Quote of the Day
Burning your own fuel in your own house is about far more than the “aesthetic of it”, no matter how hard the papers try to tag it with that superficial label. A wood burner offers energy independence, and for that reason, like everything else that offers any kind of independence, they are considered a threat.
The existence of anyone or anything outside of the system, even in token or vestigial ways, threatens the idea that the system is even necessary. Therefore they must be attacked.
It’s an autoimmune response, a reflex; they can’t help it.
They need to know everything you’re doing, how you’re doing it, and why.
And, more importantly, they need you to be OK with that, to welcome it, even thank them for it.
They need you to know that is the safe; the normal; the only way the world works.
So, expect this messaging to continue until the ban is in place, or licenses are required, or they manage to wire a smart meter to a wood axe.
Kit Knightly
October 22, 2025
They’re Coming for Your Wood-Burning Stove. Again. – OffGuardian
While the article is referring to potential U.K. regulations it would only take an administration change in D.C, for the U.K. craziness to be imported with similar motivation.
Yup. Right down to how much water you use to flush your toilet. Then they think of something else/more.
And the longer it is allowed to go on. The nit-pickier it gets. Along with greater punishments for ever smaller offenses.
Then communism starts.
Where only those you don’t like get severely punished for minor infringements.
And your murderous friends get to walk free.
In the words of Solomon;
“There is nothing new under the sun.”
It’s all the same plays, with different players.
As Solomon’s statement was about human nature.
One can look up “The basic laws of human stupidity” for more insights on the matter.
As for wood stoves, fraud nullifies all contracts. Since “climate change” is a lie. It’s no real law, only naked power can enforce it.
When I was replacing a couple of toilets in the house, the contractor found one of the toilets I wanted locally, and another one had to be shipped up from California. Which was OK, because the one in California couldn’t be sold down there any more because it flushed too hard. WA state was in that window where they lag behind codifying the latest CA stupidity, so we could still get one. Apparently, these were the last two toilets of that model left.
I’m on well water and a septic system. It’s nobody’s damned business how much water my toilets use. I pay for electricity to get the water out of the ground, and electricity to pump septic tank water up to the drain field. I’d be fine with a toilet that was 4.0 gpf if it reliably got the poo out of my smallest rooms, a wild ride through the piping, and slammed it into the first chamber of my tank while yelling “Worldstar!”
I’ve heard of people going to Canada to buy toilets because the the 4.0 gpf types are still available there.
Wickard v Filburn, the 1942 case holding that your use of wheat grown on your own property and completely consumed on that property, never even leaving the county, let alone the state, has an effect on interstate commerce, so the national government can include that in its regulation has not been repealed, it was merely sleeping.
The rationale was that the small Colorado farmer/ rancher Filburn (emphasis on small here) was, by supplying part of the wheat he consumed, had (some non zereo effect on interstate commerce and so could be regulated, limited, and most importantly, taxed and penalized.
Ohio farmer – my Dad spent some time in a care home located on what had once been Filbert’s property – Filbert Lane was the address.
Thank you! I don’t know where I got the idea he was a Coloradoan. I know the state wasn’t mentioned in Law School. Maybe the lawsuit reminded me of my own grandfather’s independent cussedness — something my mother was ambivalent about. (?)
California has been strangling other means of heating and cooking other than electricity. No fireplaces, wood/pellet stoves, gas cooking or heating.
Considering the State’s inability to even provide enough electricity as it is-this is a very strange strategy. The only thing that makes sense is making you entirely dependent on the state with the benefit that they can turn off the electricity for any reason at anytime.
Turning the electricity off. Just in case turning the bank off for being a dissenter isn’t enough.
It has already happened here in the guise of air pollution regulations
That’s the excuse used in my small liberal city to ban fireplace use.
And then the forest circus allows/starts fires and let’s them our forests burn all summer.
Least that’s what they do here in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
Communist America is the “riptide of stupid”.
I live in rural Snohomish county on 5 acres. We have a nice, pretty efficient fireplace. A couple of years ago, BPA went through the adjacent neighborhood to clear out a tower line and dumped several big hemlocks and firs, and we asked the neighbors if we might have some of the wood. They said, “Take it all!” – we asked if they didn’t want some for their newly-built home and to our surprise, we learned that no new construction with wood-burning stoves or fireplaces were permitted in our area! Astonishing – surrounded every spring by a free or nominal fuel source and no way to utilize it.
In Los Angeles, no new fireplaces allowed since about 25 years ago for exactly that reason.
People are still suspicious about the Palisades fire that that might be one of the secret reasons for letting the place burn (that and the only people who can afford to rebuild anything are either much richer than the people who were removed by the clearances (yes, that’s a Scottish reference) or those who can build R3 or bigger structures (multiunit). Certainly the people who lived there LAST year were powerful enough to block that kind of infill.
I was watching an episode of the British show Escape to the Country recently and they portrayed a septic system as a downside to one of the houses they were looking at.
I was thinking: Are you really in the country if you are on a public sewer?
God forbid they look at a house with a well too!
My cousin had one outside Eureka, California. Home with a well, I mean. He used the well water only for watering his plants and his chickens, since the water table was fairly close to the surface. He had to pay an extra fee to the county or city or town because it was, after all, well water and suspect. He complained to me once that he wasn’t going to be feeding this well water to his family and he was in fact using town water for that. To eliminate that extra fee, he would have to cap the well and use town water to keep his plants green and chickens hydrated. I don’t know what happened since then, because the last time I thought to discuss this overreach with him was in 1989.
In a similar vein, in Southern California, my mother had to pay three dollars to the city because one of her two toilets were the old kind, first installed in 1958 when effectiveness overrode green theories. We finally installed a specially approved weak-flow toilet to stop this needless outflow of cash. She did manage to coordinate that change with a subsidy for senior citizens to buy a toilet, so we got it for just the cost of the toilet (My brother and I are fairly handy — not the third son, though).
This phenomenon is not new, nor is it news. And in many places like Kalifornia, Taxatwoshits and NY they have already made it virtually impossible to do ANYTHING without permission, taxes, licenses and threats of imprisonment. They will do what ever we allow them to get away with. And they WON’T quit until they no longer are wasting oxygen.