3 ms·
I really think the answer is to switch to wood fuled biomass generators for electricity. It would be an incentive to plant more trees, and the charcoal waste co
by dec0dedab0de 11y ago
I really think the answer is to switch to wood fuled biomass generators for electricity. It would be an incentive to plant more trees, and the charcoal waste could be burried as fertilizer, placing excess carbon back in the ground.
- willismichael 11y agoThe amount of solid carbon left as waste is inversely proportional to how efficiently the wood is burned. In high-heat combustion, virtually all of the carbon is consumed and released as CO2, rather than remaining in the ashes.
- dec0dedab0de 11y agoWhat if it were purposely inefficient, and stopped once the wood is reduced to charcoal?
- infinite8s 11y agoSo we basically go back to using fireplaces for heat.
- dec0dedab0de 11y agoNo. The idea would be to never actually burn the wood, just heat it up enough to release gases, and burn the gases in a generator. These could be (are?) run at power plants. willismichael pointed out that efficient biomass gasifiers will then burn the resulting charcoal, which releases quite a bit of CO2. I suggested using the charcoal as fertilizer, instead of burning it.
- infinite8s 11y agoWouldn't heating it up to release the gas use more energy than results from burning the gas?
- dec0dedab0de 11y agoAs far as I understand it once you get it going you can use the gas to keep the temperature up, and still have excess. Of course, this is only until the fuel runs out.