Key Tips for the Proposed Wooden Heat Restrictions

The deadline for submitting responses on the EPA proposed new wood heater laws is in one particular 7 days, on Monday Might 5.&nbsp Shown under are some of the crucial suggestions that the Alliance thinks are necessary to advertise cleaner and a lot more productive wood and pellet heating in the United States. &nbsp&nbsp
The Alliance welcomes any input about these suggestions prior to the Monday submittal deadline. &nbspHere are more comprehensive feedback listed here for your review and enter.

&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspClosing loopholes so that federal emission specifications implement to all wood heating appliances – wooden and pellet stoves, boilers, furnaces and masonry heaters.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspFollowing the 5-12 months implementation interval, rather of the different 8-12 months period of time.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspRequiring wood stoves to satisfy a 4.5 gram an hour normal and pellet stoves a 2.five normal from 2015 to 2020.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspNot grandfathering any system that does not satisfy Step A single standards in 2015 and Action Two standards in 2020.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspDemanding manufacturers to disclose the efficiency of their heaters inside of six months of finalizing the rule. &nbspAccess to correct wood and pellet heater effectiveness figures is notably crucial for minimal-income households.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspRequiring a buyer hangtag that contains emissions, performance and BTU output as measured by an unbiased 3rdget together test lab.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspStrengthening the capability of OECA (Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance) to expeditiously make much more testing and other information clear to the general public and to states.
&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbspSupporting the EPA to create a database of emission knowledge using wire wooden tests prior to finalizing the emission normal for cordwood in the rule.&nbsp
Simply because this NSPS contains so a lot of variables for both market and the EPA, the Alliance urges the EPA to defer some regulations until the subsequent NSPS, 8 a long time from now.&nbsp This includes regulating fireplaces and dealing with the installation of pre-1988, uncertified stoves as “new sources” and only allowing the set up of qualified stoves made right after 1988.&nbsp
To submit responses to the EPA, click on right here for details.&nbsp

Heated Up!

An Evaluation of Stove Emissions and the Proposed NSPS

Alliance for Eco-friendly Heat
April 1, 2014
Standard knowledge claims that cat stoves melt away cleanest on a low air placing and non-cats burn off cleanest on a large air placing.&nbsp Conventional knowledge also states that pellet stoves are cleaner than wood stoves.&nbsp Even so, the databases utilized by business and the EPA to assess stoves shows that the reality is significantly a lot more challenging than conventional knowledge indicates.&nbsp And, the implications for planning and testing cleaner stoves that strike a one.three normal, or no matter what variety the EPA arrives at, may possibly be considerable.&nbsp
This evaluation shows that stoves in all groups-cat, non-cat and pellet – usually melt away dirtiest on their substantial air setting, which below a weighted common in the current NSPS, is mainly discounted.&nbsp Underneath the proposed NSPS that large burn off fee gets to be all-important, and will be the concentrate of most cat, non-cat and pellet stove tests.&nbsp This might direct to makers making an attempt to minimize the substantial air settings to get their stoves to go.&nbsp This in change could boost start-up emissions and make it more difficult to get stoves up to temperature quickly.
This also raises the issue about whether it can make sense to check stoves at their highest air environment, when home owners normally use them at the least expensive air environment.&nbsp With forty% of non-cat stoves emitting the maximum emissions in Class 4, need to the new NSPS genuinely test them based on Group 4 emissions and totally ignore Class one emissions?&nbsp We feel that weighting of emissions can nevertheless make sense below the new NSPS, although the weighting of wood stoves could be different from the weighting of pellet stove emissions, dependent on info of in which home owners normally use their respective sort of stoves. Weighting need to at least be regarded as to contain all the test burns necessary by the NSPS. If 4 check burns are required, one particular large and one minimal and two a lot more at the dirtiest burn off rate, they could all be weighted similarly.&nbsp
This investigation is based mostly on a databases of 147 stoves, compiled by the Fireside Patio and Barbecue Affiliation (HPBA) in 2010.&nbsp It turned general public in January of this yr when the EPA introduced it amid the scores of documents they utilized to determine what emission ranges to set for wood and pellet stoves in the new NSPS.&nbsp
Summary notes:
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspWhen the 5G correction element is eliminated, as it will be beneath the new NSPS, a lot more stoves will very likely be able to go stricter restrictions than what is frequently currently being noted.&nbsp A lot of who cite figures about how several stoves can move the new NSPS limits appear to be unaware of this.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp* &nbsp5 stoves – 2 catalytic, two non-catalytic and one pellet–appear to be ready to go a one.three gram for each hour (g/hr) standard with the 5G correction making use of crib wood. Much more will likely pass without it.&nbsp

