No central heating, so I used to occasionally start a fire in my
livingroom fireplace. The wood I burned was from my two plum trees,
using some white paper scrap from my scrap printer paper to start things
or other scrap paper without colored inks.

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup told me
that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been shown to
shorten one's life.

Well, last year I stopped making fires, not wanting to suffer from the
smoke. I had noticed a not nice smell after fires, but staying warm had
me still doing it in he winter. I used to just make a small fire to get
nice and toasty and after 10-15 minutes, I'd put no more wood on the
small fire and let it burn out. I don't hang out in my living room,
anyway and have other things to do.

So I was talking to an insurance agent the other day and the
conversation turned to home insurance and the fact that I don't have
central heating. That fact seems to be a showstopper when applying for
standard home owner's policies (I currently have California Fair Plan
policy, which is basically fire with few little addenda). I mention that
I've stopped burning wood in the fireplace because I heard that the
particulate matter released is detrimental to the inhabiants' health. He
says "depends on what kind of wood you're burning."

So, how much truth is there in what he said, and how is plum tree wood
in the spectrum?

Dan


Email: dmusicant at pacbell dot net

Dan Musicant wrote:
No central heating, so I used to occasionally start a fire in my
livingroom fireplace. The wood I burned was from my two plum trees,
using some white paper scrap from my scrap printer paper to start things
or other scrap paper without colored inks.

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup told me
that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been shown to
shorten one's life.

Well, last year I stopped making fires, not wanting to suffer from the
smoke. I had noticed a not nice smell after fires, but staying warm had
me still doing it in he winter. I used to just make a small fire to get
nice and toasty and after 10-15 minutes, I'd put no more wood on the
small fire and let it burn out. I don't hang out in my living room,
anyway and have other things to do.

So I was talking to an insurance agent the other day and the
conversation turned to home insurance and the fact that I don't have
central heating. That fact seems to be a showstopper when applying for
standard home owner's policies (I currently have California Fair Plan
policy, which is basically fire with few little addenda). I mention that
I've stopped burning wood in the fireplace because I heard that the
particulate matter released is detrimental to the inhabiants' health. He
says "depends on what kind of wood you're burning."

So, how much truth is there in what he said, and how is plum tree wood
in the spectrum?

Dan


Email: dmusicant at pacbell dot net

Not quite an answer he

http://www.woodheat.org/environment/smoke.htm

but, if most particulate is tar or pitch, pine is the worst and
hardwoods the best.

Smoldering fire gives off most pollution but hot burning one burns the
tars before they are emitted in the smoke.

On Oct 24, 8:24*am, Dan Musicant wrote:
No central heating, so I used to occasionally start a fire in my
livingroom fireplace. The wood I burned was from my two plum trees,
using some white paper scrap from my scrap printer paper to start things
or other scrap paper without colored inks.

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup told me
that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been shown to
shorten one's life.

Well, last year I stopped making fires, not wanting to suffer from the
smoke. I had noticed a not nice smell after fires, but staying warm had
me still doing it in he winter. I used to just make a small fire to get
nice and toasty and after 10-15 minutes, I'd put no more wood on the
small fire and let it burn out. I don't hang out in my living room,
anyway and have other things to do.

So I was talking to an insurance agent the other day and the
conversation turned to home insurance and the fact that I don't have
central heating. That fact seems to be a showstopper when applying for
standard home owner's policies (I currently have California Fair Plan
policy, which is basically fire with few little addenda). I mention that
I've stopped burning wood in the fireplace because I heard that the
particulate matter released is detrimental to the inhabiants' health. He
says "depends on what kind of wood you're burning."

So, how much truth is there in what he said, and how is plum tree wood
in the spectrum?

Dan

Email: dmusicant at pacbell dot net

If you are worried about it in the air _inside_ the house, don't. If
you can smell the fire inside, you have a serious chimney problem,
something is interfering with a proper draft.

The "danger" of particulate matter in smoke is grossly over stressed.
Yes, if you are not burning cleanly, there can be enough to cause
asthma suffers some problems but that is about it. Listen to the
'nuts' enough and they will have you thinking that just breathing pure
air is dangerous.

