As Utah debates seasonal stove ban, Salt Lake County adopts stricter rules

The proposed state seasonal
ban affects 75% of the Utah
population. 
As Utahns debate a seemingly doomed proposal to ban seasonal stove use,  Utah’s most populous county enacted its own rules banning stove use on both mandatory and voluntary air actions days as of Jan. 1, 2016. In other counties, voluntary air action days continue to be voluntary.

This will impact about half of all wood burning appliances in the non-attainment counties and could contribute significantly to reducing wood smoke.  Salt Lake County has nearly 102,000 wood burning appliances, with fireplaces accounting for a majority of that with 60,000 units, according to EPA figures.  There are nearly 20,000 uncertified wood stoves and about the same number of pellet stoves and certified wood stoves.  

This stove inventory was provided by EPA who use a variety of databases and sources to estimate the deployment of wood burning devices.
The governor’s seasonal ban proposal that would impact 7 counties in and around Salt Lake City is drawing intense and sustained criticism from Utah residents, with only a few people speaking up in support of the ban.  It’s also drawing national attention from the wood stove industry that wants a 2-stage system, where EPA certified stoves could be used in stage 1 and all stove use banned in stage 2.
On the other hand, Salt Lake County, which has a more than a third of the state’s population and nearly half of the population and half the stoves in the Wasatch front non-attainment area, went the opposite direction, including all stoves, certified and uncertified, in both stages of air action days.  “This is a significant measure and with more enforcement could achieve a quarter to a half of the reductions that the Governor’s plan sought,” said John Ackerly, President of the Alliance for Green Heat.

The issue has become an emotionally charged debate about individual rights vs. government control, striking a nerve within a deeply conservative part of the country.  In the public hearings, many people have testified about not being able to afford any other fuel than wood, and not wanting to be forced to use fossil fuel when they can use a cheaper renewable. 
But for air quality officials, the issue is simply about cleaning up the air and meeting federal air quality goals that are tied to highway funding.  The discussion quickly becomes about what the state can enforce and what it can’t.  The problem is that the state compliance capacity is already overstretched, with little ability to take on wood stoves.
However, that is different in Salt Lake County, which is moving ahead to enact stricter rules.  The County has decided to undertake the investigations of wood burning on mandatory no burn days itself, instead of leaving those to the state, which now only issues the fine.  Typically the initial warning is viewed an education process that leads to compliance, so that while many $ 25 fines have been given, rarely has the maximum of $ 299 been imposed. 
The new Salt Lake County rules, which take effect on Jan. 1, 2016, were not a reaction to the governor’s proposal or a rejection of the stove industry’s recommendations.  The County’s process began before the state’s process and ended before the stove industry got involved and helped set up the advocacy group Utahns for Responsible Burning.
According to officials at the Salt Lake Country Health Department, there was virtually no support for exempting EPA certified stoves from the county rule.  Both certified and uncertified stoves can produce excessive smoke, depending on operator behavior and moisture content of wood, with uncertified ones performing worse, on average.  While most EPA certified stoves produce 2 to 4.5 grams of particulates an hour in the lab when they are tested with specially prepared dry wood, they often produce far more in the real world.
The Alliance for Green Heat is urging Utah officials to consider phasing out uncertified stoves, since reducing the number of wood stoves will have the biggest impact.  “It may be that only about half of wood burners are really burning responsibly, whether they own a certified or uncertified stove,” Ackerly said.  “The uncertified stoves made before 1988 are now obsolete and most should not be used in densely populated areas,” Ackerly continued.

The current debate over wood heating comes less than 2 years after the outdoor wood boiler industry fought against Utah regulations that would prevent the installation of wood boilers on the Wasatch Front.  That debate also brought national attention of industry who hired lobbyists in Utah.  The industry effort to keep the market for outdoor boilers open in the non-attainment area was partially based on the now discredited argument that outdoor boilers were cleaner than wood stoves.

That case, like the current debate, involved questions of emissions data from test labs vs. emissions in the real world, and the likelihood that operators would be burning responsibly.


Heated Up!

