Doc, the 'little people' are being harmed not by the EPA, but by people who cause excessive woodsmoke emissions. Your community is being harmed, and is asking the borough for help. The borough has determined through measurement and scientific analysis that wood smoke is the major source of fine particulates in our communities. The ordinance is a good one. Those who are burning wood cleanly don't have to do anything differently. Those who are polluting have the opportunity to become educated, or get most of their money back for a clean-burning stove. Finally, those who are still a public nuisance receive some warnings, and as a last resort, fines. Our problems are not so unique. Many other communities have had similar air pollution problems, and solved them. Btw, I listened very carefully to all the people testifying at last night's assembly meeting, and couldn't identify one EPA plant among them.

I dont see EPA down here saying anything about our wood stoves. All we get is what lukey and bunch tell us they are saying., and THEIR assesment of what we HAVE to do to satisfy EPA. Natural gas would clear up the air, but dont bet that its going to be cheap whether its trucked or pipeline. The oil pigs will wring every penny out of us they can. So dont throw away your wood stove, you may not be able to afford gas either.

We do not need federal regulations on our emissions in Alaska. Its cold here and we have specific challenges that outsiders do not have to face. the EPA is nothing more than a government agency with a big hammer to squash the little people so big brother can regulate more and make more money.

Cost effective alternative before you turn off the heat .. might be a thought to ponder.

Coal, high priced oil, GVEA electric .. no natural gas .. yep, hard to keep my little igloo warm just by shivering.

Yep, letting the homeowner with a wood stove know he may have a problem with his neighbor(s) might bring some light on who wants to freeze him out and grab his homestead.

I have no pity for those who knowingly purchased an outside burner,outside boiler or stove that was outdated & did not meet the law. They made the purchase knowing full well that they did not meet EPA standards. Nor do I have pity for those who drive a hummer or a RV. They made their choice. It's called accountability & responsibility & obeying the laws. They basically broke the law. It should not be addressed any different then any other EPA law broken.

The elected need to demand the LNG be built to meet the needs of alaska.

My comments concern outdoor wood boilers, which are the worst polluters and the source of a disproportionate share of complaints received by the borough.

Socom, you may call the residents who have registered complaints about polluters whiners, but they are actually looking after the health of themselves and any children they may have. Seems more like being responsible citizens and parents, especially when one considers the societal cost of chronic diseases such as heart disease, cancer and emphysema.

But there is a group of whiners out there, most of them comfortably ensconced in the middle to upper-middle class. Think of the families, they say. What about our poor, freezing children?! You're thinking back to 2008 and the cost of heating oil goes through the roof. Faced with the prospect of freezing and starving children, you decide to buy a $10,000 hydronic boiler, financing the purchase with a loan, or maybe a spare $10,000 you have tucked under the mattress. With additional money that's floating around somewhere in the recesses of your ginormous house, you will either buy the 10-20 cords of wood per year to feed the new monster, or perhaps you will cut all your own wood from your private woodlot, or borough land that is only 30 miles away, using your handy pickup, trailer and chainsaw. Whew, that hydronic boiler sure saved the day. Otherwise you might have had to choose between your poor starving children or that annual dipnetting trip. Oh, but wait, you only dreamed you were poor, maybe because you spent the previous day posting about how destitute you'll be if this ordinance goes into effect.

But back to reality. There are poor people in our community, for whom a price increase in one necessity will result in a shortfall in another area. They sometimes have to choose between warmth and food. Some of them do heat with wood, mainly rural people with smaller houses and relatively easy access to wood. Maybe 1 or 2 struggling families in Fairbanks somehow ended up with a hydronic boiler, despite having little cash on hand, bad credit, a small-to-medium size (often rented) apartment or house, and no way to collect or store a large quantity of firewood. But I doubt it.

POW, regarding your investment paying for itself in two years, that is a heck of a lot of fuel oil displaced; see above. And if you are a responsible burner that doesn't affect your neighbors' quality of life, this ordinance will not affect you financially or otherwise.

"Senate to vote on blocking EPA greenhouse gas regulations"

Just had to throw this out there. No one dare question the authority of the EPA with regard to woodstoves... but, we'll sure tell them to go pack sand if they mess with corporate interests.

Once again, our public servants just can't seem to act in accordance with their own position on things. If you can tell the EPA off in one case, you can tell them off in both cases... OR, if one group- private citizens- are going to be held accountable for their actions, then another group- corporations- are going to be held accountable, too.

Why, oh dear god why, is this so hard to see????

Why does Fairbanks need a locally managed air quality program with a PhD rocket scientist and opacity cops? How is this going to clean the air to EPA's standard and satisfy the local whiners? How will the local program correct all the sources of PM 2.5 (badly tuned oil burning furnaces, wood stoves, OWB, vehicle exhaust, aircraft exhaust, road dust, wildfires, ....)? Why can't the assembly enforce existing laws and go after the worst problems as a public nuisance? Why do we need grants from EPA and DOT to study the problem? Why does the assembly fear threats of EPA sanctions and military installation closure if they don't dance to the regutor's tune?

I own an outdoor wood boiler and I dont make a lot of money. The initial investment was tough to swallow but after two years of burning wood, the stove completely paid for itself and my fuel bill is less than a 100 dollars for the entire year. I do cut my wood early and allow plenty of time to dry. I have my wood cut for 2011 winter already. Dont punish us all becuase we are saving money and being responsible

I know looks can be deceiving, but most of the people who own wood/coal stoves and outdoor boilers in my neighborhood live in very big houses and drive nice cars. I'm not sure there's any danger of starving for them, especially for those who spent the money to purchase the outdoor boilers, which are very expensive.