·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspIf the EPA settled on a 2 g/hr regular, 16 stoves would look to move: eight pellet, four catalytic and 4 non-catalytic.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp* &nbspOn regular, non-cat stoves are inclined to burn off cleanest on Class 3, the medium high melt away fee and dirtiest on Category four, the large burn off fee.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp* &nbspCat stoves burn regularly cleanest on Class one, the low melt away fee and dirtiest on Group four.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp* &nbspPellet stoves melt away practically similarly cleanly on Groups 1, 2 and three, but are substantially dirtier on Category four.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspTo go long term specifications, a lot of producers might look to decreasing the air in Class 4, which could have an affect on efficiency and may possibly have effect of decreasing optimum BTU output.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp* &nbspBy screening at its dirtiest melt away rate, numerous wooden stove would be examined at burn up charges which the customer does not frequently use.&nbsp This could make screening much less attribute of true entire world use, instead than much more.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspThere is a very slight damaging correlation among firebox measurement and emissions with non-cat stoves displaying somewhat reduce average emissions from larger fireboxes.&nbsp Larger non-cat stoves are acknowledged to be more challenging to tune and get to move.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspThere is a very slight optimistic correlation between firebox dimension and emissions with catalytic stoves exhibiting marginally greater common emissions from more substantial fireboxes.
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspOn the EPA checklist of certified stoves, there is a higher focus of stoves that examined just significantly less than 4.five g/hr, and comparatively handful of that analyzed previously mentioned 4.five.&nbsp This could show that stove businesses are able to fantastic-tune their stoves to strike stricter emission targets.

