Answer:
Biomass
Step-by-step explanation:
In most cases, it is organic waste. anything, including pig intestines, maize husks, and wood chips. The procedure can vary depending on what is burned specifically, but in a typical power plant arrangement, it is burned similarly to coal. Pollution (even if it is carbon neutral) and the plant's potential for intermittent feedstock supply, which reduces efficiency, are downsides. either carbon neutral or renewable In my opinion, it is renewable by definition. Although it is not carbon neutral, very little else is either. Solar and wind energy still have a carbon impact. Those still have a net gain even though they offset more carbon than their footprint (per current manufacturing). Although burning biomass has a positive carbon footprint, is it more carbon-neutral than burning coal and natural gas? Maybe. Burning biomass releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that has previously been stored. Through feedback processes, this sudden rise in carbon will lead to an increase in other GHGs. Cutting down young trees for this reason also eliminates a carbon sink, which doesn't replenish until 60+ years (or 100+ in certain cases). Other biomass sources have a quicker recovery time. It is possible for biomass to be net negative when combined with carbon capture. Its efficiency might be increased by using it directly for heating purposes. There are several factors to take into account while deciding whether to utilize it, such as which other sources it would actually counteract. Overall, it should be used sparingly and with continual consideration of the particulars.