Rhode Island wants to shut down your boiler

[Swamp Yankee]

There is a bill in the Rhode Island house right now (H7064) (http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText10/HouseText10/H7064.pdf) that would retroactively ban nearly every wood boiler in the state as of July 2010.

key points:
23-23.7-5. Manner of installation. -- (a) Effective July 1, 2010, no person shall install a
Phase II outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater unless it is installed at least one hundred feet (100')
from the nearest property line and has a permanent attached stack that is at least two feet (2')
higher than the peak of the roof of the building served by the outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater
and the peak of the roof of every other building within three hundred feet (300') of the outdoor
wood-fired hydronic heater.
23-23.7-3. Seasonal prohibition and nuisance conditions. -- (a) No person shall operate
an outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater between the first (1st) day of April and the fifteenth (15th)
day of October, both inclusive, in any year.
(b) Only persons registered with the contractors registration board and licensed to install
an outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater may install an outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater.
(c) No outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater may be used as a primary heat source for any
residence and/or commercial structure.
(d) All existing and installed outdoor wood-fired hydronic heaters that do not meet the
emission standards as set forth above and shall have a set back of five hundred feet (500') from
any property line along with a stack height of two feet (2') above the peak of the nearest
structure.

It is unreasonable to make this bill retroactive. Problem installations should be dealt with on case by case basis. There are plenty of people who spent a lot of money to make a legal, permitted, approved installation, and use wood as our primary heating source, offsetting oil dependence, reducing heating costs, and promoting a carbon neutral heat source in the process. To suddenly prohibit use of these existing legal installations is a bad precedent and certainly would create hardship for some, especially in these economic times.

If you are in RI, please call, email, etc your state rep to voice your concern with this proposed regulation.

Thanks!

 

[patch53]

(c) No outdoor wood-fired hydronic heater may be used as a primary heat source for any
residence and/or commercial structure.

Wow, that is scary. Gee, what do they think people are using these things for... heating their driveways !!?

Probably being pushed by lobbyists from the oil/gas industry, and of course the liberal environmentalists who think a little wood smoke is another source of man-made global warming ! LOL Hopefully cooler heads will prevail here, this is just plain stupid !

 

[Rebel Wood]

Yes, be very cautious, Pa. is proposing very similar regulations,including existing units. These regs., would render every unit I am aware of useless!!

 

[lexybird]

its happening everywhere in all states ,the epa knows whats best for yo uand your family and will force whatever king barry tells them to do ..no matter hwere you live be very cautious about purchasing a new wood boiler as it might be a 700 pound paper weight in the next year or two

 

[patch53]

I have heard before about some of the states in the northeast restricting, or wanting to ban OWB's becasue of the smoke. What about people who burn wood in their homes in a fireplace or insert? They give off just as much smoke as an OWB, and I've never read about anything restricting or eliminating their use. If the rationale for allowing the burning of wood in a fireplace or insert is because of the height of the chimney, then why can't OWB owners simply have to raise their chimney heights to be on same playing field?

Seems to me if you're going to ban OWB's because of the smoke, then fireplaces, inserts, pellet stoves and even trash burning barrels should fall under the same guidelines. They seem to be unfairly targeting just OWB's, and ignoring the other wood burning devices?

Pat

 

[Swamp Yankee]

its happening everywhere in all states ,the epa knows whats best for yo uand your family and will force whatever king barry tells them to do ..no matter hwere you live be very cautious about purchasing a new wood boiler as it might be a 700 pound paper weight in the next year or two

More like a 3500lb paperweight. Even a Garn would be impacted by this retroactive bill due to the "15 grams/hour" requirement even though it meets the .32lb/MBTU emission limits.

 

[henfruit]

Thank god i live in NH on 285 acers. and i dont have any neighbors.Sounds like obama is focused on RI. good luck.