Wood Heating Trends in Utah


The proposal by the Governor of Utah to ban the wintertime use of wood and pellet stoves was met with intense opposition from a large majority of Utah residents and the wood stove industry. It also underscored the need for Utah state agencies, the media, and the public to better understand the role of wood heating and its prevalence in the United States. This short paper compares census data of wood heating in Utah compared to the rest of the country. As of 2013, 10,500, or 1.2%, of Utah residents use mainly wood and pellets for their primary heating, far less than the national average of 2.1%, according to the US Census. There are likely to be an additional 40,000 to 50,000 who use it as a secondary heat source, though the US Census does not track secondary heating.  The EPA however estimates that there are about 93,000 wood and pellet stoves in Utah, some of which may not be used at all or only occasionally. Utah is one of the states that buck the national norm, in that far more homes heated with wood and pellets in 1990 compared to 1940. Utah residents gave up wood heating faster than the United States as a whole, with the number of homes mainly heating with wood hitting a low point in 1950, two decades before the rest of the country. But between 1970 and 1990, Utahns embraced wood heating far more aggressively than the rest of the country. The number of Utah homes mainly heating with wood rose from 0.3% in 1970 to 3.2% in 1990, a high point that the state has not hit since then.
The rapid growth of wood and pellets in Utah since 1970 is likely due to many of the same reasons it has grown so quickly elsewhere: both gas and oil prices had been climbing, until gas prices finally dropped in 2008 and oil prices just starting dropping in 2014.  And, the increase of wood and pellet heating may also be linked to an increased desire for household energy security by both conservative and liberal households, but for different reasons.
Median household income remained relatively static in Utah for most of the 2000s before they began falling in 2008 and rising again in 2012, compared to the US where incomes first decreased in 2007 and only started recovering in 2013. Often, more households turn away wood heating as incomes rise and this is likely a factor in Utah since 2012 as well.
Since 2005, the percent of Utahns using wood or pellet as a primary or sole heat source has ranged between 1% and 1.4%, and since 2010 has remained steady at 1.2%, significantly below the national rate of 2.1% that has remained unchanged since 2009. Wood heating peaked in 2009, at the height of the recession and dropped slightly as the economy has picked up.
Wood and pellets are the fastest growing heating fuel in Utah, followed by electricity, as it is the US overall. Wood and pellet heating as a primary heat source had increased nearly 40% in Utah from 2000 to 2013, slightly less than the nation overall. Utah is quite different than national heating trends when it comes to gas and oil. Gas heating has grown 30% in Utah since 2000, yet has only grown by 4% nationally. This increase in gas heating may be tied to slower growth of wood heating in areas with gas lines, while wood heating remains robust in areas without gas lines. Accurate county data could confirm this.  And oil heating has dropped far quicker in Utah than it has in the nation overall, although it has not been a very widespread form of residential heating in Utah.
Utah has the lowest percentage of homes heated primarily with wood in the West.  The Census does not have county level data of wood heating in Utah, but typically rural counties have far more wood heating than more urban ones.  And, lower income counties typically have more primary wood heating and higher income counties have more secondary wood heating. EPA Estimates of Fireplaces, Stoves and Boilers in Utah
The EPA figures, above, estimate nearly a quarter million wood fueled devices in Utah.  A majority of those are fireplaces and studies show that a large percent of fireplaces are never used or only used once a week, unlike stoves which are often used every day.  About 93,000 units are stoves, nearly 16,000 of which are pellet stoves, 48,000 uncertified stoves (most made prior to 1990) and 26,000 are EPA certified stoves, made since 1990.
As this chart shows, 84% of Utah residents heat with gas, one of the highest percentages in the U.S. The second most popular heating fuel is electricity, which heats 11% of Utah homes, followed by propane, which heats 2%.  The fourth most common heating fuel is wood and pellets which account for 1.2% of homes.
Heated Up!

Utah bill HB 396: A Hastily Crafted Bill that Misses the Mark

Winter inversions, caused mainly by cars
and trucks, often obscure the Utah legislature
in a cloud of pollution that can last days.

A bill was just introduced in the Utah House of Representatives that would mandate certain types of change out programs, set air quality levels that can be used to call no burn days and otherwise undermine the ability of the state to help move toward cleaner burning and cleaner air.

(March 4 update: The bill passed 9-4 in the House committtee. April 1 update: Governor Herbert signed the bill.)

The key to reducing wood smoke in Utah’s populated and often polluted valley surrounding Salt Lake City is a genuine partnership between the states air quality division, industry and other non-profits and stakeholders.  Ultimately, solutions are going to require funding, especially if a change out program is involved, which can be expensive.  For any significant amount of money to be used for change outs, the Utah governor and air quality division should support the change out, not have HB 396 thrust upon them, which will tie their hands.

