Squeal on your neighbor if he uses his fireplace
Regulators want to ban fireplace blazes on 'Spare the Air nights'
Mercury News ^ | 3/1/08 | Paul Rogers

Mention air pollution, and what comes to mind? Factories. Oil refineries. Auto tailpipes.

Now Bay Area smog regulators are trying to crack down on another source that they say is just as significant, even if beloved: home fireplaces.

Citing growing medical research that soot causes more severe health problems than was previously realized, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District is proposing a ban on all wood burning in fireplaces and wood stoves in the nine Bay Area counties during winter "Spare the Air" nights.

snip

If approved, fireplace police would enforce the rules, and neighbors would be encouraged to report neighbors.

"We understand a crackling fire is a long-held tradition of American family life," said Jack Broadbent, executive officer of the air district, based in San Francisco.

"But traditions need to be changed when there is information showing that our health and our neighbors' health are impacted."

snip

Supporters compare wood smoke dangers to that of cigarette smoke, and note natural gas fires are much cleaner. Critics call the proposal bureaucracy run amok.

snip

Kathy Voss-Jensen and Joel Jensen favor the rules. Three years ago, the Redwood City couple got a new neighbor who burns wood nearly every winter day despite their requests to limit it.

"It's very noxious and irritating," she said. "We have to keep our windows closed tight for several hours a day. And we have to keep them closed all night."

Others say the proposal goes too far.

"I think this is a precursor to banning all wood burning. It is a camel's nose under the tent," said Steve Drenker, a Los Altos sales manager whose 1950s ranch home has a fireplace.

Drenker burns only dry oak, he said, and his fires do not smoke up the neighborhood.

Direct link to the rest of the article:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8417810

Here's my VERY favorite part.
-----------------------------------------------

How to enforce the ban?

Broadbent said he has 60 inspectors, some of whom would drive around looking for smoking chimneys. Neighbors also could phone a toll-free number to report violators. First-time offenders would be warned by a letter, with fines of $50 to $100 for second violations, and larger fines for later violations.

Similar programs recently passed by air districts in Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley allow violators to waive a $50 fine if they attend a two-hour class on the health risks of wood smoke.

60 Inspectors at ten dollars an hour, plus benefits and vehicle expenses, would equate to over one million two hundred and forty eight thousand dollars a year. Add to that letters and postage and these people are crazy. At the same time these same citizens are complaining about the high cost of government.

Not to mention that the state of California goes up in flames a couple of time a year. If these people are so prone to illness and disease from smoke they should move to an island or at least a boat.

I suppose they will need another buck a pack on cigs to pay for the officers to patrol.

That is the plan isn't it? Have the smokers pay all the taxes so there will be more tax money for welfare and illegal immigrants?

It seems that people are going crazy.