February 16th, 2014

EPA’s Wood-Burning Stove Ban Has Chilling Consequences For Many Rural People


EPA

This has almost  nothing to do with the environment, in my humble opinion, but everything to do with Agenda 21. Google Agenda 21 if you are unfamiliar with it. – Shorty Dawkins, Associate Editor

This article comes from Forbes.com

by Larry Bell (Forbes Contributor)

It seems that even wood isn’t green or renewable enough anymore.  The EPA has recently banned the production and sale of 80 percent of America’s current wood-burning stoves, the oldest heating method known to mankind and mainstay of rural homes and many of our nation’s poorest residents. The agency’s stringent one-size-fits-all rules apply equally to heavily air-polluted cities and far cleaner plus typically colder off-grid wilderness areas such as large regions of Alaska and the American West.

While EPA’s most recent regulations aren’t altogether new, their impacts will nonetheless be severe.  Whereas restrictions had previously banned wood-burning stoves that didn’t limit fine airborne particulate emissions to 15 micrograms per cubic meter of air, the change will impose a maximum 12 microgram limit. To put this amount in context, EPA estimates that secondhand tobacco smoke in a closed car can expose a person to 3,000-4,000 micrograms of particulates per cubic meter.

Most wood stoves that warm cabin and home residents from coast-to-coast can’t meet that standard. Older stoves that don’t cannot be traded in for updated types, but instead must be rendered inoperable, destroyed, or recycled as scrap metal.

The impacts of EPA’s ruling will affect many families. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2011 survey statistics, 2.4 million American housing units (12 percent of all homes) burned wood as their primary heating fuel, compared with 7 percent that depended upon fuel oil.

Local governments in some states have gone even further  than EPA, not only banning the sale of noncompliant stoves, but even their use as fireplaces. As a result, owners face fines for infractions. Puget Sound, Washington is one such location.   Montréal, Canada proposes to eliminate all fireplaces within its city limits.

Only weeks after EPA enacted its new stove rules, attorneys general of seven states sued the agency to crack down on wood-burning water heaters as well. The lawsuit was filed by Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont, all predominately Democrat states.  Claiming that EPA’s new regulations didn’t go far enough to decrease particle pollution levels, the plaintiffs cited agency estimates that outdoor wood boilers will produce more than 20 percent of wood-burning emissions by 2017. A related suit was filed by the environmental group Earth Justice.

Did EPA require a motivational incentive to tighten its restrictions? Sure, about as much as Br’er Rabbit needed to persuade Br’er Fox to throw him into the briar patch. This is but another example of EPA and other government agencies working with activist environmental groups to sue and settle on claims that afford leverage to enact new regulations which they lack statutory authority to otherwise accomplish.

“Sue and settle “ practices, sometimes referred to as “friendly lawsuits”, are cozy deals through which far-left radical environmental groups file lawsuits against federal agencies wherein  court-ordered “consent decrees” are issued based upon a prearranged settlement agreement they collaboratively craft together in advance behind closed doors. Then, rather than allowing the entire process to play out, the agency being sued settles the lawsuit by agreeing to move forward with the requested action both they and the litigants want.

And who pays for this litigation? All-too-often we taxpayers are put on the hook for legal fees of both colluding parties. According to a 2011 GAO report, this amounted to millions of dollars awarded to environmental organizations for EPA litigations between 1995 and 2010. Three “Big Green” groups received 41% of this payback, with Earthjustice accounting for 30 percent ($4,655,425).  Two other organizations with histories of lobbying for regulations EPA wants while also receiving agency funding are the American Lung Association (ALA) and the Sierra Club.

Read more here.




SUPPORT OUR BILLBOARD CAMPAIGN
Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath


Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!



 Read More Posts

Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.

7 Responses to “EPA’s Wood-Burning Stove Ban Has Chilling Consequences For Many Rural People”

  1. 1
    Big Al Says:

    Massive non-compliance on a scale the likes these yahoo’s have never seen…arrest all the traitors in office and abolish all the alphabet agencies, that would suffice.

  2. 2
    mcw Says:

    In Alaska where the temperature ,hovers around -14 degrees it is impossible for a normal furnace to keep up for the heat demand. Size of the furnace btu’s a conductive to the size of the house by city code. So they are dependent upon their wood burning devices to keep not only warm but to keep from freezing to death. So with the EPA standard it will make their devices illegal. There fore they must leave their homes. 20 century CARPETBAGGING to the max.

  3. 3
    Cal Says:

    Shorty is correct, this has to do with the UN’s Agenda 21″s depopulation attempts.

    So can anyone tell me why the EPA is a lawful agency, because so far I have found nothing in the US Constitution that lets a bureaucracy REGULATE us, all regulation powers I can find (remember ALL legislative must come from the congress to be lawful) are these:

    Article 1, Section 8 has this:
    – To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
    – To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
    – The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

    If is not in the US Constitution or in Pursuance thereof it – it is NOT lawful and must not be followed. They cannot take (LAWFULLY) more powers to themselves as our reps – working for us – those within those agencies have also gone too far with their deliberate and treasonous attempts to destroy our nation for a NWO to replace us. As the founders said it would be “null and void”.

  4. 4
    Louis Fowlkes Says:

    This tactic is one of many that we build utilized to put the pressure on the population. The only way to be able to live in piece is if you have the finances to stay within the masses. This is electricity, gas, and heat supplied by the towns, cities, states, and the country. This is so the can bend you over, pull down your pants, and shove a microscope up your anus. They will then be control over your life and have no more privacy at all. The economy is going to be blown up to smithereens. The only way to be allowed to live is by getting implants in the brains to be able to live within concentration camps.

  5. 5
    Cal Says:

    @ Louis Fawlkes, “The only way to be allowed to live …”

    To me, that is NOT living.

  6. 6
    jack Says:

    EPA CAN KISS MY ASS

  7. 7
    Calin Brabandt Says:

    Yes. This is all Agenda 21 stuff. Humans have lived for many thousands of years using low impact and sustainable technology, which is now being banned. On the other hand, fed.gov readily supports nuclear power and nuke plants are really all ticking time bombs with implications that far exceed the risks and downsides of “the old ways.”

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148