The plan sets regulations on chimney smoke with fines of up to $500 to be imposed on the worst polluters starting late next year.
The assembly will decide at its next meeting whether the measure goes to a public hearing.
Even so, critics of the 16-page plan testified to the assembly, invoking God, freedom and the U.S. Constitution. Some mocked Borough Mayor Luke Hopkins. About a dozen people stood outside picketing. No one testified in favor of curtailing air pollution.
“I would be happy to breathe dirty air and let someone be warm,” Lovette Marchbanks told the assembly.
A mandate by the federal government prompted the Fairbanks North Star Borough to start reducing levels of PM 2.5. The air pollutant is known to cause health problems, and wood smoke is believed to be the No. 1 contributor.
Hopkins’ plan provides government subsidies and tax credits to encourage people to replace old, dirty wood stoves. Only solid fuel burning devices approved by the borough or the Environmental Protection Agency would be allowed to be installed in the borough under the plan. Already-installed devices are grandfathered in.
The plan would ban the burning of certain materials, including construction debris, garbage and tires, in the heart of the borough. Chimney smoke would be judged based on opacity and methods put forth by the EPA. Borough employees designated by the mayor would measure the emissions starting Sept. 1, 2011.
“If I catch somebody on my roof, I’m going to blow them off of it,” one man told the assembly. Another testifier called for a total recall of elected leaders. The picketers carried their signs into the assembly chambers. “Staying warm shouldn’t be illegal,” one sign read.
Coleman Barney of North Pole said it seems like “we have to have permission for everything we do.”
“We are not free people,” he said.
Rita Leake said the plan should be thrown out.
“You need to vote this down or start all over with something that makes sense,” she said.
Critics of the pollution control plan also asked the assembly to refuse the mayor’s request to hire an air quality project coordinator. Residents said in testimony that they objected to accepting federal money to pay for the position.
The assembly voted 5-3 to approve the new hire with Assemblymen Guy Sattley, Hank Bartos and Matt Want opposing. Members of the audience shouted angrily following the vote.
Moments earlier, Bartos said the community ought to focus on preparing for natural gas instead of “fooling around stomping on wood fires.”
“The citizens in our community are drowning in a sea of high energy costs,” he said. “Hiring someone to teach us how to burn wood is not the most cost-effective use of our funding.”
Assemblyman Tim Beck said the community can’t afford to wait for another politician’s promise to bring natural gas to Fairbanks.
“I’m not any happier than the rest of you,” he said. “We need to take care of this (pollution) problem.”
In other business, the Borough Assembly postponed a measure to excuse companies from paying the bed tax when they rent rooms long-term.
The unanimous vote on Thursday came after the measure’s sponsor asked for postponement.
The city of Fairbanks is considering revoking its corporate bed tax exemption.
The city mayor asked the borough to hold off on establishing an exemption so the municipal governments can coordinate. Individuals who rent rooms in either the city or the borough are exempt from paying the bed tax when they rent rooms for longer than a month.
The assembly also approved two measures Thursday in support of a realignment of the Alaska Railroad to south Fairbanks.
One measure asks the Alaska Legislature to pay $10 million to study a railroad move. The second measure asks the Legislature to transfer Chena riverfront land to the Fairbanks North Star Borough for recreational use.
A private railroad safety group has been pushing for the railroad move, citing safety concerns due to multiple railroad crossings through the middle of Fairbanks.
Supporters of Ice Alaska, host of international ice sculpting competitions, also want the realignment.
Ice Alaska rents the riverfront land in question from the railroad, and officials say they can’t afford an April 1 rent hike.
Supporters of the organization have pinned their hopes on getting a new landlord.
“If we don’t do something about the Ice Park, there’s not going to be one next year,” said Assemblyman Hank Bartos, sponsor of the measures.


Comment reply.
I got some help from a friend who has a different computer was able to get your links to work better.
THIS MUST READING:
Main link:
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?_service=data&_debug=0&_program=dataprog.dw_do_all_emis_2005.sas&pol=231&stfips=02
Use the pull down menu choice, and select
For Fairbanks and Anchorage.
look closely at the graphs
Screen copy and save for future reference.
The outhouse pit is going to hit the fan!
4 burro seats are up for election.
All the state house is up for election,
Some local Senators,
The Governor,
1 Federal Senator.
spxuy
TheRecalcitrant,
The woodburning ordinance offers a far less painful attempt at clearing the air, and with the incentives offered and the length of time offered for education and compliance, the proposal seems reasonable to reasonable people who think it through. I was hoping you were one of them.
