I agree, we are currently planning a new rural dwelling in the sub-alpine region of Victoria and we're planning for good insulation and solar hydronic as the only form of heating. There really is a pall of wood smoke on still winter days.

Every time I put the washing out. Every. Frickin'. Time. Thanks, elderly neighbours.

BTW what about the effect that open fires have of pulling cold air into a house and pumping hot air out the chimney, thus lowering the overall temperature of the house. This makes them actually less than 0% efficient, so they actually cool your house. (The Mythbusters did it so it must be true:
http://youtu.be/k17B6CFVeEA?t=9m19s )

Good start to the investigation. We live in a rural area of Northern NSW and collect our own wood from coppiced trees which are therefore endlessly renewable. We are on our own small property (50 acres) and have no neighbours with-in 600m and then only one. We have a slow combustion wood heater, I am unsure of it's efficiency level but as discussed, open fireplaces are basically useless. We also cook on the trivet top occasionally, using it as a proover for bread, to heat stews and soups and keep water boiled for tea, I am not sure how this measures into the equation as no gas is used to cook these things. I would hope when I need to replace mine I can purchase a more efficient model and some bureaucrat hasn't held back my options with inane red tape, as seems usually the case. We have a small 2 bedroom cottage with reasonable insulation, easy to heat with a single small size unit. We are not connected to the mains for power or water, collecting and storing all of our own and hotwater is solar with a gas backup, rarely used but never shower in the morning, ha ha ie work with nature so no reverse A/C for us

What about supply side environmental damage ? There is no mention of manufacturing and transport degradation for various heating units, what materials are involved for example, are there any rare earths used in the reverse cycle A/C's. And what about the Gas, is it CSG , in which case that ecological damage should be considered ie a more holistic investigation rather then the in your face particulates, even if the Gas is being used to generate power, the methane release alone a nasty GHG.

Along with insulation, what about the importance of thermal mass eg our mud brick cottage has only reasonable insulation but great thermal mass. I thought David Holmgren had done a study some time ago concluding that coppiced trees and an efficient wood heater was the least environmental damaging, albeit that was some years ago. I hope I can go on using woodfire heaters indefinitely, We use the equivalent of about 1 litre of petrol a fortnight I would guess to cut the wood. Then some sweat to split it, which I actually enjoy and beats going to a Gym to use a treadmill.

We are currently in Cambodia where they burn all rubbish in the side of the road, plastic, rags, bottles food scraps etc so I am very aware of particulate issues in urban areas.

At the end of the day the "problem" comes down to too many people.

My view is that using firewood in country districts, especially in wooded areas, will never be stopped. There are many reasons for this, not just fuel efficiency, including distance from power lines, sustainability, charm and amenity.

The issue seems to be concerned with open fireplaces, when what country houses need is good solar passive design, good open-plan thermal mass and heavy insulation, and not least a good quality slow combustion stove and/or pot-belly enhanced with heat transfer pipes and hot water boosting.

In Australia, like everything else, housing policy has been to whack up cheap timber-frame houses with an electic stove in the kitchen and an open fireplace in the lounge, usually over the other side of the house. As a result, rather than enjoying a comfortable 22 degress throughout the house, the kitchen and lounge are usually too hot while bedrooms and other areas are too cold.

I've lived in both, for most of my life in fact. Resolving the problem has only little to do with burning wood, or pellets or whatever may be available locally, but with the way the overall system is designed and hangs together.

There is in fact a health risk to every person from wood smoke, and not just those with cardiac/respiratory problems. The author is seriously misinformed!

Wood smoke smells indicate a health problem per health authorities. Health problems have to be stopped by law and public policy. Unfortuneately, the smells exist in the country as they do in the cities and driving in the country for a long distance to get to the cities, exposes people to unhealthy pollution causing stinging eyes and other health problems in even the healthy. The health problems from direct exposure and the indirect world wide health problems from global warming due to the black soot such as melted glaciers and droughts and extreme weather have led the U.N. to recommend a quick phaseout of all cordwood burning in developed countries. Ethics codes call for recognition of professonal authorities like the U.N.

