New Amazing Fantastic Material

[KeithO]

https://csl.noaa.gov/factsheets/csdWildfiresFIREX.pdf
also
National Interagency Fire Center https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html

Whats wrong with burning firewood ? We have had strict emissions limits on new wood stoves for decades now. Not everyone can get firewood, but to suggest that heating through electricity, Natural gas or Fuel oil is cleaner is a fallacy.
Choosing the Right Wood-Burning Stove | US EPA https://www.epa.gov/burnwise/choosing-right-wood-burning-stove
"Emission Limits for Wood Stoves
The internal design of wood stoves has changed entirely since the EPA issued standards of performance for new wood stoves in 1988. EPA's mandatory smoke emission limit for wood stoves is now 4.5 grams of smoke per hour (g/h) under Step 1 of the revised standards of performance for wood burning room heaters; Step 2 will take effect on May 15, 2020, when the standard will be lowered to 2.0 g/h. Heaters using the optional cord wood test method must meet a standard of 2.5 g/h. A voluntary hangtag marks units that meet these standards before the May 2020 date."

On volcanoes, I notice that in recent times the only papers you will find concern CO2 output. As we all know, CO2 has no impact on air quality and human health whatsoever unless you are in s space ship. This website Smithsonian https://volcano.si.axismaps.io/ provides info on sulfur dioxide emissions in volcanic events. It is considered a particulate (PM2.5) but its effects are more than that since it is a potent driver of acid rain and causing problems to the health of trees. The actual other PM emissions are not stated although the ash and dust emissions in the high atmosphere are well known. One eruption in 1991 of Pinatubo produced 18 million tons of sulfur dioxide alone. I shudder to think of the other emissions from that event.

The point is that our cars, wood stoves and power stations are regulated like never before. Yet large parts of the country have a severe problem with air quality, mainly due to wild land fires and their mismanagement. No action is being taken to solve this problem, even though it is dominating air quality issues. "Some" large metro areas may have air quality issues of their own, like the big cities in California with their special topography and weather conditions specific to those areas.. Perhaps they should do the right thing and limit expansion to the population. They don't have water either, living in a desert, so this is made into a massive water rights problem for people living upstream in the mountain regions who are not even allowed to capture rainwater coming off their roof because it deprives the sun worshipers who want to water their desert in California...

Cite statistics, please, and name your source.
Burning it is probably not the best use, and the planet got along just fine with forest fires long before we came on the scene.

Again, statistics and source, please. Also, the planet got along fine with the kind of volcanic activity we're all familiar with. Volcanism WAS a major factor in planetary mass extinctions several times in the deep past, but it was typified by events such as one that covered roughly half of India two miles deep in lava.

Read The Ends of the World, by Peter Brannen.

 

[ondarvr]

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.

 

[KeithO]

Ondarv, CO2 is not giving anyone asthma, whereas the same is not true of the HC, soot and other emissions produced by wildland fires and volcanoes. A lot more people are dying right now from sources that no-one is doing anything about, yet we are supposed to worry about CO2 which might, could possibly be a problem ? The CO2 movement is a movement/religion of politicians, celebrities and virtue signalers, and those wanting to tax and control. I understand that there is not much that we can do about volcanoes but on the wildland fires, owned, administrated and controlled by the government its a different story.

 

[ondarvr]

I didn't have much time, that was thd first thing I found

I believed the Volcanos are worse stuff prior investigating it, turns out people contribute more in every aspect.

There are several theories on how to handle fire danger, let it all grow, and cut it all down, both are wrong, but get the headlines.