 

[Frozen Canuck]

This is long overdue on this side of the Atlantic. The writing has been on the wall for a long time (for those that cared to read it). This will not stop with OWBs that is just where it starts (low hanging fruit). Eventually this will include all wood burning devices, yes stoves & fireplaces too (just like it does in Europe). BTW similar laws apply to fossil burners in Europe. People there get very anxious when testing time comes as they realise how costly a failed test can be. (This BTW is very effective at getting people off the fence on items like maintenance, service, cleaning etc). The Systems will be tested on a regular basis (same as Europe) all systems that fail either the combustion efficiency test (same as Europe) or the total system efficiency test (same as Europe) or the particulate emission test (same as Europe) will have to be either repaired & then pass all tests or removed & replaced with a system that passes all tests. It wont matter where you live, how much land you own or how far you are from your nearest neighbor. The only tests will be on the system (same as Europe). You see they focus #1 on the environment. #2 on efficient use of any resource, which feeds back into #1. Their laws reflect this & they continue to raise the levels of efficiency required. Law makers here have a very easy template to follow they will just copy Europe. Easy for them to do. So coming soon to this side of the Atlantic, at a much faster pace though as we have 20 - 30 years of regulated efficiency to catch up on. I don't think we need to spend a lot of time complaining though as we have all driven past the "road closed bridge out" sign on this issue & will have to do some corrective action to get ourselves out of the situation we put ourselves into. After all there is no point in continuing & driving right off the cliff.

 

[Mushroom Man]

This issue is of particular interest since what happens in the USA will no doubt prompt our own misguided legislators to follow suit. Not that legislators should necessarily disregard pollution issues. After all, pollution effects health and health impacts public health budgets and thus taxes etc.

My concern is that poorly informed legislators will draft rules that make matters worse.
What would they have us heat with? Oil, gas, propane, coal all have issues of supply that might easily outweigh issues of pollution.
Electricity has its own unique set of environmental impacts.

What if they legislate us all into using fossil fuels and then fossil fuels skyrocket in price due to supply constraints. It could happen; and it would be a real shame when alternatives are available at present.

I, for one, moved to wood and a gasser because the price/supply issues with oil (and arguably peak oil issues) made sustainability of an indoor mushroom operation questionable. I also appreciated that I was moving to a non-fossil fuel alternative that was carbon-neutral. I really thought I was doing my part for the environment since the gasser specifically had efficiencies of operation that reduced pollutants to the range normally associated with oil and gas.

What might I use that has a better pollution profile?

This issue is worth standing-up for. Legislators need to be educated and not left in the dark to be taught by the oil and gas lobbyists.

 

[Swamp Yankee]

I have no problem with legislation for new equipment to make it meet wood stove emissions, or that deal with problem units (every town has a couple). I do have a problem with retroactively banning existing legal installations that have caused no problems, and that impose unrealistic restrictions on Outdoor hydronic heaters that other wood appliances do not need to meet. For every one OHH in this town I can show you ten old smoky wood stoves.

This type of hypocritical BS is no surprise from the state that made all outdoor wood fires illegal (RIDEM Air Resource Reg #4), oh, except:

"(b) Bonfires composed of clean, untreated wood or cellulose derivatives for festive occasions conducted by an institution."

ie, Waterfire in providence. (http://www.waterfire.org/about-waterfire/welcome) This ridiculous ceremony is conducted 15-20 times Mid-May through October in Downtown Providence. Up to 100 smoky open fires are burned in sconces on the providence river. A volunteer for the event told me they burn 20 cords PER EVENT (will confirm if that's a face cord or full cord). Funny...this time of year coincides with their proposed burn-ban for OHH.

I guess its okay for them to seriously pollute the downtown area 20 times a year for 'festive occasions' wasting resources but want to make it illegal to heat my home. Granted, I'm doing so a efficiently as possible in a garn with wood harvested sustainably from our own land in the middle of winter when I'm more than 400 feet +/- from the nearest neighbors...who are also burning wood. Maybe I need to become an institution and make every fire a festive occasion to be granted this special privilege of burning wood?

