AGW Today: Envirowackos Not Even Happy With Biomass

You know what biomass is, right? In essence, it is a fancy way of saying “incinerating trees and garbage.” Yes, it does encompass a few more types of organic matter, but the predominant sources are wood and garbage. And, now it is having some difficulties

An energy technology that has long been viewed as a clean and climate-friendly alternative to fossil fuels is facing tough new regulatory hurdles that could ultimately hamper its ability to compete with renewable power sources like wind and solar.

So, they need more handouts, er, government tax incentives and investment.

But a long-simmering debate in Massachusetts questioning the environmental benefits of biomass has culminated in new rules that will limit what sorts of projects will qualify for renewable energy incentives there. If other states — or even Congress, which is writing energy legislation of its own — follow suit, it could have wide implications for biomass developers, as well as for states trying to meet renewable energy production targets.

They are writing new regulations regarding how climate friendly the plants can be. Say, if you are burning lots of wood, and pushing for more and more of these plants, wouldn’t that be pushing human existence back to before the 19th Century?

Biomass power — a $1 billion industry in the United States, according to the Biomass Power Association, a trade group based in Maine — has long been considered both renewable and carbon-neutral on its most basic level. Trees and plants can be replanted, its proponents point out, and while they emit carbon dioxide when burned, they absorb it while alive, resulting in no net gains in greenhouse gases.

Helpful hint for you alarmists: it takes quite a bit longer to grow a tree than burn a tree. And, of course, the wackos are not particularly happy about this

But many environmental groups say that the benefits of biomass power — and all forms of energy derived from organic sources, including biofuels — are realized only in carefully controlled circumstances. The cycle of carbon emission and absorption also unfolds over long periods of time that need to be carefully monitored.

“Whether you call it biomass or simply chopping down trees, it’s still deforestation,” said Franz A. Matzner, climate legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington, which supports the sensible use of biomass power. “Burning trees for energy is an age-old practice that we know can cause some pretty bad effects if we don’t get our heads around doing it the right way.”

See? Alarmists like to talk a good game about “alternative energy sources,” but, when push comes to shove, they would prefer we go back to before the discovery of fire.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

2 Responses to “AGW Today: Envirowackos Not Even Happy With Biomass”

  1. Otter says:

    Yo! johnnie ryan!

    Turn off your cell phone, your GPS and the AC in your truck. In fact, turn off your truck. And your computer, and all the lights in your house. Just switch that circuit breaker to ‘OFF’ for your entire house. Cut the wires coming into your house. Don’t breath. Don’t buy a pet. Don’t water your garden (if you even Have one, like us more environmentally-conscious do).
    Don’t consume ANYTHING.

    YOU ARE KILLING THE PLANET! To not do the above proves your hypocrisy.

  2. Kevin says:

    I can’t read this because I turned off my monitor to save the Earth.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8226 access attempts in the last 7 days.