Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
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?  |
So in your view there's a 'hidden agenda' by the government to favour wood pellet production and burning over oil and gas production? So, governments are labeling wood pellet production and burning as 'green' because they have some vested interest in doing it, but these same governments lie and/or deceive about practises in the oil and gas industry? And you're suggesting that these governments don't support wood pellet burning because it is supposedly 'green' but for other (unspecified) nefarious reasons? Do I understand you correctly?
Also, which government(s) are you upset with here? Federal/provincial/Canada/USA/UK?
Also, it sounds like you think Canada's contributions to global carbon emissions are a problem. Am I reading this right?