Renewable energy: Burning US trees in UK power stations

Hi peeps...

I do not think felling thousands of trees in the US and then exporting them to the UK where they will be used as fuel for power stations is a good idea.. However I suppose it is in one way a step in the right direction. As UK power stations may convert their boiler's from coal to wood. But to me it does not seem sustainable...

Swamp forests in the US are being felled to help keep the lights on in the UK. Is this really the best way to combat climate change?

Environmentalists are trying to block the expansion of a transatlantic trade bringing American wood to burn in European power stations.
The trade is driven by EU rules promoting renewable energy to combat climate change.

Many millions of tonnes of wood pellets will soon be shipped annually to help keep the lights on in the UK. Other EU nations may follow.

This will only end in tears. The potential effects of the trade on climate and wildlife could be disastrous. There is the possibility that with a increasing demand for power generators could encourage foresters to start taking land that is grown for food. Or the plantation forests will replace even more of the natural forests in southern US, which are already declining fast...

In the vast areas of plantation forests wildlife and habitats are scare. It is cleared of weeds with not much light getting through. The trees are planted close together to make the trees grow taller and straighter. If these vast areas of plantation grow bigger which they may very well do. Then there is a huge risk of wiping out a huge amount of wildlife...

And as with many big industries they have their secrets..

The wood fuel industry has not advertised that it also takes trees from natural forests like this to boil kettles in Britain - but that's what happens. Most of the swamp forests in south-east US are in the hands of small private landowners and they face few restrictions on what they do with their assets.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Well we shall see what happens in the coming months. But I for one am not too keen on the idea...

Peace
Fluff

It is laughable in a way isn't it?

In order to preserve the environnment trees are felled and shipped all the way from the USA to the uk!

Makes you wonder if they thought about the impact on the environnment when they chose to ship? (Gas, pollution etc...) Many factors should be considered here...

What i do find odd however is why it is not possible for the UK Gvt to come up with windfarms (which can be seen throughout the whole of Europe)... i mean it is not for lack of wind in the UK and i am sure that this could be done for an eventual long term less expensive solution compared to tree felling and costly shipping? The north sea is a great place to place windfarms! Any comments from UK residents?

Hope this thread doesn't turn into a brit bashing thread?

*scratches head*... maybe i need coffee

Kindest respects

Rodinus

If this is an example of the intelligence the corporations are runing on we need to KILL them

With proper replanting, of which Oregon and Washington are very stict on, its more than possible.

I've lived there....they don't tolerate unresticted lumbering.

Originally posted by Hopechest
With proper replanting, of which Oregon and Washington are very stict on, its more than possible.

I've lived there....they don't tolerate unresticted lumbering.

Yea, well, Its probably safe to say we need to plant trees and ground cover all over the US. You cut one down plant one, or 3. Trees are a natural canopy. We lose that, we're screwed.

Originally posted by stirling
If this is an example of the intelligence the corporations are runing on we need to KILL them

Let's hear what you would have them do then.

Originally posted by Nephalim

Originally posted by Hopechest
With proper replanting, of which Oregon and Washington are very stict on, its more than possible.

I've lived there....they don't tolerate unresticted lumbering.

Yea, well, Its probably safe to say we need to plant trees and ground cover all over the US. You cut one down plant one, or 3. Trees are a natural canopy. We lose that, we're screwed.

I'd hardly say we are screwed.

Problematic, maybe...nothing we can't work around.

And what scenario do you envision where we cut down all the trees?

reply to post by Rodinus


Thanks for the reply...

It is totally ridiculous! I am from the UK. I live on an island off the West Coast of Scotland. And I can tell you there is plenty of wind up here~!! They are welcome to it...

The problem is they keep building wind farms on peatland. And that only creates more greenhouse gases as the peatland acts as a carbon sink.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think that they need to look at tidal energy a bit more. That is far more sustainable. My friends Dad is head hunted constantly by engineering companies who want his experience and expertise on tidal and wind power. He reckons tidal energy is the way to go.

He has not long finished a job in Orkney where they were essentially putting in huge wind turbine devices into the sea to harness the power of the sea. This was what he was working on. He has worked with quite a few engineering and power companies now..

www.bbc.co.uk...

I hope this does not turn into a Brit bashing thread too..! There is no need for any bashing here. Just discussion...

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by Nephalim

Originally posted by Hopechest
With proper replanting, of which Oregon and Washington are very stict on, its more than possible.

I've lived there....they don't tolerate unresticted lumbering.

Yea, well, Its probably safe to say we need to plant trees and ground cover all over the US. You cut one down plant one, or 3. Trees are a natural canopy. We lose that, we're screwed.

I'd hardly say we are screwed.

Problematic, maybe...nothing we can't work around.

And what scenario do you envision where we cut down all the trees?

I dont know about all trees right. I dont think we're dumb enough anywhere to do that. (I hope) but you know those trees help hold water. Create shade, Block wind/combat erosion just being there. and if you look at all the things that grow naturally around trees, you're not gonna wanna over log at all. Mind you, trees dont grow to good heights over night either. Heck I wish we had more trees in my area. Damn dustbowl.

Originally posted by Nephalim

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by Nephalim

Originally posted by Hopechest
With proper replanting, of which Oregon and Washington are very stict on, its more than possible.

I've lived there....they don't tolerate unresticted lumbering.

Yea, well, Its probably safe to say we need to plant trees and ground cover all over the US. You cut one down plant one, or 3. Trees are a natural canopy. We lose that, we're screwed.

I'd hardly say we are screwed.

Problematic, maybe...nothing we can't work around.

