3 ms·
Trees are net neutral. Tree starts as a seed. Grows up and sequesters X tons of carbon. Tree is burned, releases X tons of carbon. Tree is re-planted, grows u
by brianwawok 3y ago
Trees are net neutral.
Tree starts as a seed. Grows up and sequesters X tons of carbon.
Tree is burned, releases X tons of carbon.
Tree is re-planted, grows up, sequesters X tons of carbon.
Tree is burned, releases X tons of carbon.
If everything in the world right now was wood powered, we would not have a global warming problem. We would have massive tree farms sequestering the same amount of carbon we are releasing. (We might have a soot and particle problem, but that's another story).
The problem with oil and coal, is we have no way to make more. We burn oil and release carbon.. how are we making more oil and pumping back underground to sequester that carbon?
- throwbadubadu 3y agoVery true, but we likely couldn't have that amount of farmland for what we currently just pull out of earth with millions of years of sequestring.. not sure if getting rid of most of the livestock needs would free enough ("Livestock takes up nearly 80% of global agricultural land, yet produces less than 20% of the world's supply of calories").. are there any calculations how many tree farms we'd need besides a huge solar/wind/geothermal mix?
- brianwawok 3y agoI don't know the math to globally power the world with wood. I don't think it's even a good idea. But I don't feel bad when I burn firewood pulled from a local forest. As that burning is not adding carbon to the world overall.
- TravelPiglet 3y agoDiscounting all the power consumed planting, growing, cutting down and delivery of the logs to the power generator.
- 7952 3y agoWe don't have a way to make trees quickly enough. In the timespans relevant to climate change it is far from neutral.
- brianwawok 3y agoI make no claims it's a global clean energy. Just pointing out it's not actually carbon increasing.