This is where we disagree most I think. I think we need to educate, AND tell the EPA that we are working on it and they can wait and give us a few years and see if we have fixed the problem. I feel that an ordinance/s and forced compliance is heavyhanded and uncalled for....at least for now. And, to be honest, I don't having a liar for a Mayor, but we can fix that next election.
Fairbanks Focus Alaska View... nope ... nothing there either...
Media is minimizing, this issue, it need to be made much more public.
The burro says there are 5,000 wood stoves in Fairbanks.
Lets see: 2 voting adults per house hold = 10,000 votes.
I assume the 2 voting adults have at least 2 friends they can convince to vote the same way.
That is 20,000 votes.
FACT:
In Fairbanks elections are won and lost by 1, 2 , 3 or 4 votes! Often by less than 200 votes.
Next fall 4 burro seats are up for election!
FACT:
1 federal senate seat is up
1 One state Governor is up
ALL of the STATE House is up.
?? TWO local Senators???
FACT:
20,000 votes decide who is hired and fired at the burro level, state level, and federal level.
FACT:
The EPA can't to stop congress from appropriating money for highways etc. Because congress appropriates their budget. ONE unhappy Federal Senator has their Full attention.
State EPA is funded by your legislators. And, "You betcha they know where their paychecks comes from"
-------
llivj
@1AhHa
The link I posted should work, but try these ones to find the info on the EPA website.
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?_service=data&_debug=0&_program=dataprog.dw_do_all_emis_2005.sas&pol=231&stfips=02
-------
Reply comment:
Thank you for the above working link..
Just looked at this link..
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?_service=data&_debug=0&_program=dataprog.dw_do_all_emis_2005.sas&pol=231&stfips=02
Interesting reading.. the first page, first graph,
IS A MUST.
-------
Looking through some of the other documents
At:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=latest emission summary for pm 2.5 on the EPA website for the Fairbanks North Star Borough is located here.&btnG=Google Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq
FLATLY SHOW IS deliberately classified as "non-attainment" to provide political motivation to construct a gas line to Fairbanks.
You will notice Matsu/Anchorage deliberately classified as attainment by State Dec.
ALSO: EPA cut the 2.5 standards in half to create more government Jobs and a nation wide stink.
My conclusion:
This is 100% political!
Our elected officials are in it for the money.
The Fairbanks Development bunch have a part.
The gas line bunch pushing the gas line have part.
Anchorage/Matsu has an interest in reducing growth in Fairbanks to eliminate the competition.
What better way to sabotage your competition than to use a government agency SUCH as the EPA to do the job.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------Always, Always follow the money!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And when government starts acting irrational-- you always know it is political!
Rule of thumb: 2 rational people will often come to a nearly similar rational conclusion.
luiwa
- planning to install a non-EPA approved stove in the near future;
- planning to start a clandestine business selling such stoves in the borough;
- burning substances other than the dry wood you said you burn, such as: paint/garbage/tires/asphalt products/animal carcasses, etc.
- planning on setting up a hydronic burner on a small lot, using a short stack;
- or creating a public nuisance with your wood burner,
I just have a hard time seeing what you could be objecting to in the proposed plan... I'm not trying to pick a fight with you - I just want to know what you're thinking. What I see from the other comments is that people simply don't want to be told what to do, and that the feeling is that other sources cause more pollution than wood burners.
The fact is, FNSB has a helluva lot of wood burners - that's a fact, jack, and although cars, trucks, buses, coal burners at UAF, GVEA and Ft. WW do contribute heavily to the problem, I can assure you that efforts to change the way those entities create power will be far more painful in the wallet area for those of us who utilize the power they create.
The woodburning ordinance offers a far less painful attempt at clearing the air, and with the incentives offered and the length of time offered for education and compliance, the proposal seems reasonable to reasonable people who think it through. I was hoping you were one of them.
The link I posted should work, but try these ones to find the info on the EPA website.
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?_service=data&_debug=0&_program=dataprog.dw_do_all_emis_2005.sas&pol=231&stfips=02
or if that doesn't work, this one should, you just have to specify Alaska, and then the Fairbanks North Star Borough to find the relevant information.
http://www.epa.gov/air/emissions/pm.htm
There's one of those outside furnaces 3/4 mile from my house on a lot larger than the proposed specified size. At the end of last summer when it began to cool off, smoke from that thing was thick; it drifted over an area many people live in. That has only taken place a few times. These folks could easily be cited & educated (or asked, with a warning of real negative sanctions) to burn something that doesn't pollute like that. Probably nice folks, tho - gotta say that, seriously. In any case, they need to know the pollution they're generating is unacceptable, but it doesn't take ANY kind of rocket science to see what it is & where it's coming from. Isn't this what people have been saying for months?
