The Nov. 11 Washington Post, in a story, “EU’s Big Climate Ambitions Have the Scent of Wood Smoke,” calmly reveals that “If the world behaved like Europe, it would be burning an awful lot of wood.” You will say, of course, that wood burning is a terrible source of injurious pollution and early death in some underdeveloped countries, and to be prevented by more modern energy sources. But this is the EU; even more, this is the U.K.. Fraud is climate virtue, and climate virtue is fraud.
Despite Europe being carpeted with solar panels and wind turbines, its largest source (60%) of “renewable energy” is biomass, the Post reports, meaning wood chips and scraps and other plants. On an industrial scale, it means wood chips. EIR’s “Great Leap Backward” report exposed that wood chips are the source of 6% of all power production in the U.K., for example. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/10/eu-cop26-biomass-wood-emissions/)
The buzzword “renewable” is a nonsense-term, as precise in meaning as “jabberwocky.” Wood chip supplies can be “renewed” by blocking off more wooded land from agriculture, and cutting down more trees while planting others. In the same stupid sense, oil can be “renewed” by finding more untapped deposits and granting new leases. But everything depends on: For whom is the political-economic policy being made? In Europe, deforestation is a “renewable energy source.” In Brazil or Malaysia, it’s raping the planet.
And in the EU and the U.K., cutting down trees “counts” as a small amount of CO2 emissions (due to losing the carbon-capturing qualities of those trees); while burning wood does not “count” as CO2 emission at all! This not only “overlooks” the fact that wood burning produces more CO2 emissions than modern coal burning. It deliberately ignores the real pollution, which is not CO2 – the particulate soot or smoke, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, sulfur dioxide, and other pollution released by wood burning.
Thus, “For now, much of Europe’s emissions reductions are being achieved by burning biomass instead of coal — and then not counting the resulting greenhouse gases, which critics say they should,” says the Post. And it quotes EU Commission Vice President and climate chief Frans Timmermans at Glasgow: “To be perfectly blunt with you, biomass will have to be part of our energy mix if we want to remove our dependency on fossil fuels. I do admit that it’s quite complicated to get this right.”
It’s complicated, my dear fellow, it’s quite complicated. Read Romans 7:19 in the very latest British spelling: “For the good that I wood, I do not: but the evil which I wood not, that I do.”
