sen-no-sen wrote:The main criticism that can be made of pellet is that we have transformed a free source into a paying product whose ecological purpose is particularly dubious.
Certainly.
But under the "logical", theoretical and undoubtedly implacable analysis (perhaps true, but let me doubt that a mind, even as sharp as yours, encompasses the whole of " alive "), what do we do ???
- free: for who can (technically, health, skills) do their logs! Otherwise, per kWh cleared, the log purchased, even from the "black" (in parallel circuits, lumberjacks or farmers who do this in addition to their activity), is more expensive than the pellets ("clear").
- the share of embodied energy, in "reasonable" circuits (buy from a producer located even 100 km from home), in the pellets is low: a few% (this mainly depends on the drying technique - with biomass, or with gas) ...
- Consumption of electricity also: I consume, with a large freezer (vegetable requires), an electric oven, a CESI with electric circulator, still 2 400 kWh / year, including boiler (I left 3 700 there is a decade). And of course, I chat a lot on the internet (the proof) and put videos on Youtube (I do not know if the source is reliable, but it would represent 9% of the domestic electricity consumption? Without doubt more than my boiler.)
There would therefore be, from my point of view, a few nuances to add to your comments. At the risk that "thought" loses its "aesthetic and radical beauty".
But above all, at 65, cardiac, what are you doing ??? How do you heat yourself ??? Concretely please - not sodomizing Drosophila. This interests me, because I thought a lot before acting. And your words, in their radicality, hit me! I excluded any technique based on electricity with a nuclear dominance (a choice that can be qualified as "political", which I assume; one can also see a concern for consistency: I have no desire to have a nuclear power station behind my vegetable garden, so I don't impose it on others!). I then prioritized "decarbonization". Without being naive about the "limits" of my choice (a condensing pellet boiler - with a particle emission rate close to oil-fired boilers - it does not reach gas, but is "neutral", at 90% , in fossil carbon), silo for bulk pellets, 2 years of storage capacity to be able to adjust according to the price curve). Of course, without electricity it doesn't work. But like any boiler, any modern heating circuit with circulators! I am considering a "back up" by a group.
Finally, if you could support the PARTICULARLY dubious ecological purpose. I am of course talking about a really existing world and the choices available to a person. Not the "into the wild" solution (morbid by the way).