Harry K

"Harry K" wrote
Dan Musicant wrote:

So I was talking to an insurance agent the other day and the
conversation turned to home insurance and the fact that I don't have
central heating. That fact seems to be a showstopper when applying for
standard home owner's policies (I currently have California Fair Plan

That makes no sense. Central heating isnt a requirement for insurance.
Space heaters are perfectly legal and many all electric homes have them.

The "danger" of particulate matter in smoke is grossly over stressed.
Yes, if you are not burning cleanly, there can be enough to cause
asthma suffers some problems but that is about it. Listen to the
'nuts' enough and they will have you thinking that just breathing pure
air is dangerous.

Correct Harry. Dan, just avoid resinous ones like pine.

On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup

Yo! My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance that
I noticed your post.

told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
shown to shorten one life.

Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be shortening
your neighbor's lives, not your own. Of course, if your fireplace has
a drafting problem, you could get smoke and particulates inside.

The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood burning
insert in your fireplace. They have some form of afterburner or
catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. Plus you could improve the
efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house, as you should be
able to arrange to use outside air for combustion and just blow the
heat into the house. Much more efficient than a conventional
fireplace.

However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
improvements or liners may be prohibitive.

Cheers, Wayne

"cshenk" wrote in message
...
"Harry K" wrote
Dan Musicant wrote:

So I was talking to an insurance agent the other day and the
conversation turned to home insurance and the fact that I don't have
central heating. That fact seems to be a showstopper when applying for
standard home owner's policies (I currently have California Fair Plan

That makes no sense. Central heating isnt a requirement for insurance.
Space heaters are perfectly legal and many all electric homes have them.

The "danger" of particulate matter in smoke is grossly over stressed.
Yes, if you are not burning cleanly, there can be enough to cause
asthma suffers some problems but that is about it. Listen to the
'nuts' enough and they will have you thinking that just breathing pure
air is dangerous.

Correct Harry. Dan, just avoid resinous ones like pine.
Sent out several faxes to get insurance quotes (home and auto) two years
ago. Did find a suitable company, however, AARP called back and asked me,
"What do you use for heat", I replied that most of the time we use the
pellet stove in the family room and have the back half of the house closed
off. "Sorry, but we cannot insure you if you use a pellet stove or a
fireplace for heat". When I mentioned that I do also have central heating,
the rep said, "well it's too late now, you already told me you use a pellet
stove".
Go figure?

Ivan Vegvary

Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup

Yo! My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance that
I noticed your post.

told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
shown to shorten one life.

Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be shortening
your neighbor's lives, not your own. Of course, if your fireplace has
a drafting problem, you could get smoke and particulates inside.

The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood burning
insert in your fireplace. They have some form of afterburner or
catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. Plus you could improve the
efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house, as you should be
able to arrange to use outside air for combustion and just blow the
heat into the house. Much more efficient than a conventional
fireplace.

However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
improvements or liners may be prohibitive.

Cheers, Wayne
Thia Old House just had a show with that. Inserts are expensive!

LouB wrote:
Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup

Yo! My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance
that I noticed your post.

told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
shown to shorten one life.

Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be shortening
your neighbor's lives, not your own. Of course, if your fireplace
has a drafting problem, you could get smoke and particulates inside.

The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood
burning insert in your fireplace. They have some form of
afterburner or catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. Plus you could
improve the efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house, as
you should be able to arrange to use outside air for combustion and
just blow the heat into the house. Much more efficient than a
conventional fireplace.

However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
improvements or liners may be prohibitive.

Cheers, Wayne
Thia Old House just had a show with that. Inserts are expensive!

I bought my EPA certified insert with most of the stainless chimney liner used
for $300. Replaced the "afterburner" tubes in the top for $40 or something like
that. There are ways.

It heats well, and rarely has visible smoke after the initial few minutes.

And I get way more heat from it, and less heat loss up the chimney then a
fireplace could ever provide.

cshenk wrote:
"Harry K" wrote
Dan Musicant wrote:

So I was talking to an insurance agent the other day and the
conversation turned to home insurance and the fact that I don't have
central heating. That fact seems to be a showstopper when applying for
standard home owner's policies (I currently have California Fair Plan

That makes no sense. Central heating isnt a requirement for insurance.
Space heaters are perfectly legal and many all electric homes have them.

