PDA

View Full Version : EPA Attacks Self-Sufficiency: Most Wood Burning Stoves Will Soon Be Illegal




donnay
10-02-2013, 07:25 AM
EPA Attacks Self-Sufficiency: Most Wood Burning Stoves Will Soon Be Illegal

by Daisy Luther


When you think of that little dream homestead in the woods, what does it include?

Probably a well and septic system, a little stream bubbling nearby, a chicken coop, a sunroom for winter growing, and a cozy fire to curl up next to.

When my daughter and I spent a year living in a cabin in the Northwoods of Canada, our wood stove was our lifeline. It was the only source of heat in a place that reached -42 degrees. It was the only way we could cook when our power went out during snow and ice storms (as it did frequently). It was the cozy center of our home, and we survived for an entire frigid winter for less than $800. After that experience I vowed never to live in a home without a wood stove.

If the EPA has its way, however, heating your home self-sufficiently with wood could soon become illegal – or at the very least, insanely expensive.

Off Grid Survival reports:

Shortly after the re-election of President Obama, the agency announced new radical environmental regulations that threaten to affect people who live off the grid. The EPA’s new environmental regulations reduce the amount of airborne fine-particle matter from 15 micrograms to 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air.

This means that most wood burning stoves would now fall into a class that would deemed unacceptable under these new draconian measures. The EPA has even launched a nifty new website called Burn Wise to try to sway public opinion.

On their site, while trying to convince people to get rid of their old stoves and buy the new EPA-certified stoves, they state that these older stove must be scrapped and cannot be resold.

From the EPA Site:

The local air pollution agency says I can’t sell my old wood stove to help pay for an EPA-certified wood stove. Why is that?

Replacing an older stove with a cleaner-burning stove will not improve air quality if the older stove is reused somewhere else. For this reason, wood stove change out programs usually require older stoves to be destroyed and recycled as scrap metal, or rendered inoperable. (source)



One of the easiest ways for the government to force this issue is through homeowner’s insurance policies. If you have a mortgage, you have absolutely no option but to carry homeowner’s insurance. Even if you own you homestead outright, most people consider insuring their homes and property to be a vital safety net. When your policy comes up for annual renewal, the insurance company can require an inspection of your home. At that time, compliance can easily be forced by either charging insanely high rates or through the cancellation of the policies of those who have “outdated” wood stoves.

An Attack on Self-Sufficient Living

The ability to heat your home off-grid is a major part of most preparedness plans. Heating with wood is the number one way to do this. Much like our food supplies, the ability to keep ourselves warm and healthy and the ability to cook without being connected to the grid are vital to our freedom.

Those of us who live this lifestyle are constantly targeted. In many places it’s illegal to collect rainwater. Growing food in your front yard instead of flowers is all but outlawed. Sellers of raw milk have their farms raided by SWAT teams as though they’re running a meth lab instead of a dairy. We are being Codex Alimentarius-ed and Agenda 21-ed right into slavery and the government and its agencies try to make it appear that they are “saving” us.

We, the self-sufficient, by our very nature, are a threat to this insidiously spreading control. Our self-sufficiency means that we won’t be forced to be subjugated, tagged, chipped, and inventoried like our less prepared friends and neighbors. We won’t have to cave in order to survive. We can eat, stay warm, and stay off the radar. And this is a threat because we can withstand the assaults on our freedom. We don’t need the government’s benevolence to survive. Those of us who don’t need the government are the last hold-outs of liberty in a country that has strayed far from it’s freedom-loving origins.

The “Credibility” of the EPA

Don’t be fooled by environmental friendliness or the warm and fuzzy green words. The EPA is just another tool of subjugation. Their stamp of approval carries the same “credibility” as that of USDA or FDA approval. The Environmental Protection Agency, that bastion of clean air and fertile land, wants you to believe that they are taking steps to save us all.

You know, the same folks who upped the legal levels of glyphosate for their friends at Monsanto, even though the herbicide has been proven to cause toxicity and death. The same agency that responded quickly when radiation from the Fukushima disaster reached dangerous levels on the shores of California by closing down 8 of their 18 radiation-testing facilities in California and increasing the “safe amounts” of radiation that we can absorb.

The EPA (or as I like to call it, the Environmental Deception Agency) tends to find things to be highly threatening to the environment only when those things allow us to be non-reliant on big business.

One controversy after another can be attributed to the EPA, an agency charged with protecting the air we breathe, the soil in which we grow our food and the water that we drink. At the bottom of each of those controversies can be found ties to the conspiracies of the big businesses that really run the country. Decisions are being auctioned off to industry lobbyists with the most money and influence.

Environmental protection is only the rule of thumb if it goes along with Agenda 21 – the EPA is all over the green agenda in cases that benefit the redistribution of wealth, but the agency completely ignores blatant crimes against the earth if it involves fracking for the benefit of a natural gas company or poisoning the soil and groundwater for the benefit of a biotech monolith.

Source:
http://www.naturalblaze.com/2013/09/epa-attacks-self-sufficiency-most-wood.html

ClydeCoulter
10-02-2013, 07:32 AM
They've been threatening this for a while.

I can't see how home owners with wood stoves can compete with a forest fire.

phill4paul
10-02-2013, 07:36 AM
Done with the fed.gov and all it's tendrils..........

https://scontent-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1375942_430430153730440_344548478_n.jpg

69360
10-02-2013, 07:56 AM
Good luck enforcing this

donnay
10-02-2013, 08:10 AM
Good luck enforcing this



They will definitely try to enforce it through the homeowner's insurance. If you do not comply your insurance is cancelled and if you have a loan, you will have to have insurance. Or a town ordinance will tell you, you must have homeowners insurance. As with everything they do it will be incremental and selectively enforced and then it will be mandatory.

