Phase out coal and burn trees instead, urges leading scientist

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

TreeBot

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
247
Reaction score
32
Location
Ks
By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Sunday, 14 September 2008

Humanity must urgently embark on a massive programme to power civilisation from wood to stave off catastrophic climate change, one of the world's top scientists has told The Independent on Sunday.


Twenty years ago, Professor James Hansen was the first leading scientist to announce that global warming was taking place. Now he has issued a warning that a back-to-the-future return to one of the oldest fuels is imperative because the world has exceeded the danger level for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Growing trees, which absorb the gas from the air as they grow, burning them instead of fossil fuels to generate electricity, and capturing and storing the carbon produced in the process is needed to get the greenhouse effect down to safe levels, he says.

Professor Hansen's assertion that there is too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will alarm governments and environmentalists, who are concentrating on the already daunting task of limiting its build-up, while allowing it to rise well above present levels. However, his views will command respect because, as director of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies for the past 27 years, he has been one of the few climate scientists ready to risk his reputation by openly stating what many suspect to be true.

In 1988 Professor Hansen put global warming on the political agenda by telling the US Congress that he was "99 per cent certain" that human activities were warming up the planet. It took the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change until last year to catch up, by which time nearly two vital decades had been lost.



That's just part of this article: http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...s-instead-urges-leading-scientist-929889.html
 
hoo boy...the price of wood just increased ten fold and "free" wood will not be found again.
 
You'd think that someone from NASA would have an idea of the sunspot cycle.

they do.

they just let the al gores run around, give speeches and collect money and trophies.

real scientists haven't bought into al gore's doom and gloom for quite a few years and simply write off climate changes as part of the earth's natural cycle of events.
 
i am no rocket surgeon, but you would need a whole lot of wood ( around a zillion cord or so, give or take) to replace how much coal the world uses for just power production.
 
I keep scratchign my head over this. Just how is burning wood and capturing the co2 any different than burning coal and capturing the co2 off of it?

At least with coal you aren't destroying trees that are collecting co2 to begin with.

Harry K
 
i am no rocket surgeon, but you would need a whole lot of wood (around a zillion cord or so, give or take) to replace how much coal the world uses for just power production.
+1! And, in the mean time, how are you going to stop all the forest fies that already burn about 95% of all the wood burned annually today? Many of those are caused by lightning strikes and preventing those is virtually impossible.
 
+1! And, in the mean time, how are you going to stop all the forest fies that already burn about 95% of all the wood burned annually today? Many of those are caused by lightning strikes and preventing those is virtually impossible.

thats easy. Ole George Bushy will make forest fires illegal, anyone caught with a forest fire on their properyty will be subject to huge fines.:clap:
 
I keep scratchign my head over this. Just how is burning wood and capturing the co2 any different than burning coal and capturing the co2 off of it?

At least with coal you aren't destroying trees that are collecting co2 to begin with.

Harry K

Trees remove CO2 from atmosphere during growth. Capturing the CO2 that a tree has already removed from the air will sequester it. Net loss of CO2 in atmosphere.
 
I keep scratchign my head over this. Just how is burning wood and capturing the co2 any different than burning coal and capturing the co2 off of it?

At least with coal you aren't destroying trees that are collecting co2 to begin with.

Harry K

The carbon in coal and other fossil fuels has been trapped and out of 'circulation' for a long time. By burning this fuel we are putting old carbon back into the air. Without adding more trees to replinish the oxygen. We are decreasing our oxygen supply. Sure trees use the carbon dioxide and replenish the oxygen we need , but are we puttung carbondioxide in at a faster rate than trees and plants can consume and store it ?

Trees are bio-mass and are a renewable resource. Coal and Oil have a limited supply. There was a reason that much carbon was locked away years ago. Mammalian life seemed to flourish in the last 20,000 years with lower CO2 levels, I'll take that as a good'a reason as any to find other ways to keep the lights on and limit my own use of fossil fuels.

I don't think trees are the only answer to limiting total use of fossil fuels. Harnessing other sources such as wind, hydro and solar as well as conserving whats left and respocible use will go a long way towards having breathable air longer.

I'm not ready for a solar powered chain saw or going back to using a cross cut. I have toyed with the idea of a wood gassifier powered generator though. Wouldn't I be the envy of my neighborhood then !? LOL
 

Latest posts

Back
Top