[Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 16

[Paul Harris]

G'day Robin et al,

The advantage of using biomass (or organic waste as is possible with AD) is
that we are "rapid cycling" CO2, as the plant material that was recently
absorbing CO2 is used to make CO2 that will (hopefully) be reabsorbed. The
problem with fossil fuels is that the carbon sequestered a long time ago is
released into the atmosphere with no hope of being returned to fossil
reserves in the near future (by definition). Every kJ of biogas that
replaces a kJ of fossil fuel is a win/win situation.

Happy Digesting,
HOOROO

PS: Please delete parts of the original message that are not needed in your
reply!

Mr. Paul Harris, Room 202 Charles Hawker Building, Faculty of Sciences, The 
University of Adelaide, Waite Campus, PMB 1, Glen Osmond SA 5064 Ph    : +61
8 8303 7880      Fax   : +61 8 8303 4386
mailto:paul.harris at adelaide.edu.au  
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/directory/paul.harris

CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
information that may be confidential and/or copyright.  If you are not the
intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and immediately
delete this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by anyone
other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. No
representation is made that this email or any attachments are free of
viruses. Virus scanning is recommended and is the responsibility of the
recipient.



-----Original Message-----
From: digestion-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:digestion-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Jones,
Robin (TWP)
Sent: Friday, 22 July 2011 6:02 PM
To: 'digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org'
Subject: Re: [Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 11, Issue 16

Something I have been thinking about for quite some time now.

I understand that the whole argument surrounding global warming is that
temperatures etc. have changed proportionately to CO2 levels in the earth's
atmosphere. The hypothesis is that CO2 forms a thermal blanket through which
the transmission of heat waves to outer space is retarded.

For most heat to be created the primary starting point is combustion which
in most cases produce CO2. Therefore the level of CO2 in earth's atmosphere
is proportional to the heat generated by the primary energy source (i.e.
Combustion). If this is the case, can't we conclude that global warming is
also proportionate to the thermal energy produced worldwide. 

Considering this hypothesis, shouldn't we be focusing more on conserving
energy before we look at alternatives to produce more? There are hugely
inefficient processes that continue operating on a global scale. The Kyoto
protocol has assisted in quantifying, regulating CO2 footprints as well as
reducing them. Is the world moving towards regulations on kWhs utilized
against output capacity for each specific industry (e.g. a maximum of XkWh's
per ton cement, food, mineral etc. produced) failing which these entities
would face fines or closure until they comply?

I know my thinking is very simplistic; however it would be great to see what
the rest of this forum can add to this topic. The consequences of not
debating or sharing new ideas on this topic   would be dire to all that live
on Earth.

Robin Jones