A University of New England study in 2019 found that 14 people a year die unnecessarily in Armidale due to pollutants from wood heaters.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
However, any time council mentions potential plans to ban wood heaters in new developments people take to social media in a rage.
Firstly, there does seem to be an element of people spreading misinformation that any proposed bans will also be retroactive on existing wood heaters - something council has ruled out.
But then there's other people suggesting wood heaters are the only source of heating for a home, suddenly forgetting that electricity and gas exist.
I love a wood heater as much as the next person, they give off an enchanting glow and a radiant heat that it can be hard for other heaters to mimic.
But knowing that the smoke settles into the valley on wintry mornings causing untimely deaths it can be hard to grasp the hyperbolic arguments that stopping wood heaters will lead to people freezing to death or other extremes is short-sighted at best.
Outwardly it appears some people take a "rules for thee but not for me" stance, ignoring that the smoke kills people and arguing against modernisation.
I think we need some reflection on the social harm that having one kind of home comfort - when other methods are available - can have without such a confrontational stance.
I don't think many people would be arguing to put a wood heater in a new home if their loved ones were among the 14 each year who died of an asthma attack or smoke-related respiratory disease.
This really is a "first-world problem" so let's at least consider modern thinking and not be tied to the old ways.
Jacob McMaster
Editor