Page 1 of 1

Arkansas foresters

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 7:39 pm
by Wilberforce
Arkansas foresters

Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 total comments
LContreras says... February 26, 2016 at 1:45 p.m.

I would like to respond to Scott Rowland’s letter. We urgently need a conversation to decide what is best for Arkansas and our future. Please ask the Editor for my contact info.

Phantom demand. Pellet mills seem like a blessing for Arkansas foresters, something too good to be true. The Drax demand for wood pellets is phantom based on an intentional carbon accounting error. The European Accounting Error That's Warming the Planet,” by Climate Central, is a three-part special series on burning wood pellets for electricity, October 20, 2015

This is the core question: how many years do we have before our planet becomes inhabitable? If we fail to reduce the carbon dioxide concentration and continue burning trees and fossil fuels as in the past, by 2050 the human race and most species would be extinct.

Here are the facts: last year was the warmest year on record, an increase of 16 tenths of one degree Celsius. This a huge temperature increase, when you consider the 2015 United Nations Climate Change agreement to keep global temperatures below 1.5 C and no higher than 2 C over pre-industrial times. We have already used up 1.16 C degrees, and global warming is driven mainly by carbon dioxide and methane emissions.

Arkansas foresters have succeeded growing and caring for the forests; they need to be fully compensated for keeping the trees and the forest soil doing what they do best: removing carbon dioxide, releasing oxygen, storing carbon in the soil, providing fresh water, and dealing with severe storms and flooding. Coal-fired power plants would benefit paying forest owners for carbon credits to offset greenhouse emissions, to meet EPA air quality standards. Paying to keep our forests and reducing carbon dioxide is a win-win alternative to deforestation.

Wood pellets are the wrong solution to climate change. Pellet mills are very high energy and water intensive, one of the largest industrial air, water, and land polluters. The U.K. does not want pellet mills, only pellets. But burning wood pellets is much worse than burning coal: over 50 percent more carbon dioxide pollution and deadly wood smoke particulate matter emissions per unit of energy.

UK ratepayers are furious: “The UK's £1billion carbon-belcher raping US forests ...that YOU pay for: How world's biggest green power plant is actually INCREASING greenhouse gas emissions and Britain's energy bill,” the wood pellet scam has been subsidized by the UK, using taxes working people pay. There is no free lunch. Daily Mail, June 6, 2015.

When you look at the whole picture, from harvesting the trees, 400 logging trucks delivering trees to pellet mills, processing pellets and shipping them 4,000 miles to the U.K., you can see why the Drax wood pellet sham has been called “The bonfire of insanity: Woodland is shipped 3,800 miles and burned in Drax power station. It belches out more CO2 than coal at a huge cost YOU pay for... and all for a cleaner, greener Britain!” Daily Mail, March 16, 2014.

The European demand for wood pellets is an international scandal. The Drax U.K. claim wood pellets are carbon-neutral is a sham: burning today, trees planted 50 years ago 4,000 miles away, with the promise to pay back the carbon debt sometime in the future, is deceptive and flawed logic. “Nothing green about burning wood for electricity,” said Jeremy Wates, the Secretary General of the European Environment Bureau in Brussels, in a letter to Britain’s The Independent newspaper. January 7, 2016.

For the latest scientific findings, please read the Biomass Monitor report: “Climate consequences from logging forests for bioenergy,” February 9, 2016.

Quoted references are available online. Links are not allowed herein.

Thank you very much.

Luis Contreras ... -20160226/