Premature deaths.
Air
while air quality in Ireland is generally good and compares favourably with many of our European neighbours, there are concerning localised issues which lead to poor air quality.
www.epa.ie
Replacing Solid Fuel Open Fire
- Thread starter AnneMc
- Start date
www.epa.ie
Don't think we're actually talking about air pollution in this instance.
It is when you open to stove door to add more fuel
Wood burners triple harmful indoor air pollution, study finds
Exclusive: Burners should be sold with health warnings, say scientists who found tiny particles flooding into rooms
www.theguardian.com
From that particulr article & underlying study:It is when you open to stove door to add more fuel
Wood burners triple harmful indoor air pollution, study finds
Exclusive: Burners should be sold with health warnings, say scientists who found tiny particles flooding into rooms
"Wood burners cause less indoor pollution than open fires. “But every time you open the door, you reduce the stove to an open fire and particulate matter floods into the home,” he said. The peaks take an hour or two to dissipate. “But by the time it comes down, someone opens the door again to refuel and you get spike after spike,” Chakraborty said."
So it's still better than an open fire in terms of indoor pollutants & burn efficency as I read it. I don't put a whole lot of stock in that study tbh, we've been burning indoors in stove type equipment for decades or longer & while I don't dispute the findings I just don't think that it is as bad as the headline reads. If it was that bad I'm sure regulators would have stepped in already. The study also refers to wood burning only.
The studies are really only mounting up over the past few years. It's been know for way longer that smoking is a serious health risk, that still hasn't been outlawed, regulators move very slowly on stuff like this.
Well you've a range of options
- you could fit a gas fire (HE boxes now up to around 80% efficient) with an external propane tank, but then you're dealing with the mess of having to get it maintained and have to get a 47kg tank refilled
- wood burner (considering comments above)
- multi fuel stove (same)
- bio-ethanol burner (no mess & least air polluting, but fuel difficult to source & relatively expensive)
As for pollutants, think the issue with some MSF and wood burners is people running them with doors/vents open and thus bringing pollutants into the room. Proper use probably avoids that,
- you could fit a gas fire (HE boxes now up to around 80% efficient) with an external propane tank, but then you're dealing with the mess of having to get it maintained and have to get a 47kg tank refilled
- wood burner (considering comments above)
- multi fuel stove (same)
- bio-ethanol burner (no mess & least air polluting, but fuel difficult to source & relatively expensive)
As for pollutants, think the issue with some MSF and wood burners is people running them with doors/vents open and thus bringing pollutants into the room. Proper use probably avoids that,
The health risks being raised now relate to the pollutants (particulate matter) released when the door of a lighting stove is opened. So unless you're suggesting a pellet stove with automatic feed, then the risks do apply.
It seems pretty clear that there are risks from low-level exposure to particulates that a solid fuel fire will generate. What is not clear to me is what these risks actually are. The EPA website seems to have good information but I was not able to find a guide as to what the actual risk of having a solid fuel stove in your home is (vs. the population level risks which encompass any air pollution - approximately %50 of which is not from home heating as I understand it). I wonder if the risks are too low to be easily quantified or is there actually good data that could tell you for example that having a wood stove in your house adds x% to your chance of developing lung cancer or similar?
Air pollution has a very broad impact on health.
Wood burners triple the levels of particulate matter inside a home, but risk of any particular health issue occurring isn't something that is easy to calculate. There are so many other factors involved including genetics, diet, exposure to pollution outside the home. etc., etc..
fistophobia
Registered User
- Messages
- 351
There is a risk and likelihood that Govt. will ban wood-burning stoves.
Its happened recently in the UK.
I would not be surprised at all.
I converted to a stove back in 2009, got rid of my central heating.
Its frugal cost-neutral. I only burn pallets, sourced freely.
Its happened recently in the UK.
I would not be surprised at all.
I converted to a stove back in 2009, got rid of my central heating.
Its frugal cost-neutral. I only burn pallets, sourced freely.
Indeed there are plenty of reports to this effect, I don't have any reason to doubt that air pollution has negative health effects. The question remains however, what is the extent of the effect? Is it in the range of the danger of living in an area with low radon emissions or is it more like living in the same house as a heavy smoker? I suppose I am wondering if there is really any measurable impact at all at an individual level or we can only see the effects at population scale where there are so many confounding factors that it may be impossible to determine the effect of solid-fuel burning only.
It would be close to impossible to determine the potential affect at an individual level of any health risk. You would need absolute certainty of the extent to which thousands of other factors are affecting the health of that individual. As a result, the likely impact of pollutants can only effectively be assessed in broad terms.
Like smoky coal, no one can determine the likely outcome for an individual, but at a population scale you can see a correlation between the Dublin ban in 1990 and a significant drop in stroke, respiratory and cardiovascular disease and deaths. Wood burning stoves release similar PM 2.5 particulate matter.
I agree with you. I would also imagine that the big drop in smoking & drinking and general improvements in healthcare since 1990 would make it very hard to determine just the effect of the reduction in air pollution. That said, everyone old enough will remember how awful the smog was in Dublin at one time - far worse I would suggest than the output of a modern solid fuel stove burning dry wood?
I think I am coming to the conclusion that although it is a laudable goal to reduce air pollution in general and there is a measurable population level health impact, a properly operated wood burning stove probably does not represent any measurable health risk. Is that a naive opinion?
The air pollution impacts would represent more significantly in urban populations, so you could see variance versus the other measures you mention that affect the broader population.
From the level of alarm within the scientific community, to the point where they are calling for an immediate ban, I suspect that may be a naive assumption. That said, if you have one, best practice would appear to be avoiding opening the door once the stove is lit.
CuriousCork
Registered User
- Messages
- 60
I would not get a wood burning stove.
We made a mistake and got 2 of them. The latest research is that having a wood burning stove is equivalent to smoking 50 cigs a day.
We are sorry we did not get gas.
We made a mistake and got 2 of them. The latest research is that having a wood burning stove is equivalent to smoking 50 cigs a day.
We are sorry we did not get gas.
No offense but I find that incredible. I'm in the market for a stove to replace an open fire & if this is true I need to see the source & perhaps reconsider.
IMO even an open fire is not going to be equivalent to smoking 50 cigarettes a day.
CuriousCork
Registered User
- Messages
- 60
EPA estimates suggest that a single fireplace operating for an hour and burning 10 pounds of wood generates 4,300 times more carcinogenic polyaromatic hydrocarbons than 30 cigarettes. The components of wood smoke and cigarette smoke are quite similar, and many components of both are carcinogenic. EPA researchers estimate the lifetime cancer risk from wood smoke to be 12 times greater than from a similar amount of cigarette smoke.