Quote:
Originally Posted by b1crunch
Alright, so a few pages back in this thread you argued that Canada's percentage of the total global emissions was so small that it wasn't an issue worth worrying about, but now you're suggesting the harvesting and burning of wood pellets is a massive issue that needs immediate solutions. I mean, the whole harvesting and shipping of the wood pellets would be part of Canada's emissions totals, right? Why is the carbon emissions of associated with wood burning pellets (a single industry) an issue but the entire carbon emissions (all industries) as produced by Canada is not an issue?
I'm confused. (I'm not saying we as a society shouldn't care about the issue, we 100% should. I'm questioning the logic at which you seem to come to these conclusions, which seem to be at odds with one another.)
|
I've literally been arguing for years that tree planting, utilization of wood based resources (such as wood waste), engineered wood products, CLT construction, etc are all extremely important when it comes to reduction of carbon emissions in industries such as construction. Concrete production alone accounts for 7% of the world's emissions, and WOOD is our primary way of moving away from that.
But you're not doing that if what you do with wood is burning it for fuel.
At the same time, Fuzz is right. Burning natural gas is more carbon friendly. So why are we not doing that instead of pumping taxpayer money into burning more wood pellets? I thought its all about what is better for the environment?
Or perhaps it is all about what is perceived to be better, and governments have zero interest in developing fossil fuel industries? And of course that wouldn't have anything to do with the lies that are associated with how oil & gas actually works in reality?
