microdoc wrote:Uh .... excuse me but I'm starting ....
And emission CO² level what gives what? It may be better to burn wood that will emit CO² absorbed by the growth of other trees rather than transformed cardboard that will eventually emit more CO² once burned no?
I understood this on other forum but maybe I misunderstood.
It depends on the point of view ... That is to say what you count or not ...
I did not want to mix CO2 and Primary Energy in this subject but I see that it is too late.
My reasoning is as follows: the cardboard will, indirectly, emit more CO2 than the same tree if it had been burned because it will be necessary to take into account the different processing and transport.
BUT (because there is one but obviously): this cardboard is WASTE ... its primary function was not to be burned! Burning it will therefore avoid burning another tree (or worse, fuel oil or coal). And this is where it can become interesting in terms of the CO2 balance ... especially taking the indirect CO2 costs of recycling.
In addition, we can do exactly the same reasoning on recycling between CO2 and primary energy:
Spend 2 L of gasoline to bring cardboard to the waste disposal whose recycling will ultimately deduct from saving 0.2L is a nonsense!
By replacing "L of gasoline" by "kg of CO2 ..."
Suddenly, I fear that a good part of the cartons and other papers collected will end up ... in the incinerator.
Well in this case I prefer to incinerate it at home and save kWh EP rather than greasing the system of incinerators!
It is not Jonule who will contradict me on this one!