Other points:
The RIDEM Renewable Energy website doesn't even list biomass as a renewable fuel ((broken link removed to http://www.dem.ri.gov/cleannrg/index.htm)) but does list hydroelectric....How ironic they are trying to remove dams from old mill sites (lower shannock falls and kenyon mill dam) on the wood/pawcatuck rivers... dams that could be supplying hydro power to the surrounding communities every day of every year! But we're going to spend $2.5 million from the 'American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009'.... ie use Stimulus Money to destroy a natural resource ((broken link removed to http://www.ricentral.com/content/view/174660/239/))

I could go on all day.

 

[Swamp Yankee]

Update on the Bill:

I spoke with and wrote our house rep (as did many others) and this is his response:

"Friends, Thank you for contacting me regarding bill 7064 on Outdoor Hydronic
Heaters. I didn't attend the hearing on this bill yesterday. The room was
packed.

However, today I spoke with the prime sponsor of the bill, Rep. Ray
Gallison. He has no intention of hurting people who have already bought and
installed these heaters. The bill is being held, and will be considerably
re-worked.

Rep. Gallison's purpose, which we can probably all support, is to protect
air quality. We have all heard horror stories of the type of garbage some
people have put in these heaters. So I wouldn't be surprised if a revised
version of the bill includes restrictions on what can be burned and perhaps
minimum heights for chimneys. Then there may be restrictions on what type
of burners are acceptable for future installations.

Regards,"

So there is hope... but keep calling/writing your state Reps, especially Rep Gallison.

Thanks!

 

[Fred61]

While walking through the living room one evening a couple weeks ago I overheard a snippit on the news about the state of Vermont implementing some sort of cash for clunkers program on OWB saying that the technology has changed ant would want to help OWB owners to the new technology. By the time I was able to focus my attention on what was being said it was over.
My first and only thought was that it's a little too early for the state to hand out money for the upgraded OWB since the upgrades have not been proven successful.
Another example of lawmakers sticking their nose into something they are not familiar with. Can't help but think that some OWB manufacturers might be providing fodder to some gullible lawmaker.

 

[stee6043]

This is long overdue on this side of the Atlantic. The writing has been on the wall for a long time (for those that cared to read it). This will not stop with OWBs that is just where it starts (low hanging fruit). Eventually this will include all wood burning devices, yes stoves & fireplaces too (just like it does in Europe). BTW similar laws apply to fossil burners in Europe. People there get very anxious when testing time comes as they realise how costly a failed test can be. (This BTW is very effective at getting people off the fence on items like maintenance, service, cleaning etc). The Systems will be tested on a regular basis (same as Europe) all systems that fail either the combustion efficiency test (same as Europe) or the total system efficiency test (same as Europe) or the particulate emission test (same as Europe) will have to be either repaired & then pass all tests or removed & replaced with a system that passes all tests. It wont matter where you live, how much land you own or how far you are from your nearest neighbor. The only tests will be on the system (same as Europe). You see they focus #1 on the environment. #2 on efficient use of any resource, which feeds back into #1. Their laws reflect this & they continue to raise the levels of efficiency required. Law makers here have a very easy template to follow they will just copy Europe. Easy for them to do. So coming soon to this side of the Atlantic, at a much faster pace though as we have 20 - 30 years of regulated efficiency to catch up on. I don't think we need to spend a lot of time complaining though as we have all driven past the "road closed bridge out" sign on this issue & will have to do some corrective action to get ourselves out of the situation we put ourselves into. After all there is no point in continuing & driving right off the cliff.

This is a well written and well organized thought on the subject. Unfortunately, I disagree 100% that this kind of regulation is "long overdue". I tend to think us Americans can come up with substantially more creative and effective ways to solve our problems than Europeans tend to. For goodness sake, you have to have a permit/license to operate a chainsaw in some EU countries. No thank you. No way. I'd like to hold on to my freedom just a little bit longer. How many red-blooded Americans would support modeling much of anything after EU principles? Not this one. I love my German saw and my Polish boiler.....but I'm not ready to give up on real democracy just yet....

