Where there’s smoke — If a tree falls in a forest—and then it’s driven to a mill, where it’s chopped and chipped and compressed into wood pellets, which are then driven to a port and shipped across the ocean to be burned for electricity in European power plants — does it warm the planet?
If a tree falls in a forest, and you make it into lumber, you have no sequestered that tree product for 100+ years…
If a tree falls in a forest, and you make it into Drax Pellets, you are returning its products to the atmosphere whence it came…
it would probably be better to bury that tree, and introduce bacteria that produce methane from it’s corpse, and collect that methane for a power plant
Sounds like another story for that environmentalist woman, that Gormley had on the radio yesterday.
She’s a hardcore environmentalist, but she’s putting out a movie about the lies the environmental movement is telling, re; EV, solar panels, bio mass etc and the carbon footprint most of these green ideas have.
The vast majority of us are environmentalists. It’s just that some of us are realists as well. The biggest threat to the environment where I live comes from urban sprawl. The area I live in is unrecognizable from when I was a kid because hundreds of thousands of acres have been paved over for “development”. 90 Percent of that development is caused by immigration. The biggest threat to the environment where I live is immigration. Of course our “environmentalist” federal government loves immigration, but frets about a harmless trace gas in the atmosphere that’s plant food.
+++++/\ Rusty.
In my. younger days, I was a Caver. Have been through some most spectacular Caves in the Eastern Rockies. (Nakamou – Rogers pass, Garantua – Pincher Creek, Rats Nest -Canmore…among others).
Our mantra then, was simple. Bring what you want, but you damned well take Every molecule of it back. No Exceptions….
My kind of environmentalism
Its pretty warm in Ontariowe today. Currently -2.
Think I’ll burn some wood and do my part to save the world from warming.
Couple of inches of snow here.
inefficient as hell. low fuel density compared to any coal or diesel fuel.
Just like wind and solar. Noticing a pattern?
With our planet, it doesn’t matter.
The planet will adapt as it always have in the past.
It only bugs people who want to stir shit anyways as they are paid to do so.
The Mainstream media loves any shit disturbing that they can be part of.
Yes jojo, all species currently on this big blue rock will all be gone in what one million , two million years, maybe more maybe less and the planet will still be here.
Whether biomass is designated carbon neutral depends on whether or not the check clears.
Trees aren’t oil… so they’re cool.
I bet that pretty much sums up all the science they considered.
“Trees aren’t oil”
yet… give them long enough and they might be…
Oil formed from marine life. Coal formed from terrestrial life. Trees become coal
Coal can be the basis for synthetic oil, though it would take a chemical processing facility to accomplish that.
If a “waste tree” falls in the forest … does it contribute to the 300% inflation rate in lumber products … making an already unaffordable housing market … well, somewhere near 300% more unaffordable?
That meandering article was a mish mash of half truths, green nonsense, and a few facts. Wood, as a low density energy source, makes sense if you are off the grid, using local residual sources or supplying an unsubsidized market. Wood fuel is only net zero if the alternative is the dream-world of the greens and forests are left to decay and or burn (much of the US public land). Net zero is also a physical impossibility.
If The Big Guy gets his 10% the Green extremists will STFU.
How did using wood for fuel work for Haiti?
Makes for some cool satellite photography.
Encourages lots of landslides, err.. soil re-distribution.
Trite bit of sophistry, the pseudo premise.
If a tree is felled …. and, more accurately, if a forest is
felledclear cut.That notwithstanding, There are big shortages in certain larger dimension beams (4×6 and up), and apparently the creep has already begun toward harvesting early. Biodiversity is ruined, ecology therefore is shot. etc. etc.
One would think Easter island would come to mind. But no. Let’s further demonstrate that progressives shouldn’t be allowed to touch a thing. They are like children in a gift shop.
This practice makes any format of coal mining look environmentally pristine.
Bring back coal while molten salt reactors, lots of them, are built over the next 30 years.
Clear cutting is the preferred silvicultural system of most tree species if “preference” can be implied by relative tree growth. All commercial species on Canada’s west coast “prefer” full sunlight to growing in shade, for example. It also facilitates slash abatement (preventing wildfire) and minimizes exposure to pathogens and windfall. It allows for maximum dispersion of ground disturbance while minimizing multiple ground entries, for better soil conservation. It’s also the preferred agricultural system on the prairies. But it appears to be ugly for a few years so in terms of Trudeaupian aesthetics it must be bad.
Who is collecting the subsidies. There is your answer.
It is always about who profits, who benefits, who gets the shaft.
Throught rural Eastern Canada and BC, folks burn wood for heat, where is the pollution tax on this shitty practice. Nope, it is all about dirty oil from Alberta and Sask
Are you suggesting there are no wood stoves in either Alberta or Saskatchewan? Quite a blow to us, both eats and west, that utilize “that shitty practice”
Human beings on this planet have been using fire for a few years now from what I’ve read. I could go on but rest assured there will be smoke coming from this house as a source of heat for some time to come. As well I BBQ with wood and during the next “smoke” I will smile.
bverwey
Hey, so we can harvest the Turd”s 2 million trees to recoup our investment then?
bverwey
The point is not to really lower world CO2 emissions, it is to lower Europe’s CO2 emissions by ‘exporting’ the CO2 emissions to Canada. The European power plant only lists the last step – burning the fuel – the other steps (the logging, conversion to wood pellets, and shipping to the power plant) occur in Canada (and other countries) and are part of those countries’ CO2 emissions. So the total is most likely higher than burning coal (even after including the mining and transportation) but is lower for Europe. It also raises Canada’s emissions, and if Trudeau is serious about mitigating CO2, then exporting wood pellets means more reductions in other areas for Canadians.