100 Comments

  1. Obviously not enough wood to power an entire state but as the level of wind and solar increases (facilitated by local storage) biomass energy can be exported helping to offset CO2 emmissions in other states and providing an income for the operator.

  2. I beg to differ that ”new” trees absorb more carbon than old trees.
    Really differ .
    Let me explain:
    A young tree has a small crown and few leaves/needles. Leaves/needles retain a lot of the yearly carbon. Fruits, cones and seeds make another big chunk of the absorbed carbon. The wood itself, being the trunk and branches get a few millimeters of thickness yearly. That represents less than 50% of the carbon absorbed.
    An older three, say 200-500 years old has a huge crown, the grows massive branches and bears * a lot more leaves and fruits/seeds *

    And whilst a tree can live for 700 to 1200 years, with some exceptions being several millennia old, calling a forest mature at around 100 years is like calling a 4 year old child mature and ready to join the army (and die in war in the next 10 months).

    You don't see trees that old so often just because they are cut millennia before they'd be called old.

  3. Excellent.  Implementing Project Hope "Joe Dome" in Guatemala City, Guatemala a "Off-grid"  Smart City powered by 100% renewable energy, Anaerobic Biomass,  Wind Turbines, Solar Farm.  This is a CO-op project with University del ISTMO and the Government of Guatemala.   Concept Design Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zkKE4EXNlY       r/ Joe Byers  President Human Relief Organization International   www.humanreliefusa.org   Email: [email protected]@gmail.com

  4. Kind of completely defeats the object by chopping down almost an entire 660,000 Trees every year to fuel the energy don't You think? Chopping down trees to fuel a town doesn't equal green does it? Why not completely replace the Bio mass with solar or hydro & Wind. Also, it can be done because there's already thousands of Earth Ship Towns, Tiny House Communities & Underground, Earth bag, dome Home & other sustainable communities who are relying entirely on Solar, Wind & Hydro energy as well as independently using small wood stoves with sustainable wood and/or propane. If People used propane as well as electricity to evenly distribute what They're using, their usage would be a lot more energy efficient. The power plant are telling them that They can't go entirely hydro or wind or solar despite the fact entire communities already are doing it & have been for decades & I think the key here is that the power plant still need to make money & want People to stay on grid. We can all live off grid. We don't have to use the main grid.

  5. So… You could put in 1 itty bitty teeny tiny nuclear reactor, power the whole city for a zillion years, and not have to mass produce any windmills, toxic solar panels, collect transport and burn stuff and all of your power would come from essentially rock also no fish elevation required. well done

  6. Absolutely amazing system! Maybe dropping woods and go for rooftop PV system with battery should be the next step. 👍

  7. Power doesn't magically scale like that.
    You can't have every block be its own grid. Basically the only power you can do that with is solar. For hydro you would need each block to have a waterfall. For wind you have the downwind blocks get less and less power until they have basically none. For biomass each one needs its own forest. So solar would be the only option for that.
    If you ignore the fact that Chicago isn't on the equator, then the sunlight reaching the surface has an flux of roughly 1 kW /m^2. However, not all of that is usable with solar power. A large portion is too low in energy, and some is too high in energy to be used efficiently. If you be generous and say the solar cell gets 20% of the power, that is down to 200 W/m^2. If you consider the height of their buildings and how many people live/work in them, that is nowhere near enough; especially when you remember that it isn't always mid-day and they aren't on the equator, meaning over the course of a day that power will vary from significantly less than 200 W/m^2 all the way down to 0.

    For any large city the only solution for renewable energy is to have large centralised systems which distribute power to large areas.

  8. Also, biomass is effectively just indirect solar. Has anyone done the math on how much power you would get if you just wiped out the forest and put a solar power plant there instead?

  9. I see many old guys here and fossil fuel fanboys who lived in a time where they're killing the future of they're children and grandchildren, with so many arguments about renewable energy's underdeveloped technologies short term drawbacks. If only more research and money is put on by your war mongering government then it would be very possible that renewable energy will be efficient and economically viable in a short span of time. No offense grannies but your fossil fuel generation is up, you might as well just rest in peaces.

  10. It's 2018. Solar alone with batteries can handle the entire city. The justification of the guy on how they offset pollution is kinda weak but they are doing a much better job than the rest of the USA.

