But that would be one trip every 50-100 years. I'm hoping for something with a faster turnaround time. How about some kind of faster-growing tree, like pine or something?
Lodgepole pine. Very fast growing, straight with small limbs, easy to cut & stack. Western BLM land has vast forests of lodgepole.
The giant redwoods are 1,500 years and older. The get tall fast, but if you want the 10-foot thick or more trunks, you're gonna have to wait a lot longer than 100 years.
Why not just use coal?
Because the hypothetical scenario is "power stuff with 'captured solar energy' (wood)", not "run things on coal". I'm wondering how it all compares to solar+batteries that the greenie-meanies harp on about.
Besides, we already know we can build a technological civilization on coal.
And carbon neutral. Burn the tree, release the carbon, grow the tree capture the carbon. Pellet stoves are a nice version, but a modern wood stove does a nice job.
If you don’t burn the tree, it eventually dies and rots, which releases its carbon.
Considering most energy comes from burning hydrocarbons I'd say greenies are really coal burners.
(post is archived)