 

[KeithO]

Camp Fire (2018) - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Fire_(2018)

The story gets more complicated when people live in the areas prone to burning.
The fire, caused by dilapidated PG&E transmission lines that are many years past the maximum service life failing in a windstorm, completely destroyed a town and killed a lot of the town residents. Far more serious immediate consequences than some story from Al Gore. Yet in fact, the legislative demands by the state government forced PG&E to spend $Billions on expensive and unreliable renewable energy instead of on maintaining its infrastructure, with the predictable result that people die. Despite people dying, nothing has changed, nor will it change. PG&E will now go bankrupt from the insurance claims, and thus the residents of California will pay for their own insurance claims when they have to pay to bail out the utility since there are no others in the region. All of it will be blamed on global warming (the big boogeyman) when in fact it is a problem entirely of the governments making. This is in a part of the US with the highest taxes and the most regulation. Its definitely not working for the people.

I didn't have much time, that was thd first thing I found

I believed the Volcanos are worse stuff prior investigating it, turns out people contribute more in every aspect.

There are several theories on how to handle fire danger, let it all grow, and cut it all down, both are wrong, but get the headlines.

 

[ondarvr]

Sorry

This thread has wondered far from the original topic of little used fibers.

 

[kach22i]

Sorry

This thread has wondered far from the original topic of little used fibers.

Let's bring it full circle, in lieu of burning wood (cellulose fibers) and bamboo (a grass not a wood), how about using them in composites and foams?

Green Science Alliance Co. Ltd. manufactures new nano cellulose composites
The company has established a manufacturing process for mixing nano cellulose with various thermoplastic plastics.
Green Science Alliance Co. Ltd. manufactures new nano cellulose composites https://www.compositesworld.com/news/green-science-alliance-co-ltd-manufactures-new-nano-cellulose-composites

In the near future the company aims to make products such as food trays and boxes, straws, cups and cup lids with this biodegradable plastic/nano cellulose composite. They are also plan to apply supercritical foaming technology, in order to make biodegradable plastic mold products even lighter and stronger.

Consortium works to develop biosourced composites from bamboo fiber
The BAMCO collaborative project aims to develop new biocomposites created from long bamboo fibres.
Consortium works to develop biosourced composites from bamboo fiber https://www.compositesworld.com/news/consortium-works-to-develop-biosourced-composites-from-bamboo-fiber

A consortium of companies have come together to design new biosourced technical composites based on bamboo. Known as BAMCO (bamboo long fiber reinforced biobased matrix composite), the innovation aims to reduce the environmental footprint of aircraft and deliver benefits said to extend beyond the aerospace industry.

BAMCO composites aim to be a potential replacement for glass/phenolic composites as a result of their lightness (reducing overall weight, and therefore fuel consumption), their thermal resistance and the mechanical properties in terms of strength and impact/vibration absorption. In aerospace, the biocomposites are said to show potential for use in cabin interiors, in cover panels and fuselage cladding panels, and in the onboard galleys used to prepare and store in-flight meals on aircraft. They reportedly could also have applications in the manufacture of finished components for use in the marine and leisure sports markets.

One of my hobbies is stereo and includes loudspeaker design. The natural pulp fibers of banana leaves in a dynamic cone driver have less peaky distortion (self-dampening) compared to Kevlar, carbon fiber and plastics. The very minimal epoxy used in the Kevlar and carbon fiber drivers makes the surface feel dry, not coated at all, as if it were bare fiber and not hard, just rigid enough to hold it's shape. This is in contrast to metal dome tweeters that can make your ears bleed when over driven and when amplification pluses some nasties though it.

My point is that composite materials made with a variety of base fibers can be catered to almost any physical demand in my opinion.

Going back to the very first volcanic rock derived material mentioned in this thread, I doubt that it has very good dampening qualities, but is inherently heat and moisture resistant.

Are any of these materials going to replace the steel in the hull of an Ice-Breaker?

Probably not in my lifetime.

 

[ondarvr]

Again, very small markets that can't justify the costs involved to process non traditional fibers in limited quantities.

The decision in production frequently comes down to, can we make a profit using a particular raw material. Will the end user pay the additional cost in the retail market.

There are some high end markets that will pay the price, most won't though.