MyOpolisHelp Build Greenopolis |
Wood Power Project Delivers Big Results
Submitted by hlund05 on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 11:53am.
There is a power plant in New Hampshire that is doing big things for the environment, even if the story doesn't get the press that solar, wind and tidal projects receive. In 2003, Public Service of New Hampshire (PSNH) announced the Northern Wood Power Project, a plan to build a fluidized-bed boiler that would run off of wood chips. This facility, when completed, would replace one of the three 50MW coal boilers at Schiller Station in Portsmouth, NH (see below). The wood plant was completed in December 2006, and is delivering big environmental and economic returns.
The plant burns wood chips derived from what the forestry industry does not use: trees unsuitable for logging, scraps from the milling process, and even sawdust. Essentially the plant uses wood that was wasted in the past. What's more, this wood burns very clean. According to PSNH, the wood burner emits 75 percent less nitrogen oxide, 90 percent less mercury, and 95 percent less sulfur dioxide than a coal plant. The wood burner is defined as carbon neutral because it only releases what the trees capture during their lifetime, and does not bring additional carbon dioxide to the atmosphere (as coal or oil does). This enables PSNH to sell Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) to traditional power plants, bringing down the cost of the wood burning process. Assuming sustainable foresting practices, this is a renewable energy that's powering 50,000 homes today. That's pretty exciting. This story represents a great idea being put into practice to make a difference today. In an ideal world we would have limitless, zero-impact sources of energy. But while we wait, I wish more plants like this one would be built. Click here to learn more about the Northern Wood Power Project. (5 votes) »
Bookmark This Page |
Featured Thought LeaderHere we are at GreenBuild, in the Boston Conference and Exhibition Center with over 20,000 other folks- builders, architects, designers, homeowners and just anyone concerned about the environment and how our building and living choices can positive... Green Tips
Speaking of GreenLatest PostDo you remember the game of telephone when you were a child? One person would whisper something in someone's ear and then turn to the next person and do the same and so on. Invariably the story mutated with each telling and wa... Latest Forum TopicI wish to have a clean and green world. Want to make this world a better place to live in. Not just the clean air and water but the society as a whole. Help the underprivileged children in education and what soever means possible. Because childre... Latest PollBecome a vegan... 0% (0 votes) Become a veggeterian..... 0% (0 votes) All of the above..... 100% (1 vote) None of the above... 0% (0 votes) Total votes: 1 |
at least it is a step in the
at least it is a step in the right direction, even if its very small . . . (in terms of better than coal, but not really that great)
Maybe
You know I have always been one to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good, but I not sure that we have that luxury at this point. As we cling to an unsustainable economy that is gasping what is the ultimate consequence of investing in something that is not as bad versus something that sets us on the path to recovery? How many missteps can we really afford and what does this expenditure do in terms of emptying our collective coffers. Or the cummulative impact of a number of these types of well meant but already obsolete approaches?
Bob Ferris
Executive Director
Yestermorrow Design/Build School
Better but not great
I agree with the poster that this is certainly a lot better than coal in terms of SOx and NOx. And I will also agree that it is good that it uses some by-products of the forest industry. That said, a standing forest sequesters carbon and a cut one does not store very much. Yes this can be considered renewable, but is it a sustainable path? My first acid test in that equation is that I have never seen a tree grow as quickly as it burns. My second one would be the question about whether at the end of the day we end up with more CO2 in the air or less. If we are burning, we are adding not subtracting and it makes it more difficult to go from 387ppm of CO2 to 350ppm. That is why conservation, wind, solar, and tidal energy are better bets for our future and why they get more attention.
Bob Ferris
Executive Director
Yestermorrow Design/Build School