Letters support carbon neutrality of biomass
In a letter to U.S. House and Senate leaders last week, 114 of the nation’s leading environmental scientists express concern over the proposed U.S. EPA’s Tailoring Rule equating biogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with fossil fuel emissions.
See, see, see, that tops the 90 scientists supporting the Manomet hoax.
No word on how many of the 114 work for Monsanto.
On the other hand, Monsanto isn't in the business of growing franken monster trees that will surely eat the planet. At least Monsanto isn't in that horrid business as far as I know.
The carbon dioxide released from the combustion or decay of woody biomass is part of the global cycle of biogenic carbon and does not increase the amount of carbon in circulation, according to the scientists. Equating biogenic carbon emissions with that of fossil fuels is not consistent with good science and could stop the development of new emission-reducing biomass energy facilities, they add. "It could also encourage existing biomass energy facilities to convert to fossil fuel or cease producing renewable energy. This is counter to our country’s renewable energy and climate mitigation goals."
Aww what's a few trillion more tons of CO2 and methane in the atmosphere if it makes the Sierra Club happy? Who needs good science when we have political science?
the scientists argue that biomass power facilities generally contribute to a reduction of GHGs beyond just displacement of fossil fuels, as the use of forest fuels in modern boilers eliminates methane emissions from incomplete oxidation following open burning, landfilling, or decomposing, which occurs in the absence of a higher and better use for the material.
Dirty pool, science guys. Not fair attacking Mother Nature.
So how does one choose rationally between scientists?
Thinking is my suggestion.
If that is out of the question, try jobs converting fossil fuel plants and engines to biomass.
If that doesn't grab you, I am out of ideas.
Best, Terry