On 6/9/07, Peter Halasz <email(a)pengo.org> wrote:
To reply to a few random bits, while trying to avoid
another rant on
why we should try to reach zero-emissions:
1.
Nuclear power is not a renewable energy source.
Neither is anything else unless you are going to rewrite the laws of
thermodynamics. Nuclear reactors using fast breeder technology will
last long enough.
3.
I know it was said in jest, but to correct a misconception, and have a
bit of an off topic rant: paper production actually releases a
surprising amount of carbon. Especially when the woodchip for the
pulpmill was from an old growth forest that will take hundreds of
years to regain its previous level of carbon storage in the trees and
soil. A large part of the carbon of a forest is found in the soil, and
this is often burnt after the wood is harvested, releasing massive
amounts of carbon (at least from what I understand of the situation
around here in Australia. Probably different elsewhere). A large
percentage of the wood does not end up in paper or wood products
either (I've heard numbers upwards of 90%, but I don't know where they
were pulled from). I understand there are some papers coming out about
this soon. A huge amount of carbon dioxide emissions can be saved
simply by not cutting down trees and unfortunately the value of not
logging forests was left out of the Kyoto protocol. (plantations are a
different matter). </rant>
I live in the UK. Between about the end of ww2 and the 1960s we
planted rather a lot of pine forests. Now harvesting the stupid
things. Got to do something with them.
--
geni