The Database
The primary database used by sector and the EPA has in depth details about 147 stoves, displaying emission prices at the 4 burn ranges.&nbsp It was compiled by Bob Ferguson, a consultant for HPBA who gathered data from makers who agreed to share it. The EPA independently also has this knowledge and far more.&nbsp Legally, emissions info is not guarded by the private enterprise info (CBI) label, but all companies post it as CBI, which then calls for the EPA to go through a prolonged approach to eliminate the label. The info was compiled in 2010, so it is a little bit out of date and not an exhaustive listing, but it nonetheless provides useful and important knowledge to comprehend how a 1.three g/hr common might effect the stove sector in five or eight years, when and if that regular gets legislation.&nbsp There are up to one hundred stoves not on this listing, like numerous that grew to become licensed soon after 2010, which are currently being analyzed by the EPA.&nbsp
5G, 5H and the Correction Aspect
One particular of the biggest hidden characteristics of the NSPS is that stoves at or four.four g/hr below the existing NSPS could occur out a gram or even two grams less below the new NSPS.&nbsp This is because the EPA is acquiring rid of an adjustment or correction issue that has been used for stoves tested beneath certain check approaches.&nbsp Most of the industry does not understand this and it makes the figures proposed by the EPA appear stricter than they truly are.&nbsp In this examination listed here, we are just making use of the figures in the existing NSPS and we have not re-altered them. If we experienced, it would make several of them demonstrate a lot reduced emission quantities. (For a lot more details on this, see the emission testing strategy dialogue below.)&nbspSeventy-two of the 147 stoves on this list utilized some edition of 5G (5G1, 5G2 or 5G3). 20-9 did not specify whether or not they utilised 5G or 5H.
Stoves that can meet 1.3 grams for every hour
This investigation is entirely about conference 1.3, or whatsoever standard the EPA arrives at, making use of crib wood testing.&nbsp Crib wooden tests will continue to be utilized for 5 many years prior to transitioning to cord wood.&nbsp After makers begin creating for cordwood tests, stoves may run in people’s residences much more like they were tested in the lab, and become cleaner.
Of the 147 stoves on the checklist, 5 of them tested underneath one.3 g/hr on reduced and high rates and are likely to go the proposed new EPA requirements employing crib wood – but not necessarily cordwood. &nbspThe Alliance commented on how the EPA can established a normal for cordwood. &nbspTwo of them are cat stoves, 2 are non-cat and a single is a pellet stove.
Total Average Emission Rankings
The all round regular weighted emission fee of all the stoves on the record is two.01 for pellet stoves, 2.05 for cat stoves and three.fifty one for non-cat stoves.&nbsp On typical, all three classes of stoves were dirtiest on Class 4, which is the maximum air placing and the most BTU output.&nbsp Cat stoves had been the only sort that was uniformly cleaner at Classification one and uniformly dirtier at Classification four.&nbsp For non-cats, the cleanest regular burn was Class three, but there was only about a 1 g/hr big difference among all four-burn up charges.&nbsp Conversely, cat stoves ended up persistently and drastically cleaner at one particular burn up price in contrast to others, with far more than a 2.5 g/hr range.&nbsp Pellet stoves had been a bit cleaner on Class two, but Groups 1, two and 3 ended up extremely equivalent.&nbsp There was about a 1.5-g/hr variety among cleanest and dirtiest burns.
It is crucial to know that EPA emissions quantities do not equally typical the 4 melt away costs to occur up with a final quantity.&nbsp They are a “weighted average,” so that the high melt away charge counts for quite little and the reduced burn off rate counts a whole lot. &nbsp&nbspSince the Classification 4 substantial burn up doesn’t impact the weighted typical much, most makers do not pay out that a lot interest to it.&nbsp&nbsp This is one cause why the typical Group 4 burns had been the dirtiest for all stove types. On the other hand, the lower burns are intensely weighted, so stoves are developed to perform well at these ranges.&nbsp Substantial burns that beforehand counted for one-10% of a weighted regular will now count intensely. &nbspThe great information for stove manufacturers is that large burn up emissions are usually simpler and less expensive to decrease than minimal melt away emissions.&nbsp But the affect in the area is very likely to be improved emissions throughout start-up.
Its also relevant that the median figures for every single burn up price for each and every stove kind are decrease than the regular, displaying that there are more stoves on the cleaner conclude of the spectrum.&nbsp
Cat Stove Emission Traits
Cat stoves ended up the only stove kind to have an typical beneath 1.three on any burn off classification.&nbsp Cat stoves experienced an typical of one.1 g/hr on Group 1, the low burn up.&nbsp But below the new EPA proposal, stoves have to meet up with 1.three on their dirtiest placing, which will be Class 4 for cat stoves.&nbsp In this stove sample, the regular on Classification 4 was three.six.
Beneath the proposed new technique of tests at the dirtiest burn off level, stoves that consistently have the biggest assortment amongst Categories 1 and four could be penalized, and stoves that have the minimum range might reward.&nbsp Although cat stoves have the cleanest burn up at their “sweet spot” which aided them pass with flying colours above the earlier 2 many years, they will lose some of that edge underneath the new rule which does not average in the cleanse burns, considerably much less give them greater bodyweight.
Of the 15 cat stoves:
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp * &nbspthirteen burned cleanest on Classification 1, the low burn off price
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbsp12 burned dirtiest on Group four, the high melt away rate
·&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp *&nbspThe optimum emitter was g/hr on Category 4
Non-cat Emission Qualities
Non-cats had the dirtiest average weighted burn up rate of 3.5 and had the dirtiest regular on any one burn up group.&nbsp They experienced an regular of 4.04 on substantial burn, and the cleanest average was 2.nine on medium substantial.&nbsp This contradicts the much-repeated traditional knowledge that non-cats are cleanest on their highest air location and dirtiest on the least expensive air location.&nbsp Beneath the new NSPS, these stoves will typically have to be analyzed at the maximum air setting, which is their dirtiest and have the furthest to occur down toward one.3. This might end result in non-cats (and cats) being analyzed at burn off prices that homeowners really don’t frequently use.&nbsp In contrast to cat stoves, that are persistently cleanest on Group one and constantly dirtiest on Group four, the following desk shows that cat stoves do not demonstrate any equivalent regularity:

