Forest biomass as source for energy independence

I would have thought this concept a joke, something one might see in a political cartoon. I gather not. A few days ago I just happened onto a live broadcast of the testimony by the head of the US Forest Service before congress. In the bit that I caught, Chief Gail Kimbell stated that a fair percentage of the nations energy needs could be met by utilizing the forest biomass. Instead of bio diesel from corn, substitute forest biomass; trees etc. It appeared that she was advocating, planning for such a use.

Think about it, the polite words like 'biomass'. I'm sure that there are some user groups that would greatly benefit from having forests cleared. It would kill two birds with one stone; it would keep fuel costs down, and clear the land for easier and more extensive motorized access. No need to sell the Hummer and the 6 vehicle trailer.

But I find the idea of turning our forests into biomass that can meet future energy needs absolutely horrifying. And to think that this is being seriously proposed by the current administration.

Larry

Second coming of the "Healthy Forests" initiative..

The purpose of biomass boilers is not to run on fresh cut wood but wood biproduct. This biproduct could be wood chips from the underbrush, tops and branches, bark and shavings, waste from the process of making logs into lumber, or even corn cobs/husks/stalks.

There are many advantages to using biomass as a energy resource in many area of the country. It would reduce our dependency on fossile fuels (see Iraq), reduce the fuel load in forests (see California Wildfires), it could save millions of dollars in energy costs, and it is a renewable resource.

Like everything there are disadvantages including air quality. Biomass boilers are cleaner burning than a residential fire place, but air quality can be an issue in certain areas during certain times.

I would agree that using more biomass would need to be managed correctly as a society, but it should not be thrown off the table because it has the potential to be mismanaged as an energy source.

For more information on Biomass see < www.biomasscenter.org/> ;

I heard a similar thing on NPR last week.  They were interviewing the head of Range Fuels who just opened or just started building their facility in Georgia. 
Range Fuels

Agree fully with the comment re byproducts. The cost of collecting material independent of a saw-log operation renders forest biomass use (for power, heat) basically impractical. Or rather, I should qualify that statement by saying that it did when I looked at it for the USFS in 1998. However, my guess it that things haven't changed much, and the cost equation is as bad as it ever was, if not worse. On the flip side, if the idea is simply to reduce fuel load in a high-risk forest, that's great -- as long as we recognize that biomass use isn't going to "pay the way" for forest management.

The NY times just ran an article on this topic with some discussion of Range Fuels:

www.nytimes.com/2007/11/09/business/09fuel.html?pagewanted=1

I agree with just about everything Seth said, including the last statement.