21 Apr '12, 4pm

Researchers contend that large-scale forest bioenergy is neither sustainable nor greenhouse-gas neutral

Recent life cycle assessments cast doubt on the existence of emission savings of bioenergy substitution from forests. In the Pacific Northwest United States, policies are being developed for broad-scale thinning of forests for bioenergy production, with the assumed added benefit of minimizing risk of crown fires. This includes forests of all ages and thus timeframes of biomass accumulation. However, a recent study suggests that more carbon would be harvested and emitted in fire risk reduction than would be emitted from fires. Furthermore, policies allow thinning of mesic forests with long fire return intervals, and removal of larger merchantable trees to make it economically feasible for industry to remove the smaller trees for bioenergy. These actions would lead to even larger GHG emissions beyond those of contemporary forest practices.

Full article: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/04/schulze-20120421....

Tweets

The Arctic Ocean could be a major source of met...

straitstimes.com 23 Apr '12, 2am

PARIS (AFP) - The Arctic Ocean could be a significant contributor of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, scientists report...

That’s what the scale read this morning. Down 2...

ronisweigh.com 26 Apr '12, 3am

That’s what the scale read this morning. Down 2.2 on my scale from last week. However, yesterday I had my Body Composition...