We issue no matter whether this data supports the EPA’s proposal to take a look at on a stove’s dirtiest burn price.&nbsp An additional option would be to keep the weighted common for wooden stoves (not pellet stoves) but set a cap on emissions on any test run as the EPA proposes to do with out of doors boilers.&nbsp Therefore, even if the EPA finalized on one.three or 2. g/hr, the stove could not emit more than three or four g/hr on any melt away price.
Out of the 110 non-cats on the checklist:
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp 8 ended up cleanest on Class one
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp 28 ended up cleanest on Classification four
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp fifty four were dirtiest on Class four, the greatest burn off rate, and
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp 33 have been dirtiest on Category one, the low burn up fee
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp The highest emitter was 17.4 g/hr on Category 4
Pellet stove Emission Traits
As famous previously mentioned, the cleanest weighted common incorporated one particular pellet stoves that emitted under 1.three g/hr on higher and reduced melt away costs. Even even though almost a third of pellet stoves had a weighted common under one.three, with the weighting removed and testing targeted on the dirtiest emission charge, a lot of pellet stoves would have to redesign to get their higher burn fee emissions down. This is why numerous companies are currently obtaining the pellet stove qualified so they have a 5-yr certification and won’t have to retest below the new tests protocol for five more a long time.&nbsp
Emissions had been nearly flat on Classes 1, two and three (amongst one.sixty five and one.eight) and about the very same amount of stoves experienced their cleanest operate on Class 1, 2 and 3. &nbspPellet stoves ended up constantly dirtiest in Class four, in which emissions jumped to an regular of two.nine. 1 pellet stove place out eleven.nine g/hr on Class four. &nbspNonetheless, a lot of authorities feel that pellet stoves have a great deal of area for advancement and have been deliberately “de-tuned” to meet up with the 35 to one air to gas ratio.&nbsp
Of the 22 pellet stoves:
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp 10 burned cleanest on Class one, the reduced burn off fee
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp 12 burned dirtiest on Category 4, the higher burn price
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp five burned dirtiest on Classification one
·&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp The dirtiest emitter was eleven.9 on Class 4
There is greater certainty close to pellet stoves, as they are not going through this kind of a drastic swap in screening strategies from crib wood to cordwood.&nbsp Their examination gasoline is not remaining the very same nonetheless, as the EPA will commence to demand the use of PFI certified pellets, which could carry out marginally various than the pellets employed ahead of.
If the EPA have been in the long run to set a two g/hr normal after five years, this databases demonstrates that pellet stoves would be the category that shines in between one.three and two g/hr, with about a 3rd of them emitting considerably less than two g/hr on all 4 burn charges.&nbsp If the EPA were to set a two. limit, there are rarely any much more cat or non-cat stoves that would be much less than 2 g/hr 4 burn up operates on this checklist (more would probably go right after having absent the 5H correction).
Implications for Effectiveness

Below the proposed NSPS, there will be no minimum effectiveness standard, but companies will have to take a look at and report efficiencies employing the CSA 415.1 stack loss efficiency test.&nbsp This is a approach that steps how very hot the flue gasses are coming out of the stack, in contrast to the heat that was transferred from the stove to the room.&nbsp All other issues becoming equivalent, the hotter the gas coming out the chimney, the considerably less productive the stove.

Stoves have a tendency to burn up more efficiently at reduced burn off charges and significantly less efficiently at increased burn up rates.&nbsp To design a stove that fulfills 1.3, or what ever variety the EPA comes at, on higher melt away, a lot of producers may concentrate R&ampD on decreasing their greatest burn fee.&nbsp Below this situation, a stove’s efficiency could increase.
Even so, if efficiency calculations below B415.1 are completed using a weighted typical of all 4 melt away costs, that info will not even be obtainable and efficiency will only be calculated utilizing large and low burn up fee info.
A single adverse implication of reducing air in Classification 4 is that stove begin up may be much more challenging and could outcome in higher emissions as Classification four is most consistently employed throughout the begin up time period. This difficulty could be reduced if the operator leaves the door somewhat ajar, which is presently a extremely typical follow and advised as an option in some owner’s manuals.&nbsp Even so, this can’t be done throughout certification testing.
Pellet stoves are probably to see the most rapid increase in efficiencies due to the fact many of them are at the moment exempt because of the 35 to 1 air to fuel ratio exemption.&nbsp By making use of this exemption from certification, producers have penalized the efficiency of numerous pellet stoves.&nbsp By taking away that exemption to certification in the proposed NSPS, those stoves will have to reduce airflow through the combustion chamber, which can significantly raise efficiency.&nbsp A five – 20% increase in effectiveness, or a lot more, is achievable for several exempt stoves.&nbsp This will result in important fuel personal savings for hundreds of shoppers.
Tuning a pellet stove for highest efficiency could cause difficulties in stoves that are vented by means of the wall as an alternative of by means of the ceiling.&nbsp Pellet stoves are examined with a vertical stack set-up and a side vented device will not have the advantage of that increased draft.&nbsp The decrease effectiveness and increased airflow of some existing pellet stoves can assist them in the discipline when they are facet vented.
Cat Stove Emission Correlation
We found that there is a small optimistic correlation amongst the usable firebox volume and EPA weighted emissions. This indicates that as the volume of the firebox will increase, so does the emission of the stove in g/hr. The worth of R (correlation) is .3356. Although technically a optimistic correlation, the romantic relationship amongst the two variables is weak (the nearer the value is to zero, the weaker the connection) making use of an alpha of .05, the correlation is not deemed to be statistically considerable. The scatter plot underneath depicts the slight good slope.

