Current estimates are that biomass from forestry and agriculture provides about 14 percent of the world’s primary energy supplies, principally in the form of wood used for cooking and home heating. With effective planning, strategic development, and a focus on the latest technologies for converting wood to useful energy, the International Energy Agency (IEA) believes the potential exists for biomass resources to meet 50 percent of world energy demands during the next century while still reducing carbon emissions from fossil fuels.
Despite general enthusiasm for the prospects of bioenergy development, there are significant concerns about the potential role of forests in bioenergy production. Some see great opportunity, viewing new markets for forest biomass as a source of income to more effectively respond to ecological challenges including insect and disease threats, wildfire and fuel loading concerns, storm events and natural disasters. There are, in addition, perceived benefits of achieving more effective management of young forests to support longer-lived species and higher valued products. Biomass harvesting and resulting energy, fuel and chemical products are also widely viewed as offering significant opportunities for economic development, fossil fuel independence, community self-reliance and job creation. It is a concept that has gained the attention of governments worldwide. Others envision problems. For example, in Africa and other developing regions of the world, most of the wood harvested is currently used for home heating and cooking. With such use already a major driver of deforestation, in these regions there is great concern over expanded exploitation of forests for such things as liquid fuels production. In developed regions of the world there are concerns regarding forests as a source of biomass for energy production, including possible negative impacts on esthetics, biodiversity, soil productivity and ecosystem health. It is worth noting that environmental concerns are not unique to biomass energy or woody biomass harvesting; there are serious questions about potential environmental impacts associated with the full range of alternative energy options.
A cornerstone of responsible biomass energy development is the establishment of guidelines for biomass harvesting and utilization that fully consider short- and long-term impacts on the local and regional environment and communities. The potential for significant impacts from biomass harvesting and collection suggests an important public policy and planning role – particularly when forests are involved – as a large number of communities, existing biomass-dependent industries, and a broad swath of the landscape will likely be engaged. Thus, broad and proactive stakeholder input that considers ecological, social, and economic impacts will be important to help ensure that unintended consequences of biomass energy development can be avoided. Periodic updating of guidelines, based upon the results of monitoring and improved scientific knowledge, will also be important.
In some regions, including several U.S. states, guidelines have been developed for removal of woody biomass from forested areas; similarly, guidelines for removal of agricultural residues, in anticipation of commercialization of cellulosic ethanol and other fuels, have been developed. This report provides a brief overview of forest biomass harvesting guidelines and their importance in the United States and other regions of the world.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| DovetailBioGuides0709.pdf | 963.83 KB |
Comments
New Information Available About Biomass
A collaboration of researchers from the University of Minnesota, Michigan Technological University, University of Oregon, and the Northern Research Station of the USDA Forest Service have released a new report entitled "Conventional Wisdoms of Woody Biomass Utilization." Using 10 case studies from across the nation, this report considers whether commonly-held beliefs about the barriers and opportunities for woody biomass utilization appear to hold sway. It evaluates conventional wisdoms regarding consistency of supply, stewardship contracting, scale of operations, the role of collaboration, agency constraints, and several others.
This paper sheds new light on the myriad issues surrounding woody biomass utilization and serves as both a primer for those unfamiliar with the topic, as well as a source of new research for those well versed in the issues.
The report is available at:
http://www.forestguild.org/biomass/resources/ISE_Biomass.pdf
http://www.forestry.umn.edu/ENRPolicyCenter/research.html
Additionally, the Ecosystem Workforce Program at the University of Oregon has released its own latest working paper about the social
issues surrounding biomass utilization. Although the technical and economic issues of woody biomass utilization have been frequent topics of research, social concerns have received far less treatment. This new working paper delves into the current social science research in the area and suggests lessons for policy makers and managers, and identifies topics that merit further study. The working paper is available at
http://ewp.uoregon.edu/publications/working/
Biomass Harvesting Guidelines Report
Overall this paper presents a good overview of a variety of issues. It may
benefit however from a more forward discussion of why guidelines won't solve every challenge nor safeguard against every pitfall. Some state government agencies and institutions seem to be "anti-guidelines" and definitely "anti-regulation." The challenge for independent groups watching from the
sideline and participating in these debates seems to be about steering this
the development of this market and biomass harvesting activity towards an
adaptive management approach. There is a lot we do not know about the
potential long term impacts of biomass removal on soil nutrient cycling and
forest productivity as well as aggregate landscape level impacts to
wildlife. Other challenges as you mention include life-cycle GHG emissions accounting. Of course in real world conditions we are never going to get it 100% right and too much 'guidance' can be a bad thing in terms of stifling innovation which is why some discussion of the need for adaptive management and look back mechanisms at the state, regional and national level may be useful.
Brian A. Kittler
Pinchot Institute for Conservation
http://www.pinchot.org