Abstract
Although three billion people in the developing world face severe indoor air pollution from domestic incineration of biomass, other nations have not learned from these bio- mass harms. Instead, scores of developed countries are massively subsidizing biomass crop growing/incineration, touting biomass burning as clean and technologically im- proved, and claiming it helps address climate change. Are they right? To show why not, this commentary has three objectives. These are (i) to outline the drought/food, air pol- lution, and water-pollution threats posed by growing/burning biomass, (ii) to answer government/industry defenses of biomass growing/incineration, and (iii) to use a south- ern Indiana case study to reveal the flawed science in most biomass crop/incineration proposals. For instance, most biomass proposals fail to include a full human-health risk assessment, cost-benefit analysis, and ecological risk assessment. Discussing health- related biomass problems, the commentary uses a case study of a contemporary, state-of- the-art facility to incinerate Miscanthus giganteus biomass. It closes with suggestions for improving biomass science/decision-making and reducing biomass threats.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.