Utah Governor Herbert’s proposed seasonal ban was ill conceived and drawn up without sufficient consultation.  HB 396 was similarly drawn up without sufficient consultation and will not lead to genuine solutions that can get solid funding.

Like most others, the Alliance did not support the seasonal ban proposed by the Governor, but HB 396 is not the solution.  HB 396 was drafted by key stove industry members and reflects the interests of some stove retailers and manufacturers, but does not embrace many solutions which can benefit homeowners who heat with wood and pellets.

There are a variety of proven ways to reduce wood smoke while protecting the rights of families who heat with wood and pellets.  HB 396 only refers to several strategies and it ties the hands of the Division of Air Quality, without even providing funding for solutions.  Wood stove change out programs are one of the effective strategies, but HB 396 does not include many options and best practices that other jurisdictions use in change outs to support high efficiency wood and pellet heating while reducing emissions at the same time.
This hastily crafted bill needs to emphasize the interests of all Utahans, more than the just retailers and stove manufacturers who drafted the bill.  Lines 28 and 29 which require consultation with representatives of the solid fuel burning industry while not mentioning representatives of other concerned groups is unfortunate.  The solid fuel burning industry does not represent the consumers who use their products any more than any other industry group represents consumers of their products.  For instance, one of the most important reasons people heat with wood and pellets is to save money, particularly lower income families.  However, the solid fuel burning industry refuses to release the efficiencies of the stoves they sell.  Some pellet stoves are between 40 – 50% efficient and some are between 70 – 80% efficient, but industry has long stonewalled consumer interests to know which stoves are more efficient than others. 
Industry has also actively opposed change out and incentive programs which require the disclosure of efficiency or only make the cleanest stoves eligible for replacing older, uncertified stoves.  Such options and programs, however, benefit consumers and should be considered in any change out program.
Ultimately the solution in Utah, like in any jurisdiction, requires the active engagement of all stakeholders and the consideration of all solutions – and funding.   If industry, DAQ, and other stakeholders can agree on the parameters of a change out program, it will be far easier to secure funding each year and for that funding to have the most impact.  HB 396 will not achieve that and pits the solid fuel industry against the interests of many other key stakeholders.
For these reasons, we urge the Legislature to vote against HB 396.
Over the last 4 years, the Alliance for Green Heat has also advocated on behalf of families who heat with wood and pellets with members of the Utah legislature, the Utah Division of Air Quality and the Utah Air Quality Board.  We provide expert background on wood heating technology, wood smoke emissions, and analysis.
On the current debate in Utah, we issued three short papers to help policymakers and the public better understand the importance of wood and pellet heating and options to improve air quality:
On February 24, we provided an informal briefing at the Utah Division of Air Quality (DAQ) on options for reducing wood smoke that other jurisdictions are pursuing, none of which include a ban on stove use.  That powerpoint can be downloaded here

Heated Up!

Utah invoice HB 396: A Hastily Crafted Invoice that Misses the Mark

Winter inversions, caused mainly by cars
and trucks, often obscure the Utah legislature
in a cloud of pollution that can last days.

A bill was just introduced in the Utah House of Representatives that would mandate certain types of change out programs, set air quality levels that can be used to call no burn days and otherwise undermine the ability of the state to help move toward cleaner burning and cleaner air.

The key to reducing wood smoke in Utah’s populated and often polluted valley surrounding Salt Lake City is a genuine partnership between the states air quality division, industry and other non-profits and stakeholders.  Ultimately, solutions are going to require funding, especially if a change out program is involved, which can be expensive.  For any significant amount of money to be used for change outs, the Utah governor and air quality division should support the change out, not have HB 396 thrust upon them, which will tie their hands.

Utah Governor Herbert’s proposed seasonal ban was ill conceived and drawn up without sufficient consultation.  HB 396 was similarly drawn up without sufficient consultation and will not lead to genuine solutions that can get solid funding.

Like most others, the Alliance did not support the seasonal ban proposed by the Governor, but HB 396 is not the solution.  HB 396 was drafted by key stove industry members and reflects the interests of some stove retailers and manufacturers, but does not embrace many solutions which can benefit homeowners who heat with wood and pellets.

