Why is it better to burn wood instead of coal? Compared with coal, wood fuel cut carbon emissions by 74% to 85% when they took into account the entire life cycle of both fuels, including emissions from production and transportation, and possible land-use shifts. Is wood more flammable than coal?
What is the difference between coal and wood carbon?
The difference is that the carbon in coal has been sequestered for the last 300 million years but the carbon in wood was only sequestered for a hundred years or so. That means burning coal (and other fossil fuels) brings CO2 into the atmosphere that hasn’t been there for 300 million years. That’s the reason atmospheric CO2 is rising,
What would happen if Europe started using wood instead of coal?
Based on a study Buchholz did for the Southern Environmental Law Center, if Europe imports southeastern U.S. wood instead of burning coal, atmospheric greenhouse gases could up to a 300 percent in the first 50 years, although they would drop below fossil fuel levels eventually.
Is burning wood pellets better for the environment than coal?
Atikokan's analysis found that burning wood pellets would have a 90 percent greenhouse gas emissions benefits over the lignite coal it previously consumed, most of which came from western Canada. It estimates 85 percent of the 90,000 metric tons of pellets will come from existing logging residues.
What are the pros and cons of using coal over wood?
Coal has the advantage of burning hotter then the same amount of wood so you would use less mass. This makes it easier to store then wood for the same amount of heat. You can use a smaller stove for coal so the footprint of the stove is smaller. I personally think coal gives off a more pleasant heat then wood.
Is wood or coal worse for the environment?
In fact, the authors wrote, “Scientific studies have shown that [wood burning] will worsen the consequences of climate change for decades or through the end of this century.” Wood burning emits more CO2 emissions than coal, is more expensive than utility-scale wind and solar, and has harmful knock-on effects like ...
Why is it better to burn wood?
1. It's better for your wallet – Reduces utility costs and virtually eliminates your heating bill. 2. It's better for your safety-By taking the risk of fire outside of the home, it removes the dangers associated with indoor burning including chimney fires, carbon monoxide poisoning or oxygen depletion.
Is burning wood worse than coal?
Wood pellets cause more climate pollution than coal when they're burned.
Why is burning coal so bad for the environment?
Coal impacts: air pollution When coal is burned it releases a number of airborne toxins and pollutants. They include mercury, lead, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates, and various other heavy metals.
Which is best to burn wood or coal?
Put another way, a coal-burning fire is less time consuming (once it has caught and is drawing well) than a wood-burning one. While creosote is a common problem with wood burning, coal deposits very little creosote in the flue.
Is it eco friendly to burn wood?
For several good reasons, wood burning is an environmentally friendly way to heat your home. During the life of a tree, it absorbs CO2 from the atmosphere. Whether wood is burned in a fire or whether it decays naturally over time, it gives off the same amount of carbon, an amount equal to what was absorbed.
Does wood release more CO2 than coal?
When burned, trees generate more CO2 emissions per unit of energy generated than fossil fuels. An oft overlooked fact is that burning wood emits more CO2 than fossil fuels per megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity generated or per unit of heat generated.
What is the difference between burning wood and coal?
Coal ignites at a temperature more than 100 degrees higher than wood, and it requires a hot bed of wood coals to get it started. Being far denser than wood, coal burns more steadily and longer.
Do wood fires contribute to global warming?
Firewood production is often considered to be CO2–neutral, if the carbon dioxide emitted by burning the wood is absorbed by replacement trees. However, burning firewood in the domestic heaters that are currently available in Australia produces methane and black carbon particles that increase global warming.
Why should we stop using coal?
At every stage of its life — from extraction to burning — coal does serious damage. Coal is the top contributor to climate change, is a leading cause of mercury pollution, and continues to scar mining communities in countless ways. Coal also threatens our economic security.
Is coal the dirtiest energy source?
Coal, again, is the dirtiest fuel. It emits much more greenhouse gases than other sources – hundreds of times more than nuclear, solar, and wind. Oil and gas are also much worse than nuclear and renewables, but to a lesser extent than coal.
Is coal the worst fossil fuel?
Coal is a fossil fuel, and is the dirtiest of them all, responsible for over 0.3C of the 1C increase in global average temperatures. This makes it the single largest source of global temperature rise. Oil releases a huge amount of carbon when burned - approximately a third of the world's total carbon emissions.
Is it better to burn wood or let it decay?
Moreover, burning wood releases all the carbon dioxide in one roaring blaze, whereas your decaying pile would take years to break down, meaning that brush would do way less damage while we wait for the human race to come to its sense, call off its apocalypse, and drastically cut CO2 emissions.
Is burning wood cheaper than gas?
In fact, it means that a wood burning stove costs about a third of the price of electric heating and approximately 13% less than gas central heating for the average household.
What do you get from burning wood?
When wood comes in contact with fire, it sets off a series of complex chemical reactions. The combustion of wood results in the release of carbon dioxide, water vapor and various gaseous products, as well as the formation of black solid residues like charcoal and ash.
Is it worth having a wood burning stove?
