http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=140997&#storycomments

----------------------------------------------



New crusade for smoke foes
Dangers posed by fireplaces, wood-burning pizzerias bring warnings
By Ames Boykin | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 2/24/2008 12:26 AM

People also tend to melt at the smell and taste of pizza baking in a woodfire.

But one suburban resident wants these fires to go cold in the name of good health.

Kenneth Dubinski of Elk Grove Village is leading a group seeking to prevent wood smoke from wafting through the air, pushing to ban what he calls the new secondhand smoke. He is working to galvanize support on the heels of a statewide tobacco smoking ban.

For Dubinski, this is familiar terrain: He actively railed against smoking on airplanes in the 1980s and fought for the smoking ban in public places which took effect last month.

Since his hometown of Elk Grove Village lifted the ban on outdoor wood burning in 2004, Dubinski has smelled something foul.

"The main thing is people are worried about secondhand smoke. That's what this is. I come home and get headaches," he said, blaming wood smoke from his neighbors.

Dubinski, who has been active in mobilizing a small yet determined group under the name Breathe Healthy Air, points to a dossier of research he has collected.

Wood smoke is a major contributor to particulate matter in the air and can be linked to increased risks of emergency room visits and hospitalizations for cardiopulmonary conditions and premature death, according to the American Lung Association.

Besides kicking up particulate matter, wood-smoke emissions contain carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde and chemicals known or suspected to cause cancer, the association said.

Dubinski cites such evidence as he battles wood smoke. He also wants lawmakers to issue financial incentives for converting wood-burning fireplaces to natural gas. No state lawmakers have taken up the issue yet.

A ban is a hard sell to those Chicago-area residents who adore their fireplaces and wood stoves -- and many are fuming at the idea.

Bill Wilson, who runs Brix Wood Fired Pizza in Lombard, chuckled at the thought of banning the very thing that lures his customers.

"Everybody says, 'Man, that smells so good. I had to come in,' " Wilson said.

Besides, he said, it's part of our primal existence.

"If we didn't have wood burning, nobody would be here," Wilson said. "That's how the caveman lived. If he didn't have fire, he wouldn't eat."

Rick Vlahos, of McHenry, who works as senior manager of training for the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association, loves his wood stove. He says he used it frequently when he lived in Palatine and Schaumburg.

About 20 years ago, federal environmental regulators began restricting wood stove emissions to create cleaner air. As a result, modern wood stoves belch a cleaner smoke, he said, recommending stoves built before 1988 be retired.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency officials have no immediate plans to recommend the statewide ban or limitations that Dubinski and other wood-burning foes seek, said Jill Watson, state EPA spokeswoman.

The agency does acknowledge, however, that wood smoke contributes to air pollution.

Wood smoke has become more of an issue in the more mountainous Northeast region due to air inversions that trap the smoke. New Hampshire state lawmakers are looking at placing limits on outdoor wood furnaces, called wood boilers, by ensuring they are at least 50 feet from property lines.

Wood smoke has created similar concerns out West. In the San Francisco area, there's a proposed ban on burning wood on bad air days.

"In an environment like Chicago where there are no mountains, smoke just dissipates and goes away," said Vlahos of the barbecue association.

Opponents of wood smoke argue remnants of the acrid smoke hang in the air, aggravating people with asthma and other breathing problems.

There's been resistance locally to local wood smoke foes, one reason Dubinski's group is calling for action at the state level.

When Dubinski appealed to Elk Grove Village trustees to reinstate the ban on outdoor fireplaces, he received a resounding "no" from Mayor Craig Johnson.

That would infringe on people's property rights, Johnson said.

"There's probably more smoke put in the air by the California forest fires than would be from any fire pit in the country over 10 years," Johnson said.

Dubinski, however, said it becomes his business when it creeps into his personal space and causes him headaches.

One forum for the debate has been the letters columns of the Daily Herald, where Dubinski and his supporters regularly appear, sparking spirited replies from wood-burning fans.

Residential wood burning can be blamed for about a third of particulate pollution, federal environmental officials estimate.

So why should Dubinski see wood smoke as more of an environmental enemy than exhaust from trucks and cars, which appear to spew more pollution in the Chicago area than fireplaces?