  11. Fake news. There is a cost associated with transporting the wood chips to the plant and the ash . Typical left liberal democrat bs. What we need is bigger nuclear plants.

  12. unfortunately, biomass is only available for certain cities you couldn't do it in places like nevada and solar just wont cute at least not without government subsidies and wont generate enough power also in terms of long term I don't think it can be sustainable

  13. Bruciare biomasse, come ogni altra cosa inquina!
    Se è la tua maggiore fonte green, non sei green.
    Imparate dall'Europa. 🇪🇺

  14. All for renewable energy and making the world a cleaner place. But dam Vermont's largest city only has 40,000 people. In Ohio that's like a suburb.

  15. The wood made me second guess things but I really like how they explained and talked about that in this video. Basically they are the guinea pig’s right now (as mentioned in another comment) and the renewable technology is still just beginning to kick off. So for me I see this city dropping the dependence on wood over the years as renewables get better.

    It’s a bit like other places that burn rubbish for energy short term but are also looking for alternative more renewable options. So I think the point here is to do the best you can do with what you have and learn from it so you can do better. As well as help guide others seeking to follow them to do better via shared experience, in this case.

    Great video, really informative and I really enjoyed it. 🙂

  16. If you look at the power companies today and from the past, this is everything they despise. Low cost power and efficiency. People like what they can get for less and eco friendly has proven it works even with upkeep.

  17. I stopped watching when I saw that a big part of their electricity came from burning wood chips.. LOL. what a joke. "renewables". How about people stop lying to themselves and just be honest.

  18. BULLSHIT!!! THIS IS SO NOT REAL, THIS TOWN IS A PIMPLE ON THE STATES ASS!! IT CANT KEEP IT UP BECAUSE PAPER MILLS CPOMPETE FOR THOSE SAME CHIPS!!! JUST SAYING OLD ONE LEGGED JOSEPH T RETIRED NAVY

  19. Ummm why not use coal and keep planting the same number of trees they are planting right now? The coal doesn't kill the existing trees!!!

  20. There is nothing sustainable about biomass energy. It requires chopping down entire forests and then replacing those forests with monocultures of pine trees where there was once biodiversity. The science does not show that planting more trees counteracts the green house gases being burned. That's a completely made up statistic.

  21. He is FULL of BS .. He jsut want to stay n business …. Cutting trees to burn them because they grow back does nothing for increasing demand …. and carbon emissions already causing the 1 degree and we're on the way to 1.5 to lead to global flooding ….. no nuclear … jsut solar .. we use too much electricity and want to grow with stupid demands from general public who contribute nothing to the world … jsut consume … entertain and continue being stupid ….. Too much waste of human resource .. We need a population decrease …. carry on ..

  22. When it comes to ash, I just want to point out that when they study the regrowth in a clear cut forest vs the regrowth in an area that was burned by forest fire, the place that was burnt has 10x the regrowth.

    So please if you burn wood on a large or small scale, bring that ash back to help the forests grow 10x better. It is a very simple task and it makes a huge difference!

  23. Northeastern USA including Vermont is powered by hydro dams in northern Quebec. That is where your power is being bought from. The whole province of Quebec is carbon free as is most of Canada. Hydro is king here with Nuclear picking up the remainder. Wind and solar are starting to come on line too.

    One city? That is cute but you gotta go way bigger then that! Vermont is a little state, why not power the whole state? I mean Quebec can do it for you really. They have some of the biggest hydro facilities in the world. Check it out. Large Nuclear and coal power plants look like childs' play compared to Quebec dams.

  24. I would love to see Stan Meyers technology or the stuff that powers UFO's or Searl Effect generators to power the world. The internal combustion engine needs to be replaced and it looks like batteries will do it but still I want to see some real sci-fi energy production to come online. I am ready to kick the oil habit and the constant need for fuel or more energy.

    The bonds between atoms obviously hold massive amounts of power and when they are split we get nuclear bombs but short of that there must be a far less violent way to tap into that unlimited source of energy. Nuclear energy is fine but I don't know I am still convinced that by toying with radio frequencies, sound or magnetic energy we could hit that zero point jackpot and unleash tremendous amounts of safe, peaceful energy that can last very close to forever.