This problem boils down to people being irresponsible with their burning, something that goes on 24 hours a day, every day. The problem is that wet wood, coal, and trash are being burned and the pollutants from that 24 hour a day, every day burning is affecting people who like to live a healthy lifestyle and breathe clean air.

The dirty burners do not notice, somehow, what they are doing. Perhaps they do not like to do anything outdoors in the winter. Perhaps their lung capacity is already damaged from cigarette smoking. Perhaps the money they think they are saving is more important than long-term health effects from heating their giant houses in such a dirty way. Perhaps they just don't feel any kind of community/neighborly responsibility to not be an a-hole.

In my neighborhood, people and animals (some animals have died) alike have been affected by living in this "triangle of death." The onus for fixing the problem is upon the dirty burners; I should not have to move or do anything differently in my life because of the problem they are creating. What the dirty burners are doing is illegal, immoral, and despicable.

Oh, and the summer smoke from dry trees miles and miles away? It has nothing on what we had here this winter. Nothing. It is hardly noticeable in comparison.

GVEA is smoking something- my last bill had a fuel 'surcharge' that was higher than my useage charge for hours used! That is something that needs to stop. Can the state regulators investigate GVEA please?

That there is something called a 'regressive tax, use.

All surcharges should be prorated per kilowatt charges so that those of us with small, efficient homes aren't paying for those whose usage is much greater.

And, again, we have to stop these commies in the borough assembly like Want who think it's a good idea to Spread the Wealth and buyout those who made poor heating choices.

As a good Republican, I know that if we subsidize the mistakes of those who made poor heating choices they'll never learn to be responsible, productive members of society.

NO SOCIALIST, UNFAIR REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH!

Interesting how Hopkins' proposal reads like punishment for people who heat with wood and Want's proposal reads like an open discussion to resolve an issue.

I'll agree that natural gas would undercut the energy costs around here and that until then wood is far more cost effective than oil and cleaner than coal-at least for keeping in the house. However, natural gas is still a 'pipe dream' until the near future. Yes, there is the trucking option but then you are using fuel to move fuel to provide energy. Some would argue it creates trucking jobs; ok, it does. It also adds overhead to the cost of the gas and we're looking for cheaper methods to heat our homes.

GVEA is smoking something- my last bill had a fuel 'surcharge' that was higher than my useage charge for hours used! That is something that needs to stop. Can the state regulators investigate GVEA please?

While I applaud Want for suggesting an alternative (a much better alternative) to what’s been proposed in the past, it still won’t solve the actual problem. You’ll never get total compliance because there are people out there that don’t want to spend the time, energy and money it would take to meet your standards. You need to provide them with a better alternative. Fairbanksgas has already hit the nail on the head in this matter.

I just thank the Lord the I/M program is dead or you guys would be sticking your hands in the taxpayers' pockets whining that it's our responsibility to buy new cars for folks whose cars couldn't pass emissions.

You know, the whole "It's terrible that you'd punish young families for trying to drive around in the winter" thing.

What is really disgusting is the apparent efforts by Hopkins and his minions (Jim Conner and Glenn Miller) to replace the IM program with PM 2.5. They have been actively soliciting EPA and DEC to declare our community as a non-attainment area. They claim to be acting in the interest of public health even though the wood stove program is only one part of the air quality problem. These people are not problem solvers. They are selfish regulating outsiders who need to be sent packing next November.

"A majority of the voters last fall said they want a plan devised locally."

Wrong. The majority of voters were somewhat aware that this wasn't a choice or vote.

"You can choose to go with plan A, with this group doing it, or Plan A, with another group doing it."

That's not a choice.

Borough studies? Ha ha. EPA studies? A laugh again.

Meanwhile, the same folks telling us the air is just so bad repealed I/M. The same folks still think recycling is just too expensive so they burn anything and everything.

Here's a vote: Drive on with this ridiculous mess, or throw the whole stinking bunch of dolts out of their precious offices and put some folks in who can at least act in accordance with their own position. It'd sure be a welcome change.

Penalizing poor young families for trying to stay warm in the middle of winter. Thats ridiculas to say the least.

"code enforcement officers " who are these people and how were they trained? Are they EPA approved? What will it cost to get them approved? How often will they recive training?

This whole thing is standard operating (SOP)procedures for the EPA. Better know as blackmail.

When is the borough ass. going to understand this? How stupid are we?

While the borough has been running around finding ways to ban wood burning and force everyone to burn high-sulfur heating oil, the EPA has been lowering the permissible limits for sulfur emissions.

EPA approves tougher pollutant limits

Standards will be felt most in areas using coal power plants

"Industry officials said the rules are “very stringent,” noting that power plants have reduced emissions of sulfur dioxide by 70 percent since 1980.

“Some communities will look to power plants for cuts” to meet the standard, said Dan Riedinger, a spokesman for the Edison Electric Institute, an association of power plant owners. It's likely the states will have to cast a wider net to reach attainment.”

If we spend millions of tax dollars on enforcing wood burning we will actually be increasing our sulfur emissions and be further out of compliance with these new standards. Instead of chasing our tails and making life more expensive for borough residents we need to head right for the ONLY solution to both problems, affordable natural gas! This is the only possible way that we will ever comply with the ever tightening EPA standards. In fact the EPA has already proposed tentative dates to reduce the PM 2.5 levels even further to a level that our city could never reach even if we outright banned all wood burning.

When if comes to the borough's "studies" I get a good laugh. The bias in the samples and methodology was guaranteed to meet the administrations predetermined outcome. This is the main reason that none of the data has been made available to the public for critical review. If you place your sensors across the street from known problem sources you can not qualify the readings as being indicative of the entire borough! If the men's room at the borough building smells funny does that mean that the entire staff is full of you know what?