 

[USA-1]

Any nitwit can go down to a local Target store and buy 10 AC units if he wants, no questions asked. Doesn't matter if he wants to keep his Florida home at 50. 40
Gee.. Yah, think, just maybe.. pollution is being generated at the electric plants to power these AC units?? So this guy can be cool
Why isn't there regulation to keep our air safe from those people who run AC units?
But I guess in this political environment that's OK. So lets get this right.
So It's OK to buy 10 Korean made AC units and power them with an electric power plant down the road. ( not my backyard theory)
Coal,NG, OIL, Wood, Nuclear? Who cares?
BUT, Let's harrass some New England land owner ( Farmer? )who cuts his own renewable trees and uses them to keep his family alive and warm in the cold north with an OWB?

Yup. It's a sad day for America

 

[WoodNotOil]

I have read the regulations that most states have put in place Swamp Yankee and I think your rep is right. The restrictions in most states simply have to do with not burning treated woods, etc., the hieght of the stack and the proximity to your neighbors. It makes sense really when you think that all of it was really just fueled by neighbor complaints. Some states do talk about air quality and phase II burning, etc., but all of that simply refers to the EPA testing that has been done and there are OWBs that pass that testing when burning clean, dry wood.

I don't think current owners have much to worry about unless their neighbors are actively complaining in most cases...

 

[ewdudley]

So It's OK to buy 10 Korean made AC units and power them with an electric power plant down the road. ( not my backyard theory)
Coal,NG, OIL, Wood, Nuclear? Who cares?
BUT, Let's harrass some New England land owner ( Farmer? )who cuts his own renewable trees and uses them to keep his family alive and warm in the cold north with an OWB?

Yup. It's a sad day for America

Sad day indeed.

Shouldn't some woodchucks be harassed? It's bad enough that all the smoke they spew is making my kids cough and wheeze their way though childhood, but did you ever think about it enough to realize that by avoiding sales tax on legitimate heating fuels they're only increasing my tax burden? They're cutting down all the CO2 absorbing trees and now me and my family has to pay for it twice, once by having to breath their noxious fumes and again to the Tax Man!

 

[Nofossil]

I posted the data in another thread, but to me the issue is that these old-style OWBs when operated AS DESIGNED put out 70 times the particulate emissions of a gasifier of the same BTU rating. There's no need to smoke out the neighborhood in order to be self-sufficient. I'd prefer education to legislation, but at this point there's not really much valid reason to buy a traditional OWB. They're not even less expensive in most cases.

 

[Frozen Canuck]

You are right NoFo. Just for the heck of it I got a price on exactly the same model of OWB that I currently pollute 200 acres with (yes they still make the very same model even 10 years after I bought mine) would you believe $59.00 more than a Garn 1500. Kind of makes that choice OWB/Gaser very easy.

 

[karri0n]

Regulations on new installs of old-style non-gasification OWB's is a good thing. There's no reason these things should even be available on the market. That being said, I find it very hard to believe that any legislation would make it through that would affect existing installs.

In fact, the only wording I see regarding existing installations below:

"All existing and installed outdoor wood-fired hydronic heaters that do not meet the
emission standards as set forth above and shall have a set back of five hundred feet (500’) from
any property line along with a stack height of two feet (2’) above the peak of the nearest
structure."

doesn't say anything at all. If it were slightly reworded, it COULD mean that any existing installs will need to be moved so that they are 500' from a property line. However, as it stands here, it isn't saying anything. It's a series of descriptions of a unit with no listed course of action for said unit.

 

[4acrefarm]

Obama is writing legislation in R.I? Wow!

