In its never-ending quest to rid this town of its many evildoers, the Davis City Council on Tuesday will once again consider an ordinance to restrict wood burning inside the city limits.

Yes, this is another one of those solutions-in-search-of-a-problem deals we’ve all become accustomed to.

Worse yet, the council is being asked to support a “Declaration of Urgency to protect public health and safety.”

Considering we’ve never had such an ordinance in the 150 or so year history of this town, and considering that no other city in Yolo County has such an ordinance, and considering that most Davisites were still running their air conditioners through the record-setting heat of September and early October, the notion that we need some sort of “Declaration of Urgency” to deal with wood smoke is likely to qualify as the Stretch of the Century.

Notes the staff report: “The program being proposed by staff provides the authority and structure to assess fines and enforcement actions for egregious offenders, yet will be implemented with a strong focus on education.”

Ah yes, education. Trust me, there’s nothing more fun than having city officials try to “educate” the Ph.D.-laden citizens of the Second Most Educated City in America.

For those who resist such education, the ordinance “Provides for the assessment of fines via an administrative citation with fines up to $100 for an initial offense, $200 for a second offense and $500 for the third.”

Or about twice the price of a full cord of properly seasoned firewood.

For a fourth offense, even on a very cold night, the violator will be forced to live in Woodland.

Some are even suggesting Davis adopt the portion of the Sacramento ordinance that forces fireplace felons to attend “wood smoke awareness” training. I am not making this up.

And now, a few details of the program for those of you who fear you will never again be able to roast a marshmallow in your fireplace on Christmas Eve.

On so-called “no-burn” days, wood burning is prohibited unless you own a “U.S. EPA Phase II certified wood burning device or a pellet fueled wood burning heater.” If you can’t afford one of those expensive options, put on a sweater.

Unfortunately for all of us, those pushing to exempt wood stoves have chosen to ignore several inconvenient truths.

Citing official EPA emission rates, Tom Cahill, one of Davis’ renowned air quality experts, notes “Open fireplaces are about twice as bad as wood stoves per kg of wood burned, but the amount of wood burned and the duration of burning is 20 times higher for wood stoves than fireplaces.”

In other words, people with wood stoves tend to run them day in and day out for long periods of time, while most folks with open hearth fireplaces have a handful of short-duration fires for “aesthetic” reasons on special winter occasions. So who’s putting more smoke into the winter air here?

Even more telling, Cahill adds that “models used in a recent City of Davis study show the local ground level impact is enhanced for wood stoves because its cooler smoke tends to hang closer to the ground, compared to the generally hotter and more buoyant smoke from an open hearth fireplace.”

Clearly, if the goal of the ordinance is to keep smoke out of the air we breathe, it ought to first and foremost go after those who put a steady stream of smoke into the atmosphere on a regular basis, and leave alone those who only occasionally use an open hearth fireplace.

The Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, while noting that “The air quality in Davis currently meets federal standards,” points out that wood burning can lead to “nearest neighbor” complaints. Speaking of the exemption for wood stoves, the District warns that “these exemptions could potentially cause ‘nearest neighbor’ type impacts.” Furthermore, the District adds, “It should be noted that it is not known if the majority of ‘nearest neighbor’ complaints are generated by certified or uncertified” burning devices. “Allowing the operation of these devices could still result in ‘nearest neighbor’ complaints and might not achieve the ultimate policy goal.”

Amen to that.

Of the 120 days in the 2009-10 winter burn season, the city of Davis logged 16 complaints concerning wood smoke on “no-burn” days. That’s not much in a city of approximately 15,000 homes. Even more telling, no one from the city has determined the source of the wood smoke for any of the complaints, which would seem to be an elementary question to ask before crafting a wood-smoke ordinance.

In the 2010-11 season, there were 61 complaints on “no-burn” days, an increase to be sure, but still very, very low in the great scheme of things.

We also don’t know from the data if there were actually 61 separate individuals filing single complaints or a handful of individuals filing multiple complaints each time the “nearest neighbor” fired up his old wood stove.

Crafting an ordinance to take something valuable away from this town’s citizens without first ascertaining the source of the problem is folly.

But this is a town that likes to ban things. And once that mindset takes over, there’s no point in letting a few cold, hard facts get in your way.

— Reach Bob Dunning at [email protected]

Comments

comments