Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on February 7, 2007

Click here to view bill details.

why not a woodburner? Why just the costly pellets? Some of the woodburner stoves and furnaces are pretty efficient.

Besides, isn't the growing season for corn less, I mean what about the oxygen output of trees, corn, etc. Which do we need more? Also cooling and shade etc. I don't see a tax break for wood burning without serious data.

Yes, we are in tough times, but there will need to be a period of transition between manufacturing as our main means of income and (also pollution) and being a part of the solution instead of being part of the PROBLEM. We put all of our eggs in one basket. That is never a good idea. Now we are paying for it. In a big way. It's going to take some mopping to get through this, but we will.

To be just another way of subsidizing another industry that cannot stand on its own two feet. Let market forces rather than tax breaks be the engine that drives consumer decision making.

MAYBE we need some intentional intervention such as this FINE bill. Let's pass this before we're all treading water.:)

SO when you see GOOD LEADERSHIP like this, people who can see that "what we've BEEN doing" isn't really getting us anywhere GOOD, that they can correct for that with thoughful leadership and legislation. That's why I elect good leaders, so that they can have forethought and solve problems. That's what this bill does. Thank goodness.

has gotten us GLOBAL WARMING! Not that we are aware, let's use some of that human genius to solve the problem. Make corrections. This legislation is genius.

Introduced by Rep. Neal Nitz on February 7, 2007, to authorize a refundable income tax credit equal to 20 percent of the cost of buying and installing in a residence a biomass-burning heater, meaning one that burns pellets made from wood, corn or switchgrass, but not a traditional wood-burner. Referred to the House Energy and Technology Committee on February 7, 2007. Reported in the House on March 14, 2007, with the recommendation that the bill be referred to the Committee on Agriculture. Referred to the House Agriculture Committee on March 14, 2007.

lol

This is one of the greatest ideas our leaders have had in a while. Republican leaders, although the democrats would just tax more and spend more, even though Michigan is the 2nd highest taxed state in the Union. Corn is grown here, sold here, and consumed here. If you are against this due to some propaganda of global warming, which hasn't been proven, global climate change yes, warming maybe not. Better check with Albert Gore on this one.

And if there was it would be because of China and all their polution, not the USA. This bill is a good idea to promote michigan. Wood pelets are made here, corn is grown here and several corn and wood stoves are made in the USA. Mine Is. Market forces my behind, the rest of the world doesn't play by the same rules and regulations as the USA. People who believe in Global Warming are nuts, It is unproven the scientists don't agree and they are experts

Something rather odd happened the other day. If you go to NASA's Web site and look at the "U.S. surface air temperature" rankings for the lower 48 states, you might notice that something has changed. Then again, you might not. They're not issuing any press releases about it. But they have quietly revised their All-Time Hit Parade for U.S. temperatures. The "hottest year on record" is no longer 1998, but 1934. Another alleged swelterer, the year 2001, has now dropped out of the Top 10 altogether, and most of the rest of the 21st century – 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 – plummeted even lower down the Hot 100. In fact, every supposedly hot year from the Nineties and this decade has had its temperature rating reduced. Four of America's Top 10 hottest years turn out to be from the 1930s, that notorious decade when we all drove around in huge SUVs with the air-conditioning on full-blast. If climate change is, as Al Gore says, the most important issue anyone's ever faced in the history of anything ever, then Franklin Roosevelt didn't have a word to say about it. And yet we survived. So why is 1998 no longer America's record-breaker? Because a very diligent fellow named Steve McIntyre of climateaudit.com labored long and hard to prove there was a bug in NASA's handling of the raw data. He then notified the scientists responsible and received an acknowledgment that the mistake was an "oversight" that would be corrected in the next "data refresh." The reply was almost as cool as the revised chart listings. Sunday, August 12, 2007 Mark Steyn