There are a variety of proven ways to reduce wood smoke while protecting the rights of families who heat with wood and pellets.  HB 396 only refers to several strategies and it ties the hands of the Division of Air Quality, without even providing funding for solutions.  Wood stove change out programs are one of the effective strategies, but HB 396 does not include many options and best practices that other jurisdictions use in change outs to support high efficiency wood and pellet heating while reducing emissions at the same time.
This hastily crafted bill needs to emphasize the interests of all Utahans, more than the just retailers and stove manufacturers who drafted the bill.  Lines 28 and 29 which require consultation with representatives of the solid fuel burning industry while not mentioning representatives of other concerned groups is unfortunate.  The solid fuel burning industry does not represent the consumers who use their products any more than any other industry group represents consumers of their products.  For instance, one of the most important reasons people heat with wood and pellets is to save money, particularly lower income families.  However, the solid fuel burning industry refuses to release the efficiencies of the stoves they sell.  Some pellet stoves are between 40 – 50% efficient and some are between 70 – 80% efficient, but industry has long stonewalled consumer interests to know which stoves are more efficient than others. 
Industry has also actively opposed change out and incentive programs which require the disclosure of efficiency or only make the cleanest stoves eligible for replacing older, uncertified stoves.  Such options and programs, however, benefit consumers and should be considered in any change out program.
Ultimately the solution in Utah, like in any jurisdiction, requires the active engagement of all stakeholders and the consideration of all solutions – and funding.   If industry, DAQ, and other stakeholders can agree on the parameters of a change out program, it will be far easier to secure funding each year and for that funding to have the most impact.  HB 396 will not achieve that and pits the solid fuel industry against the interests of many other key stakeholders.
For these reasons, we urge the Legislature to vote against HB 396.
Over the last 4 years, the Alliance for Green Heat has also advocated on behalf of families who heat with wood and pellets with members of the Utah legislature, the Utah Division of Air Quality and the Utah Air Quality Board.  We provide expert background on wood heating technology, wood smoke emissions, and analysis.
On the current debate in Utah, we issued three short papers to help policymakers and the public better understand the importance of wood and pellet heating and options to improve air quality:
On February 24, we provided an informal briefing at the Utah Division of Air Quality (DAQ) on options for reducing wood smoke that other jurisdictions are pursuing, none of which include a ban on stove use.  That powerpoint can be downloaded here: http://www.forgreenheat.org/upload/upload/AGH Utah presentation.pptx

Heated Up!

Wooden Heating Trends in Utah


The proposal by the Governor of Utah to ban the wintertime use of wood and pellet stoves was met with intense opposition from a large majority of Utah residents and the wood stove industry. It also underscored the need for Utah state agencies, the media, and the public to better understand the role of wood heating and its prevalence in the United States. This short paper compares census data of wood heating in Utah compared to the rest of the country. As of 2013, 10,500, or 1.2%, of Utah residents use mainly wood and pellets for their primary heating, far less than the national average of 2.1%, according to the US Census. There are likely to be an additional 40,000 to 50,000 who use it as a secondary heat source, though the US Census does not track secondary heating.  The EPA however estimates that there are about 93,000 wood and pellet stoves in Utah, some of which may not be used at all or only occasionally. Utah is one of the states that buck the national norm, in that far more homes heated with wood and pellets in 1990 compared to 1940. Utah residents gave up wood heating faster than the United States as a whole, with the number of homes mainly heating with wood hitting a low point in 1950, two decades before the rest of the country. But between 1970 and 1990, Utahns embraced wood heating far more aggressively than the rest of the country. The number of Utah homes mainly heating with wood rose from 0.3% in 1970 to 3.2% in 1990, a high point that the state has not hit since then.
The rapid growth of wood and pellets in Utah since 1970 is likely due to many of the same reasons it has grown so quickly elsewhere: both gas and oil prices had been climbing, until gas prices finally dropped in 2008 and oil prices just starting dropping in 2014.  And, the increase of wood and pellet heating may also be linked to an increased desire for household energy security by both conservative and liberal households, but for different reasons.
Median household income remained relatively static in Utah for most of the 2000s before they began falling in 2008 and rising again in 2012, compared to the US where incomes first decreased in 2007 and only started recovering in 2013. Often, more households turn away wood heating as incomes rise and this is likely a factor in Utah since 2012 as well.
Since 2005, the percent of Utahns using wood or pellet as a primary or sole heat source has ranged between 1% and 1.4%, and since 2010 has remained steady at 1.2%, significantly below the national rate of 2.1% that has remained unchanged since 2009. Wood heating peaked in 2009, at the height of the recession and dropped slightly as the economy has picked up.
Wood and pellets are the fastest growing heating fuel in Utah, followed by electricity, as it is the US overall. Wood and pellet heating as a primary heat source had increased nearly 40% in Utah from 2000 to 2013, slightly less than the nation overall. Utah is quite different than national heating trends when it comes to gas and oil. Gas heating has grown 30% in Utah since 2000, yet has only grown by 4% nationally. This increase in gas heating may be tied to slower growth of wood heating in areas with gas lines, while wood heating remains robust in areas without gas lines. Accurate county data could confirm this.  And oil heating has dropped far quicker in Utah than it has in the nation overall, although it has not been a very widespread form of residential heating in Utah.
Utah has the lowest percentage of homes heated primarily with wood in the West.  The Census does not have county level data of wood heating in Utah, but typically rural counties have far more wood heating than more urban ones.  And, lower income counties typically have more primary wood heating and higher income counties have more secondary wood heating. EPA Estimates of Fireplaces, Stoves and Boilers in Utah
The EPA figures, above, estimate nearly a quarter million wood fueled devices in Utah.  A majority of those are fireplaces and studies show that a large percent of fireplaces are never used or only used once a week, unlike stoves which are often used every day.  About 93,000 units are stoves, nearly 16,000 of which are pellet stoves, 48,000 uncertified stoves (most made prior to 1990) and 26,000 are EPA certified stoves, made since 1990.
Heated Up!

