http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100924095819.htm
There is a new heating system that is more less a community center. This would be very environmental friendly. This heating unit is like a building where you put natural things in, such as your trash and wood. Buring wood reduces greenhouse gas because when you burn wood it re-releases carbon dioxide into the air. This community heating system would be costly at first but in the long run you would save so much more money. Plus it's not even about the money when you think about how you're helping the environment. I think many people would be in favor of this idea in the US. They have already started working on this in the UK, so if they can do it i know we can as well. By burning wood the UK saved greenhouse gas reductions over 84% and think they can keep saving with this new heating scheme. They also want to start using sustainable fuels rather than fossil fuels. You could really help save how much carbon dioxide was used if we did this. So i think the US should really look into it.
The general idea of a community heating center is good for conserving energy and saving money, but I disapprove of burning wood. If the point of this new heating source is to conserve natural resources and go to renewable resources, why burn trees? Yes, trees to grow back and they are easier to create than fossil fuels, but shouldn't we look more towards solar or wind energy, something that is made daily? Trees take several years to grow, and if we deplete the tree supply even more than we do making paper, what good does not using fossil fuels do us? The trees then become the new fossil fuels. Furthermore, burning trees releases methane into the air. While we would cut down on the carbon being released, methane is another gas we don’t want in high amounts. This idea is a start in the right direction, but certainly not a fix.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Hayden because if we end up using more trees for another source other than paper where will that even leave trees on the earth in ten years? I think that there is a way that they can possibly burn something else to create the energy because if we burn all the trees the not just the animals will go extinct but we could possibly go extinct too. I don't know about you but I want to stay alive quit a bit longer. Like Hayden said yes it is easier but it is definitely not going to fix anything just make things much worse.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the UK can save from the new heating scheme they think that will actually help in reality makes the whole thing much worse in the air.
Perhaps the U.K. should look further into their heating system because in all reality it is a short term fix, true but definitely not a safe or conservative long term fix. As Haydan and Katilyn have pointed out, this would cause tree depletion much faster than what we would be able to supply. So this is awesome that the U.K. is attempting to conserve, but maybe they should rethink their tactics.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the general idea of a community heating center is a good idea, it would use alot of resources such as tress for the burning of the wood. I dont think burning wood is an appropriate way to heat an house. Like hayden said, if he whole purpose is to use less natrual resources why would they use wood as resource? We already use numerous of trees for our paper supply so the idea of burning wood would deplete the population of trees even faster.
ReplyDeleteAs good as this idea sounds i agree on not burning wood for a source of heat because that would be so many more trees being used when we could use a different resource. At least the UK is starting to look at different sources of heating. Hopefully they will try to find a way to be able to use the trash from landfills or something like that for a source of heating.
ReplyDeleteThis is a solid idea. They are using natural materials though. They would be using wood and some thing to stat the fires. And fires create smog which is also another enviromental issue.
ReplyDelete