This guest essay by Rebecca Freedman, an emission specialist with the British Columbia Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport, expands on a comment posted at The Woodpile. We hope it prompts a dialogue among those whose work involves communicating with the public about wood heating.

I commented in response to the Wood Smoke Emission Reductions Through Public Education article, in which John wrote:

“The lack of good quality public information is not for lack of intelligence or creativity. I think the biggest reason why emission reduction through public information is in its infancy is because it is a very difficult task and that the agencies with resources, like government and manufacturers, are populated by technologists and marketing specialists, not sociologists and educators.”

The statement piqued my interest because I work for the government of British Columbia and, with both a marketing and education background, I believe in the critical role that public education and behaviour change must play in reducing wood smoke emissions. I run a province-wide woodstove exchange program, giving funding and capacity to local governments to promote exchanges, offer incentives, and deliver education. We currently have 23 programs running and over 3000 exchanges in three years.

Household energy strategy in tough times

When homeowners fear high energy prices, winter power outages or loss of income they turn in big numbers to wood heating. It is a recognized pattern that’s been apparent each time people lose confidence in conventional energy price and supply. This response is perfectly logical for people living outside the urban core because a wood stove installation is relatively inexpensive, firewood can be bought fairly cheaply (or scavenged) and the wood stove can keep the house warm without electricity. The thinking is that if everything goes to hell in a hand basket a wood stove can help get you through. That makes firewood a strategic fuel resource for families.

This is part of a doctoral thesis by Wendy Milne of Ontario, Canada, who studied at the University of Guelph rural studies department, in a program dealing with sustainable rural communities. Wendy was developing the idea of energy literacy, which has to do with how average people manage their energy use, how it affects their lives and how much control they have over their energy choices.

Most people who use conventional fuels for home heating have a relationship with the process that consists of paying the fuel bill and adjusting the thermostat. They know little about the system and are helpless if anything goes wrong. Wood heat is different and what follows is the most thorough exploration of that difference we've seen. JG

It may seem a strange title for a commentary about a form of home heating that is often seen as quaint and dated. But if politics is the process by which we decide how to manage our lives together, then yes, there certainly is a politics of wood heating. Some people heat with wood and like it, and other people think it is a terrible way to heat houses, and there you have the makings of a contest of ideas and therefore politics.

Wood is a renewable fuel because young trees grow up to replace those harvested for fuel. That’s a simple enough statement, but there is much more to consider when you look into the details.

The use of wood as a heating fuel does not contribute to global warming and climate change the way fossil fuels do. When oil, gas and coal are burned, the carbon they contain (which was absorbed from the atmosphere by plants millions of years ago) is oxidized to carbon dioxide (CO₂), the main greenhouse gas. In effect, the combustion of fossil fuels releases ancient carbon, thereby increasing the atmospheric concentration CO₂.