Noxious Emissions from Your Neighbours' 'Wood' Burners? Here Are the Rules.
Jordan Kelly • 5 March 2025

Breathing in Foul-Smelling Emissions from Over the Fence? House Filling up with Toxic Fumes? Getting Your Washing Smoked Out? Here Are Your Rights.

Back around New Year, when the temperatures were baking hot and the sun was scorching, I considered the timing ideal to haul out an almost boutique's worth of beautiful clothes I'd had in storage, since my globe-trotting lifestyle got placed on a decade-long hold.


Now, my washing machine happens to be housed in my garage. So here I was - on this beautiful hot and sunny mid-summer day - with colour-sorted clothes, many bagged up in delicates bags, and hundreds of wooden coathangers strewn around my large back garden . . . a park-like back garden overlooked directly by an imposing big two-storey house with only a tiny back yard of its own . . . and a woodburner's chimney that directs pretty much straight down onto my washing line.


I was out there, on that baking hot day for hours (and hours and hours) putting the painstakingly sorted clothes through short gentle cycles and then strategising how on earth to get them all onto one Hills hoist clothes line . . . which I achieved with considerable ingenuity, involving but not limited to, clothes hangers hanging off of clothes hangers and garments pegged vertically, horizontally, and diagonally.


The Most Toxic Woodburner Fumes I've Ever Smelled . . . On This Mid-Summer Day


Finally, I went indoors. Emerging to check with pride and satisfaction on my productivity and creativity a couple of hours later, I found (wait for it) the neighbours' wood burner (you know, the neighbour with the large windows that look straight down onto my yard) pumping out the most toxic fumes I've ever smelled a wood burner emit. On this mid-summer day.


To cut the rest of the story mercifully short, I've spent the ensuing seven or so weeks washing, re-washing, washing, re-washing and repeating that same cycle over and over again - as I pull yet another lot of stench-permeated clothes from one of the large airtight sealed crates and other containers I have had to source to seal them up in, in the interim . . . although they'd already stenched out my living room in the meantime.


Truly, they smelled PUTRID. After multiple re-washings I've had to surrender to defeat and some have had to be thrown away. I'm STILL going through the process (the smoke-out having occurred YET AGAIN while I was in the re-washing and re-hanging-out process). And some have been washed so many times that they've lost their structure.


My initial response to the occurrence was to hand the neighbour a bag of freshly picked plums over the back fence and a sugar-sweet plea for future consideration . . . explaining, particularly, the very special nature of the hundreds of clothing items I was trying to process (or now, re-process).


Freshly-Picked Plums & An Uber-Polite Plea Didn't Work


With the repeating of the incident (the plums and the plea didin't work), I finally wrote to the neighbour, telling them of the days and days I've spent trying to save as many of my beautiful (and some especially sentimental) clothes as possible, and the hundreds of dollars I have spent on multiple large bottles of eucalyptus oil, peppermint oil, Dettol, commercial-sized boxes of washing powder, containers and new delicates bags. And that's without even considering the monetary value of the trashed clothing that I've had to throw away, and that which I might yet still have to assign to the wheelie bin.


But . . .  it's all fallen on completely unsympathetic ears, shall we say.


A letter arrived (in response to my own request) saying - in essence - that they'd be doing it again any time they wanted. What's more, the letter read (and I have no idea why this was included, but here we go), they'd be taking down their net curtains across their back windows. Maybe I'm meant to find that threatening or something. I don't. What I do find it, is astounding how little regard the home's inhabitants must have for their own privacy. All I can say is, I do hope they don't get around their house naked. It wouldn't be something I'd be keen that I or any of my visitors should witness.


In the irony of ironies, while I was in Wellington yesterday, the not-so-neighbourly-neighbours over the back - or one of the property's apparently quite numerous inhabitants of various age groups - apparently turned up at my door wanting to involve my attending tradespersons, in my absence, in the matter. What said woman - with her letter in hand - didn't know, was that said tradies were here (a) getting a previously non-opening window opening again to get some additional rectifying airflow through the house, and (b) trying to work out where to relocate my washing line to i.e. out of the reach of said neighbours' noxious emissions.


