Biomass: Seeing the Forest Through the Trees

The future of biomass is not about the cutting of trees. Biomass is using waste vegetation, which all around you, including your yard waste, not necessarily trees. Processing this material to use as fuel, not create steam, but by using the heat and compressed air to turn turbines will then increase the energy efficiency and emit lower emmissions than steam systems presently used. This research is currently being tested by a New Hampshire based company. Think of the jobs that will be created by doing this in fuel processing and manufacturing.

Due to concerns of global warming, I would not recommend any biomass or biofuel be used until CO2 levels get back down to about 260 ppm, which may take 50 years. We heated our house with wood for 50 years, but we need to be removing CO2, by making biochar, and putting it into the ground. See http://www.gobisolar.com/ for a projection of energy sources through 2050. There is currently a shortage of oil of about 1%, which has caused gas and oil prices to go through the roof, but a rapid growth of wind and solar energy that shortage will grow to 20% by 2015. The projection is based on meeting 10% of our energy from wind and 10% by solar by 2015, in order to eliminate that shortfall.

Why does NPR allow these biomass proponents to pollute our airwaves? Biomass is neither renewable nor alternative energy. It is sustainable (if done in moderation) but there are far better technologies for sustainability than burning trees. We already have to much development and logging in this beautiful state - I can't imagine how much a full scale energy production from wood would rape our landscape, destroy ecosystems and cheapen the quality of life. The supposed "environmental benefits" of burning trees is a magician's trick as it is still releasing CO2 and particulant emissions and it is misleading to the public for a responsible radio station to be validating this technology.

With all of the great technologies available that fall under 'alternative energy', biomass should not be one of them. Its disturbing that they are given a full hour of free promotion for a false cause by NHPR.

I believe your program on biomass energy on may 19, while educational, had a much to narrow focus. We now have several energy options for wood biomass utilization. Small scale, using biomass to soley heat and potentially cool an individual or small cluster of buildings like the Merrimack Valley High/Middle School in Pennacook, or the Nubanusit Village that was mentioned on your program. Community and large campus scale, where combined heat and power starts becoming competive such as Concord Steam, the Crotched Mt Rehabiliatation Center in Greenfield, NH and the several communities, particularly in the north country that are looking at heat led district systems. Heat led means that heat or cooling through chillers is the primary goal. Electricity, in these cases, can be produced, depending on the scale of ther project, but likely only for electrical needs within the confines of where the boiler is located. Current PUc regulations do not permit power distribution "outside the fence". And finally commercial scale, electricity led, biomass energy which is what you concentrated on in your show. The general inefficiency of electrical production (not just limited to biomass) must direct our thinking to more efficiecient uses of biomass as a renewable fuel. Other issues that make this discussion often confusing are terms such as "carbon nuetral", which needs clarification. I also take issue with Curt that we must be willing to accept a fundamental change in our forest resource base if we look to biomass as a serious fuel component for our energy needs. I believe we can maintain the forest diversity that we need and desire while extracting a sustainable level of fuel.