ArtikBanana@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 6 days agoGermany hits 62.7% renewables in 2024 energy mix, with solar contributing 14%www.pv-magazine.comexternal-linkmessage-square161fedilinkarrow-up1597arrow-down17
arrow-up1590arrow-down1external-linkGermany hits 62.7% renewables in 2024 energy mix, with solar contributing 14%www.pv-magazine.comArtikBanana@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 6 days agomessage-square161fedilink
minus-squareBlackmist@feddit.uklinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·5 days agoBiomass may well be renewable, but I still don’t think it counts as green.
minus-squareexplodicle@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·5 days agoWhy not? Doesn’t creating the biomass require sequestering carbon?
minus-squarekjetil@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·4 days agoDifference is timescale. Coal “sequestered carbon” over millions of years, and released over a few decades. Biomass gathers and realeases on the same timescale
minus-squarePhilippe23@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·4 days agoThen you’re saying biomass is not really sequestering carbon, essentially.
minus-squarebitwaba@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·4 days agoNeither is solar or wind. But they’re all net-zero or near-zero carbon emissions when considering the entire lifestyle of the energy and machinery production.
Biomass may well be renewable, but I still don’t think it counts as green.
Why not? Doesn’t creating the biomass require sequestering carbon?
Coal is sequestered carbon.
Difference is timescale. Coal “sequestered carbon” over millions of years, and released over a few decades.
Biomass gathers and realeases on the same timescale
Then you’re saying biomass is not really sequestering carbon, essentially.
Neither is solar or wind. But they’re all net-zero or near-zero carbon emissions when considering the entire lifestyle of the energy and machinery production.