A wood burning stove can be worth it alone for the increased heat output from your fires compared to using open wood burning fireplaces, and you'll save on firewood costs in the long run because you can control the fire more effectively in a wood stove to burn more slowly and efficiently.
Why is Drax worse than burning coal?
If some pellets for Drax are not coming from residues, but from cutting whole trees as National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) asserts is already happening, the carbon payback can look worse compared with burning coal because more mature trees absorb more carbon than smaller trees do.
Where does Atikokan wood come from?
All of the wood will come from within 200 kilometers of the power plant, from the province’s Crown forests, greatly reducing shipping costs and emissions. Atikokan's analysis found that burning wood pellets would have a 90 percent greenhouse gas emissions benefits over the lignite coal it previously consumed, most of which came from western Canada. It estimates 85 percent of the 90,000 metric tons of pellets will come from existing logging residues.
Can coal be replaced with wood?
Although replacing coal with wood is hotly debated, the extent to which older coal plants will be converted partially or completely to biomass is limited by various factors, such as energy efficiency and the price of natural gas. Cheap natural gas has meant that many utilities have decided to build gas plants or make more use of existing ones, instead of upgrading old coal plants. In 2010 FirstEnergy Corp. canceled plans to convert two units of a plant in Ohio to biomass because of low energy prices, which were partially driven by the price of natural gas. Tilbury power station in the U.K. decided earlier this year to shut down completely after partially converting to biomass because it could not secure the subsidies needed to move fully to biomass. In Ontario most of the coal capacity is being replaced by solar, wind and natural gas, the latter of which can respond faster to balance intermittent renewables on the grid than coal-fired power plants.
Is wood a waste?
The plant also uses natural gas, but wood is the primary fuel source. The wood is considered waste, said Jeff Guillemette, biomass fuel manager for Ever-Green Energy, which operates the plant. Jeff Guillemette, biomass fuel manager for Ever-Green Energy, said it’s been a busy fall, but trees are recycled all year round.
Does Emerald Ash borer happen in winter?
Some tree removal, such as for emerald ash borer, happens in the winter, providing fuel for the District Energy power plant that heats buildings in downtown St. Paul. Elizabeth Dunbar | MPR News. “It's been a busy fall,” he said, adding that tree companies and city crews bring in plenty of trees in the winter, too.
Is it bad to switch out a gas furnace for a wood furnace?
But it wouldn’t be a good thing if all of us switched out our natural gas furnaces for wood furnaces. In urban areas, burning wood contributes other kinds of pollution that are harmful to people's health, especially the tiny particles in soot that can get into people's lungs.
Is wood a renewable resource?
Burning that wood for heat speeds up the process, he said, but it's carbon neutral, as long as it's managed in a way that allows for new growth and new opportunities for carbon absorption. "Wood is a renewable resource, assuming that the forests that the wood is taken from are managed sustainably,” Bowyer said.
Do trees live forever?
Trees, of course, don't live forever. One way to lock in that carbon capture for the long term is by harvesting a tree for lumber before it decomposes and allowing new trees to grow it its place. But if a tree is left to die and decompose, Bowyer said, “the decay process is exactly the reverse of photosynthesis.”.
Is burning wood a fossil fuel?
Paul. Wood — unlike oil, coal and natural gas — is not considered a fossil fuel.
Why is wood burned compared to coal?
Probably the best if not the only reason to burn wood as compared to coal is that wood, if properly managed, is a sustainable resource whereas coal is a limited and finite supply.
Which type of coal is the best to burn?
Coal is not a single compound but multiple types, Coal Anthracite is the best type of coal to burn because it concentrates more specific energy (Wh/kg) and is cleaner than Bituminous or Lignite Coal and even Wood
What is wood made of?
Wood, however is made from the carbon in the air of today and the recent past. As trees grow they grab carbon dioxide from the air using light, split it into carbon and oxygen, which is incorporated into the wood and forms sugars in sap and nectar. When you burn wood you release carbon from the air of the recent past not millions of years ago. As such the net carbon dioxide doesn't rise.
What happens if CO2 is high?
CO2 is a simple asphyxiant, meaning that it drives off oxygen, so if the CO2 concentration gets high enough you suffocate.
Does burning coal increase CO2?
Burning almost anything releases carbon dioxide, but the carbon in coal has come from the an cient world some hundreds of millions of years ago. So burning coal, a fossil fuel, causes atmospheric CO2 concentration to rise and cause a rise in global temperature.
Is coal a pollution product?
In terms of other pollution products, coal is more problematic as it can contain sulfur. Burning sulfur produces sulfur dioxide what dissolves in water to produce sulfuric acid and thus acid rain. Acid rain - Wikipedia
Is wood renewable?
Well, wood is somewhat renewable, in theory at least. The problem is deforestation. If you actually replant the logged areas, it is carbon neutral except for the carbon required to harvest and replant the trees.
How much particulate matter does a wood stove emit?
That is about 60 g/h of particulate matter at highway speed. My EPA certified wood stove emits an average of 3 g/h of particulate matter per hour of operation. So what should have priority, my home heating or a truck taking computer games to Wal-Mart?
How long has the human species lived in wood smoke?