And what scenario do you envision where we cut down all the trees?

I dont know about all trees right. I dont think we're dumb enough anywhere to do that.

(I hope) but you know those trees help hold water. Create shade, Block wind/combat erosion just being there. and if you look at all the things that grow naturally around trees, you're not gonna wanna over log at all. Mind you, trees dont grow to good heights over night either. Heck I wish we had more trees in my area. Damn dustbowl.

I know for a fact that any mining or lumbering in Oregon and Washington is very strictly regulated. They have to leave an area in better shape than when they arrive. They take one tree they have to plant three and clear out the area so it can grow.

Originally posted by fluff007
reply to post by Rodinus

 

Thanks for the reply...

It is totally ridiculous! I am from the UK. I live on an island off the West Coast of Scotland. And I can tell you there is plenty of wind up here~!! They are welcome to it...

The problem is they keep building wind farms on peatland. And that only creates more greenhouse gases as the peatland acts as a carbon sink.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think that they need to look at tidal energy a bit more. That is far more sustainable. My friends Dad is head hunted constantly by engineering companies who want his experience and expertise on tidal and wind power. He reckons tidal energy is the way to go.

He has not long finished a job in Orkney where they were essentially putting in huge wind turbine devices into the sea to harness the power of the sea. This was what he was working on. He has worked with quite a few engineering and power companies now..

www.bbc.co.uk...

I hope this does not turn into a Brit bashing thread too..! There is no need for any bashing here. Just discussion...

Tidal energy would be a great solution... but what is to gain for the powers to be? Sad isn't it!

You would have thought that with all the curries that are consumed in the UK that there would be enough wind to go around for everyone!...

Joke aside... your friends dad should apply for a job at AREVA (French private/public company), if i remember correctly they also own almost all of the electricity production in the UK (they also have an AKA which is EDF or EDGF) if i remember correctly?

Kindest respects

Rodinus

The things we use for power is so outdated and not needed it's insane. Coal/wood/nuclear isn't needed, there are so many cleaner alternatives, but I guess they can't charge as much for cleaner energy, so they won't do it

reply to post by sarahlm


That is the problem. In the end it all comes down to money. They do not care for us or the planet. When will they take a step back be quiet and just listen to what the people want. Which is what they should be doing...

I really do not know how they sleep at night. Seriously...

reply to post by Rodinus

Tidal energy would be a great solution... but what is to gain for the powers to be? Sad isn't it!

You would have thought that with all the curries that are consumed in the UK that there would be enough wind to go around for everyone!...

Joke aside... your friends dad should apply for a job at AREVA (French private/public company), if i remember correctly they also own almost all of the electricity production in the UK (they also have an AKA which is EDF or EDGF) if i remember correctly?

Kindest respects

Rodinus

Looool...!

Thanks Rodinus I shall definitely throw that information his way.

They suppress technology that cannot be as profitable as they want them to be. The issue about this is we the people can open source the change. Meaning how can you suppress something that millions will be a part of ( hopefully ). Maybe in order to continue our evolution of innovation we must see past making money off things and see more towards the better of mankind. Maybe certain ideas of how to build it become opensource but then people can then turn around and build and market it, giving whole new means to Free Market.

reply to post by Tranceopticalinclined

Maybe in order to continue our evolution of innovation we must see past making money off things and see more towards the better of mankind.

I do not think it is a maybe. It is a we need to....! We need to learn that there is more to life and the universe than money. Instead of wreaking havoc with the well being of ourselves and our planet to make money. We need to start doing things to help ourselves and our planet. Whether money is to be made out of it or not. But it will take a while before many people understand this. And the people who so desperately need to understand it the most are the TPTB... And god knows how long that might take...

The fate of human kind, animal kind and earth kind is in our hands..

From what I saw of the television report, those trees for the UK are unsuitable for lumber, are cut down to make way for trees to grow that are good for lumber, and the cut trees left on the ground could lead to diseases that would effect the healthy trees.

I'm wondering what will happen to the wood ash, its really good for soil, used for growing food, and is a 'natural' substance.

reply to post by fluff007


WOW...even more proof that these people don't really care for Climate Change or the environment...

To what idiot did it occur to cut more trees in order to "combat Climate Change"?...

Trees absorb CO2, not to mention the fact that the more CO2 there is in the atmosphere the GREENER the planet is...

Yes, there is a point where CO2 is very toxic to humans, animals, and even trees, but the Earth's levels of atmospheric CO2 are nowhere close to being toxic. In fact, imo it does seem that the global elites have in mind the sequestration and lowering of CO2 levels to help them depopulate Earth and maintain their population control schemes.

If atmospheric CO2 levels were at least double what they are now we would have an exponential increasing in plant and tree growth, producing more harvests which means more food. Not to mention the fact that with increased levels of atmospheric CO2 all trees and plants use less water, which leaves more water for humans and animals. Likewise, the less atmospheric CO2, means the more that all plants, trees and in general green biomass will use water, leaving less water for us and animals.

Successful indoor growers implement methods to increase CO2 concentrations in their enclosure. The typical outdoor air we breathe contains 0.03 - 0.045% (300 - 450 ppm) CO2. Research demonstrates that optimum growth and production for most plants occur between 1200 - 1500 ppm CO2. These optimum CO2 levels can boost plant metabolism, growth and yield by 25 - 60%.

www.planetnatural.com...


BTW, I am not advocating to pollute the Earth, but it is a really bad idea to sequester atmospheric CO2, since this can, and will stun the growth of all plant life in the planet, and this in turn will cause them to produce less harvests, which means less food and less water for humans and animals alike.