🚀 go-pugleaf

"Robert" <RB@..> wrote in message 
news:619u23d54lhtc02g4ee3r1o5mr2pofob3r@4ax.com...
> BURNING FACTS
>
> Many people are concerned about climate change but most are a bit 
> mystified as
> to how Australia stands. Here are some facts and figures.
>
> Australia burns about 120 million tonnes of fossil fuels per year, 
> producing
> some 300 million tonnes of CO2. Australia also burns over one million 
> hectares
> of bush each year, releasing 150 million tonnes of CO2 or 30% of its total 
> CO2
> output.

Which the Aborigines were doing long before white men arrived........

> Last summer's bushfires produced considerably more greenhouse gases
> than Australia's normal yearly output from all other sources.

So?

> The current S.E. 'hazard reduction' burn, involving some 60000 hectares of 
> SE
> forests, will convert well over one million tonnes of forest litter into 
> three
> million tonnes of CO2 and one million tonnes of water vapour....equivalent 
> to
> three days of Australia's total fossil usage and about six times the 
> yearly
> output of all SE residents and tourists.

And it will burn anyway. Whether people burn it in a controlled way, or 
mother nature does it in an uncontrolled way - they result is the same.

>
> When burned, one tonne of dry forest litter produces 5000 KwH of heat 
> energy or
> about half as much as does the same weight of petrol. The current program 
> will
> release over five billion Kwh of heat into the atmosphere, worth some $600
> million retail. That's enough to power Eurobodalla for about four years or 
> keep
> the whole of Canberra warm over winter...and it's literally all going up 
> in
> smoke...as well as in our eyes, up our noses and down our lungs. This is 
> most
> unfortunate to say the least.

The only 'unfortunate' thing about it is that you obviously don't have a 
fucking clue.

> We live in an energy hungry world and cannot afford to simply burn this
> valuable material as though there is an infinite supply. There isn't...and 
> when
> oil and coal become scarce we'll certainly have to harness every form of 
> energy
> we can.

ROFL. I don't know what planet you live on, but here on earth plants GROW. 
They are a renewable resource you fucking moron.

>
> There's an element of pyromania in all of us since fire was always 
> associated
> with warmth, food, good times and security. It isn't surprising therefore 
> that
> the age-old myth about forests requiring regular burning has attracted a 
> large
> cult following of those with a psychological or financial interest in 
> seeing
> things burn. The well-organised pro-fire lobby has now amassed such a vast
> collection of so called 'scientific evidence' to support their obsession 
> that
> no politician or group of citizens has the ability or courage to stand up 
> to
> them and question their motives.
>
> In reality, although new green shoots look most impressive against a 
> blackened
> background, fire spells almost total disaster for a forest.

Utter bullshit.
My almost destroyed by the Ash Wednesday fires. Looking at it now, other 
than a few black trunks on (living) trees, you wouldn't even know.

> Often a completely
> new ecosystem emerges from the ashes, complete with weeds, flammable 
> shrubs and
> exotic flora and fauna. Not only are huge amounts of heat and CO2 pumped 
> into
> the atmosphere but also enough particulate matter to considerably reduce 
> the
> chances of rain. Not only does it destroy the material that protects the 
> earth
> and supplies the forest with nutrients but also it wipes out the countless
> millions of essential creatures that would normally compost that litter 
> into
> fertile topsoil. Because plants need hundreds of times their own weight of
> water to grow, an extra metre or so of rain is required just to restore a 
> burnt
> forest to its previous condition.

Which is why controlled burns are the way to go. They are usually limited to 
vegetation below the tree canopy and do not generate enough heat to 
penetrate far into the earth.

>
> We all know that hot bush fires are to be avoided wherever possible and we 
> all
> respect the work of our essential fire crews. However one must seriously
> question whether regular hazard reduction burns are either effective or 
> wise.
> They wipe out both the engine room of the forest and the fuel that is 
> supposed
> to make it run well into the future. Surely, in today's climate, there are 
> more
> constructive and less polluting uses for this valuable commodity.
>
> Here are some suggestions. Firstly, call on research bodies to devise 
> efficient
> ways to collect surplus material. (Remember its heat content is 
> potentially
> worth about $500 per tonne retail). Then:
>
> Turn it into ethanol or gas for use as fuel.
> Make brickettes out of it and use it for all kinds of heating.
> Use it to heat water, which can be transported into townships and sold.
> Burn it cleanly to generate electricity.
> Use it for space heating of large buildings.
> And note: The litter on a one-hectare block would easily run a steam car 
> for a
> year.
>
> ......So who wants to become a billionaire?????

Fuck off, idiot.

-- 
Kwyj.