    For now though I am happy with my solar panels and batteries, off grid here in Canada

  25. i think with the tesla solar tiles those houses can make use of their roof spaces more efficiently and with the extra solar panel will be more then enough for a family unit of 4. i think only on peak summer and winter times they will only need to draw power from the grid cuz of AC and heaters . but i think AC and heaters are also getting more efficient

  26. This story is why I stopped talking about "renewable" energy. The reason is that carbon emissions are what we should be limiting, It's a case of being 100% renewable accurately getting in the way of eliminating carbon emissions from electricity. Remember, as we transition to EVs we'll have greater demand for electrical power plants. We'll see how much it plays out to, but it could be a lot.

  27. Hydro has powered towns and cities for hundreds of years. The problem is when you say "100%" because you're then talking about the generators, steel framed buildings, copper wires to run electricity, etc.

  28. According to Wikipedia Burlington only has about 43,000 people – a reasonably sized town, not a city. Try this with a population of 1million.

  29. A city that can never grow because you don't have enough power. Chicago over a million people. What are these people doing to the fish with that hydro power?

  30. It is not very green it is releasing a lot of CO2. Twin Falls ID has been existed with renewable resource for more then 50yrs. Burlington suxs.

  31. Not one mention of cost, except for the unquestioned assertion that government conservation subsidies are cheaper than buying grid power. At least they do admit that fluctuating renewable output must be backed up by reliable grid power. Otherwise, there would be brown outs and black outs in Burlington.

  32. Their secret is that they falsely claim that burning trees is green, because trees grow back.
    The American Lung Assoc. said that such plants create about 50% more pollution and CO2 than coal plants, and that none of the plants in question have any kind of requirement or plan for making sure that the trees that are chipped and burned by the plants are actually regrown.
    It is literally like burning down the Amazon and calling it green, because trees grow back… albeit much later, and only if the trees are allowed to regrow.

  33. Of course, dozens of entire countries run on RE in the form hydro electric power. Intermittent power like solar and wind does not run anything 100%. Burning up trees doesnt scale nor should it given the traditional emissions like particulates and NOx (a lot more per unit than coal).

  34. In my opinion we should genetically engineer a tree that grows extremely quickly. That could reduce the amount of space people need the trees to grow in.

  35. so you can harvest trees to power your home, but you cannot harvest trees to build you home. what is the CO2 footprint for producing wood chips as opposed the CO2 footprint for producing naturau gas?

  36. This video makes me laugh… This is no different than burning coal… Same CO2 output… No reductions. Yet all the Millennials are eating it up… Burning biomass needs scrubbers just like coal or oil.. Burning natural gas is actually cleaner than biomass… and there is enough natural gas to power the US for 400 years… Also if the wind dies out or cloudy days come they have to buy the same power… Essentially this is pretty much the same as any other power company, but a bit dirtier due to the wood chip burning…

  37. why they dont do that for the entire usa , instead of investing huge sums of money in weapons and wars and army usa can invest a small amount of war money in clean green energy

  38. Learn how to use clean solar alternative power http://www.astro-vision-avenir.com/index_Eng.html

  39. It's a complete lie (on a Trumpian scale) to claim that things built and maintained with fossil fuels are "100% renewable." The worst part of it is industrial wind power, the most invasive form of sprawl ever created, and it really doesn't reduce carbon. See these links: http://google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=wind+farm+mountain

    http://google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=wind+farm+ocean

    https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+turbines+noise+infrasound

    https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+turbines+birds+bats+kill

    https://www.google.com/search?q=germany+energiewende+co2+emissions+failure

    https://www.google.com/search?q=wind+energy+backlash
    https://www.google.com/search?q=cubic+mile+of+oil

  40. possible… just gotta figure out how to fix the battery problem… theres a lot of ethical shit burning wood its not as green as what people think it is

  41. Are they connected to a power grid, if so then there not really running on only renewable energy

  42. We got them same parakeets in NY. Yo if Darwin is right, shouldn't animals just adapt or die. Them birds are very smart, they about to be comp for the sparrows and speckled starlings. They're very noisy too, but they don't hang around in the fall. They must fly to Florida or something.