The Word from the Local Council


Now, in the meantime, quite a few people have become acquainted with my clothes recovery mission . . . from the local chemist who recommended the eucalyptus oil, to the friend who came to help me sort those that were intended for a recycling boutique, to a few other friends who visited and commented on the smell of the clothes, and/or who asked why I had large containers of clothes around the house. (Oh, AND my neighbour on one side, who had advised that he wouldn't exercise in his driveway such was the stench in the air on the day in question.)


Those who braved the up-close sniff test, advised me to call the local Council and ask what the policy was concerning the burning of rubbish in domestic wood burners.


So I did. And here is part of the core intel provided by the Council's Environmental Services Manager:


Firstly, this is an issue which is covered extensively in the Health Act 1956, Section 29 Nuisances, and Part 4 of the Bylaws - Prevention of Nuisance from Fire and Smoke.


At any time, therefore, writes the department head, an affected resident should:


" . . . telephone (number provided) and log a service request about a smoke nuisance, this will then be logged for one of the Environmental Services Team to attend.

 

"The Customer Services Team will then load the service request, with the details you have provided and pass this onto an Environmental Services Team Member.


"An Environmental Services Team member will attend the property and make an assessment of the discharge to air, if it is still occurring when we arrive. They may engage with the owner if they are home to gather more information. We will educate the owner about not burning rubbish in their fireplace.

 

"If the issue continues, we may engage the support of the Greater Wellington Regional Council in relation to illegal discharge air."


Regional Council Takes Serious Approach to Air Pollution from Home Heating


Greater Wellington Regional Council works under the Resource Management Act 1991 and has a specific air pollution hotline.


From GWRC's website:


"Concerned about air pollution?


"If you are being affected by unpleasant or excessive amounts of chimney smoke, dust or agrichemical spray, call our Environmental Hotline on 0800 496 734.


"We measure levels of air pollution from traffic and home heating emissions and check that our air quality meets national standards and guidelines to protect the health of our communities.


"Everyone deserves clean air to breathe. Breathing polluted air can lead to respiratory (lung) and cardiovascular (heart) problems. Children and the elderly are especially vulnerable to air pollution. We can all be part of keeping our air clean."


The Ministry of the Environment has guidance about wood burners and the rules here:


https://environment.govt.nz/guides/authorised-wood-burners/frequently-asked-questions/

 

"My neighbour’s chimney is producing a lot of smoke, what can I do?"


"Your local regional council may have rules in its regional plan that prohibit or limit smoke from chimneys. You can call your regional council and bring this to their attention.


"Smoke from home heating appliances such as wood burners causes increases in ambient air pollution which can cause adverse health effects in your community. If the appropriate fuel is burned (such as only firewood in wood burners) and if it is used correctly, this can help minimise pollution."


"Can a wood burner be exempted from complying with the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality?"


"No. The standards were introduced to ensure a baseline level of national consistency. Allowing exceptions to the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality would go against the intent of the standards and would compromise their integrity."

