Tomfh
Structural
- Feb 27, 2005
- 3,549
Supposing we replaced the bulk of fossil fuel use with biofuels (wood, ethanol, etc). Roughly how much additional farm land would it take to replace current fossil fuel consumption?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A bit of a non sequitur, but I keep hearing about how 30% (or more) of the food bought in the US goes to waste and is thrown away. Not sure about the exact number, but it is shocking.
enginesrus said:No reason to grow trees for fuel, there are already thousands of acres of trees. All that needs to be done is use tractors/ bulldozers with rakes to rake up all the under growth in forests, selectively log etc.
rb1957 said:I don't know if this (growing trees for fuel) is a proposal being pushed by anyone, but I hope not !?
It sounds to me like another harebrained, not-well-thought-through idea someone had (at some inopportune moment).
What is the energy density of wood ?
Salad said:Rough estimate? The bulk of land, and probably a good bulk of water as well.
SnTman said:Per USGS net US net cropland is 166 E6 ha, or, just about 130% net cropland.
Shrug. I've seen old super 8 video of areas north of where I live that were quite heavily clear cut about 50-60 years ago. They're back to well grown bush again.
But, few, if any, trees?