SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
U.S. EPA says it will define wood as a 'carbon-neutral' fuel, reigniting debate
Weighing in on a fierce, long-standing climate debate, the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Washington, D.C., said yesterday the agency will now define wood as a "carbon-neutral" fuel for many regulatory purposes.
The "announcement grants America's foresters much-needed certainty and clarity with respect to the carbon neutrality of forest biomass," EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said at an event in Cochran, Georgia, The Washington Post reports. But many environmental groups and energy experts decried the move, arguing the science is far from settled on whether wood is a climate-friendly fuel.
As Science contributing correspondent Warren Cornwall reported last year, the forest products industry has long been pushing for the carbon neutral definition in a bid to make wood an attractive fuel for generating electricity in nations trying to move away from fossil fuels. The idea is "attractively simple," Cornwall reported:
The carbon released when trees are cut down and burned is taken up again when new trees grow in their place, limiting its impact on climate. ...
Yet moves by governments around the world to designate wood as a carbon-neutral fuel—making it eligible for beneficial treatment under tax, trade, and environmental regulations—have spurred fierce debate. Critics argue that accounting for carbon recycling is far more complex than it seems. They say favoring wood could actually boost carbon emissions, not curb them, for many decades, and that wind and solar energy—emissions-free from the start—are a better bet for the climate. Some scientists also worry that policies promoting wood fuels could unleash a global logging boom that trashes forest biodiversity in the name of climate protection.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday April 26 2018, @05:14PM (9 children)
Complete and utter bullshit.
Modern plumbing has saved more lives than medicine ever did. Modern plumbing is what makes disease control possible.
One thing that appears to be repeated in modern civilizations: when they reach a level of maturity and wealth that children are not required to support he adults in their old age, population growth drops off, and in many cases becomes negative.
Remove the financial need to have many children, provide education on and access to birth control and population growth stops. We know this.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday April 26 2018, @05:39PM (7 children)
India is the second most populous nation in the world - and they didn't get that way due to indoor plumbing. Your suggestion implies that if/when they stop shitting in the fields and in the streets, their population will skyrocket? On the contrary, their population rose in proportion to other nations, such as Chine, over the past 200 years or so.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:18PM (6 children)
Are you asserting that the people in India that don't have access to indoor plumbing have access to modern medicine?
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:22PM (4 children)
No, Ma href=https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-05-12/india-access-toilets-remains-huge-problem-worst-all-women-and-girls>only 70% DON'T have access to indoor plumbing.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:22PM
Damn: https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-05-12/india-access-toilets-remains-huge-problem-worst-all-women-and-girls [pri.org]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:45PM (2 children)
Go back and read my post again. I did not assert that lack of toilets was not an issue in India.
Oh, WTF, it's pointless trying to correct the idiots here.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2018, @07:40PM (1 child)
Just let them hate on "third world savages" who have no "personal responsibility" and just breed like rabbits. These haters can't even stomach the idea of providing support to their fellow citizens, doubly so for the people outside their tribe.
(Score: 1) by Captival on Thursday April 26 2018, @10:05PM
Give me all your money so I can distribute it to my friends however I see fit. You have no choice, shut up and do it.
That's what many people object to.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday April 27 2018, @01:26AM
Yes, many of them do. There are drives in India to get children vaccinated, to get prenatal and natal care to women of child bearing age, and more. Most of that is readily accepted by the population. At the same time, the drive to provide modern plumbing is actively resisted. It's not just rural people, either.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-27775327 [bbc.co.uk]
"Just building toilets is not going to solve the problem, because open defecation is a practice acquired from the time you learn how to walk. When you grow up in an environment where everyone does it, even if later in life you have access to proper sanitation, you will revert back to it," says Sue Coates, chief of Wash (water, sanitation and hygiene) at Unicef.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 26 2018, @06:27PM
Above you assured us that just getting the first two kids to adulthood would reduce population.
Now you say just getting the parents mature and wealthy will do it.
Stop throwing ideas against the wall, and state an actual case.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.