http://biomasshub.com/burning-biomass-lipstick-on-a-pig/ global bioenergy supply chain intelligence Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:38:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://biomasshub.com/burning-biomass-lipstick-on-a-pig/#comment-53 Massachusetts: Biomass vs Biosphere | BIOMASS INTEL Tue, 08 Jun 2010 07:40:44 +0000 http://www.biomassintel.com/?p=187#comment-53 [...] Related story: Is Burning Biomass ‘Just Lipstick on a Pig?’ [...] [...] Related story: Is Burning Biomass ‘Just Lipstick on a Pig?’ [...]

]]> http://biomasshub.com/burning-biomass-lipstick-on-a-pig/#comment-52 Climate Legislation and Bioenergy Accounting Errors | BIOMASS INTEL Tue, 25 May 2010 14:33:15 +0000 http://www.biomassintel.com/?p=187#comment-52 [...] Is Burning Biomass Just Lipstick on a Pig? [...] [...] Is Burning Biomass Just Lipstick on a Pig? [...]

]]> http://biomasshub.com/burning-biomass-lipstick-on-a-pig/#comment-51 Reluctant Partners: Coal & Biomass Vie for Baseload | BIOMASS INTEL Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:02:34 +0000 http://www.biomassintel.com/?p=187#comment-51 [...] Coal, enemy #1 in NIMBY circles, and Biomass, enemy #2, are struggling to find balance in local power communities.  Coal, most argue, is too dirty to remain a long-term option.  Biomass, while cleaner, is expensive to aggregate, less energy dense and may not offer the environmental benefits over coal that proponents claim (see Is Burning Biomass Just ‘Lipstick on a Pig?‘). [...] [...] Coal, enemy #1 in NIMBY circles, and Biomass, enemy #2, are struggling to find balance in local power communities.  Coal, most argue, is too dirty to remain a long-term option.  Biomass, while cleaner, is expensive to aggregate, less energy dense and may not offer the environmental benefits over coal that proponents claim (see Is Burning Biomass Just ‘Lipstick on a Pig?‘). [...]

]]> http://biomasshub.com/burning-biomass-lipstick-on-a-pig/#comment-50 OR: Biomass Legislation Turns on Jobs, Carbon Neutrality | BIOMASS INTEL Tue, 23 Feb 2010 14:49:16 +0000 http://www.biomassintel.com/?p=187#comment-50 [...] Some have argued that the biomass facilities — which were built before 1995 — are some of the biggest and most polluting in the state.  During the ACES debate, a similar issue came up before the House in which lawmakers noted that burning biomass is not actually the carbon neutral panacea for climate change that many had assumed (see is burning biomass just ‘lipstick on a pig’?). [...] [...] Some have argued that the biomass facilities — which were built before 1995 — are some of the biggest and most polluting in the state.  During the ACES debate, a similar issue came up before the House in which lawmakers noted that burning biomass is not actually the carbon neutral panacea for climate change that many had assumed (see is burning biomass just ‘lipstick on a pig’?). [...]

]]>