Nationally, cars and trucks make up 21 percent of particulate pollution -- less than wood smoke, Dubinski said.

"I don't smell the diesel from (Route) 53," Dubinski said. "I smell the smoke from these guys wood burning."

How to cut wood smoke pollution

• Convert to gas. Rising natural gas prices have traditionally spurred people to turn to burning wood.

• Use a wood stove made after 1988. They use cleaner burning technology as a result of a federal clean air crackdown.

• Burn clean, dry, seasoned hardwood. Wet wood doesn't burn well and produces more smoke.

• Never burn painted or treated wood, trash or colored paper.

• Keep the stovepipe and chimney clean to prevent the buildup of creosote that can cause chimney fires and noxious emissions.

Source: American Lung Association, Daily Herald interviews

Particulate pollution

• Residential wood burning: 35%

• Other sources: 30%

• Cars and trucks: 21%

• Forest fires: 13%

• Other residential fuels: 1%

Source: EPA

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/n/content/oh/index/news/local/news_poll.html


Please refer to the above link if you are a smoker who feels you have lost all rights to choose.

Please click this link or cut and paste it into your browser, you will see a news poll that states,” DO you agree with the smoking ban”. If you are a smoker who wants to restore some freedom of choice please select, “ no “ then submit it. You do not have to leave your name or comments.

There is a group of about 30 people who sit in front of a sponsored computer and vote every hour, they are against smoking so they vote yes, this is how the ban was put in place, by using deceptive tactics .

Since they are not playing by the rules we should respond using the same method.

You can vote as many times as possible, just once every hour, and for as many days as you want to.

Thanks for your help in restoring some form of freedom.

Also please tell as many people that smoke to vote. Thanks, a ton. Doral ultra lights, 3 packs a day.

I voted and I guess it accepted the vote. I tried to comment and it doesn't accept comments.

Probably not a good place for a random comment, but I am happy to see that more people are getting a little more bitter and upset.

I think it might mean, that although to late, people might think more about possibly trying to organize. I don't see another way.

I will do my best to vote as frequently as I can.

I do recommend the people that are here and active begin checking out sites that are trying to halt the destruction of freedom. It sounds foolish but I don't see the smoking as totally a health issue. I see it as the beginning of what Hitler wanted, a perfect society. What group of our society will be targeted next?

"What group of our society will be targeted next?"

Well let's see:

Obese
Drinkers
Pit Bull Owners
Fire Place Owners
SUV Drivers
etc.

are we as a society on the verg of living in a bubble

quote:

Originally posted by smallbird:
"What group of our society will be targeted next?"

Well let's see:

Obese
Drinkers
Pit Bull Owners
Fire Place Owners
SUV Drivers
etc.

Remember when Ariana Huffington was going around saying if you own an SUV you support terrorism? That kind of fizzled out. Might come back again.

There's some SUVs that get better gas mileage than cars. LOL

Probably the best way to see who's next on the list is see who's gotten the biggest grants lately. We were bombarded with "Click It or Ticket" seatbelt commercials prior to this weekend.

The "click it or ticket" campaigns are all aimed at getting DUI or DUII or DWI (whichever state you are in) arrests. Looks great for the cops...remember when seat belt infractions were secondary offenses and you couldn't be stopped just because you weren't wearing one?

quote:

Originally posted by smallbird:
"What group of our society will be targeted next?"

Well let's see:

Obese
Drinkers
Pit Bull Owners
Fire Place Owners
SUV Drivers
etc.

how about this one "right to bare arms"


US Supreme Court in historic hearing on gun laws

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Supreme Court will Tuesday begin weighing an individual's right to bear arms against a community's right to restrict gun ownership for public safety, an emotional issue that has long divided Americans


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080318/ts_afp/usgunsweaponsjustice_080318060314


I personally don't use guns and don't have them in my house,, however I am not going to forbid the rights of other who have them..

quote:

Originally posted by smallbird:
...remember when seat belt infractions were secondary offenses and you couldn't be stopped just because you weren't wearing one?

Yes, and I remember when there were no seatbelt laws at all. Or airbag laws.

Concerning Jemeyes' post on guns, I don't recall what show it was, but two guys were debating this. One was from the Brady Center and the other was (I think) the attorney who was going to argue the case in front of the Supreme Court.