I burned wood for many years. Green wood = no heat, bad creosote buildup; we knew that. Someone told me at the outset not to burn colored glossy paper because it gives off poisonous fumes, so I never did. Everyone in my (large) circle of friends knew that. You can burn the News-Miner under the proposed guidelines (have fun!). You just can't burn some of those silly ad inserts.
The ordinance is draconian. Except for the few really polluting outside furnaces (note not all outside furnaces), I don't think wood burners are the problem. Ever take a look at the school busbarn yard? They leave those buses (40? 50? more?) running -all- the time. The contract says they have to put them in the bus barns. They don't. They don't care. That doesn't mean all the staff there doesn't care. That means there are people there who don't care - inc the FNSBSD trans guy (what a JOKE).
Then there are the idiots who leave their vehicles running while they run into stores. A tiny percentage of those vehicles need to run because they have infants coming back into them (altho we just wrapped our babies up; so comfy) or sick passengers, & granted there are a few vehicles that don't start without great effort at low temperatures, but the vast majority: shut 'em off, idiots. Then I guess the vehicle owners & passengers would have to actually dress for the weather, but folks, you can do it. I would LOVE to see people ticketed for leaving their vehicles running. I would be willing to bet that a LOT of the increased pollution we have correlates to the build up of military personnel & their dependents in town, from leaving vehicles running. Plenty of civilian folks do that, too - all unnecessary. Also on base, muny govt vehicles, etc. Government vehicles should be shut off when they're not rolling. Certainly that can be mandated.
The Woodriver School area is sickenly polluted at times. There's no excuse for that. Cite that property owner. If there's nothing on the books right now under which to cite them, write something. It's pathetic how long that Woodriver situation has gone on. I don't give the assembly kudos for waiting so long to act regarding that. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. But banning wood stoves (or requiring fancier, more expensive wood stoves) is not the answer.
And how come I keep hearing about businesses that burn used motor oil? Then there are the ever-present sooty power plants (inc UAF). I know there are pollution control devices that have been installed - but telling people they can't use their frickkin' wood stoves while commercial & institutional pollution is still a large problem is nuts.
Don't be too cocky about not being able to be voted out. Big mistake there. On the other hand, do we really need to hear the idiot 'Heil Hitler' thing? Folks saying that are referencing one of the most reprehensible acts in human history. It was only the really dumb kids, when I was in school, who ever said that to anyone.
does not work
Do you have working link..
Thanks..
# cbysm
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?_service=data&_server=shire.epa.gov&_port=4079&_sessionid=/RhZAxH15GD&_program=replay&_entry=apswork.x00000A2.gchart.GIF
As anyone can see, the emissions from road dust outweigh everything else combined, and the emissions from residential wood combustion are behind fossil fuel combustion and electricity generation. Every time someone from the borough assembly, or news miner makes the comment that wood stoves are the largest source of pm 2.5, they're lying through their teeth.
BSRadar, yes, there were a number of people that listed alternatives. They also brought scientific information FROM THE EPA, about how there are about 4 or 5 things that contribute MORE PM 2.5 particles than does wood smoke. Appearantly, that did not convince any of the Assembly members. I think Hank Bartos, Guy Satley and Matt Want had already made up their minds how to vote. Thanks to them for their courage and intelligence. And, there are so many things wrong with this ordinance, we just need to look at other solutions instead of jumping to these drastic measures.
I agree that the air is not as clean as when I was a kid. There are a few bad patches. Also, some people burn green wood when they shouldn't. This will be an ongoing education for new wood-burners.
Here is the problem. People burn wood because of the high cost of other energy sources. Though we have told our politicians over and over we need natural gas, lets look for alternate sources of energy, and (shock!) oil prices are very high, they have ignored us.
My proposal is this: find ways to make alternatives cheaper. You will then have many people gladly switch. You can add the incentives in as well, so you will have people willing to swap out old stoves for new. Fund some education on the subject (though it looks like the wood burning association is already doing that). Finally, hold those wonderful plants to the same regs.
You said you didn't attend because of your problem with "venom-spitters", and yet you judged them for being there! How would you know they were "venom-spitters"? Because of comments here? You should know that this board attracts some nasty people.
http://co.fairbanks.ak.us/Meetings/Ordinances/2010/2010-17 with memo - map & fiscal note.pdf
rhxbg
Bring your petitions,and we will see who is in the minority.