As Utah debates seasonal stove ban, Salt Lake County adopts stricter guidelines

The proposed state seasonal
ban affects 75% of the Utah
population. 
As Utahns debate a seemingly doomed proposal to ban seasonal stove use,  Utah’s most populous county enacted its own rules banning stove use on both mandatory and voluntary air actions days as of Jan. 1, 2016. In other counties, voluntary air action days continue to be voluntary.

This will impact about half of all wood burning appliances in the non-attainment counties and could contribute significantly to reducing wood smoke.  Salt Lake County has nearly 102,000 wood burning appliances, with fireplaces accounting for a majority of that with 60,000 units, according to EPA figures.  There are nearly 20,000 uncertified wood stoves and about the same number of pellet stoves and certified wood stoves.  

This stove inventory was provided by EPA who use a variety of databases and sources to estimate the deployment of wood burning devices.
The governor’s seasonal ban proposal that would impact 7 counties in and around Salt Lake City is drawing intense and sustained criticism from Utah residents, with only a few people speaking up in support of the ban.  It’s also drawing national attention from the wood stove industry that wants a 2-stage system, where EPA certified stoves could be used in stage 1 and all stove use banned in state 2.
On the other hand, Salt Lake County, which has a more than a third of the state’s population and nearly half of the population and half the stoves in the Wasatch front non-attainment area, went the opposite direction, including all stoves, certified and uncertified, in both stages of air action days.  “This is a significant measure and with more enforcement could achieve a quarter to a half of the reductions that the Governor’s plan sought,” said John Ackerly, President of the Alliance for Green Heat.

The issue has become an emotionally charged debate about individual rights vs. government control, striking a nerve within a deeply conservative part of the country.  In the public hearings, many people have testified about not being able to afford any other fuel than wood, and not wanting to be forced to use fossil fuel when they can use a cheaper renewable. 
But for air quality officials, the issue is simply about cleaning up the air and meeting federal air quality goals that are tied to highway funding.  The discussion quickly becomes about what the state can enforce and what it can’t.  The problem is that the state compliance capacity is already overstretched, with little ability to take on wood stoves.
However, that is different in Salt Lake County, which is moving ahead to enact stricter rules.  The County has decided to undertake the investigations of wood burning on mandatory no burn days itself, instead of leaving those to the state, which now only issues the fine.  Typically the initial warning is viewed an education process that leads to compliance, so that while many $ 25 fines have been given, rarely has the maximum of $ 299 been imposed. 
The new Salt Lake County rules, which take effect on Jan. 1, 2016, were not a reaction to the governor’s proposal or a rejection of the stove industry’s recommendations.  The County’s process began before the state’s process and ended before the stove industry got involved and helped set up the advocacy group Utahns for Responsible Burning.
According to officials at the Salt Lake Country Health Department, there was virtually no support for exempting EPA certified stoves from the county rule.  Both certified and uncertified stoves can produce excessive smoke, depending on operator behavior and moisture content of wood, with uncertified ones performing worse, on average.  While most EPA certified stoves produce 2 to 4.5 grams of particulates an hour in the lab when they are tested with specially prepared dry wood, they often produce far more in the real world.
The Alliance for Green Heat is urging Utah officials to consider phasing out uncertified stoves, since reducing the number of wood stoves will have the biggest impact.  “It may be that only about half of wood burners are really burning responsibly, whether they own a certified or uncertified stove,” Ackerly said.  “The uncertified stoves made before 1988 are now obsolete and most should not be used in densely populated areas,” Ackerly continued.