  43. Never can a city run on 100% renewable energy. And no city in America or anywhere else in the world does. Anyone who states that as fact is spouting or espousing a false lie and fallacy (fabrication). They are full of shit. Their city is on the grid. The sun isn't always shining. The wind isn't always blowing. Renewable energy is the dirtiest and most inefficient in the world. It is not even possible with current technology (probably for another century or more). Their is a bunch of false leftist propaganda being promoted, and ignorant people who don't do their due diligence research, eat it up as "feel good" fact.

  44. The Mayor said more than 100% renewable, what kind of crazy talk is this? There is no such thing as more than 100%.

  45. They burn then the argument is that trees can be grown back to take the carbon up. Well we can grow trees to take up co2 from gas and. Coal too. A shorter cycle doesn't change the principle.

  46. FUSION!!!!! it is like almost here it like why not use sea water we have more than enough (it is hard to fuse btw)

  47. RUN THE NUMBERS AND DO THE MATH YOU LEFTY MORONS AND YOU WILL SEE THE NUMBERS ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE…..BIOMASS, SOLAR, WIND, AND OTHER GREEN ARE NOT ENOUGH. UNLESS YOU WANT TO SIT IN A COLD HOUSE IN THE WINTER AND A HOT HOUSE IN THE SUMMER..…..BY THE WAY, WOOD CHIPS ARE NOT RENEWABLE YOU TOTAL FOOLS!!!! YOUR CARBON FOOT PRINT IS GIANT WHILE BURNING WOOD CHIPS..!!!!!! YOU SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN, FINED AND IMPRISONED !!1

  48. Yes , screw the electric company who forces a poor person to turn their STOVES on for heat and consequently DIE in fires! or literally freeze to death. The electric company that turns off oxygen, CPAPS, and rots the only food in the fridge you'll have for a whole month. The person with c-PTSD feom childhood abuse who can't sleep with the lights off. If the person dies, or is essentially taken to the hospital for any of this (3rd degrees burns, hypoglycemia, CHS, Asthma attacks, panic attacks ) , they should be held CRIMINALLY responsible. Enough already! Now is the time to punish these degenerates who would so callously treat the most vulnerable of us.

  49. Soil can only support so many generations of trees before the soil nutrition is depleted. Also, burning trees releases all the carbon stored in the trees. Finally, growing trees for fuel is a long term process compared to a fast growth plant like hemp.

  50. I did a quick calculus: (((50Mw ÷ 43%) × 100) ÷ 42 000)= 27 685w per user, it's three times higher than us here, in France, where we can't pull more than 9 000w because main power supplier, EDF (stand for "Électricité – Distribution de France" ( "electricity – supply of
    France" litteraly)) place a power limiter which is triggered if we use more than 45amp. On our 230V powerline.

    So how still could they think they're greener than other when use three times more power than frenchs ?

    I know we mainly work and rely on nuclear power, but it's adaptable like wood chips or pellets, no fuel quality problems (try to get energy out of wet woods (even the dryer won't be enough to get it dry and ready to use)), when less power is used, less power is produced too (no need to store it outside, it just last longer (so less renewings mean less transports))

    Last, but not the least, coal and oil, according to the fossilization of vegetation and animals for generate it, was actually the first renewables energies, because it never start and stop without any autorisation released by a mysterious and dark administration.

    And, the question that i wonder since always is: for a same weight and volume of wood, did the wood won't be more efficient in the form of log instant of wood chips ?

  51. Come back in 30 years to see if they have any trees left. Or. How fast are they planting trees to make up for the trees they cut down.
    They will have to plant more trees now then they cut down to account for increase in population if power per person to be the same.

  52. Vermont has been operating a nuclear power plant for many years. Keep it going and build more nuclear plants. Save the trees. If you do cut down the trees make homes or furnature. This way the carbon stays out of the atmospher and not returned to the atmospher.

  53. Sooo I guess employees of the energy department on their way to work gets to say to their significant other “ok honey I’m heading off to BED now, got a big exciting meeting with some colleagues”- with no repercussions? Unreal 🤷‍♂️

  54. I'm holding a magnet in my hand with a steel slug stuck to each side.
    On my desk is a physics book with a picture of the lines of force coming out one side of the magnet, then returning through the other end.
    If this were true, one of the steel slugs would have to fall off. It does not fall off.
    Fix the books and you can have unlimited clean electricity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *