67 ms·
OP doesn't comment on the air pollution from wood stoves, except to say it can be "cut in half". Half the pollution from wood stoves is still a lot of pollution
by dsizzle 5y ago
OP doesn't comment on the air pollution from wood stoves, except to say it can be "cut in half". Half the pollution from wood stoves is still a lot of pollution. I'm reminded of this essay by Sam Harris https://www.samharris.org/blog/the-fireplace-delusion https://www.samharris.org/blog/the-fireplace-delusion
- aaron695 5y ago100% this. It's only for pre existing fireplaces. Like pre-existing cigarette smokers. Even as a prepper you need to be dogfooding so you should limit stuff like this. But if you are going to do it... heres a little fan that uses the principal. I'm unsure if the wind chill is worse that mixing the heat..but it's a cute use of a Peltier https://www.amazon.com/WAPEMORK-Fireplace-non-Electric-Circulating-Accessorie/dp/B09BTVGHM8/ https://www.amazon.com/WAPEMORK-Fireplace-non-Electric-Circu...
- kseistrup 5y agoThis! As somebody who lives in an area where people mainly uses wood stoves to heat their houses during the winter, I think it's a terrible idea.
- phonypc 5y agoI like Sam. I've noticed several instances of him speaking/writing as if rural areas don't exist though. The sentence "If you are burning wood in the United States, Europe, Australia, or any other developed nation, you are most likely doing so recreationally" is just monumentally silly. It's also odd to reference the WHO on the harms of burning solid fuel (not just wood) for heat in an essay condemning recreational fire-burning. Anyway, it's all just an analogy for religion here. Not a serious treatment of the problem of air pollution.
- dsizzle 5y agoHe says “most likely” and only 20% live in rural areas. Also there are other sources of heat in rural areas.