@husmanden @betateach @MLiebreich @_heatgeek @swebster56 I have indeed. As I understand it, atmospheric carbon is taken up slowly by trees as they grow, thereby sequestering it. Burning fuels like coal, gas, oil and wood returns this carbon instantly to the atmosphere, requiring it to be once again taken up slowly by trees. Correct?
@edbradburn @betateach @MLiebreich @_heatgeek @swebster56 Fossil fuels are carbon stored over millions of years. Burning biomass is part of the natural carbon cycle. Not saying we shouldn't limit burning of biomass to a minimum. We shoul only use it where the direct use of electricity is not an option.
@husmanden @betateach @MLiebreich @_heatgeek @swebster56 Humans burning trees is part of the natural carbon cycle? I'm not sure I follow you there. Surely trees dying after a fairly long lifetime, followed by slow rotting and a release of (some) of their carbon over decades or centuries is the natural carbon cycle?
@edbradburn @betateach @MLiebreich @_heatgeek @swebster56 Or in one year, if we are talking about straw. Biomass is many other things than trees.
@edbradburn @betateach @MLiebreich @_heatgeek @swebster56 And yes, biomass burning is part of the natural carbon cycle.
@husmanden @edbradburn @betateach @MLiebreich @swebster56 Wouldn't the planet be better without more wild fire equivalents?
@_heatgeek @edbradburn @betateach @MLiebreich @swebster56 True. Just trying to put some perspective to the fierce resistance against anything carbon. Hydrogen is a shitty fuel, so can’t see us getting by with hydrogen alone. And carbon is cycled all the time. With every breath we take.
@husmanden @_heatgeek @betateach @MLiebreich @swebster56 Green hydrogen is tricky to make and tricky to store so it can be used but it‘s the most energy-rich fuel we have (excepting nuclear power). I’d certainly be more hopeful of success with green H than biomass for applications where either could be used.
@edbradburn @_heatgeek @betateach @MLiebreich @swebster56 Fuel pressurised to several hundred bars or cooled to -250 degrees Celsius is not trivial. I think the majority of people underestimates that challenge. And the danger.
@husmanden @_heatgeek @betateach @MLiebreich @swebster56 Yes, exactly. Green methane could be a better solution. That solves the timescale problem of biomass by taking carbon out of the atmosphere and putting it back on a scale that gets the inputs as close to the outputs as possible. A much-improved cycle. At least as I understand it.
@edbradburn @_heatgeek @betateach @MLiebreich @swebster56 Upgrading CO2 in biogas, extracting gasses for synfuel/syngas with pyrolysis are other options. Here a model for a 100% renewable Denmark. The different fuel producing processes provides (waste) heat, thus the coupling to district heating.