The New Coal – Burning wood pellets creates more global warming pollution than coal, not less

The new coal. More CO2 than coal. Yet biomass is called green by the AGW cult and the Eu and the other cult leaders .

“A controversy with reverberations across the Atlantic Ocean is brewing in Hamlet, North Carolina – a literal hamlet 120 miles northwest of Wilmington – where a new wood-pellet facility is already in the initial stages of construction.

The mill would become the fourth in North Carolina and the seventh in the Southeast built and operated by Maryland-based Enviva, the largest producer of wood pellets in the world.

The dried and compressed bits of wood produced at the plant would be shipped from Wilmington to a power company in the United Kingdom, who plans to burn them instead of coal as part of the country’s effort to slash greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by the end of the decade.

The problem, according to many energy analysts, is that burning pellets creates more global warming pollution than coal, not less. One prominent research ecologist even calls wood biomass “the new coal.”

At the same time, environmental advocates say the new mill will further the destruction of deciduous forests in the Southeast – especially in wetlands – and disproportionately harm public health in Dobbins Heights, an overwhelmingly African-American town two miles northeast of the facility.”

“A 2015 analysis for the Southern Environmental Law Center examining the loss of forests found that Enviva wood pellets supplied to Drax would create two and a half times more greenhouse gas emissions than coal over 40 years.

A 2014 study by the U.K.’s environmental agency also factored in drying and transportation costs; it found climate pollution from southeastern U.S. wood pellets to be three times that of coal.”

 

 

Advertisements

World Total Primary Energy Supply

Remember, when they say “renewable” what it really means is:

“Their trick is to hide behind the statement that close to 14 per cent of the world’s energy is renewable, with the implication that this is wind and solar. In fact the vast majority — three quarters — is biomass (mainly wood), and a very large part of that is ‘traditional biomass’; sticks and logs and dung burned by the poor in their homes to cook with. Those people need that energy, but they pay a big price in health problems caused by smoke inhalation.

…world energy demand has been growing at about 2 per cent a year for nearly 40 years.”

The items circled in red do not produce CO2.

http://joannenova.com.au/2017/05/matt-ridley-wind-power-makes-0-of-world-energy/

 

CO2 rising at 2ppm – Whats to Worry?

Climate science says:

CO2 was about 280ppm in 1750.

CO2 is about 404ppm now.

CO2 levels have been rising by about 2ppm since 1997.

Therefore a doubling of CO2 from 1750 will occur around 78 years from now – say 2100.

The Transient Climate Response to a doubling of CO2 is around 1.35C.

Therefore temperatures from 1750 to 2100 will have risen by 1.35C

And for temperature to rise another 1.35C CO2 will have to go from 560ppm to 1120ppm – 280 more years 2380.

I don’t know about you, but 2.7C by 2380 sounds pretty nice.

And remember, for temperatures to go up 1.35C from today, it will take 200 years.

Whats everybody worrying about?

(h/t Hockey Schtick)

 

CO2 is Making the Planet Greener

CO2 is making the planet greener.

We show a persistent and widespread increase of growing season integrated LAI (greening) over 25% to 50% of the global vegetated area, whereas less than 4% of the globe shows decreasing LAI (browning). Factorial simulations with multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend, followed by nitrogen deposition (9%), climate change (8%) and land cover change (LCC) (4%).

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n8/full/nclimate3004.html

Betcha that made the nightly news headlines for weeks right … right?

c4z-wcywaaa4jnl-1