EverCurious
Gold Member
^ TODAY perhaps. In big cities that use /most/ of the electricity in the nation perhaps (THUS the "biased" news "only 30% so we can shut it down" bullshit.)
Example, folks in rural Alaska have no fucking choice but to burn wood to heat their houses. What's the percentage of houses that's burning wood for all their heating and hot water in America today? Should the EPA tell these folks who have no other choice that they cannot burn wood and force them to freeze to death; just so lower 48ers can get their feels about "saving the planet"?
Your stats are nationwide, they do not reflect the /reality/ of certain places who are just as American as everyone else.
Just putting that out there.
there are more people in Dallas County than the entire state of Alaska -
As of 1 January 2012 Alaska had a population of 731,449, and its 2017 population is estimated at 739,818. With a population of 710,231, according to the 2010 U.S. census, Alaska is the 48th most populous and least densely populated state.
just pointing that out there.
That's a good point - those 100k people in Fairbanks, Alaska (and other rural villages) mean jack shit to your social/political agenda so let em freeze to death. And you folks accuse the "other party supporters" of not caring. Two sides, one coin.
The worst part, the stupidest part, of that particular example only comes out if someone has the intelligence to look deeper. Like for example the argument of the wood stove thing is about 2.5 fine particulates; for comparison purposes second hand smoke is 3000-4000. Then research what happens when a tree is left to rot "naturally" in the forest - their CO2 is released into the atmosphere, the mold and fungus create a bunch of methane.
Ah but you /think/ ya'll are doing the "right thing" for the environment and that is /all/ that matters to the billion dollar political agenda of "green energy." Again, lower 48ers gotta get their feels about "saving the planet," and the lives of actual people, American lives, matter nothing to them.
/END RANT
My point was simply that the numbers are cooked to support their agenda. They don't look at the details and consequences, merely hype the biased numbers to look like its a problem, or in this case not a problem to get rid of wood stoves. (And for the record the new EPA regs made 80% of all wood stoves made non-compliant.)