C++ programming pioneer hacks off-grid, DIY, smart home

Post by VMG » Tue, Apr 03, 2012, 5:30 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #24

VMG wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless he has high-tech stoves, it is pretty polluting. Smoke contains many toxic chemicals. http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/is-burning-wood-f...

Hardly anything wrong with them as far as I can tell, provided you don't have neighbours. I would suspect that all the wood people burn in North America as fuel is greatly offset by all the forest fires people in North America put out. Large-scale adoption of course is not a bright idea, but that's not what this guy is doing. (And it is carbon neutral, so if you're going to burn something, better wood than fossil fue…

Post by VMG » Tue, Apr 03, 2012, 5:52 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #32

VMG wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (And it is carbon neutral, so if you're going to burn something, better wood than fossil fuels from that standpoint.) It is carbon neutral only if you plant a tree. Which you can do anyway. Burning gas or oil, which have a better co2/kwh ratio and planting a tree is better than burning a tree and planting a new one.

It's carbon neutral in the sense that the CO2 it puts in the air was taken out of the air a decade ago, not millions of years ago. >Which you can do anyway. Buying wood funds planting trees. Buying gas and oil do not.