Also, on topic. Doesn't burning wood also leave a good bit of the carbon behind as solid material?(Ashes) Meaning that when you burn wood you have the over-all effect of putting less carbon back than the tree took out.
To continue the bucket analogy, the little droplets that stick to the side of the bucket after you've dumped it.
Yeah the charred remnants is essentially solid carbon. The burning of wood gives off CO2, heat and water vapor. If you burn the wood until there is nothing left, you have only released the CO2 that was sequestered by the tree out of the atmosphere in the first place. The additional carbon comes from the energy demanded to burn the wood to this degree of intensity.
This may or may not work but if you go to internet options (I assume you are both using I.E.) and then over to advanced tab and under browsing check the box "Automatically recover from page layout errors with Compatibility View".
Thanks. I followed your steps, but it was already checked on. I don't have this problem on any other internet text window, just the AH BBS.
Wow, I never heard about that before. Isn't the lumber industry also conducting its large-scale operations in forests devoted to creating timber (i.e., they grow trees, cut them down, replant them, and move on in an area small enough not to have a big impact)? I don't feel nearly as guilty about wood now. However, isn't it true that a great deal of energy (and therefore carbon) is expended in order to process the lumber?
-Penguin
Yeah, that's right. Sawdust, bark, trim waste, and lignin (pulping liquors) are used to generate electricity and steam. US Wood Products Industries are 60-70% self-sufficient, but 30-40% of energy consumed is non-wood based. Despite this, the US Wood Products Industries are still the third largest industrial consumer of energy in the United States behind the Petroleum and Chemical Sectors. Here in the southern US, particularly Arkansas as the #1 exporter of Pine, we are known as the "woodbasket". I always tell people that forestry is essentially "tree farming". Instead of annual agriculture crops like corn, rice and soybean, Loblolly Pine plantations are usually grown out to a little over 30 years. Before the final harvest, the stand is thinned 3-4 times to take out undesirable trees and free up room for the superior trees to keep growing.
^ unless one is using saws, horses and rivers, I think a LOT of carbon would be produced. Trucks, chainsaws, lumbermills, etc.
So any guilt you felt towards the actual cutting down down trees can now be diverted to the transportation and processing aspect. 
"Money" doesn't make the world go round anymore; petroleum does. Getting the oil out of the ground where it is locked and releasing new carbon into the atmosphere that has Been stored away for eons way out paces anything else. Now its used to produce an insane amount of goods we need, like fuel, rubber, lubricants and electronics. Even producing biofuel from trees is not a viable solution because of the energy required to produce it would pretty much null the effort. The thing I like the best is Hydrogen fuel cells, which gives off nothing but heat and water vapor (which is also considered a greenhouse gas). However, the thought of driving around in a hydrogen powered Ford "Hindenburg" does not excite me.
