| Outdoor furnaces: Smoke gets in your eyes—and lungs |
OUTDOOR FURNACESSmoke gets in your eyes—and lungs
In that case, for every happy furnace owner, there’s often at least one unhappy neighbor. The furnace owner—with an investment of at least $5,000—probably puts up with a lot more smoke than he or she would have before the purchase was made. The tolerance of the neighbors—those who aren’t saving on their heat bill and are instead tired of smelling smoke in their homes—is considerably lower. Communities in many states have decided that outdoor wood furnaces don’t belong in town. The low chimney height of the units doesn’t dissipate smoke like a traditional house chimney. During certain stages of burning, wood burns at a very slow rate and produces an acrid smoke with high particulate emissions. Burning unseasoned wood and garbage only make the problem worse. It’s hard to not be impressed with the free-standing, shed-like furnaces. They heat water for use in baseboard heating systems or for use with a traditional forced-air system via heat exchangers, and they do it cheaply. Furthermore, they’re located outside the house to lower the danger of fire from a wood-burning heating system. Their shine fades when learning about how dirty they burn—an estimated 12 times dirtier than a traditional wood-burner that meets federal EPA guidelines, and, of course, hundreds of times dirtier than natural gas. Morenci’s planning commission members first looked at the outdoor furnace issue Monday after a complaint was received regarding smoke. They would do well to follow guidelines of other communities that have either banned the furnaces or allowed them only in areas where several hundred feet separate the furnace from a neighbor. Any legislation should keep an open mind toward the future. Many European countries require much cleaner-burning models and manufacturers have met the demand. Eventually, U.S. standards might also rise and it could be time to take another look. – DGG, Nov. 23, 2005
|