Non-cat Stove Emission Correlation
&nbspThe very same correlation amongst firebox quantity and EPA weighted emissions evaluated for non-cat stoves demonstrates a small unfavorable correlation. The sample measurement is considerably bigger at a hundred and ten stoves, and the correlation among volume and emissions has an R-value of -.2566. This unfavorable correlation indicates that as the firebox size goes up, the weighted emissions of the stove go down, for a cleaner burn. Though technically a negative correlation, the romantic relationship between these two variables is also statistically weak with an alpha amount of .05. The graph over exhibits the downward sloping connection. Firebox dimensions are not as relevant with pellet stoves and really handful of of 22 pellet stoves on the checklist even provided their firebox size, so we did not perform a correlation examination for them.

Distribution of Tested Emissions in Non-Cat Stoves
&nbspUsing the checklist of EPA licensed stoves that was up to date in December 2013, we see a quite large focus of stoves that were examined proper below 4.5 g/hr.&nbsp Conversely, there are extremely few stoves examined correct previously mentioned 4.five g/hr.&nbsp This may possibly reveal an potential of stove makers to fantastic tune their stoves to just scarcely fulfill stricter EPA standards.&nbsp The EPA stove record does not contain the lab where they ended up tested, so it is not identified at which EPA approved labs the tests was completed.&nbsp Equivalent emission charts for catalytic stoves and pellet stoves did not demonstrate any similar concentration around 2.five or four.five g/rh.&nbsp Cat stoves are held to a 2.five g/hr regular in Washington and Oregon and in some adjust-out packages.

Heated Up!

Australian Perspectives on the EPA’s Proposed Stove Restrictions

In the US the federal EPA has not too long ago introduced a proposal to update the 1988 emission boundaries for new wood stoves. &nbspWhile the new laws is nevertheless in its consultation stage, it is proposed that it will be released as regulation in 2015 and will have a five 12 months stage in period.&nbsp
In the US they measure particulate emissions in grams for each hour rather of the grams for each kilogram that we use in Australia, which makes a direct comparison hard. &nbspBut the intent of the laws is significantly the same as proposed in the modern draft of the Australian wood heater emission expectations, which is to significantly decrease emission prices for new heaters. [The Alliance did a more in-depth investigation of the new, proposed Australian wooden heater rules in August 2013. – eds]
Comparable to the situation in Australia, it appears that these new limits are generally supported by the big heater companies, who have the capability to develop new, compliant designs, but opposed by the more compact companies who cannot very easily manage the costs of improvement and testing.
In both the US and Australia the new boundaries will not apply to existing heaters, so any reducing of neighbourhood smoke ranges will just take a extended time to materialise, provided the twenty 12 months furthermore lifespan of most wooden heaters. &nbspIn both international locations wood heater manufacturers would like to see governments support (or enforce) the substitute of aged heaters with new designs, for the evident purpose. &nbspHowever, it seems that governments are reluctant to head down that route.

Due to the fact these new designs of wooden heater are considerably easier to function with out creating excessive smoke, the gradual substitution of installed heaters need to consequence in significantly less smoky heater problems. &nbspThe experiment carried out in the city of Libby, Montana in which every single wooden heater in this little city was modernised or replaced, confirmed that improving the heater inventory can have a modest effect on smoke amounts (thirty%). &nbspHowever, this experiment clearly demonstrates that heater procedure follow has by considerably the biggest influence on smoke emissions and is anything that can by changed at no excellent price with immediate influence.

Heated Up!

