[wldlyinaccurate]

I'm not disagreeing that wood burners have a negative effect on air quality, but there are plenty of valid reasons to burn wood for heating. Not having access to a stable uninterrupted electricity supply is one reason. Cost is another reason. A good cast iron wood stove can be quite efficient and will continue to put out heat long after the wood has finished burning.

Yes, we should all aim to pollute less. But we should not attach stigma to things that for many people is their only choice of heating, transport, etc.

[AnthonyMouse]

> Not having access to a stable uninterrupted electricity supply is one reason.

Non-electric heating systems use relatively little electricity, to the point that a small inexpensive solar panel and battery would suffice. Some don't require any. Also, this criteria doesn't apply to the vast majority of locations which do have access to the power grid.

> Cost is another reason.

Cost is generally regarded as an invalid reason for pollution. Surely it costs less to dump industrial waste in the river as well.

Also, how much money is your health worth to you?

> A good cast iron wood stove can be quite efficient and will continue to put out heat long after the wood has finished burning.

This kind of system is less efficient than modern heating systems designed for fuel efficiency, which run only when they're needed and only to the extent they're needed. Storing heat in metal rather than burning fuel as needed means burning more fuel at the start and less later, which means a greater temperature variation and more fuel required to maintain the same minimum temperature, which exacerbates the level of pollution being generated.

> But we should not attach stigma to things that for many people is their only choice of heating, transport, etc.

We should attach a stigma to things that have negative externalities, because they have negative externalities. If some people can't afford it then give them money instead of overlooking the harm they cause.

[gambiting]

>>Cost is generally regarded as an invalid reason for pollution. Surely it costs less to dump industrial waste in the river as well.

You know, I'm feeling idealistic like this quite often, but then the reality hits hard sometimes. In Poland where I'm from apparently 35% of residential properties still use coal for heating in 2020, which to my modern sensibilities is insane, but then I speak to some of my family living outside of the cities and the reality is:

1) there is no mainline gas supply, so gas is not really an option, unless you want to pay a lot of money to have an external tank installed at your property(look at point 3)

2) electricity is far too expensive to use for heating, every back of a napkin calculation shows that it would simply eat your entire salary to heat using electricity in colder months. Electricity in Poland is both hugely expensive and almost entirely from fossil fuels, we produce most of our electricity from coal power plants(and building more of them!). I can keep telling people that "surely their health is more important than money" but it would literally by a question of "heat or food for the month" if they used electric heaters.

3) there are some "eco" options like converting your boiler to eco-pellets, but even with EU grants, realistically, it's still like 2-3 months worth of salary to fit a new boiler for a lot of people. Simply not an option.

4) coal is very very cheap. You can buy supply that will last you entire winter for about ~400USD, maybe less if you're willing to burn poorer quality coal(which theoretically shouldn't be burnt anymore but yeah good luck enforcing it).

>>If some people can't afford it then give them money instead

Again, that's cool as an idea, that's just not how it works in reality.

[wldlyinaccurate]

If you think the presence of a power grid is the same as having power 24/7, you need to spend some time in other parts of the world. In some places you are lucky to have power for 12 hours a day.

You're looking at this from a position of privilege. When I say "cost is another reason", what I'm really saying is that many people literally can't afford the electricity or the electric heater itself. The vast majority of the world's population earn no more than a few US dollars a day. They are saving for their next meal and hoping they can afford to have their shoes repaired soon. They aren't in a position to consider how they can be more environmentally friendly. They just want to survive.