The current debate over wood heating comes less than 2 years after the outdoor wood boiler industry fought against Utah regulations that would prevent the installation of wood boilers on the Wasatch Front.  That debate also brought national attention of industry who hired lobbyists in Utah.  The industry effort to keep the market for outdoor boilers open in the non-attainment area was partially based on an argument that outdoor boilers were cleaner than wood stoves.

That case, like the current debate, involved questions of emissions data from test labs vs. emissions in the real world, and the likelihood that operators would be burning responsibly.


Heated Up!

Invoice to overturn out of doors wood boiler rules fails to pass Utah Legislature

Salt Lake Metropolis, Utah – The Republican dominated Utah Senate upheld laws on outside wood boilers by not voting on a invoice that experienced very easily handed the Utah Residence. &nbsp The monthly bill, HB 394, would have overturned restrictions on outside boilers that was handed nearly unanimously by a Property committee and then by the full House on Tuesday by a vote of 59 to twelve. The bill most likely would have handed the Senate experienced it not been for the initiatives of advocacy groups these kinds of as the Alliance for Green Heat, the Wasatch Clear Air Coalition and other people anxious about the damaging impact out of doors wood boilers can have on regional air high quality.

Proponents of the invoice had been distributing a flyer with inaccurate and deceptive information to legislators. The flyer mentioned that OWBs are cleaner and far more productive than EPA certified wood stoves and that forty nine states permitted what the new Utah restrictions would not. In reality, the Utah restrictions authorized the set up of certified outside wooden boilers in most of the point out but did not allow their installation in the more populated locations that had been in air good quality non-attainment.

The Alliance for Green Heat contacted the Senate sponsor of the invoice who turned extremely concerned about the accuracy of flyer as nicely as a key proponent of the monthly bill who experienced represented himself as a concerned citizen but who was in fact becoming paid by Central Boiler to guide the campaign. The Alliance collected forty five signatures in under 24 hours for an open sign-on letter to the Utah legislature urging them not to vote for this invoice that would overturn affordable restrictions the state set on outside boilers this February. The signatories represented leaders in the biomass sector, nonprofits, professors and clean air advocates and citizens who experienced been personally influenced by OWB smoke and more.

A important concern, related to a lot of towns and valleys in the West, like locations like Libby Montana, is regardless of whether EPA competent outside wooden boilers need to be permitted in populated valleys that encounter inversions and are in non-attainment. Central Boiler and HPBA sent remarks to Utah officials that had been really crucial of the restrictions that only permitted out of doors wooden boilers to be mounted in rural, attainment locations.

For far more history and data on the position of the Alliance, click below.

Click on here to see the letter to the Utah legislator signed by fifteen leaders of the wooden stove and boiler sector and other professionals and here to see the letter signed by forty six men and women.

Thanks to everybody who lent their voice to this marketing campaign. With your support, we ended up ready to assist the Utah legislature comprehend the disinformation campaign that the invoice was dependent on.
Heated Up!

An Open Letter to the Utah Legislature in Help of Outdoor Wood Boiler Restrictions

The Utah legislature is transferring rapidly to overturn quite reasonable and reasonable laws on out of doors wooden boilers. You should consider introducing your signature to the open up letter under, urging Utah to preserve the laws approved by their Air Top quality Board.

Utah’s rules permit the installation of EPA Section 2 outdoor wooden boilers in most of the condition, but ban them from the extremely populated regions about Salt Lake which are in air top quality non-attainment.

An outdoor boiler maker is aggressively battling to get the legislature to overturn these regulation dependent on a lot of misleading statements. Simply click below for the flyer becoming circulated to Utah Senators, which argues that outside boilers are much a lot more productive and cleaner than stoves.