4 Myths About the EPA’s Proposed Wood Stove Regulations

In the weeks since the EPA unveiled their new regulations on residential wood heaters, many myths are starting to circulate in the right-wing media about what they mean.  It’s sometimes hard to tell if the authors are intentionally spreading misleading information about the regulations, or they simply haven’t done enough research to know that they are spreading rumors.  Probably some of both. 
Next week we will be taking a look at the language used by some environmental activists who want much broader bans on wood heating.  And sometimes it’s hard to tell who is on the right and who is on the left.  One off-grid newsletter was touting the benefits of unpasteurized milk, organic vegetable gardens – and the evils of the EPA who cozy up to big business and threaten our freedom to live healthy lives.
After reading quite a few of the articles decrying the wood stove regulations, it’s clear that they are feeding off one another and often quoting one another.  Many of the articles are from small fringe groups and websites, but some are from mainstream ones like Forbes and from ideologues at think tanks like the Heartland Institute. Here are some of the most common myths in the making:
1.     The “EPA Banned 80% of Wood Stoves” Myth: “Only weeks after the EPA effectively banned 80 percent of the wood-burning stoves money-saving Americans use to heat their homes, the attorneys general of seven states are suing to force the agency to crack down on wood-burning water heaters.”  That the EPA is banning 80% of stoves has appeared in numerous headlines, and refers to the estimate that 80% of stoves currently on the market do not meet the new standards that will come into play 5 to 8 years from now.  True, the EPA will “ban” the production of those models 5 to 8 years from now, but those articles often do not clarify that existing stoves are not affected and are grandfathered.  This writer also confused the timeline and nature of the EPA’s proposed regulations and the lawsuit.
2.     The “Replacement Isn’t Allowed” Myth: “Older stoves that don’t [meet new standards] cannot be traded in for updated types, but instead must be rendered inoperable, destroyed, or recycled as scrap metal.”   Another article simplified this by saying “trading in an old stove for a newer stove isn’t allowed.”  This nugget of misinformation started by quoting language about trade-out programs and then got applied to the new EPA stove regulations. 
      The “Sue and Settle” Myth: This is but another example of EPA … working with activist environmental groups to sue and settle on claims that afford leverage to enact new regulations which they [EPA] lack statutory authority to otherwise accomplish.”  With a wink, wink, the Federal agencies encourage outside groups to file suit against some perceived flaw in the way we live.”Such lawsuits … are nothing but an opportunity for the courts to take power and authority from the legislative and executive branches of the government since the courts supervise the settlements. It’s a way the courts can become another legislature.”  “This collusive lawsuit is intended to expand EPA authority to stop burning wood.”
Part of this is sheer myth and part is a skewed analysis of what is going on.  First of all, the EPA has statutory authority already given to it by the US Congress in the Clean Air Act of 1970 (under Richard Nixon) that was updated in 1990 (under George H.W. Bush).  The agency does not need to expand its powers and, for example, has the authority to regulate fireplaces but is choosing not to use that power.  Second, the lawsuit filed by 7 states and another by 5 environmental groups has nothing to do with the merits of the regulation, but only to force the EPA to issue regulations and not keep delaying them.  (The industry trade group, the HPBA, is also now a party to that suit.)  True, the states and groups suing are ones that want much stricter regulations; however, their influence on the regulations preceded their lawsuit and happened during 2012–2013 when they realized that the EPA was going to propose far less strict regulations. It was believed by many that the EPA had become too close to industry and too dependent on industry expertise and data during a time that the EPA didn’t have enough of their own resources to do necessary testing and research. 
4.     The “EPA Will Force People to Buy New Stoves” Myth: “Low- and middle-class families living primarily in rural areas may be forced to spend thousands of dollars to switch to newer units or use more expensive forms of energy in order to stay warm.”  No matter how often the EPA says that existing units are grandfathered and not impacted, this myth was going to gain traction.  There may be some local areas that pass “sunset” laws, like in Tacoma-Pierce County, Washington, where use of old, uncertified stoves will not be allowed as of Jan. 1, 2015.  But low-income families are often exempted, or provided funding to trade up.  Most people assume that this will add some cost to most new stoves (estimates range between $ 100 and $ 1,000) and that low-income families will be even more likely to buy and install an old, uncertified stove rather than buying a new one.  This is a legitimate issue and will undoubtedly get lots of public attention over the next year.
The EPA expects to issue final regulations in 2015.  Watch for a new round of myths to arise then.
For a sample of one of the more mainstream mythmaking articles, click here.

Heated Up!