If you drive around in Maine without a seatbelt, you are slammed with a ticket. I know I am in New Hampshire (the only state that doesn't make adults where seatbelts), and I have driven over the state line, to be tagged within seconds of entering Maine without a seatbelt. I remember a time when they said; "We will not ticket you for not wearing a seatbelt"--just one example of incremental tyranny.

fisharmor
10-02-2013, 08:26 AM
The thing I don't get is why it never occurs to these people to use incentives.
In Virginia, there was a particularly burdensome tax on new cars up until the late 90's when governor Gilmore (R) pushed to get it severely reduced.
The result was that everyone with any money got rid of their clunkers and bought new cars that are cleaner-burning.

And the thing that really gets me is that the newer wood stoves aren't just cleaner burning, they're also more efficient. So you burn less wood.
If there was an incentive to replace them, then people would replace them.

Nope, punishment is the only tool in the box. And the best part is there's no ruling on fireplaces, so if you want to go ahead with the dirtest, least efficient burn possible, then you're golden.

donnay
10-02-2013, 08:34 AM
The thing I don't get is why it never occurs to these people to use incentives.
In Virginia, there was a particularly burdensome tax on new cars up until the late 90's when governor Gilmore (R) pushed to get it severely reduced.
The result was that everyone with any money got rid of their clunkers and bought new cars that are cleaner-burning.

And the thing that really gets me is that the newer wood stoves aren't just cleaner burning, they're also more efficient. So you burn less wood.
If there was an incentive to replace them, then people would replace them.

Nope, punishment is the only tool in the box. And the best part is there's no ruling on fireplaces, so if you want to go ahead with the dirtest, least efficient burn possible, then you're golden.


It's got nothing to do with cleaning the air or getting more efficiency, it has EVERYTHING to do with control. The controllers do not like people who are self-reliant and self-sufficient--living off the grid.

69360
10-02-2013, 09:41 AM
They will definitely try to enforce it through the homeowner's insurance. If you do not comply your insurance is cancelled and if you have a loan, you will have to have insurance. Or a town ordinance will tell you, you must have homeowners insurance. As with everything they do it will be incremental and selectively enforced and then it will be mandatory.

If you drive around in Maine without a seatbelt, you are slammed with a ticket. I know I am in New Hampshire (the only state that doesn't make adults where seatbelts), and I have driven over the state line, to be tagged within seconds of entering Maine without a seatbelt. I remember a time when they said; "We will not ticket you for not wearing a seatbelt"--just one example of incremental tyranny.

I have no loan, I paid cash for my place and have no insurance. This is not uncommon in Maine.

donnay
10-02-2013, 09:45 AM
I have no loan, I paid cash for my place and have no insurance. This is not uncommon in Maine.


It's just a matter of time before it becomes mandatory to have homeowners insurance--just like it is mandatory to have car insurance in Maine.

Occam's Banana
10-02-2013, 10:10 AM
It's got nothing to do with cleaning the air or getting more efficiency, it has EVERYTHING to do with control. The controllers do not like people who are self-reliant and self-sufficient--living off the grid.

It is also about enriching influential special interests at the expense of others.

Apparently, the wood-stove lobby hasn't got much in the way of connections or "pull" - so wood-stove users get the short end of the cordwood.

One thing is absolutely certain: apart from their role as "fig leaves," things like "clean air" and "energy efficiency" have got nothing to do with it ...

FloralScent
10-02-2013, 10:52 AM
They will definitely try to enforce it through the homeowner's insurance.

It very well may be the insurance lobby behind this.

Cleaner44
10-02-2013, 10:53 AM
Good thing the EPA is shut own... or are they essential?

A Son of Liberty
10-02-2013, 10:55 AM
I'm seriously getting tired of this bullshit.

A family member got ticketed yesterday for the heinous crime of talking on a phone while driving. Except she was not talking on a phone, she was scratching her ear. But the great state of Maryland is rapidly descending into a nanny-state tyranny, and yesterday was the first day of primary enforcement of "hands-free" communication devices. She told the trooper that she was scratching her ear, and that she has bluetooth in the car and hasn't held a phone to her ear in the car probably ever. He said, "that's nice", and handed her a ticket for $130. She'll of course fight the ticket, but she won't be compensated for her time and trouble.

Perhaps a case for such legislation could be made (not that I'd support it in any case) in areas these do-gooders come from - over-populated, urban hell-holes like downstate Maryland, where driving on the highways down there are a hazard to your health whether you're on the phone or not (which goes further to my point that secessionism should be a primary political goal of this movement (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?428888-Break-it-up), by the way), but out here, I'm OFTEN the only vehicle I can see on the local interstate highway. It is the height of absurdity that I should be detained and subject to a monetary shakedown for holding a piece of plastic to my ear.

And so it goes, as we are relentlessly dominated by a mob of urban nannies who cower and fret at the idea of someone somewhere doing something of which they do not approve. The smoke from my meager little wood stove, nor any of the wood stoves owned by the right-living rural folk across the country do not amount to a hill of beans in comparison to the filth generated daily in their urban dumps.

Parenthetically, the article was fine until the last paragraph. It's a shame the author has bought the environmentalist bilge about fracking.

FloralScent
10-02-2013, 10:57 AM
I'm seriously getting tired of this bullshit.

A family member got ticketed yesterday for the heinous crime of talking on a phone while driving.

Definitely the insurance lobby.

jbauer
10-02-2013, 11:07 AM
So I guess I'll just unhook my boiler when they come for an inspection. These dirty rotten F'ers can get bent. There is no way that the pollution from woodstoves outweighs the pollution of trying to enforce a bogus "pre" law.