Stakeholder perspectives on converting forest biomass to energy in Oregon, USA

Biomass and Bioenergy

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 203-213

  Stidham, Melanie ^a   Simon Brown, Viviane ^a  

^a OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioenergy; Forest biomass utilization; Forest restoration; Public forest management; Stakeholder perspectives; Wildfire

Indexed keywords

BIO-ENERGY; FOREST BIOMASS; FOREST RESTORATION; PUBLIC FORESTS; STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES; WILDFIRE;

CONSERVATION; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; FORESTRY; RESTORATION; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

BIOMASS;

BIOENERGY; CONIFEROUS FOREST; ENERGY POLICY; FOREST MANAGEMENT; MIXED FOREST; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; STAKEHOLDER; WILDFIRE;

BIOMASS; CONSERVATION; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTS; RESTORATION; SOFTWOODS; USA;

OREGON; UNITED STATES;

CONIFEROPHYTA;

EID: 78650531285     PISSN: 09619534     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.08.014     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Demirbas M.F., Balat M., Balat H. Potential contribution of biomass to the sustainable energy development. Energy Convers Manage 2009, 50(7):1746-1760.
2. Buchholz T.S., Volk T.A., Luzadis V.A. A participatory systems approach to modeling social, economic, and ecological components of bioenergy. Energy Policy 2007, 35(12):6084-6094.
3. Hall D.O. Biomass energy in industrialized countries - a view of the future. For Ecol Manage 1997, 91(1):17-45.
4. Stupak I., Asikainen A., Jonsell M., Karltun E., Lunnan A., Mizaraite D., et al. Sustainable utilization of forest biomass for energy-possibilities and problems: policy, legislation, certification, and recommendations and guidelines in the Nordic, Baltic, and other European countries. Biomass & Bioenergy 2007, 31(10):666-684.
5. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-40 December 19, 2007, p. 121 Stat. 1492.
6. Madlener R. Innovation diffusion, public policy, and local initiative: the case of wood-fuelled district heating systems in Austria. Energy Policy 2007, 35(3):1992-2008.
7. Soliño M., Prada A., Vázquez M.X. Green electricity externalities: forest biomass in an Atlantic European region. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33(3):407-414.
8. Kumar A., Flynn P., Sokhansanj S. Biopower generation from mountain pine infected wood in Canada: an economic opportunity for greenhouse gas mitigation. Renew Energy 2008, 33(6):1354-1363.
9. Becker DR, Abbas D, Halvorsen KE, Jakes PJ, McCaffrey SM, Moseley C. Conventional wisdoms of woody biomass utilization. Final report, Boise (ID): Joint Fire Sciences Program; 2009 [Summer].
10. Dwivedi P., Alavalapati J.R.R. Stakeholders' perceptions on forest biomass-based bioenergy development in the southern US. Energy Policy 2009, 37(5):1999-2007.
11. Eckhoff M., Mackes M. A case for increasing forest biomass utilization research in Colorado. Western J Appl For 2010, 25(1):22-26.
12. Nicholls D.L., Monserud R.A., Dykstra D.P. Biomass utilization for bioenergy in the western United States. For Prod J 2008, 58(1/2):6-16.
13. Becker D.R., Larson D., Lowell E.C. Financial considerations of policy options to enhance biomass utilization for reducing wildfire hazards. For Policy Econ 2009, 11(8):628-635.
14. Hessburg P.F., Agee J.K., Franklin J.F. Dry forests and wildland fires of the inland Northwest USA: contrasting the landscape ecology of the pre-settlement and modern eras. For Ecol Manage 2005, 211(1-2):117-139.
15. Domac J., Richards K., Risovic S. Socio-economic drivers in implementing bioenergy projects. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 28(2):97-106.
16. Lord R., Ehlen C., Stewart-Smith D., Martin J., Kellogg L., Davis C., et al. Biomass and bioenergy from Oregon's forests 2006 Jun, Oregon Forest Resources Institute, Portland (OR).
17. Almquist B. An inventory and analysis of biomass utilization efforts in southwestern Oregon 2005 Sept, Resource Innovations, University of Oregon, Eugene (OR).
18. Sampson R.N., Smith M.S., Gann S.B. Western forest health and biomass energy potential: a report to the Oregon Office of Energy 2001 Apr, The Sampson Group, Inc., Alexandria (VA), [Sponsored by the Oregon Office of Energy].
19. Davis Inc H.M. Forestry values and beliefs: 2006 Benchmark Survey of Oregonians 2006 Jan, Oregon Forest Resources Institute, Portland (OR).
20. Dietrich W. The final forest: the battle for the last great trees in the Pacific Northwest 1992, Penguin Books, New York.
21. Bliss J.C. Public perceptions of clearcutting. J For 2000, 98(12):4-9.
22. Shindler B., Brunson M., Stankey G. Social acceptability of forest conditions and management practices: a problem analysis. Gen. Tech. Report. PNW-GTR-537 2002, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Corvallis (OR).
23. Raison R.J. Opportunities and impediments to the expansion of forest bioenergy in Australia. Biomass Bioenergy 2006, 30(12):1021-1024.
24. The Lands Council v. McNair. In: Lexis15749, U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 2007.
25. Hagengruber J. Timber lawsuits frustrate officials: forest Service, city leaders say management plans being derailed. Spokesman Rev 2006 Dec 20.
26. Sierra Club v. Bosworth, In Lexis28013, U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 2007.
27. Kvale S. Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing 1996, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
28. Patton M.Q. Qualitative research and evaluation methods 2002, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. 3rd ed.
29. Rubin H.J., Rubin I.S. Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data 2005, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. 2nd ed.
30. Miles M.B., Huberman A.M. An expanded sourcebook: qualitative data analysis 1994, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. 2nd ed.
31. Guo Z., Sun C., Grebner D.L. Utilization of forest derived biomass for energy production in the USA: Status, challenges, and public policies. Int Rev 2007, 9(3):748-758.
32. Aguilar F., Garrett H.E. Perspectives of woody biomass for energy: Survey of state foresters, state energy biomass contacts, and National Council of Forestry executives. J For 2009, 107(6):297-306.
33. Shindler B. Public acceptance of wildland fire conditions and fuel reduction practices: challenges for federal forest managers. People, fire and forests: a synthesis of wildfire social science 2007, 37-54. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis. T.C. Daniel, M.S. Carroll, C. Moseley, C. Raish (Eds.).
34. Ceccon E., Miramontes O. Reversing deforestation? Bioenergy and society in two Brazilian models. Ecol Econ 2008, 67(2):311-317.
35. Boone R. Court halts national forest logging: federal plan involved thousands of acres in Panhandle [Internet] [cited 2007 Dec 10]. Associated Press article posted on The Lands Council website: available from:. http://www.landscouncil.org/news/court_halts_national_forest_logging.asp.
36. Abrams J., Burns S. Case study of a community stewardship success: the White Mountain Stewardship Contract 2007, Ecological Restoration Institute, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff (AZ).
37. Sturtevant V., Moote M.A., Jakes P., Cheng A.S. Social science to improve fuels management: a synthesis of research on collaboration. Gen. Tech. Report. NC-257 2005, USDA Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul (MN).
38. McKenzie D., Gedalof Z., Peterson D.L., Mote P. Climatic change, wildfire, and conservation. Conserv Biol 2004, 18(4):890-902.
39. Whitlock C., Shafer S.L., Marlon J. The role of climate and vegetation change in shaping past and future fire regimes in the northwestern US and the implications for ecosystem management. For Ecol Manage 2003, 178(1):5-21.