# Allegheny County offers ‘bounty’ for woodstoves, boilers



## Panhandler (Aug 10, 2013)

http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/4500420-74/county-wood-boilers#axzz2baWuj5ww

That old woodstove might have new value beyond its rustic ambience.
The Allegheny County Health Department on Thursday said it would pay a “bounty” of several hundred dollars each to people who turn in older woodstoves and outdoor wood-fired boilers that don't meet newer rules for air emissions.


Read more: http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/4500420-74/county-wood-boilers#ixzz2baXE994l 
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook


----------



## Jon1270 (Aug 10, 2013)

Almost makes me want to buy up a couple of junker stoves on Craigslist.  Heck, I saw one listed for free within the last few days.

I was slightly alarmed at the new chimney height regulations noted in the article, until I realized they only apply to OWBs.


----------



## mustash29 (Aug 10, 2013)

Cash for clunkers strikes again.


----------



## ScotO (Aug 11, 2013)

Sad reality is, this is going to get stricter and stricter every year.  My problem with the media (and the government in general) is they are painting a bad picture for EVERYBODY that uses wood for heat......when in reality it's only a certain percentage that doesn't "comply" to the standards.....

10 years from now, we'll probably be paying a large tax YEARLY for burning your own, hard-earned wood.....even though it's the GREENEST heat source out there.  BULLCHIT.

OK, rant over....carry on.


----------



## DevilsBrew (Aug 11, 2013)

Allegheny County can have a coal fired power plant but not old woodburners. Makes perfect sense.


----------



## Jon1270 (Aug 11, 2013)

Scotty Overkill said:


> My problem with the media (and the government in general) is they are painting a bad picture for EVERYBODY...


 
Eh, not necessarily.  This is how it goes if you conceive of "the government" as something separate from yourself, but as I've gotten older and more familiar with how things work, it seems more and more that the government, especially local government, *is us,* and the problems happen because we're not present for the discussion, rather than out of any natural animosity.  I've been going to borough council meetings lately and it's often amazing how few constituents show up to offer their thoughts or even watch the proceedings.   Occasionally there will be some controversial issue that packs the hall and gets everybody's blood pumping, but last month there were about 4 people watching the meeting, three of whom had come to comment on one agenda issue or another.  In that environment it's easy for things to happen without a lot of consideration simply because there's nobody around to offer competing perspectives.  I think this sort of problem may be getting worse as little local newspapers go out of business; council might debate some code change for months, and still residents are blindsided when they hear about it because the traditional mechanisms for notifying the public are broken.


----------



## ScotO (Aug 11, 2013)

Jon1270 said:


> Eh, not necessarily. This is how it goes if you conceive of "the government" as something separate from yourself, but as I've gotten older and more familiar with how things work, it seems more and more that the government, especially local government, *is us,* and the problems happen because we're not present for the discussion, rather than out of any natural animosity. I've been going to borough council meetings lately and it's often amazing how few constituents show up to offer their thoughts or even watch the proceedings. Occasionally there will be some controversial issue that packs the hall and gets everybody's blood pumping, but last month there were about 4 people watching the meeting, three of whom had come to comment on one agenda issue or another. In that environment it's easy for things to happen without a lot of consideration simply because there's nobody around to offer competing perspectives. I think this sort of problem may be getting worse as little local newspapers go out of business; council might debate some code change for months, and still residents are blindsided when they hear about it because the traditional mechanisms for notifying the public are broken.


I agree with you....people need to become more active in their local and even the federal government.  We're electing people in that we really don't even know who they are or their backgrounds....and we b*tch and complain when they screw us over!

I don't want to derail the thread, just had to let out some morning frustrations....carry on....


----------



## DevilsBrew (Aug 11, 2013)

I have to disagree, Jon.  I don't think the "little guy" matters.  It is always about the money.  Whoever has the money has the power to control an agenda.   If the actual welfare of the county was the major concern, then fracking wouldn't be allowed.


----------



## Jon1270 (Aug 11, 2013)

DevilsBrew said:


> It is always about the money. Whoever has the money has the power to control an agenda.


