Essay by Eric Worrall
In the 16th Century, coal saved the forests of Britain and Europe from total extinction. My question, who or what will save the forests this time?
EU votes to keep woody biomass as renewable energy, ignores climate risk
by Justin Catanoso on 16 September 2022
- Despite growing public opposition, the European Parliament voted this week not to declassify woody biomass as renewable energy. The forest biomass industry quickly declared victory, while supporters of native forests announced their plan to continue the fight — even in court.
- The EU likely renewed its commitment to burning wood as a source of energy largely to help meet its target of cutting EU carbon emissions by 55% by 2030, something it likely couldn’t achieve without woody biomass (which a carbon accounting loophole counts as carbon neutral, equivalent to wind and solar power).
- Scientific evidence shows that burning wood pellets is a major source of carbon at the smokestack. The European Union also likely continued its embrace of biomass this week as it looks down the barrel of Russian threats to cut off natural gas supplies this winter over the EU’s opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
- While the EU decision maintains that whole trees won’t be subsidized for burning, that natural forests will be protected, and that there will be limits to logging old growth and primary forests, these provisions include legal loopholes and were not backed with monitoring or enforcement commitments. No dates were set for biomass burning phase down.
For three years, European forest advocates have courted public opinion and lobbied the EU parliament to stop spending billions annually to subsidize the burning of wood for energy — a process ultimately dirtier than coal — and to reject the EU’s official designation of woody biomass as a renewable, zero-emissions energy source on par with wind and solar.
The relentless campaign grew steadily in strength, with recent opinion polls showing most Europeans in favor of protecting their shrinking natural forests over seeing them harvested to make wood pellets to burn in converted coal power plants. A growing portion of parliament too began speaking out against woody biomass burning.
So it was this week that the European Parliament voted in Brussels for amendments to its Renewable Energy Directive (RED) that are the first-ever ostensibly aimed at protecting natural forests and limiting biomass subsidies. But it was the bioenergy industry claiming victory on Wednesday, not forest advocates.
With the EU legally mandated to phase out coal by 2030, the parliament voted down an amendment to declassify woody biomass as a renewable energy source, which the bioenergy industry immediately applauded. With that continued designation, carbon emissions from biomass go legally uncounted by EU countries at the smokestack — as if they don’t exist.
…
The population of Britain in the 16 century (3-4 million people) and Europe (70-78 million) were a tiny fraction of today’s population, yet people back in the 16th century still managed to devastate all but the most remote and inaccessible forests, in their search for fuel and building materials.
How long will today’s European forests survive, now that British and European politicians want to reject coal, and are subsidising the chopping down of trees?
Only the discovery and exploitation of coal saved the forests of the 16th century from total extinction. Trees simply don’t grow fast enough to replace timber lost to large scale energy exploitation, even for 16th century needs, let alone today’s needs.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hey, it could be worse. They could be incentivizing child labor in Africa, slave labor in western China, and agenda science in schools. /sarc
Devastating pictures of the rape of America’s century-old hardwood forests… stripped bare to provide wood pellets for European energy plants – in a deluded bid to meet climate goals
Historic forests stretching from Texas to Virginia are under threat
More than two dozen pellet mills are devouring trees across the North American Coastal Plain
Wood pellet firm chiefs say they use waste wood, create jobs and benefit the U.S. southeast – but really, majestic century-old trees are being logged, environmentalists say
The European Union this week started cutting the subsidies that make the trade possible
Campaigners say ‘loopholes’ will help pellet firms keep on ripping up the forests
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11209335/Historic-U-S-southeast-hardwood-forests-threatened-rapacious-11B-wood-pellet-industry.html
Just convince them that trees are young coal and they will stop.
I’m trying to understand how burning wood is “cleaner” than burning coal – can anyone explain the reasoning there?
Green zealots:
Trees are renewable, ain’t they?
Besides, what else do they have? A sensible person might say, let’s use gas and nuclear instead. But sensible persons are in short supply in politics, bureaucracies and environmental organizations.
Coal is renewable, it just takes a few more years to compress and cook down but nature does that all by herself
Yup, trees are renewable and they are the best carbon-capture devices yet invented, but they do not excel at carbon sequestration. If we could bury the logs deep enough to replace (in ten thousand years) the coal and the oil, and if in the short term we could replace the buried nutrients, we’d be laughing. Plus, an important paper in Nature has shown that cutting down trees in boreal forests cools the planet (by exposing more winter snow to sunlight and thus increasing the annual-average albedo of the Earth).
Remember to go full speed ahead like the White Star Line owner did into the ice field of the north Atlantic.
Just like the IPCC reports the decisions are based on politics not science.
Burning trees from North Carolina will save Europe’s trees. Its a win win.
Beyond parody! When oh when will the Black Forest go?
Where have all the Forests gone,
Long time passing
Where have all the Forests gone,
Long time ago…
Where have all the Forests gone,
Gone to DRAX plants every one.
When will they ever learn
When will they ever learn
“a process ultimately dirtier than coal” It is issues like that that tell us the environmentalist don’t really care about the environment. It is all about their Marxist agenda and they are willing to bend/ignore science to get their way. These are not honest, trustworthy people. In truth they are evil. The ends justify the means.
I wonder if they’re using “Green Energy” to harvest these trees like the did with coal a hundred years ago?
1917 War Poster, Joseph Leyendecker, Order Coal Now
https://twitter.com/DemThink/status/1572223846794825728?s=20&t=DFkALAZClk1kDKNlBiHs1g
The age of sail seriously diminished England’s forests.
Keep in mind, that serious town/city/house fires caused England to insist that people build using stone and masonry, with as little wood as possible
In the United States, one of the grievances leading up to the revolution in the 1770s, was the designation of useful/desirable trees as “Crown trees”.
These were trees designated for use by the Crown, England, for their sailing ships.
A “Crown tree”, and designated as belonging to the King of England’s property.
The woodcutter might be paid for cutting down the tree, but that was the only remuneration.
Live oak “Crown trees” in the Mid Atlantic were decimated by the English. As were many tall New England Conifers taken for masts.
In Australia, there are several articles detailing the planned extensive renewable projects. The areas involved are huge.
Unfortunately most of that is native forest, or savannah grasslands. I will miss the countryside. In Europe, at least the forests cut down are put to a use, and then the forests will be allowed to regrow. Not in Australia.The planned, Green sanctioned environmental devastation we will see in Australia is unlike anything seen anywhere.