Other News, Reviews & Commentary

by Jordan Kelly 21 April 2025
AI & Robotics Expert Provides Commentary on Skinny's New 'Brand Ambassador'
by Jordan Kelly 18 April 2025
Err . . . No Conflict of Interest Here, At All?
by Jordan Kelly 18 April 2025
You Know It's Bad When Even Mainstream Medical Journals Are Forced to Report On It
by Jordan Kelly 18 April 2025
More on the BUPA international chain of houses-of-horror . . .
by Jordan Kelly 18 April 2025
I've Been Tracking Abuse-in-Aged-Care-Facilities for A While Now . . . and Something HAS to Be Done About this Almighty Horror Show
by Jordan Kelly 18 April 2025
I'm SO Glad I Manage to Survive Without A Cell Phone . . .
by Jordan Kelly 26 February 2025
Americans are in love with Karoline Leavitt, the new, 27-year-old Whitehouse Press Secretary. She is eloquent, has a razor-sharp wit and a speed-of-light response formulation time, is meticulously prepared . . . and is fiercely loyal to the boss. However . . . At this morning's press briefing she showed a crack - a potential big negative -in her otherwise impeccable and impenetrable modus operandi. The layman audience didn't pick it up; the glowing compliments continued to avalanche in. But I saw a hint of the old politician and traditional press secretary sleight of hand: When a reporter asked her about the seriousness of tonight's deadline for all Federal government staff to respond to Elon Musk's / DOGE's "send us 5 things you did last week" V2 email, she pulled out the old "reframe the question and monologue it back to something positive and be emphatic to take the emphasis off your redirection" trick. (It's between 9.47 minutes and 13.54 minutes in. Particularly note the clarity and simplicity of the second reporter's key question i.e. will Federal employees be fired if they ignore Musk's email for a second time ? Watch .) There it was . . . that tired old advice STILL given out to politicians by their media training PR consultant hacks. I've commented on this previously here . And while I think it's disingenuous to do it at all, it's wholly inadvisable to do it if you're not particularly good at it. Under the headline, ' Minister of Police vs Jack Tame ', I gave an in-action example, including with the link to the interview and the timestamp at which Mitchell embarrassed himself mightily (albeit he bulldozed on, completely oblivious). While Leavitt employed the technique (which I prefer to call a "tactic") skilfully, that skill was more of a mechanical one in her case.. Whereas, when Trump uses it (which he does frequently), he's a master at it. His charismatic natural slide into an alternative impassioned point or story is so natural. So, well . . . Trump. Trump will always get away with it. It's baked into his style. But Leavitt will only get away with it for as long as the puppy love phase lasts and her halo continues to shine so brightly. At some point, if she employs it too regularly, the average citizen out there in viewer land will realise that she's not actually answering the question. I don't think she'll ever be seen as negatively as Biden's "press secretary" (if you could call her that) Karine Jean-Pierre, of course, but Leavitt's podium is at such a currently great height that she has a long way to fall if she does. Notwithstanding her exuberant youth, captivating good looks and "don't fck with me" forceful manner, there's one thing that pisses off the press and the punters alike. And that's repeatedly not giving straight answers to straight questions. So it was a disappointment to see her pull this one out the bag so early in her tenure as hallowed Whitehouse Press Secretary - since its emergence doesn't augur well going forward. I mean, just to know that she would resort to it whenever she felt it expedient. The Observational Minutiae By way of further observation, watch carefully as the second reporter comes in with a determination to get the straight answer the first one didn't succeed in getting. At this point, if you're a keen observer of human behaviour and responses, you'll notice Leavitt is slightly pushed off her confident footing. She makes two grammatical stumbles: she first said "Elon come in" instead of "Elon came in". Then she transposed two words slightly further on. When the second reporter kept pressing her, she defensively snapped, "Are my press briefings not good enough for you, Jackie?" Not good. She doesn't like being pressed so hard. She needs to get used to it, or there'll be an increasing number of moments when she comes at least slightly unstuck behind the podium. 
by Jordan Kelly 25 February 2025
JUST IN: PRESS RELEASE FROM THE OFFICE OF REPUBLICAN SENATOR MIKE LEE OF UTAH. Calling for the United States' complete withdrawal from the UN, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah has introduced the Disengaging Entirely from the United Nations Debacle (DEFUND) Act ,. The DEFUND Act "addresses grave issues of national sovereignty and fiscal accountability which have plagued US. involvement in the UN". Co-sponsored in the Senate by Republican Senators Marsha Blackburn and Rick Scott, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and Representative Chip Roy (also Republicans) the accompanying comments by Senator Lee read: "No more blank checks for the United Nations. Americans' hard-earned dollars have been funneled into initiatives that fly in the face of our values, enabling tyrants, betraying allies, and spreading bigotry "With the DEFUND Act, we're stepping away from this debacle. If we engage with the UN in the future, it will be on our terms, with the full backing of the Senate and an iron-clad escape clause." He said the UN had betrayed U.S. trust repeatedly, and that the country should not "to be their cash cow" while the UN undermines the U.S.'s own national security and interests. Meantime, Senator Blackburn said: “ The DEFUND Act will stop all forms of U.S. financial support to the UN and hold this wayward organisation accountable for placating Hamas terrorists and the Chinese Communist Party.” Meantime, Senator Chip Roy commented: “From UNRWA actively protecting Hamas and acting against our ally Israel, and delaying condemnation of Hamas, to China being elected to the 'Human Rights Council,' to the propagation of climate hysteria, covering for China's forced abortion and sterilisation programs . . . the UN's decades-old, internal rot once again raises the questions of why the United States is even still a member or why we're wasting billions every year on it."
by Jordan Kelly 25 February 2025
Woke & Wiggling Around the Truth . . . NZers Turning Their Backs on 'Legacy Media' in Droves
Show More