The EPA in the USA has followed the EU in declaring wood pellets burning to be carbon neutral.
Even DesmogBlog is throwing a hissy fit.
Me … I’m sad and I’m also laughing. For years the greens have deliberately confused people and tried to make it seem like green = renewable.
They used terms like biomass and biofuel etc etc. And made it seem like it was green and way better than coal.
Burning wood for electric power may be renewable but it isn’t green. It produces 2x the CO2 as natural gas and more than coal in many cirumstances.
I live in British Columbia … a place with lots of trees and a carbon tax. But guess what, our public power utility subsidizes the burning of trees for power.
A couple of miles from me is a pulp mill. They built a 55MW power plant burning wood waste and BC Hydro buys power from them at subsidized rates.
Here’s an article on one of the small projects replacing diesel with wood waste gasification. This is the sad sad paragraph:
That adds up to greenhouse gas reductions of about 400 tonnes a year, and is in-line with BC Hydro’s ongoing efforts to help remote B.C. communities – too far away from the electricity system to be serviced by the 98% clean energy generated by BC Hydro – reduce their fossil fuel emissions.
Its sad because they can only claim GHG reductions if they lie and claim wood is “carbon neutral” and produces no net CO2.
800MW of power from burning wood etc (Ignore the waste heat stations) Here is a list.
Here is a sample:
Huge amounts of CO2 and particulate matter.
If BC shut those down, we could skip the carbon tax!
The province of BC is touted as carbon tax success story. If you google “carbon tax success” BC always shows up.
Just ask the NY Times:
And of course that would mean less gasoline used .. right?
Gross sales of gasoline (1,000 liters)
2012 4,682,115 2013 4,504,633 2014 4,687,564 2015 5,481,062 2016 5,770,067
23% more gasoline used in BC from 2012.
And CO2 emitted climbed from 2010 to 2015 (last year available)
Its just a tax grab.