Brady Center guy said D.C. allowed guns, just not handguns, and how gun deaths declined after their ban.

The other guy brought up how the guns that were allowed really didn't amount to a hill of beans, seeing how they have to be broken down and trigger locked. Worthless as far as self-protection.

He also pointed out some facts to totally dispute/explain the gun deaths "facts" the Brady guy brought up. The Brady guy did not dispute this. My impression of the Brady Center guy was he would fit in quite well in the anti-smoker cartel.

How much money does the seatbelt law generate?

It is about 5 bucks in material, but to get one fixed it is generally close to 100 on the average.

How much do the car manufacturers charge for belts in each new car.

How come seatbelts aren't mandatory in school busses. They might be by now but to the best of my knowledge they aren't.

How much less would they cost if they weren't required? Would the price drop if the poor and lower income people just didn't buy them?

How many things are made mandatory just to make millionaires?

By the way, I do prefer to use one. I would rather it be a choice. This is a democracy, right?

quote:

Originally posted by asmoker123:
How come seatbelts aren't mandatory in school busses. They might be by now but to the best of my knowledge they aren't.

Believe it or not, but one of the arguments why seatbelts aren't used/wanted in buses is because the students are safer without them. Supposedly, the seats are designed to protect them better if they're not wearing belts. That may be true, but that's not going to help them in a rollover.

Another argument is that bus drivers would have a hard time enforcing seatbelt use.

The government that tickets the parents exempts itself from the same law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPqdRqacpFk

Once fireplaces and BBQ pits are banned because of particulate pollution - blanket outdoor smoking bans, even in your own yard, will be the logical next step. I have had to put up with a lot of crap lately from somebody I work with who claims that she can smell lingering smoke odor on my clothes even after I take care to cover it up avoid contact with her. Some more "progressive" places now forbid anyone from wearing fragrances or deoderant in public buildings because they may trigger asthma attacks. We are also at risk of antibiotic-resistant bacteria causing widespread, possibly deadly infections because of mass germ-phobia.
When the bar has been lowered to the point where we might as well be living in hermetically-sealed bubbles, the extinction of our species can't be far off.

As was illustrated in the book and movies "The War of the Worlds".

Good bit of reporting, I'm supprised the EPA didn't register their percentage of parts per million of toxic vapors discharged from the use of the device that ignites the ciggarette, Bic Lighter ). I mean, what the hell. Methaine gas omitted from cows should be next, not to mention humans.

----------------------------------------------



New crusade for smoke foes
Dangers posed by fireplaces, wood-burning pizzerias bring warnings
By Ames Boykin | Daily Herald StaffContact writerPublished: 2/24/2008 12:26 AM

People also tend to melt at the smell and taste of pizza baking in a woodfire.

But one suburban resident wants these fires to go cold in the name of good health.

Kenneth Dubinski of Elk Grove Village is leading a group seeking to prevent wood smoke from wafting through the air, pushing to ban what he calls the new secondhand smoke. He is working to galvanize support on the heels of a statewide tobacco smoking ban.

For Dubinski, this is familiar terrain: He actively railed against smoking on airplanes in the 1980s and fought for the smoking ban in public places which took effect last month.

Since his hometown of Elk Grove Village lifted the ban on outdoor wood burning in 2004, Dubinski has smelled something foul.

"The main thing is people are worried about secondhand smoke. That's what this is. I come home and get headaches," he said, blaming wood smoke from his neighbors.

Dubinski, who has been active in mobilizing a small yet determined group under the name Breathe Healthy Air, points to a dossier of research he has collected.

Wood smoke is a major contributor to particulate matter in the air and can be linked to increased risks of emergency room visits and hospitalizations for cardiopulmonary conditions and premature death, according to the American Lung Association.

Besides kicking up particulate matter, wood-smoke emissions contain carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde and chemicals known or suspected to cause cancer, the association said.

Dubinski cites such evidence as he battles wood smoke. He also wants lawmakers to issue financial incentives for converting wood-burning fireplaces to natural gas. No state lawmakers have taken up the issue yet.

A ban is a hard sell to those Chicago-area residents who adore their fireplaces and wood stoves -- and many are fuming at the idea.

