Washington Post Wants You To Stop Using Wood In Your Fireplace

The doomsday cult wants to restrict you from using natural gas fireplaces, wants to restrict natural gas heat for your homes, restrict coal energy, do away with nuclear, and make you dependent on unreliable wind and solar

From the screed

In 50 years, my father-in-law has never run out of wood.

Since building a wood-heated cabin in Maine in the early 1970s, he has started each summer collecting balsam, birch and maples that fell or died over the winter. That’s kept the wood pile stacked and the cold at bay.

Many fireplace lovers — myself once included — assume burning wood to stay warm and cozy is a climate win: trees regrow, suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and keep fossil fuels in the ground if forests are managed responsibly. My father-in-law’s forest in Maine is as vigorous as always.

But my intuition was wrong, according to hundreds of scientists who have examined the question. Thanks to the physics of combustion, wood emits 2.5 times as much CO? than natural gas and 30 percent more than coal when burned for heat, except in a few narrow circumstances. When it comes to nasty particulates lodging in our lungs and organs, it’s far worse than any fossil fuel.

Oh, piss off.

That doesn’t mean we should extinguish fireside nights. After all, fireplaces emit a tiny, tiny fraction of total emissions. But we can dramatically improve what we burn and where we source it.

Here’s how to burn better (and why electricity is still the hottest thing around).

Yeah, I’m done, these people are such nags.