The legislation, HB 394, was handed by the Utah property yesterday by a vote of 79 to twelve. It moved to the Senate today and will be voted on Wednesday or Thursday with no becoming referring to any committee for a hearing. This laws will “amend the powers of the Air Top quality Board” and prohibit them from “regulating the sale, set up, alternative or procedure of an out of doors wood boiler any in different ways from any other sound gas burning products.”

If the Senate passes this evaluate, unregulated and unqualified outside wooden boilers will be permitted to be installed in Utah.

If you can incorporate your title to the letter under, remember to email your identify (and affiliation if you want your affiliation to appear on the letter) to melissa@forgreenheat.org by no later than 4:00 pm on Wednesday, March thirteen.

For a lot more information about this, click on here.

*****

Expensive esteemed users of the Utah Senate,

We, the undersigned, are producing to urge you not to vote for HB 394 which would overturn Utah’s out of doors wooden boiler laws.

The Utah rule finalized by the Air Top quality Board is very realistic, reasonable and constant with attempts and regulations in a lot of other states. Revoking the rule is unwarranted and unwise and will open up a market for boiler organizations to offer very polluting and unregulated appliances.

The efforts to overturn this regulation are dependent on misleading and inaccurate claims, as set forth in the flyer “Some Specifics About HB 294.” For example, the flyer statements:

“Out of doors wooden boilers are completely legal in forty nine other states and only banned in Utah’s non-attainment locations.”

“Outside wood boilers are a lot of moments much more productive than EPA certified indoor wood burners.”

States all more than the region are enacting rules comparable to the ones Utah created. These restrictions are sensible and required to avoid the spread of the most polluting wood burning gadget in The us — outdoor wooden boilers that are not EPA competent.

At the really minimum, this bill justifies a entire hearing and must not be voted on rapidly at the extremely conclude of the legislative session. We urge you to defend the reputation of the Utah Senate and not vote for this flawed bill that is based on so a lot of misrepresentations.

Sincerely,

[Your identify]
Heated Up!

Outside boilers cleaner than wood stoves, boiler lobby tells Utah legislators

Legislators go to overturn outside boiler restrictions

In a heated combat over no matter whether out of doors boilers ought to be authorized in regions of Utah with inadequate air quality, the outside boiler lobby is swaying lawmakers with information showing that boilers are cleaner than wood stoves.

The lead Utah resident pushing for rules that would permit out of doors boilers, Daniel Leavitt, represented himself as a worried citizen to the Utah Air Top quality Board, and the Utah paper refers to him as a resident who operates his out of doors wooden boiler to heat his property. But what the paper failed to mention is that Leavitt is also a prominent Utah lawyer specializing in authorities relations and the brother of the previous Governor of Utah. What is actually more is that Leavitt is being paid out by Central Boiler, the boiler manufacturer foremost the marketing campaign.

In February, Utah adopted regulations that permitted the installation of Section 2 out of doors boilers in most of the condition but banned them in populated regions that do not meet federal air high quality attainment specifications. Central Boiler had fought against the laws but had been eventually unsuccessful.&nbsp

Following the restrictions were promulgated, the boiler company took its scenario to the legislature. On March 7, a around unanimous legislative committee sided with Central Boiler. They accredited HB394, which “prohibits the Air Quality Board from regulating the sale, set up, alternative, or procedure of an outside wood&nbsp boiler otherwise than other solid fuel burning
 units.” Om March 11, the bill was handed by the Utah Property and moved to the Senate.

Central Boiler submitted comments arguing that Period 2 out of doors boilers “are cleaner than EPA qualified wooden stoves.” David Leavitt, the “worried citizen” hired by Central Boiler, is also carrying that concept. “These outside wooden boilers are vastly a lot more productive than burning anything at all indoors,” he informed the Deseret News.&nbsp&nbsp

“Utah legislators ought to comprehend that even the best wood stoves and wood boilers are only as clean as the wooden that is loaded in them,” mentioned John Ackerly, President of the Alliance for Environmentally friendly Heat, a unbiased non-revenue marketing cleaner and much more successful wood heating.&nbspOutdoor wood boilers have fireboxes normally ranging from 14-sixty cubic ft even though a wood stove firebox is 2-three cubic toes.
“Outdoor boilers are often loaded with huge, unseasoned and unsplit logs and trash, in contrast to stoves.&nbspThis is a important reason that states control out of doors wood boilers and not stoves. Central Boiler adverts exhibiting efficiencies in the 90s are dependent on calculations that have been repudiated by the EPA,” Ackerly additional.

