The Environmental Nightmare of Wind Energy & Energy Efficiency!

Sustainability

Today's blog is a follow-up of our last post on the "message of fear" that continues in the media over biomass energy (e.g., the Huffington Post article -- Green Nightmare: Burning Biomass is Not Renewable Energy). To refresh everyone's memory -- the author of this article states that the development of biomass energy will lead to the destruction of forests world-wide.

The dishonesty of these types of arguments is that no approach to energy production or conservation is exempt from the need to be sustainable and environmentally pro-active -- not even wind energy or equipment that improves energy efficiency.

Now, we think that most "Greens" would agree that the practice of "mountain-top removal in coal mining" is a travesty that continues in the Appalachian Mountain region of the U.S. Click Here to see a horror video of this practice.

Today's New York Times has an article describing the environmental destruction that is occurring through the mining of "rare earths" that are used in the manufacturing of wind energy and energy efficiency equipment -- which appears to be just as bad as mountain-top removal for coal.


Unlike the Huffington Post article which states that forests world-wide WOULD be destroyed IF biomass energy is advanced, we could point to the N.Y. Times article and say -- Wind energy and energy efficiency IS ALREADY creating environmental destruction through mining practices.

Based on this fact of mining destruction, should world-wide Policymakers abandon green technologies of wind power and energy efficiency?

And the answer is -- of course not.

No commentsRead more

The Radical Greens -- Eco-Terrorism through the Media.

Energy Policy

Two stories on biomass energy caught our attention this week where "misinformation of fear" continues to be presented in the media:

Huffington Post: Green Nightmare: Burning Biomass is Not Renewable Energy

New York Times Op/Ed: Clear-Cutting the Truth About Trees.

The purpose of these articles is to advance a "message of fear" -- that adopting policies of biomass energy will lead to the mass destruction of forests throughout the world as clear cutting will occur.

As scientists, engineers, and farmers, we can provide a real-world "message of hope" from our efforts in Florida that we strongly believe will be more representative to provide biomass for power generation and transportation fuels.

In our approach that we call a catalytic "Genesis Effect", we have taken environmentally damaged marginal lands to grow energy crops in a sustainable and environmentally pro-active way -- with a key emphasis of soil carbon building/sequestration.


The following two pictures are of the same land area at one of our energy crop farms, showing the "before" and "after" results of the Genesis Effect. Before energy crop planting, the site had been invaded by a mono culture plant (cogongrass, that according to the USDA is the 3rd most invasive weed in the world). Typically, environmentally damaged lands have very little Soil Organic Matter or Soil Organic Carbon (SOM/SOC).


After creating energy crop tree farms on these marginal lands (where the trees coppice or re-grow after cutting), we have seen (working in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge National Lab) a dramatic increase in SOM/SOC after just a few years.


An additional environmental benefit that is occurring on our energy crop tree farms is the re-establishment of native flora and habitats (where in 3 years, ~30 native species plants have emerged on the forest floor).


Our response to the radical "Greens" is that there is a message of hope (not fear) in developing biomass energy in a "responsible and right way"!

No commentsRead more

Why Biomass Energy is Important (Part 2) -- CO2 Emissions from Coal Use in Generating Electricity

Coal Use

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has an excellent technical paper explaining why CO2 emissions associated with coal-fired generation are significantly higher than the use of natural gas.

EPRI's comparison basis is called the "carbon intensity" ratio and reflects:

The higher carbon content of coal versus natural gas and oil, and

The lower energy efficiency of existing coal power plants versus generation technologies that use natural gas (e.g., combined cycle).

Fossil Carbon Intensity(lb. Carbon/MBTU)
Many Environmentalists (and apparently Policymakers also) believe that in reducing greenhouse gas emissions that the key is just to develop more solar and wind energy generation resources -- and its just that simple.

The problem is that in the "Real World", there is more to the story -- based on something called the integrated resource dispatch grid.

Generally, wind and solar power generating resources are considered either peaking or intermediate units and on the "dispatch grid" will displace natural gas generation resources.

Generation options such as nuclear, geothermal, and biomass energy resources are typically classified as "base load units" and most often will displace coal units.

No commentsRead more