A guy I know built a log cabin long ago and paid cash. 20 years later
he applied for a home equity loan and was denied because he only had a
woodstove for heat. He ended up installing a central heating boiler and
used old cast iron radiators for looks, then after being inspected his
loan was approved.

On Oct 25, 12:13*am, "Bob F" wrote:
LouB wrote:
Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup

Yo! *My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance
that I noticed your post.

told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
shown to shorten one life.

Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be shortening
your neighbor's lives, not your own. *Of course, if your fireplace
has a drafting problem, you could get smoke and particulates inside.

The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood
burning insert in your fireplace. *They have some form of
afterburner or catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. *Plus you could
improve the efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house, as
you should be able to arrange to use outside air for combustion and
just blow the heat into the house. *Much more efficient than a
conventional fireplace.

However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
improvements or liners may be prohibitive.

Cheers, Wayne
Thia Old House just had a show with that. *Inserts are expensive!

I bought my EPA certified insert with most of the stainless chimney liner used
for $300. Replaced the "afterburner" tubes in the top for $40 or something like
that. There are ways.

It heats well, and rarely has visible smoke after the initial few minutes..

And I get way more heat from it, and less heat loss up the chimney then a
fireplace could ever provide.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

True about the efficiency. Of course _anything_ is more effectient
than a fireplace. They are the most efficient wasters of wood known
to man...well, an open pit would be worse I suppose.

Harry K

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:15:38 -0700 (PDT), Harry K
wrote:

:On Oct 25, 12:13*am, "Bob F" wrote:
: LouB wrote:
: Wayne Whitney wrote:
: On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:
:
: Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup
:
: Yo! *My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance
: that I noticed your post.
:
: told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
: shown to shorten one life.
:
: Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be shortening
: your neighbor's lives, not your own. *Of course, if your fireplace
: has a drafting problem, you could get smoke and particulates inside.
:
: The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood
: burning insert in your fireplace. *They have some form of
: afterburner or catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. *Plus you could
: improve the efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house, as
: you should be able to arrange to use outside air for combustion and
: just blow the heat into the house. *Much more efficient than a
: conventional fireplace.
:
: However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
: improvements or liners may be prohibitive.
:
: Cheers, Wayne
: Thia Old House just had a show with that. *Inserts are expensive!
:
: I bought my EPA certified insert with most of the stainless chimney liner used
: for $300. Replaced the "afterburner" tubes in the top for $40 or something like
: that. There are ways.
:
: It heats well, and rarely has visible smoke after the initial few minutes.
:
: And I get way more heat from it, and less heat loss up the chimney then a
: fireplace could ever provide.- Hide quoted text -
:
: - Show quoted text -
:
:True about the efficiency. Of course _anything_ is more effectient
:than a fireplace. They are the most efficient wasters of wood known
:to man...well, an open pit would be worse I suppose.
:
:Harry K

I should have snagged my sister's wood burning stove when she gave that
away and went to strictly gas furnace heating in her house. Not sure I
could have set it up, maybe could have vented it up the chimney. My
fireplace is downstairs, of course, in a two story house.

Dan


Email: dmusicant at pacbell dot net

Dan Musicant wrote:
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:15:38 -0700 (PDT), Harry K
wrote:

On Oct 25, 12:13 am, "Bob F" wrote:
LouB wrote:
Wayne Whitney wrote:
On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:

Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup

Yo! My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance
that I noticed your post.

told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
shown to shorten one life.

Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be
shortening your neighbor's lives, not your own. Of course, if
your fireplace has a drafting problem, you could get smoke and
particulates inside.

The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood
burning insert in your fireplace. They have some form of
afterburner or catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. Plus you could
improve the efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house,
as you should be able to arrange to use outside air for
combustion and just blow the heat into the house. Much more
efficient than a conventional fireplace.

However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
improvements or liners may be prohibitive.

Cheers, Wayne
Thia Old House just had a show with that. Inserts are expensive!

I bought my EPA certified insert with most of the stainless chimney
liner used for $300. Replaced the "afterburner" tubes in the top
for $40 or something like that. There are ways.