 
Well sure, money matters, and when there's a big disparity in wealth then the system gets perverted, bad decisions can be made and powerful entities can escape proper regulation. But even in a system that's working well, money would still have to matter because its the medium through which things get done -- including good things. With fracking, for example, no government body can afford to pay attention only to groundwater issues while ignoring economic / employment problems. Sure, water pollution sucks. So does air pollution, which is worse with coal than with gas. So does poverty. The decisions are not so simple.


----------



## ScotO (Aug 11, 2013)

DevilsBrew said:


> I have to disagree, Jon. I don't think the "little guy" matters. It is always about the money. Whoever has the money has the power to control an agenda. If the actual welfare of the county was the major concern, then fracking wouldn't be allowed.


Devilsbrew hit a nail on the head there, though.  Good point, young lady!


----------



## ScotO (Aug 11, 2013)

Be careful guys......this thread will end up in the azz can, and once there, all reason goes out the window.

Back to our regularly scheduled program.....


----------



## n3pro (Aug 11, 2013)

I've heard other places doing it, some successful and some not but as been discussed here many many times.  Stoves are only part of the problem, bad burning habits are more so the problem.  As much as I love wood heating, I hate the heavy smoldering smoke smell and the burning of my eyes.  I love going outside when I'm burning as getting a faint whiff and not seeing the smoke.  It's a step.  At least they are giving money for switching instead of trying to tax for the use of like plastic bags.  Sadly some of the same people who switch stoves will still cut, split and burn the same day air turned down and still belching smoke.


----------



## mustash29 (Aug 11, 2013)

I'm all for the local fire mashall, building inspector, etc driving around and spreading some wisdom / enforcement actions to those who are polluting.  IMO that is simply them doing their job.

My father (south central PA) had his Quad insert installed years ago, early 90's, hooked to a masonry chimney with clay liner.  A couple years ago when oil spiked & the economy tanked, many more folks started burning.  The local fire marshall was driving around, knocking on doors, asking questions and looking for install info, etc.  They were not too concerned with folks burning, but making sure things were up to code and safe.

Dad was given a "stern suggestion" to have a stainless liner installed to bring his system up to current code.  He complied since the house was built in the late 60's.  He was pleasantly supprised at how much better the insert performed with the liner.  Money well spent and they sleep better at night knowing the (chimney) fire danger is minimized.

The problem is most folks won't get off their rump and do these sort of things unless they HAVE to.  It is unfortunate that it takes laws & ordinances to make people do the right thing.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 11, 2013)

Scotty Overkill said:


> Sad reality is, this is going to get stricter and stricter every year.


 
Dude, it's a VOLUNTARY program. Chill. Save the right wing rant for when they try to pry stoves of of our cold dead hands.

TE


----------



## ScotO (Aug 11, 2013)

TradEddie said:


> Dude, it's a VOLUNTARY program. Chill. Save the right wing rant for when they try to pry stoves of of our cold dead hands.
> 
> TE


Where do you see me blaming it on one side or the other?  nowhere, that's where.
Yeah, this particular program is voluntary.....that's how all that chit started out in Oregon and Washington state, too.....look at it out there now....

I'm chilling just fine, had me several Redd's Apple Ales a bit ago, may even go out back and sit around my smoke-belching campfire here in a little bit!!


----------



## osagebow (Aug 11, 2013)

Wow. I grew up downwind from Clairton mill - they pumped benzene and sulfur into our school across the river on a daily basis, and still do. Halls were actually filled with nasty smoke during temperature inversions. EPA has pussyfooted with that place forever."Smoke means jobs" 

It's well known they turn off the "scrubbers" when it rains. My wife had been asthma symptom free down here in VA for ten + years then we passed that place in a drizzle. Kids start hacking, one pukes, wife has a full blown attack. Luckily,(??) my hockey playing beast nephew has asthma also, and had a rescue inhaler on hand.

and they go after wood burners.


----------



## Jon1270 (Aug 12, 2013)

osagebow said:


> Wow. I grew up downwind from Clairton mill - they pumped benzene and sulfur into our school across the river on a daily basis,


 
Coincidentally I went for a random drive a couple of nights ago, exploring because I still don't know the area well once I get more than a few miles from home. I was following the river and stumbled on the Clairton mill by chance. I'd just left Glassport, crested a rising curve in the road and the mill suddenly swung into view -- brilliant white lights illuminating huge columns of smoke, trolleys bigger than houses ferrying stuff back and forth. It's as if Rube Goldberg built the eighth wonder of the world. I stopped in a contractor's parking area directly across the river to marvel at it, but I wouldn't want to live next to it either.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 12, 2013)

osagebow said:


> and they go after wood burners.


