Guess some people simply hate facts, they always have a way of getting in the way of a good con job.
pI see your point.
Trees for burning: the biomass controversy
I never investigated this controversy before. I donât have time to form an opinion now.
There seems to be two sides.
The idea is that the trees would die, and the CO2 would enter the air anyway. And the trees will regrow and zero out the CO2 usage.
The other sideâs view is that the burning is increasing carbon dioxide and causes deforestation.
During Covid the government had a program in my area where if you needed help with heating. They would give you one tank of natural gas or two cords of wood. The wood came from an apricot orchard that had been killed by the states Democratic regulations requiring the farmer to smog all farm equipment. The quotes for smogging old tractors were close to $20K each. He had no choice but to go out of business.
Because of the high costs of over regulations, the apricot fields have not been used and are empty. No new trees to offset CO2. Nobody wants to farm except the industrial corporations. The small guy has been regulated out of business.
In 2020, during his campaign for the presidency, Joe Biden made a bold pledge at a New Hampshire town hall, vowing to bring an end to drilling on federal lands. With deliberate emphasis, he stated, âNo more drilling on federal lands. Period. Period. Period. Period.â However, nearly four years later, the reality of his presidency tells a different story. Under Bidenâs leadership, the United States is now producing more oil than any other country ever has, and his administration has approved more drilling permits on public lands than his predecessor, Donald Trump.
This unanticipated boom in fossil fuel production reveals a challenging truth for both Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris: it is nearly impossible for any U.S. president to significantly curb oil production, a key driver of both the economy and climate change. As Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, aptly observed, âIf you were to show someone who came from Mars the line of U.S. oil and gas production over the last 15 years, they probably would not be able to tell whether a Republican or Democrat was in the White House.â
The con job here is that Biden did nothing wrong. Biden shut down the construction of the Keystone pipeline. That is a fact.
Putting our neighbors in a bind. They had to invest billions in a new pipeline called the Trans Mountain Expansion Project. Now Canadaâs oil can be shipped to other nations from Canada. Causing the price, we pay for Canadian oil to rise. Has the cost of gas gone up? Figure it out.
Correct, both trees and hemp scrub the air from CO2, but Hemp grows much faster than trees and has greater CO2 scrubbing capacity over time.
The advantage of trees is their durability, whereas Hemp needs harvesting when a crop matures.
The advantage of Hemp is its versatility in application of industrial uses.
How is Hemp Even Better Than Trees for Producing Oxygen?
There is enough evidence to demonstrate that hemp plants have exceptionally high carbon dioxide capacity. According to several scientific articles, one hectare of densely-grown hemp for fiber use can absorb 22 tons of carbon dioxide.
Combined with the possibility of growing two crops a year, it means hemp grown in one hectare can absorb 44 tons of carbon dioxide in a year. This high carbon absorption capacity contributes considerably to the humble hempâs oxygen-producing ability.
From another perspective, botanists inform us that plants with C4 photosynthesis are more efficient in carbon dioxide absorption than their C3 counterparts. This difference is because of a process called photorespiration in C3 plants which makes them breathe even while sunlight is available.
Breathing in light is different from the normal pattern and plants emit carbon dioxide when they breathe, not oxygen. Hemp is C4, with no photorespiration. That also makes it more efficient in oxygen emission.
Hemp (cannabis sativa l.) Is an effective carbondepositing crop
It is believed that hemp is one of the fastest growing plants in the world and can grow up to 4 meters tall in 100 days. Hemp is twice efficient as trees at absorbing and retaining carbon: 1 hectare (2.5 acres) of hemp absorbs from 8 to 22 tons of CO2 per year, more than any forest area [10]. In Italy, hemp is considered as an environmentally friendly crop capable of mitigating climate change and desertification [11].
And hemp has many uses, as folder, as cloth and so on âŚ
Burning wood certainly does contribute CO2. In fact, it releases more CO2 than natural gas per BTU.
Just because it took some CO2 in, doesnât mean burning it is just âcirculatingâ CO2. And you donât have to burn the wood. Trees that die in the forest return their CO2 to the environment through rotting.
And itâs the young forests that scrub CO2. Older forests donât really help that much.
When I bought my wood burning stove they said the way the wood burns, by recirculating the gas created by the flame and fully using it all in the stove, is the same as if the tree died and rotted. Thatâs great, but itâs happening in a few hours, as opposed to the years it would take laying in the forest.
Sounds like you bought a catalytic wood stove. That does increase the efficiency by giving you the most BTUs available by increasing the burn time. The ambience of a room with a wood stove on a cold winterâs day is also a plus.