It heats well, and rarely has visible smoke after the initial few
minutes.

And I get way more heat from it, and less heat loss up the chimney
then a fireplace could ever provide.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

True about the efficiency. Of course _anything_ is more effectient
than a fireplace. They are the most efficient wasters of wood known
to man...well, an open pit would be worse I suppose.

Harry K

I should have snagged my sister's wood burning stove when she gave
that away and went to strictly gas furnace heating in her house. Not
sure I could have set it up, maybe could have vented it up the
chimney. My fireplace is downstairs, of course, in a two story house.

Legally in the US, at least in many places, any woodstove or insert that is
installed has to be an EPA certified unit. Older ones are no longer legal for
installation or re-instalation. You need to make sure that any unit you get
meets that requirement, or you could have legal or insurance problems. Permits
may be required for instalation.

Thus, it may be illegal to remove an insert for chimney cleaning and later
re-install it, and you won't be able to hire a ligit chimney cleaner to do this.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:51:01 -0700, "Bob F" wrote:

an Musicant wrote:
: On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:15:38 -0700 (PDT), Harry K
: wrote:
:
: On Oct 25, 12:13 am, "Bob F" wrote:
: LouB wrote:
: Wayne Whitney wrote:
: On 2009-10-24, Dan Musicant wrote:
:
: Wayne, are you there? Wayne Whitney who traffics this newsgroup
:
: Yo! My trafficking is fairly irregular these days, it was chance
: that I noticed your post.
:
: told me that fireplaces release particulate matter which has been
: shown to shorten one life.
:
: Right, but most of those are emitted outside, so you'd be
: shortening your neighbor's lives, not your own. Of course, if
: your fireplace has a drafting problem, you could get smoke and
: particulates inside.
:
: The best option pollution wise is to get an EPA-certified wood
: burning insert in your fireplace. They have some form of
: afterburner or catalyst to burn wood more cleanly. Plus you could
: improve the efficiency of using the fireplace to heat the house,
: as you should be able to arrange to use outside air for
: combustion and just blow the heat into the house. Much more
: efficient than a conventional fireplace.
:
: However, the expense of the insert and/or necessary chimney
: improvements or liners may be prohibitive.
:
: Cheers, Wayne
: Thia Old House just had a show with that. Inserts are expensive!
:
: I bought my EPA certified insert with most of the stainless chimney
: liner used for $300. Replaced the "afterburner" tubes in the top
: for $40 or something like that. There are ways.
:
: It heats well, and rarely has visible smoke after the initial few
: minutes.
:
: And I get way more heat from it, and less heat loss up the chimney
: then a fireplace could ever provide.- Hide quoted text -
:
: - Show quoted text -
:
: True about the efficiency. Of course _anything_ is more effectient
: than a fireplace. They are the most efficient wasters of wood known
: to man...well, an open pit would be worse I suppose.
:
: Harry K
:
: I should have snagged my sister's wood burning stove when she gave
: that away and went to strictly gas furnace heating in her house. Not
: sure I could have set it up, maybe could have vented it up the
: chimney. My fireplace is downstairs, of course, in a two story house.
:
:Legally in the US, at least in many places, any woodstove or insert that is
:installed has to be an EPA certified unit. Older ones are no longer legal for
:installation or re-instalation. You need to make sure that any unit you get
:meets that requirement, or you could have legal or insurance problems. Permits
:may be required for instalation.
:
:Thus, it may be illegal to remove an insert for chimney cleaning and later
:re-install it, and you won't be able to hire a ligit chimney cleaner to do this.
:
I guess I'll just wear a lot of clothes this winter, drink hot broth,
take a hot shower... I figure my chimney's clogged.


Email: dmusicant at pacbell dot net

"Dan Musicant" wrote
"Bob F" wrote:

:Legally in the US, at least in many places, any woodstove or insert that
is
:installed has to be an EPA certified unit. Older ones are no longer legal
for

I guess I'll just wear a lot of clothes this winter, drink hot broth,
take a hot shower... I figure my chimney's clogged.

Relax Dan, just have it cleaned regular like normal folks do. Your car
emits more bad stuff in a week than your fireplace does in a year.