Why don’t we hear of a big fuss being made about possible fumes emanating from all the fireplaces and charcoal hibachis and so forth that people seem to like so much? It must come out into the room enough to coat your lungs like somebody’s cigaret is supposed to do many yards away in a restaurant. And it would contain plenty of tar as I saw this commercial on the tv about a log you can buy and it will automatically clean off the tar on your chimney. It showed a labelled simulation of the tar being removed Even though there was also this disclaimer at the bottom of the picture that using this log was no substitute for actually cleaning your chimney, they couldn’t have been making up the part about the tar. I’m surprised some group hasn’t lobbied and made everybody brick up their fireplaces–
Well actually don a fuss is being made, I think L.A. has banned hibachis and other conventional charcoal barbeques. A lot of jurisdictions have building codes that ban wood burning fireplaces now. A Canadian friend of mine lived in New Hampshire for a few years and he said a lot of people there heat their homes with wood in the winter and he said that driving through some of the valleys in winter was like driving in a thick fog (of woodsmoke). The fuss has begun.
The smoke from a properly designed fireplace goes UP the chimney, and doesn’t cause significant discomfort or health problems in most people. (The environmental effects of burning wood as fuel are a concern, but since we burn so little wood in this country, there are worse threats).
If all smokers would show a little consideration and carry chimneys around with them, there wouldn’t be so much fuss about non-smoking areas.
Oh, and read the label on a new hibachi or kerosene heater: “DO NOT USE INDOORS. PRODUCES CARBON MONOXIDE.”
My WAG: One cigarette may not cause a lot of problems, but consider many people smoking, for hours, day after day in a restaurant. That would build up a considerable amount of smoke. Compare this to a fire going with a flue immediately above it. If smokers in restaurants would allow a thin pipe to the outside to be mounted near their cigarette, that might be analogous.
Also, it seems the majority of fireplaces are in private homes, where people may also freely smoke cigarettes if they are the owner of said home.
California targets fireplaces in smog fight
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/West/12/09/burn.ban.ap/
Just a nitpick - Carbon Monoxide (CO) is heavier than air (when air and the CO are at the same temp) and CO tends to collect at the bottom of the room. So if you ever see someone passed out on the floor from CO exposure, think twice before you bend/kneel to help the person.
For CO - The OSHA PEL is 50 parts per million (ppm). OSHA standards prohibit worker exposure to more than 50 parts of the gas per million parts of air averaged during an 8-hour time period.
Room polluted with cigarette smoke has Carbon Monoxide level of 20ppm which is much below the Osha Limit. From the same Cite :
Carbon Monoxide 2.04 +/- 2.55 ppm U.S. homes
Carbon Monoxide 2.5 - 28 ppm Offices, restaurants, bars, arenas
Carbon Monoxide 3.1 - 7.8 ppm Home kitchens with gas stoves
Carbon Monoxide 1 - 5 ppm Median outdoor conc. in cities, 1979
Carbon Monoxide 0 - 3 -27 ppm Max. 1 hr. average outdoor conc.
Carbon Monoxide 0 - 3 - 22 ppm Max. 1 hr. average indoor conc.
Carbon Monoxide 20 ppm Room polluted with cigarette smoke
Because the people who complain about 2nd hand smoke are a bunch of self-important, whining, ignorant, cry-babies who want to get their own way, not because their fears are actually grounded in reality.
I’m pretty sure that the ‘chimneysweeping logs’ thing is a scam, but you’re right about the tar.
Let’s keep it in the realm of GQ, shall we, Hail Ants?
Wood smoke is a known carcinogen and the particulates aren’t so great for you either.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=3&q=http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/92046.pdf&e=1547
Woodstoves are now required to meet EPA regulations. They use either catalytic converters or (I think), a secondary burn system. Fireplaces are obviously much less efficient, but as other posters have pointed out, the smoke goes up the fireplace. If you have a smoky fireplace, it can get pretty unpleasant. Most people don't light fires enough to worry about the minor smoke inhalation -- worries about secondhand smoke are due to the continuous day after day nature of the exposure.Sorry, CO rises. That’s why you’re supposed to install carbon monoxide detectors high on the wall.
I think you’re thinking of carbon dioxide. Though how you’d ascertain whether someone was passed out from CO or CO[sub]2[/sub] poisoning, I don’t know, so I think your advice holds. 
My wife does worry about inhaling fumes from fireplaces. She’s asthmatic, and often we can’t even eat at Cracker Barrel if they’re running the fireplace.
What about fumes from gasoline? I was just at the pump and noticed a sign that said something to the effect that long term exposure to gasoline fumes has been known to cause cancer in laboratory animals.
Why no outrage over that? Does the average non-smoker get more harmful carcinogens from the occaisional cigarette smoke wafting by than they do at the pump every few days?
:smack: you are right. CO with molecular weight (12+16 = 28) is slightly less heavier than air (Average mol wt about 29).
Sorry about that- but the rest holds
While you were at the pump, did you notice the flexible sheath on the nozzle that's part of the vapor recapture system mandated by the EPA? The one that's supposed to capture those fumes? Both to reduce human exposure to the gas and reduce formation of smog?Yes, but I always am able to smell gasoline. I suppose that’s different though. I didn’t really mean to be facetious, just that I’ve noticed a great number of products/items that people use on a daily basis that have warnings of cancer detected in laboratory tests and such. I think there’s a brand of gum or mints that has such a warning, as well as an artificial sweetener, and I believe a shampoo of some sort. I’m just curious why all the focus on harmful carcinogens is focused on cigarettes (or at least it seems to be).
Why don’t people worry about inhaling fumes from fireplaces like they do about cigarettes?
Because wood smoke tends to have an agreeable odor, whereas tobacco smoke tends to have a noxious odor. Also, fireplace smoke generally does not permeate a room like cigarette smoke.
Sorry.
But I think my answer (while a tad sarcastic) can still fall under GQ, in reference to the idea of ‘why people don’t consider the health risks of wood burning fumes like they do tobacco’.
Not because of any components of the smoke, but because smoking cigarettes is viewed as being selfish & indulgent, while using a fireplace is more utilitarian (or even quaint & romantic!)
I don’t smoke BTW…