Meanwhile, Britain is converting coal plants to wood pellet burning plants... where are those wood pellets coming from? Not from deforested Europe... but from American forests. Europe's shortsighted "green" energy policy is deforesting America now. Not long after they helped deforest the Amazon to grow soybeans for their eco-friendly vegan BS food.
The green energy movement is such a colossal joke in Europe. Germany will never produce enough energy from wind and solar at a cost that doesn't cripple their economy. And their kneejerk reactionary greens forced the removal of a low emissions, safe, clean source of energy (nuclear).
At the same time, the windmills are cranking out power on the high plains... to the tune that 17.5% of Minnesota's electricity comes from wind now. (The rest comes from natural gas, coal, and nuclear)
Guys I know Snowguy tends to get a little over excited about this topic so let me just insert some facts in this thread. Here is the energy mix of the UK...
This caricature of the UK shutting down all their coal plants and opening brand new shiny wood pellet plants is a delusion. Wood pellet planets make up such a tiny portion of the overall UK energy mix they aren't even broken out. There are forestry problems in the US but they aren't caused by a miniscule number of wood pellet plants in the UK. Get a grip Snowy.
You have to look at a countries entire energy mix. You can't just cherry pick a couple of plants and then slander an entire country. Let's look at that nuclear portion of the pie which dwarfs a handful of wood pellet plants. Let me ask you this Snowy which country do you think has a history of recycling their nuclear waste in reprocessing plants and there for reduced the need for mining of new uranium?
The green energy movement is such a colossal joke in Europe.
I suppose you could say that about the UK because in relation to fossil fuels it is tiny.
A well maintained woodframe home will last just as long as one made out of carbon intensive, non-renewable materials you seem to advocate (from an eco point of view, of course 
) Well that's the real key isn't it? You still have to maintain your house once it is built. Instead of cherrypicking dubious facts I like to take an all encompassing look at real facts. The concrete homes built in the US have R-values that crush stick and paper homes. There are people in various parts of the US that have electric bills that are over $800 a month. Now that is not every month but you consider living in a house 30-40 years and that is a lot of "maintenance". Toss in structural maintenance and the numbers look even worse. Rodents and pests? Wood and paper again is even worse. Then toss in weather disasters and the numbers are beyond appalling. Let me ask you a question. All these houses were completely demolished by Hurricane Katrina except for one. What do you think it was made out of, concrete or stick and paper? What were all the house that are now going to populate an ecologically responsible landfill made out of? Which country do you think takes more regular direct hits from hurricanes?
The fact you don't want to touch is the United States is the largest consumer of wood. The other fact you don't want to touch is one of the main causes of our forestry problems is wide spread illegal logging. Sitting here as an American and blaming a couple of LEGAL wood pellet plants in the UK for our own irresponsible behavior is why so many people despise us all over the planet. Your slander of the UK is ugly American on steroids.
By the way that doesn't mean I think every single energy policy in the UK or any country for that matter is going to be a bright idea in the long run. I think there should be experimentation on a small scale. And I hardly think 6.6% is reckless or something to slander a foreign country over. Let's be reasonable.
