Yes, I said so.
Burning wood instead of coal helps reduce the carbon footprint because wood is a renewable resource that absorbs carbon dioxide during its growth. When burned, wood releases the same amount of carbon dioxide that it absorbed, resulting in a neutral carbon cycle. In contrast, coal is a fossil fuel that releases stored carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when burned, contributing to the greenhouse effect and global warming.
Burning wood instead of coal can help reduce our carbon footprint because wood is a renewable resource that can be sustainably managed, whereas coal is a fossil fuel that releases significantly more carbon dioxide when burned. Additionally, when wood is sourced from responsibly harvested forests, it can contribute to a closed carbon cycle, as the carbon released during combustion is reabsorbed by growing trees. This makes wood a potentially lower-carbon energy source compared to coal, which contributes to long-term atmospheric carbon accumulation.
No, fire does not need carbon to burn. Fire requires three elements to ignite and sustain: heat, fuel, and oxygen. Carbon is a common fuel source for fires, but other materials like wood, paper, and gas can also serve as fuel for combustion.
Gathering fuel wood can be considered environmentally neutral when it is done sustainably, meaning that the rate of harvesting does not exceed the natural regeneration of the forests. Additionally, using dead wood or branches that would otherwise decompose and release carbon dioxide can be considered environmentally neutral as it is not adding additional carbon to the atmosphere.
Incomplete combustion of carbon-containing compounds, such as wood, gasoline, natural gas, and coal, can produce carbon monoxide. This occurs when there is insufficient oxygen present during the combustion process, leading to the formation of carbon monoxide instead of carbon dioxide.
Per pound : coal. Its pure carbon, wood is a mixture of organic substances (including water).
Carbon oxidation/reduction. The carbon typically comes from tree wood (eg a forest fire) or fossil fuel (coal or oil).
Burning wood instead of coal helps reduce the carbon footprint because wood is a renewable resource that absorbs carbon dioxide during its growth. When burned, wood releases the same amount of carbon dioxide that it absorbed, resulting in a neutral carbon cycle. In contrast, coal is a fossil fuel that releases stored carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when burned, contributing to the greenhouse effect and global warming.
Some benefits of using wood as fuel include its renewable nature, low cost compared to other fuels, and its ability to be sourced locally, reducing carbon emissions from transportation. Additionally, wood is a versatile fuel that can be used for heating, cooking, and generating energy.
Yes, fire does contain carbon, as it is a result of the chemical reaction of a fuel source containing carbon (such as wood, paper, or gas) with oxygen. The carbon in the fuel combines with oxygen to form carbon dioxide, water vapor, and other byproducts, resulting in the flames and heat associated with fire.
Burning wood instead of coal can help reduce our carbon footprint because wood is a renewable resource that can be sustainably managed, whereas coal is a fossil fuel that releases significantly more carbon dioxide when burned. Additionally, when wood is sourced from responsibly harvested forests, it can contribute to a closed carbon cycle, as the carbon released during combustion is reabsorbed by growing trees. This makes wood a potentially lower-carbon energy source compared to coal, which contributes to long-term atmospheric carbon accumulation.
No, fire does not need carbon to burn. Fire requires three elements to ignite and sustain: heat, fuel, and oxygen. Carbon is a common fuel source for fires, but other materials like wood, paper, and gas can also serve as fuel for combustion.
I think it's charcoal. I saw it on tv that they have to cover all the wood with galvanized iron (yero) and let it stay there for 3 days. It said that if there is air, it will fail. It will turn into ashes instead of charcoal.
Gathering fuel wood can be considered environmentally neutral when it is done sustainably, meaning that the rate of harvesting does not exceed the natural regeneration of the forests. Additionally, using dead wood or branches that would otherwise decompose and release carbon dioxide can be considered environmentally neutral as it is not adding additional carbon to the atmosphere.
Incomplete combustion of carbon-containing compounds, such as wood, gasoline, natural gas, and coal, can produce carbon monoxide. This occurs when there is insufficient oxygen present during the combustion process, leading to the formation of carbon monoxide instead of carbon dioxide.
burning carbon fuels like wood,coal& pettroleum relaese unburnt carbon particles to the environment.THEY sometimes causes Respiratory diseases such as asthma.
No, a broken refrigerator cannot release carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is produced during the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels, such as gas or wood. Refrigerators do not burn fuel to operate, so they do not produce carbon monoxide.