Biomass is carbon neutral
I note that many of the people who oppose renewable energy manipulate the facts to support their position. Such was the case with Robert Kischko’s letter in Saturday’s paper.
He speaks of the carbon dioxide gas emission from the proposed Springfield biomass plant. He neglects an important fact. As the forests regrow they take up this carbon dioxide, and the net results are zero carbon dioxide emissions.
I use biomass both to heat my house and run my maple sugaring operation. I cull this material from my sugarbush, resulting in enhanced growth of my crop trees. These, as they grow, take up the carbon dioxide that I release in my operation. The same arithmetic applies to all of us who burn wood, the Springfield plant included.
I am off grid; I use wind, solar, hydro and wood biomass to stay carbon neutral. I work very hard to stay this way. I resent Mr. Kischko’s implication that we wood burners are not carbon neutral.
Forest regrowth takes up the carbon we emit. Also, good biomass operations use weed trees that we should remove from our forest. Their removal creates space for profitable trees to grow. Biomass utilization, if done properly, also results in improved crop tree production in our forest and a much improved future for our lumber industry.