Wow... Great story.  It's true that many ordinances have been passed in various locales, that go after the woodburners.  As Jon already stated, often due to only one side being presented, at the local level.  WRT the EPA, I think it's more political ("see? We're doing something!"), but regardless... that's not what's happening here.  This is a local voluntary program.


----------



## bogydave (Aug 12, 2013)

Appointed bureaucrats motto: 
"We're from the Government,  we're here to help you improve your lives & tell you how to do it our way."  LOL 

Might be a good idea to help reduce the smog in  the air during winter months.

I read the coal fired power plants are in the process of converting to NG. ?

Alaska had a similar wood stove program in Fairbanks, replace many old smoke dragons with new higher efficiency /  cleaner burning stoves.
A good think IMO.
One of the few good things our Government spends our money on


----------



## NCFord (Aug 12, 2013)

Does this apply to non-residents?  The next time I drive through Allegheny County I might have to bring my old Squire stove and drop it off for a reward.  I need to get rid of it anyways and most likely  could not get more that a $100 bucks for it on CL and perhaps $50 for scarp metal.


----------



## Jon1270 (Aug 12, 2013)

At this stage it's just a pilot program; they're only accepting a couple hundred trade-ins, I believe, so you'd better act fast.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 12, 2013)

The wood stove change out programs have been going on around the country for years. 

And this thread has nothing to do with wood or wood handling gear.

In 3-2-1...


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 12, 2013)

The beauty of this program is that you don't even have to show you bought a new stove like the change-out programs require.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 13, 2013)

I was wondering why this was filed in the woodshed...


----------



## hobbyheater (Aug 13, 2013)

Laws that are well intentioned sometimes can have some negative results for others.  I have been operating for over 30 years, a Jetstream wood gasification boiler.  It produces 1/10 of a gram of soot per hour at 120,000 BTU per hour. To put things into perspective, a cigarette produces 1 gram.
According to the hour meter, it burns about 800 hours a year or produces the same amount of soot as 80 cigarettes in a year's operation.

About 4 years ago we got a new neighbour.  This spring he saw me putting wood into the wood shed and asked what I did with the wood, did I sell it?  I told him that I heated my house and domestic hot water 365 days a year with wood.  He was somewhat surprised as he had never seen smoke come out of the chimney.

I have a second brand new unit that someday I might like to install but both units predate any EPA standards.  The town bylaws now require all new wood burning installs to be EPA phase II compliant.

The above picture was taken with the boiler at full output capacity.  The air is just hot enough to be uncomfortable to breathe and is odorless; much like the air coming out of a hot air register.

As we live in a small town where most of the time common sense still prevails, I sure that if I went to a town council meeting and took along some of my neighbors who have no objections to my wood fired system, I would be able to install the second unit.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 14, 2013)

hobbyheater said:


> View attachment 108454



Now, there's a photo of a man who loves his boiler.  Maybe a little too much.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 14, 2013)

I think most of these laws are aimed at the OWB that sits and smolders day and night. These things can be hard on close neighbors.


----------



## begreen (Aug 15, 2013)

Scotty Overkill said:


> Where do you see me blaming it on one side or the other? nowhere, that's where.
> Yeah, this particular program is voluntary.....that's how all that chit started out in Oregon and Washington state, too.....look at it out there now....
> 
> I'm chilling just fine, had me several Redd's Apple Ales a bit ago, may even go out back and sit around my smoke-belching campfire here in a little bit!!


 
I'm glad WA and OR took leadership here. We are the heart of stove country (look at how many stoves are built here) due in part to an enormous amount of big trees and logging. We also have a topography that traps air pollutants in between large mountain ranges making for a fetid soup when there is a temperature inversion and a lot of wood smoke. EPA stoves have really helped clean this up and heat better using less fuel. What is not to like? Are higher respiratory bills for thousands of people a better alternative?

I'm also glad that regs cause my "don't give a damn" neighbor to cease from burning his smudge pot of a fireplace during phase 1 and 2 bans. That one fireplace stinks up the entire neighborhood with billowing smoke, but he doesn't give a damn. Thinks it's his "right" to burn as he pleases.


----------

