood to burn),

 

Low efficiency - most heat goes up the chimney. Better off using a heatilater that draws fresh air down the chimney and exhaust up the chimney. Interior air is drawn around the "fire box" and there is no exchange of exterior and interior air. Do this with natural gas or propane and efficiency can be very high.

First step: conservation - triple pane windows, R100 ceiling and R45 walls, insulating curtains, caulk every crack. It is always more cost effective to hang onto what you already have vs. "go get more."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Jun 1 2007, 12:46 PM) [snapback]453450[/snapback]</div>

I'm not sure I would qualify "quality of life" with burning wood in your house. All the of associated products of combustion of wood are not great for our health. Many homes already have terrible indoor air quality, why further degrade it by adding smoke to the house? lol

Very good point about the type of wood one should or shouldn't purchase. Here many people just buy what is cheap instead of ensuring they are not using old oak growth or other unsustainable wood.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 1 2007, 08:54 PM) [snapback]453769[/snapback]</div>

I'm not sure of the death count but we have the same problems in Sacramento. They are always tryiong to educate the public on wood burning. In the winter you can smell the effect big time. This applies to my post about deaths related to airpollution and how much it costs us each year. Typically more than 650 billion dollars if you don't count indoor air pollution.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(skruse @ Jun 1 2007, 05:55 PM) [snapback]453563[/snapback]</div>

One unfortunate side effect in my area (NJ) of super-insulating is the trapping of more radon gas in the house. Homes that passed the radon requirements before being remodeled (new siding w/new insulation, replacing old, leaky windows with thermal windows, adding extra attic insulation) are failing when they try to sell, even after only a couple of years, requiring remediation to close the sale. Most new construction have remediation systems already designed in.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 1 2007, 02:20 PM) [snapback]453428[/snapback]</div>

Are you really so willing to give up a choice available because some regulators say you should? You have a lot more faith in them than I do.

I think this is another example of gov. regulators ginning up a problem to justify the need for thier jobs. I don't have a problem regulating when wood can be burned in dense population areas (becasue if everyone did it all the time you would see some real bad air pollution) but banning it is not justified. I don't believe the number of deaths, because I don't think they can be that accurate. So basically somebody just made this up.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Jun 2 2007, 09:41 AM) [snapback]453930[/snapback]</div>

Are you qualified to make such assumptions? My girlfriend works in a children specialty area of Sutter Hospital and had 4 babies die last week due to cancer. The rate at which people die is quite astounding, even here in the developed world. There are people who spend their careers figuring out the "why" of deaths and through science they come to these conclusions. Are they 100% accurate? I would say not likely but does it mean all of their advice and work should be ignored? It only stands to reason that if you send a bunch of surfur dioxide (burning of fossil fuel) into the air where it changes to SO3 (exposure to UV) and when mixed with water can form sulfuric acid. Would breathing this stuff in and having it mix with with moisture in your lungs be beneficial to you? There are a bunch of other examples of why nearly every activity involving energy causes "stress" on one system or another. Failure to act on any of it because you (not you in particular) simply do no believe the data (when you are not qualified to do so) can be sumed up nicely in this pic.



Information is constantly being sent out by AIR Quality Boards in my area yet people continue to burn wood like it's going out of style. Banning it altogether is obviously the next step IMO. If new laws and restrictions bother you just try to imagine how insane it's going to get with more people on this planet. lol


The EPA has some basic info on this subject: