that would be mostly returned if you burn it you mean ?
Miscanthus
- Thread starter paulthefarm
- Start date
that would be mostly returned if you burn it you mean ?
i guess the un harvested bit below ground would sequester just as grass roots would bit the but you burn …….. no way unless they do so in the absence of oxygen maybe creating an biochar/ charcoal type product to be returned to soil ?
there is a miscanthus field not far from here……. was planted in the last gold rush by a company called Bical who IIRC had a lot of EU grant money ……….. their offices, also not far from here, were very impressive, as was the directors car park !!!
note my use of the past tense in that post !
note my use of the past tense in that post !
- Location
- Ceredigion
Depends how much escapes up the chimney i suppose
Why process it though to return to soil... As you said earlier, let the soil wildlife do it's bit.
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Fair bit planted near here. My friend gas put more in this spring. First harvest of the previous planting was over budget. He likes it. No idea where it goes.
- Location
- Suffolk
i do quite like the idea and the margin looks ok. Having seen it first hand though the idea of a baler in the field in early spring does look an issue on Clay!
Nice to hear.
I think that like willow biomass, the root structure is supposed to keep machinery on top....
I have me doubts too.
- Location
- Suffolk
Maybe. When I saw it near Ipswich recently you could see every tractor wheeling though as a good trench...
Indeed. I'm not advocating miscanthus etc but there's nothing inherently wrong in growing something that absorbs carbon and then burning it, then rinse and repeat. It's a cycle. The complications are the issue, but then miscanthus isn't alone in that. Or you could just dig up some fossil fuels, where's the carbon capture in that?
- Location
- Scottish Highlands
Think holistically - if we are getting energy from that, then we aren't burning fossil fuels.
true but burning any om is still pumping C into the atmosphere and we need to stop doing that it seems
it’s the same as burning coal really - just a much shorter cycle
why burn anything when power can be produced without doing so at all though ?
- Location
- Scottish Highlands
It's better than nothing - and considered holistically I'd prefer it to using larger amounts of C to bury a much smaller quantity (as your scheme appears to do).
i would say these kind of high biomass perennial crops could have a valuable place in the future - but i wouldn’t burn them ! there are cleaner ways to produce our energy
That is true but burning crops is only releasing what they took out the same year, coal, gas and oil releases CO2 captured a very long time ago do increases total current CO2
warksfarmer
Member
Very nearly put 25ac in 2 years ago. We still might ……… I don’t have the figures to hand but for biomass burning it’s better than straw by a country mile. As said no figures to hand but it was something like double the calorific value which means you need half the tonnage to get the same heat output to straw. This saved on baling and haulage costs and shed space etc and would allow sales of straw instead which the last couple of years would not doubt of paid for putting the miscanthus in
.I don’t recall the establishment figures quoted in this thread being quite so high but it was a big investment. It also suits crap land basically so ours would of been going into areas next to rivers and field corners etc.
Courier
Member
- Location
- M62 - M1 - M18 triangle
Been growing Miscanthus since 2007, It doesn't like dry summers but basically 2020 was its best year so far...
Where does it go, or rather, what is it used for? Fuel stock?