I burn wood occasionally in a very primitive, steel fireplace insert inside a masonry chimney. Basically, I'm using 18th century technology, yet I am hardly polluting at all. What's my secret? I use thoroughly dry wood and pay attention to my fire, adjusting the draft and damper accordingly. I burn so cleanly that after five years since the last inspection and sweeping, the chimney guy this year said that if I stuck to these protocols, I wouldn't need a visit from him for another five years. No creosote and hardly any ash up my stack.
Trying to idiot-proof a wood stove to be smokeless even with wet wood and other stupidity is asking all of us to pay for the actions of a dumb minority that shouldn't be using a wood stove in the first place. A good education program via a public agency such as the state Cooperative Extension services would cost less and do more. Plus education about how to properly manage a wood fire will not further alienate rural voters who might already have the impression that Democrats are rural, elitist, nanny-staters who don't even try to understand the difficulties of country life. Banning simple, efficient wood stove designs, on the other hand, certainly will.
From the article:
The National Firewood Association, based in Duluth, Minn., says some of the pollution from wood-burning stoves could be reduced if people would burn only aged wood rather than wood with too much wet sap.
-app