Gasifier stoves have been developed with emission factors equal to oil so perhaps they could be used for the poor with permits in the country. But everyone else should follow the good example of the 70% who have switched to gas or propane. Zone heating with expensive propane can still save 50% on your heating bill. Free solar energy is streaming through windows to be trapped with cheap insulation like blankets, even the poor have. A free annuity or series of money payments for life can be created with insulation or cheap weatherization savings. Dollars spent on weatherization can reduce heat bills 50%. Quartz heaters can supply the radiant heat that allows thermostats to be turned down. An infared lamp can be rigged to radiate down on chairs from the ceiling with a dimmer switch to get the heat just right. Heat pumps are another alternative as governments are trning away from coal and carbon energy towards, hydro, wind, ocean thermal power, tidal power and other truly clean energy.

The Golden Rule incorporated into laws demands we care about our neighbours all over the world. If we don't, we suffer the fire and smoke from hell like conditions.

I have experiences I'd like to share living in 5 different places in Australia and New Zealand.

1. A suburb in Adelaide's North Eastern suburbs. Me I hardly used it, but I had an oil heater to heat and ceiling fans to cool. Quarterly electricity bills were about $66. (I lived alone), Neighbours heated with wood. Wood smoke was terrible. Local council was hopeless (and negligent in my opinion). I had to move because of the wood smoke. So I agree with the author. There should be a complete ban on solid fuel fires in the suburbs.

2. I moved onto acreage in the Adelaide Hills. Me I heated my home with a gas fire using gas bottles. I went through 2 bottles a year. I cooled my home with ceiling fans. My neighbours were far enough away that woodsmoke never bothered me. Rural burning off was not a big problem. I never did myself, but my neighbour did. He had to apply for a permit on the day of the burn, and it was limited by hours (10am - 4pm) and it was for control of the fuel load to prevent bushfire risk. No permits given over summer. I was happy there but moved for employment reasons.

3. I moved to a suburb of Wellington. I chose next to the sea to lessen any smoke risk. It was a huge mistake. The air was thick often, and the local council and regional council were useless in their response (they since measured pollution in the suburb - it was in excess of the allowable exceedences of the 50 micrograms per cubic metre - ie it was polluted), but it was only a little bit in exceedence, but it really was intolerable so I think the bar is set way too high. I moved as I was only renting, but the main reason was the smoke. Now I know I could never live in a New Zealand town or city.

4. I moved to a small acreage, what Kiwis call a lifestyle block.Me I heated my home with a heatpump, aka a reverse cycle air conditioner. There was no need to cool the house as the climate wasn't hot. It was supposedly rural but there were a lot of small blocks so it was perhaps better called ex-urban. My neighbour's woodheaters did cause me a lot of nuisance. This is where I don't agree with the author. If a wood heater is too close they can still cause nuisance. I would have banned them in an instance, but I didn't complain about them, as there is a worse reality in New Zealand and that is rural burning off. They don't burn off here once a year for managing fire risk. It is recreational, and they burn rubbish will-nilly, and it is almost completely unregulated. Burn off permits are given for months at a time. Conditions of the permits are not monitored, and are always breached, and the local and regional councils do not act on the breaches. They cause regular nuisance. I lasted a little over a year in that house and sold up and moved away because of the smoke and again because of useless council responses.

Where I am now, is rural again, and the neighbours are further away and the neighbours woodheaters cause only negligible nuisance (but they still do cause nuisance, but not enough to complain about) However rural burnoffs are a huge problem and my weekend gardening is curtailed on a weekly basis (I like gardening in the rain now, as it means it will be smoke free). Me I heat my home with a heat pump, and again there is no need to cool the home.

So in cities, towns (yes rural towns too) and suburbs, I would ban them outright.

In rural areas, nuisance woodheaters should be able to be shutdown (and yes one person's complaint should be able to cause any woodheater ordered off without the right of appeal, as nuisance is subjective and people shouldn't be exposed to nuisance).

