Wood heaters are estimated to be responsible for more pollution-related deaths than all the cars on our roads. This national map shows which areas are affected the most.
This is about as credible as the ANU study that said dozens of people were being killed in the ACT every year. It’s a study commissioned, and written by the every people who have already decided that wood heaters are bad. If we are banning wood heaters, then we should ban fossil fuel cars as well. What a joke. This just stinks of “take away my privileges for my own good Daddy”.
Just got rid of my fuel sipping crossover and went full electric and boy is it nice. A week so far and I just passed 69% (nice). Im going to be really pleased if I can get two weeks out of one charge. And the price to recharge? Less than $20 usd. About half of my weekly 10 gallons of 81 unleaded.
If we are banning wood heaters, then we should ban fossil fuel cars as well.
The article specifically mentions that fewer deaths are attributable to vehicle emissions than to wood heaters:
The Centre for Safe Air at the University of Tasmania estimates long-term exposure to wood-heater smoke causes 729 premature deaths every year in Australia, which is more than the deaths attributable to emissions from the national fleet of 20 million vehicles, or from energy generation, or even bushfires.
Come on, this study is extremely poorly done. For starters, the lead researcher has been advocating to ban wood heaters for over 15 years, and has never done a study that has found anything that high mortality rates. Second, they assume that there is a blanket level of a PM2.5 percentage air pollution caused specifically by wood heaters evenly over Australia. This means that they are assuming an even wood heater pollution level (at a rate that is not scientifically backed, and whjile they may try to justify it, the reality is that it is pulled out of their arse) over the whole country. It is not based on actual measurements taken, there was poor and biased methodology of coming to this level. It does not take account of seasonal variations, or the fact that wood heaters are more common in areas with lower population density. The population functions they use rely on research done in North America and Europe, populations with different health concerns and living conditions. Populations, which have a higher level of air pollution and consistently worse air quality.
I will admit, that yes there is obviously health concerns from wood heaters. But this study has serious methodological concerns, heavily relies on insufficiently modeled methodologies, with poor input numbers, and worst of all is potentially biased by the people who wrote it have long standing advocacy positions. It’s like asking Exxon Mobile to make a study on the health impacts of fossil fuel cars.
This is about as credible as the ANU study that said dozens of people were being killed in the ACT every year. It’s a study commissioned, and written by the every people who have already decided that wood heaters are bad. If we are banning wood heaters, then we should ban fossil fuel cars as well. What a joke. This just stinks of “take away my privileges for my own good Daddy”.
This, but unsarcastically. It’s 2025 and people are still buying huge 4WD diesels to drive through the city to the office.
Just got rid of my fuel sipping crossover and went full electric and boy is it nice. A week so far and I just passed 69% (nice). Im going to be really pleased if I can get two weeks out of one charge. And the price to recharge? Less than $20 usd. About half of my weekly 10 gallons of 81 unleaded.
The article specifically mentions that fewer deaths are attributable to vehicle emissions than to wood heaters:
Calling bullshit on that number…
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-24/air-pollution-modelling-university-of-melbourne-traffic/102015778
Come on, this study is extremely poorly done. For starters, the lead researcher has been advocating to ban wood heaters for over 15 years, and has never done a study that has found anything that high mortality rates. Second, they assume that there is a blanket level of a PM2.5 percentage air pollution caused specifically by wood heaters evenly over Australia. This means that they are assuming an even wood heater pollution level (at a rate that is not scientifically backed, and whjile they may try to justify it, the reality is that it is pulled out of their arse) over the whole country. It is not based on actual measurements taken, there was poor and biased methodology of coming to this level. It does not take account of seasonal variations, or the fact that wood heaters are more common in areas with lower population density. The population functions they use rely on research done in North America and Europe, populations with different health concerns and living conditions. Populations, which have a higher level of air pollution and consistently worse air quality.
I will admit, that yes there is obviously health concerns from wood heaters. But this study has serious methodological concerns, heavily relies on insufficiently modeled methodologies, with poor input numbers, and worst of all is potentially biased by the people who wrote it have long standing advocacy positions. It’s like asking Exxon Mobile to make a study on the health impacts of fossil fuel cars.
You have a cat converter on your coonara?