Finally, in light of Burning Issues warnings of immanent disease and death from wood smoke, consider this: The human species lived with its collective head in a cloud of wood smoke for its entire million year history on earth, until the last 150 years. If the periodic exposure to the smell of wood smoke were anything like as toxic and dangerous as the fanatics would like you to believe, we never would have got this far.
Is wood smoke good for you?
Please don't misunderstand me, we don't consider wood smoke good to breathe. Clearly, it is not healthy for you. But neither is diesel truck and bus exhaust or car exhaust or many other pollutants. This is from the Union of Concerned Scientists:
Can a forest tolerate a loss of biomass?
My assessment is that a healthy, well managed forest can tolerate a moderate loss of biomass each year without any decline in viability.
Is it naive to think that science will surprise us with a new energy source that will solve all?
It is naive to think that 'science' will surprise us with a new energy source that will solve all our problems. The solution lies in using a lot less energy of all types and using more regionally specific and appropriate fuels. But then, I suspect you have your mind made up.
Is wood heat better than fossil fuels?
While I agree that wood heat alternatives might be better in the short term than fossil fuel dependency, the world is also in deforestation crises, and by encouraging wood use, you are fostering this depletion – another imbalance to our ecology. We need to find an alternative energy source that truly is "alternative" and does not rely on "endangered" resources.
Do trees lose minerals?
Yes, you are quite right that when trees are taken for fuelwood something is lost from the site. You are also right that the main loss is in the form of minerals. However, keep in mind that in the entire life cycle of the tree, the part taken is only certain fraction of the total contribution to the site of that tree. Each year deciduous trees deposit a fair mass of leaves on the forest floor and coniferous trees drop leaves on a continuous or multi-year cycle. Over a 50 year period that is a big contribution to the mineral and biomass stock of the soils. When it is harvested, we take only the bulky solid wood, not the entire tree. Also, in most of North America about half (it is hard to estimate) of the firewood produced is a byproduct of other forestry operations that produce saw logs or pulp.
How long would forests last if we burned wood?
basil_hayden wrote: Nate Hagens pointed out (on the oil drum I believe) that our forests would last about 6 months if the population began burning wood for heat to replace fossil fuels including coal.
Why are biomass plants polluting?
Biomass power plants are disproportionately polluting not just because of their low efficiency (in converting heat to electrical output) and high emissions inherent in burning wood for energy , but also because the bioenergy industry exploits and actually depends on important loopholes in the Clean Air Act and its enforcement, loopholes that make bioenergy far more polluting than it would be if it were regulated like fossil fuels. Our review of 88 air permits of biomass power plants tabulated information on facility size, fuel use, pollution control technology, and allowable emissions. Some of the facility permits were issued under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program in the Clean Air Act, which requires “major sources” of pollution to reduce emissions by conducting a the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis, and also requires facilities to conduct air quality modeling that assesses whether they will violate EPA’s air quality standards and threaten health.
How much carbon monoxide does a biomass plant emit?
Comparison of permits from modern coal, biomass, and gas plants shows that a even the “cleanest” biomass plants can emit > 150% the nitrogen oxides, > 600% the volatile organic compounds, > 190% the particulate matter, and > 125% the carbon monoxide of a coal plant per megawatt-hour, although coal produces more sulfur dioxide (SO2). Emissions from a biomass plant exceed those from a natural gas plant by more than 800% for every major pollutant.
What coal did Smurfs1976 burn?
Smurfs1976 wrote: I tried burning coal (brown coal briquettes) in the wood heater once.
Is burning wood better than coal?
Additionally, in the mistaken belief that burning wood is better for the environment that other fuels, wood and biomass plants are less regulated than coal plants. Some "biomass" plants actually burn construction and demolition debris, which emits uncontrolled amounts of HAPs (hazardous air pollutants) and more toxic heavy metals than does coal. The EPA allows this on the theory that debris represents a "minor" fuel and most of the actual fuel is "clean" biomass. There is no monitoring of the fuel sources, a plant licensed to burn mostly biomass may burn mostly polluting debris with no danger of being fined.
Is wood renewable or fossilized?
1) Although both coal and wood are renewable, wood renews in a much faster cycle (decades) while coal takes millions of years to fossilize. Still, the peat being deposited in our wetlands will one day become coal, unless it is dug up and dried and burned as biomass.
Can you have a wood based economy?
You cannot have a "wood-based economy" either. It was possible in the 1700's and earlier, but you cannot have metals, plastics, electronics, medicine, or mechanized agriculture with wood. You can't have an Amish lifestyle either - even simple blacksmithing with charcoal can only shape iron made by coal and coke.
Why is there a shortage of wood fuel?
The reasons for this growing shortage of wood fuel are various. Consumption of fuel increased as population grew and industry burnt more, while the supply seems to have dwindled as woodland of great antiquity was cleared to provide more cultivated land.
When did the price of wood increase?
This growing shortage of wood manifested itself in a price inflation of astonishing magnitude. The cost of firewood was stable until the 1540s, yet it quadrupled by the 1580s and reached ten times its old level by the 1620s. Charcoal, though rather less seriously affected, followed the same pattern in a six-fold increase by the 1660s.