And rural burning off should be regulated, nearly completely. Once a year in bushfire prone regions with lots of warnings for the neighbours maybe ok. Never in non bushfire regions, and certainly never like the New Zealand system.

And the Tasmanian forestry burns should just be stopped.

I live in a neighborhood with pellet burning stoves. The toxics and particulate matter coming from the pellet stoves are very lung and sinus irritating. We have had a serious decrease in health in the neighborhood since it was installed. One smoke caused heart attack, numerous smoke caused asthma, chronic bronchitis, COPD, siuns infection and migraine attacks and/or diagnosis since the stove was installed. Multiple cancer diagnosis. One was lung cancer in a young person (40) who had never used tobacco or lived/worked where exposed to other cancer causing substances except wood smoke. Pellets ARE WOOD.

No such thing as clean wood/pellet burning or safe levels of smoke!

Smoke can travel 700 miles. Smoke can stay near the ground up to 3 weeks. The toxics/particles are present even when the smell of smoke is gone.

Heating with wood is only 53% effiecient in perfect laboratory controlled burns. Much less in the real world.

Not just short term intense exposure but also Long term exposure to low-levels of wood smoke increases the risk of all diseases.

The US Surgeon General: research shows there is no safe level of ambient wood smoke. Wood smoke is harmful to human health at all levels!

The US EPA warns that exposure to a fraction of a nanogram of PAH increases our risk of developing cancer.

In many areas 80% of air pollution is residential indoor/outdoor wood burning; not traffic/industry.

Smoke contains several carcinogens, including benzene, benzo[a]pyrene, formaldehyde. Burning 1 kg of wood in a modern heater produces more benzo[a]pyrene than the smoke from 27,000 cigarettes; more benzene and formaldehyde than the smoke of 6,000 cigarettes.

Burning two cords of wood produces the same amount of mutagenic particles as: Driving 13 gasoline powered cars 10,000 miles each at 20 miles/gallon or driving 2 diesel powered cars 10,000 miles each @ 30 miles/gallon. These figures indicate that the worst contribution that an individual is likely to make to the mutagenicity of the air is using a wood stove for heating.

All forms of Outdoor fires are exponentially worse polluters! Including wood cooking and meat smokers!

Yard waste Composting, chipping, recycling, Propane recreation, cooking, campfires and electric meat smokers solve this problem!

Free radicals produced from wood smoke are chemically active for twenty minutes; tobacco smoke free radicals are chemically active for thirty seconds. Wood smoke free radicals attack our body’s cells and stress our immune systems up to forty times longer then tobacco smoke increasing our risk of ALL diseases and infections.

http://burningissues.org/car-www/medical_effects/fact-sheet.htm
www.familiesforcleanair.org/myths
www.MomsCleanAirForce.org

Smoke kills 60,000 U.S. Citizens a year; 3 million world wide. Respiratory illness is largest killer of infants. 4 People die daily in WA from Asthma attacks. Other ststaes have similar rates. Wood smoke is a major trigger. 1 in 10 children have Asthma. Infants who are exposed to wood smoke pollution early in life are 5 times more likely to be diagnosed with Asthma by age 5. Infants 17% increase in SIDS risk with wood smoke exposure.

Lung Cancer is the most prevalent, hardest to detect early and treat. It is the number one killer in the USA of all types of cancer. It is the number 2 cause of death from all diseases in the US. It kills more women then breast and cervical cancer combined.

73% of wildfires are human caused not lightening. 53% of lives, acres, structures lost and cost to fight fires are from human caused fires.

1 in 2 deaths in the USA had COPD as a cause/contributor but 1 in 2 are NOT cigarette smokers. 120,000 people die each year from COPD. 4 people every minute. 12 million cases are undiagnosed.

Dioxin from smoke most toxic substance on earth. Dioxin is passed from Mothers to infants.

Smoke triggers heart attacks.