Bill Wilson, who runs Brix Wood Fired Pizza in Lombard, chuckled at the thought of banning the very thing that lures his customers.

"Everybody says, 'Man, that smells so good. I had to come in,' " Wilson said.

Besides, he said, it's part of our primal existence.

"If we didn't have wood burning, nobody would be here," Wilson said. "That's how the caveman lived. If he didn't have fire, he wouldn't eat."

Rick Vlahos, of McHenry, who works as senior manager of training for the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association, loves his wood stove. He says he used it frequently when he lived in Palatine and Schaumburg.

About 20 years ago, federal environmental regulators began restricting wood stove emissions to create cleaner air. As a result, modern wood stoves belch a cleaner smoke, he said, recommending stoves built before 1988 be retired.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency officials have no immediate plans to recommend the statewide ban or limitations that Dubinski and other wood-burning foes seek, said Jill Watson, state EPA spokeswoman.

The agency does acknowledge, however, that wood smoke contributes to air pollution.

Wood smoke has become more of an issue in the more mountainous Northeast region due to air inversions that trap the smoke. New Hampshire state lawmakers are looking at placing limits on outdoor wood furnaces, called wood boilers, by ensuring they are at least 50 feet from property lines.

Wood smoke has created similar concerns out West. In the San Francisco area, there's a proposed ban on burning wood on bad air days.

"In an environment like Chicago where there are no mountains, smoke just dissipates and goes away," said Vlahos of the barbecue association.

Opponents of wood smoke argue remnants of the acrid smoke hang in the air, aggravating people with asthma and other breathing problems.

There's been resistance locally to local wood smoke foes, one reason Dubinski's group is calling for action at the state level.

When Dubinski appealed to Elk Grove Village trustees to reinstate the ban on outdoor fireplaces, he received a resounding "no" from Mayor Craig Johnson.

That would infringe on people's property rights, Johnson said.

"There's probably more smoke put in the air by the California forest fires than would be from any fire pit in the country over 10 years," Johnson said.

Dubinski, however, said it becomes his business when it creeps into his personal space and causes him headaches.

One forum for the debate has been the letters columns of the Daily Herald, where Dubinski and his supporters regularly appear, sparking spirited replies from wood-burning fans.

Residential wood burning can be blamed for about a third of particulate pollution, federal environmental officials estimate.

So why should Dubinski see wood smoke as more of an environmental enemy than exhaust from trucks and cars, which appear to spew more pollution in the Chicago area than fireplaces?

Nationally, cars and trucks make up 21 percent of particulate pollution -- less than wood smoke, Dubinski said.

"I don't smell the diesel from (Route) 53," Dubinski said. "I smell the smoke from these guys wood burning."

How to cut wood smoke pollution

• Convert to gas. Rising natural gas prices have traditionally spurred people to turn to burning wood.

• Use a wood stove made after 1988. They use cleaner burning technology as a result of a federal clean air crackdown.

• Burn clean, dry, seasoned hardwood. Wet wood doesn't burn well and produces more smoke.

• Never burn painted or treated wood, trash or colored paper.

• Keep the stovepipe and chimney clean to prevent the buildup of creosote that can cause chimney fires and noxious emissions.

Source: American Lung Association, Daily Herald interviews

Particulate pollution

• Residential wood burning: 35%

• Other sources: 30%

• Cars and trucks: 21%

• Forest fires: 13%

• Other residential fuels: 1%

Source: EPA[/QUOTE]

We still have guns,even if they are trying to take them thru the supreme court right now or get the constitutional power to regulate us to death for owning one. What they are after is the power to regulate our guns just like in canada or australia thats the blueprint. Will we submit,hell no we wont. I fought for the country and I damn well will smoke where I please..........having already defended that right once and won..........But the bigger question is, At what point do the people feel that armed insurrection is its only recourse against govmnt tyranny............just a question but one that may very well be ANSWERED
in the comming years if freedom is not returned to the people.........

I saw on this site or in the smoking lobby how allowing people to have guns actually reduces crime. I know in Maine just about every house has a gun. I don't think we have a very high crime rate per capita but don't have any exact figures.

What is being done to smoker's should be just the catylist that wakes people up, but I sort of believe if it does, it will be too late.