 

[USA-1]

I think requiring phase II boilers for new installations is reasonable and sound for all, and I don't think anyone here would balk at that, manufacture's, or users.
But, requiring a stack, including a new phase II boiler, to be higher than the house served and higher than any house within 300' is blatent discrimination. That law isn't applied to smokey fireplaces, or woodstoves, which, by the way I have made it a point to notice where large smoke plumes are coming from in my travels, and the worst ones I have seen lately have been coming certain chimneys of houses. People in RI need to attend this meeting and point out these discriminatory proposed rules.
Requiring an OWB to have a stack higher than any boilding within 300', is not ony discrimination, it is an ill conceived cheap shot at banning wood burning.
Is it pre-existing houses? If a new tall house is built you have to go and extend your chimney? Of course they know bringing an OWB chimney higher than all nearby rooftops would require an expensive- ugly- guy wired structure. But hey, this is the new America. Only here In the new America can a fat rich neighbor build a house down the road from you, and the polititions want you to have to spend money and make an ugly structure to be higher than his house.

 

[Frozen Canuck]

Agreed USA-1 very unfair......let's try this, combustion efficiency tests, system efficiency tests, particulate emissions tests......all on a regular basis for all combusting units fossil & bio (if it burns it gets tested period)...... fail a test!! unit is tagged for repair.....say 90 day time limit after failed test......repaired unit fails the same test! unit is tagged for replacement....but only by a unit certified to pass particulate emissions test & combustion efficiency tests (owners choice from this group). This should help the economy....get America working again....it will certainly get all the owners of inefficient/unnecessarily polluting units working no matter what they use for fuel. Get everyone off the fence re: cleaning, maintenance, servicing etc. As well as staying reasonably current with efficient/clean burning technology. Many EU countries seem to get along just fine with some simple....applied equally to all....rules like this....So why can't we??????

 

[jtmcgowan]

Down here in the south, I think they could try to implement such measures but they may just find as the Treasury fellows found during Prohibition that it was not worth dying to enforce the law. I fear the same fate may follow the livestock registry officials. Moreover do these regulations mean to include biomass generation facilities? If it does so much for the green jobs presbo keeps promising as the economic solutions. I guess this what we get for change we can believe in.

 

[leaddog]

Agreed USA-1 very unfair......let's try this, combustion efficiency tests, system efficiency tests, particulate emissions tests......all on a regular basis for all combusting units fossil & bio (if it burns it gets tested period)...... fail a test!! unit is tagged for repair.....say 90 day time limit after failed test......repaired unit fails the same test! unit is tagged for replacement....but only by a unit certified to pass particulate emissions test & combustion efficiency tests (owners choice from this group). This should help the economy....get America working again....it will certainly get all the owners of inefficient/unnecessarily polluting units working no matter what they use for fuel. Get everyone off the fence re: cleaning, maintenance, servicing etc. As well as staying reasonably current with efficient/clean burning technology. Many EU countries seem to get along just fine with some simple....applied equally to all....rules like this....So why can't we??????

Great idea. Lets see,,,,,,,,,,, 4 to 6 hrs testing by a SKILLED somebody that went to a gov sponsered 4hr class. charges $75 an hour, Just happens to sell parts but don't have them in his truck so he'll have to come back, Another sevice charge. That will add another $500 bucks to my heating bill. BUT I'm sure these inspectors will be smarter than I am. They think I really need a $1000 add on tag called asme now, and here in Michigan nobody is smart enough except a lisenced plumber to install a water heater. Give me a break.......................
Know wonder you can't buy the latest tech stuff from Europe over here. They don't want to mess with our stupidity.
leaddog

 

[Frozen Canuck]

NO actually they the EU are quite comfortable with rules (they live with them everyday) what they are not comfortable with is our habit of buying....say a coffee....then spilling it all over ourselves....then running to a lawyer to sue the person who served you the coffee....& the company who sold you the coffee. That kind of stupidity they want nothing to do with. You see they know as soon as they start selling their product here....let's say boilers, someone doing their own install will drop the boiler on their foot moving it, scrape their nuckles installing it, & probably burn their hand touching a hot boiler....each & every time this happens the EU boiler company in this case, has to worry about being sued for someone's stupidity despite the 100+ warnings stickers on the product (that are their because someone stupid found a lawyer). They look at that & say no thanks. Can't blame them. BTW most EU countries have the following formula, govt inspector does testing, identifies deficiencies....homeowner is free to choose the company that will repair/replace unit.