Are Wood Pellets a Good Alternative to Coal?

[Ken]

Say you are a relatively poor country like the Dominican Republic ...

Saying you are a country doesn't make you one.

Conversion to renewables would allow the Dominican Republic to become more energy independent and stop shipping cash overseas in exchange for imported oil and gas.

Unless the DR is making their own solar panels and wind turbines, etc. (and I seriously doubt they are), conversion would entail shipping cash overseas for the equipment and infrastructure, rather than for the fuel. That might or might not be advantageous for them in the long run.

It is always more complex than poor nation vs. rich nation.

I certainly agree with the complexity.

The source of the equipment is a different issue from the source of the energy itself. Every single type of power generation equipment that a country such as the DR might build is likely to contain imported components.

If they build a coal fired plant it will likely contain mostly imported components
If they build a LNG plant it will most likely contain mostly imported components
If they install wind or solar it will most likely contain mostly imported components
If they build a biomass (pellet) plant it will most likely contain mostly imported components

That is a separate question from source of the energy once the plant it is completed. Will it be imported fossil fuels (LNG, fuel oil, coal)? Or will it be domestic renewable sources (sun, wind, biomass)? And will the country continue to be depend on energy imports or domestic sources of energy?

All things being equal, most nations are likely to conclude that domestic sources of energy are superior to imported sources

Back to the question at hand. A country like the DR which has lots of forests and agriculture might possibly be able to produce domestic sources of biomass for fuel such as pellets or sugar cane waste, etc. Whereas they are likely to need to import coal, LNG, and petroleum. I don’t think there are any coal mines or oil fields in the DR.

[Neto]

I don't have time to read all the pages in this thread.

I was primarily thinking about Wood Pellets vs. Coal for energy production.

Other side topics are fine, but the political discussions are not ok!

Question for clarification:
Are you thinking primarily in terms of efficiency, environmental impact, or both (i.e., Christian integrity in respect to both frugality and environmental responsibility)? (The latter will be more difficult to determine, because of the politics involved in the Western world. The poor must use what ever is cheapest, or is readily available. The West's desire to impose "First-world 'enlightened morality'" on the poor is abusive. Opps, getting political here....)

It is always more complex than poor nation vs. rich nation. And every nation whether they are rich or poor has various competing interests.
....

Actually, I wasn't referring to "poor NATIONS", but to "poor PEOPLE", people in any nation, regardless of the national status. An example from Brazil, which may at times seem to shift into a classification of "third-world", but in general, is not accurately considered such. This is something I saw, as it was experienced by the people in the congregation where we usually attended services when we were NOT out in the Banawa village. Gas refrigerators. When the law changed the approved refrigerant from Freon to ammonia, the cost of a modest size fridge went up significantly, putting the goal of owning one out of reach for those families. This was one convenience that they were really working toward, but the can got kicked way down the road for them. And that change was something that was pushed from outside Brazil, a change forced on the "have-nots" by the "haves".