Re: Is conversion of biomass to h/carbons CO2 neutral ?
- From: "Bill Reif" <billreif@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 06:28:53 GMT
"ivk" <ivk2000@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9b1c023d-c334-4e98-ade6-4bfddb52196c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
My understanding is that a conversion of a biomass to hydrocarbons,
assisted with extra hydrogen (and potentially extra energy) generated
from nuclear plants, should be CO2 neutral. So wouldn't it resolve
both the shortage of fossil fuel and CO2 pollution ? Why then all
these futuristic "hydrogen economy", "ammonia economy", etc are
needed ?
because the creation of the biomass is not CO2 nutral. The creation of
Ethynol actually uses more fuel than its burning saves us, due to the fuel
necessary to create the fertilizer, the demands of transportation and soil
preparation, and the inefficiencies of the decomposition process. (We would
gain some efficiency by simply mixing our coal and other carbon-based trash
with the tons of coal put into our power plants.) Furthermore: the farming
industry results in much much methane and nitrisoxide in the atmosphere,
both of which, along with increased water vapor farms generate, trap several
times the heat as does CO2. I believe that the nitrogen product decay
components also stay in the atmosphere a lot longer than does CO2, which
plants are taking up at much greater rates as we've made it more available.
As oil availability decreases, it will be food production that takes the
hit. That doesn't leave much fertilizer to squander on biomass production.
Bill
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Is conversion of biomass to h/carbons CO2 neutral ?
- Next by Date: Re: Is conversion of biomass to h/carbons CO2 neutral ?
- Previous by thread: Is conversion of biomass to h/carbons CO2 neutral ?
- Next by thread: Re: Is conversion of biomass to h/carbons CO2 neutral ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