The Utah Section of Environmental Good quality (DEQ) explained the objections that that Central Boiler and Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association (HPBA) experienced with the laws ended up “similar” and publicly responded to them. Privately, some people say the positions of Central Boiler and HPBA had crucial distinctions but the community document does not expose what they have been.&nbsp&nbsp

According to the Utah DEQ, the troubles raised by Central Boiler and HPBA included:
  • DEQ appears to spot increased excess weight to a variety of out-of-point out companies and other individuals who are generally skeptical towards the emissions reduction outcomes reached under the US EPA hydronic heater software.
  • DEQ has not offered scientific information or other rationale supporting what varieties of outside wooden boilers ended up authorized beneath the rule.
  • DAQ has not released any knowledge demonstrating that outdoor furnaces presently make impacts within the nonattainment and routine maintenance regions or that they will contribute to the exceedance of the NAAQS.
  • The 1000 ft. setback from schools is not necessary primarily based on modeling carried out by the State of New York.
In reaction to the initial proposed restrictions, Central Boiler argued that the “rule lacks scientific help and would unfairly prohibit Utah inhabitants from acquiring and employing thoroughly clean-burning wooden furnaces.” A principal thrust of Central Boilers argument is that Period 2 boilers “are cleaner than EPA certified wood stoves.” Exclusively they claim that “average emissions for a Stage 2 OHH are 77% considerably less than these from EPA-Qualified woodstoves.” The total submission by Central Boiler can be discovered&nbspright here.
“These outdoor wooden boilers are vastly more effective than burning everything indoors,” Levitt stated.

Heated Up!

Utah Adopts Innovative Outside Boiler Rules


Alliance for Environmentally friendly Warmth, February 11, 2013 – A last moment attempt by a producer to derail new outside boiler rules in Utah unsuccessful. The State’s Air Good quality Board handed progressive and well balanced restrictions that permit the installation of EPA experienced outdoor boilers in rural counties but ban them in populated counties that do not satisfy federal air top quality specifications. The laws will just take influence this spring.

This can make Utah the latest in a string of states to control the out of doors wood boiler, the most polluting household wood heating technological innovation on the market place. &nbspUtah went additional than most states, banning their set up in locations that already have very poor air good quality and the place about 2 million out of Utah’s two.eight million populace lives.

Utah is now the only state to undertake an installation ban on out of doors wooden boilers in significantly of the condition, but nonetheless enable their use in rural places. Washington and Oregon have restrictions that effectively banned outside boilers in the whole point out. Other states only regulate exactly where they can be mounted by way of residence line setbacks.

Several states require boilers to be set back again at least 50 feet from the nearest residence line. New York and now Utah demand 100 feet. Maryland and Rhode Island are the only states with laws restricting installs to EPA competent units that have no property line established backs.

An revolutionary attribute of the Utah regulations addresses homes that currently have outside wood boilers and now fall in the area in which they are banned from installation. Those units are grandfathered, but people dwelling in the banned counties can put in another outside boiler in the future as long as it runs on pellets and is EPA certified.

The regulations also call for a one,000 toes setback from a college, working day treatment center or hospital, which may possibly be the strictest this kind of clause in the place. The maps underneath demonstrate the correlation amongst populace density and the non-attainment places in Utah.

Central Boiler fought towards Utah’s new restrictions arguing that the rule “lacks scientific help and would unfairly prohibit Utah people from acquiring and making use of thoroughly clean-burning wooden furnaces.” A main thrust of Central Boilers argument is that Period 2 boilers “are cleaner than EPA qualified wood stoves.” Especially they claim “average emissions for a Period two OHH [out of doors hydraulic heater, an additional name for out of doors wood boiler] are 77% much less than people from EPA-Licensed wood stoves.” The complete submission by Central Boiler can be discovered listed here.

The Alliance for Inexperienced Heat supports laws in all states that only let the set up of Period 2 competent outdoor boilers and, like Utah, have setbacks or other restrictions to avoid their set up in densely inhabited places.

Click on right here for an overview of state outside boiler regulations.&nbsp
Heated Up!