Heat over Wood Burning

By Frederic Golden

Pollution from home stoves is nearing crisis proportions In winter, when the mountain air sparkles and snow blankets the nearby hills, Missoula, Mont. (pop. 33,000), might easily be mistaken for an Alpine resort. Last week, however, it had the smogbound look of Los Angeles. A dismal haze cloaked the lumber community, virtually blotting out the slopes of the Bitterroot Range. Health authorities were forced to sound a week-long air pollution alert. They urged pregnant women, joggers and the elderly to stay indoors rather than risk breathing the foul air. Some children were not allowed out of classrooms during recesses. The local bus line dropped fares from 35-c- to a nickel to encourage drivers to leave their cars at home.

The major problem was not exhaust from motor vehicles but a new and growing source of pollution: the acrid, stinging smoke from wood-stove fires. Ever since the mid-1970s, when the Arab oil embargo sent fuel prices skyrocketing, the people of Missoula and many other American communities have been seeking out alternative sources of heat, including wood stoves. In the past decade, wood burning has more than doubled across the country. The Department of Energy estimates that more than 20% of all households now burn wood for some or all of their heat. In Vermont, more heating is done with wood than with oil, coal or electricity.

Although wood in many areas has the virtue of being cheap, home-grown and renewable, its use as fuel exacts a terrible toll. In such cities as Denver, Portland, Ore., and Missoula, more than half the minute solids in the winter air, so-called particulates, may stem from wood burning. Geography compounds the problem when there are atmospheric inversions; in mountain-rimmed Missoula last week, low-lying cold air was trapped under a smothering blanket of warmer air, preventing the escape of particulates.

No definitive evidence is yet available on the health hazards. But there is reason for concern. The fires produce some of the same carcinogens as cigarettes. They also give off" colorless, odorless carbon monoxide, which can be dangerous in a building sealed to prevent heat loss. Another troublesome emission is a family of toxic chemicals known as polycyclic organic matter, or POMS, which are to be studied by the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA). On a lesser level, says John Westenberg, legal analyst and organizer of Missoulians for Clean Air: "There are colds, sore throats, burning eyes."

Most antipollution laws were devised to control industrial wastes and the fumes of the internal combustion engine, not contamination from individual homes. When governments try to invade this sacred terrain, the political effects can be incendiary. Explains Barbara Evans, a member of the board of Missoula County commissioners, which passed bitterly contested legislation controlling home wood fires: "People feel their personal rights are being invaded. They become angry, frustrated."

One way to reduce pollution would be to get stoves to burn at higher temperatures so they would emit less waste. Manufacturers have developed smaller, more efficient stoves. But poor burning practices abound. Homeowners sometimes toss green, moist wood into their fires, along with rubbish and newspapers. (The EPA recommends wood that has been air-dried at least a year.) Mark Loding, a chimney sweep who practices his Dickensian craft in the Charlevoix-Petoskey-Harbor Springs area of Michigan, is appalled by the fire making habits of his customers. Says he: "Chimneys are clogged with nasty stuff. People are putting in too much wood and not allowing enough air to reach the fire."

For the time being, the EPA has consigned the problem to the states and affected communities. But local political action is not easy. It was only after much controversy that the Oregon legislature last June passed a bill that will require all stoves sold in the state after 1985 to meet minimal state-set emission standards, probably forcing homeowners to buy automobile-type catalytic converters (estimated cost: up to $500 each).

In 1981 Missoula County tried persuasion, adopting a voluntary plan that called for avoiding green wood and fires on smoggy days, and installing cleaner stoves. The approach failed. When the county commissioners held public hearings last year on tougher measures, a hastily organized group calling itself the United Woodburners of Missoula County staged a "Right to Burn" march that flaunted placards proclaiming WOODBURNERS ARE WARM PEOPLE. In November the commissioners passed a watered-down set of regulations that empowered local inspectors to slap warnings and then citations carrying fines up to $100 on those who continue to burn wood during a pollution alert in a designated area. Thus far, inspectors, who have been cursed, threatened and, in one case, even cornered in a room for 20 minutes, have handed out some 100 warnings.

According to Taxidermist Dick Turner, a leader of the Missoula opposition group, which hopes to put the question of regulation to a countywide vote:

"Wood burning is an old Western American tradition. It's a way of life a lot of people truly enjoy." To which Clean-Air Proponent Westenberg replies, "Controlling a stove is no different than controlling sewage. We're subsidizing lower fuel bills with our health." -- By Frederic Golden.

Reported by Richard Woodbury/Missoula

With reporting by Richard Woodbury /Missoula