From renewable energy to fire risk reduction: A synthesis of biomass harvesting and utilization case studies in US forests

GCB Bioenergy

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 211-219

  Evans, A M ^a   Finkral, A J ^b  

^a Forest Guild   (United States)

^b NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioenergy; Fuel reduction; Haul distance; Mechanization; Operations; Treatment costs

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; COSTS; ECOLOGY; ECONOMICS; FORESTRY; FOSSIL FUELS; FUELS; GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES; MACHINERY; MECHANIZATION;

BIO-ENERGY; FUEL REDUCTION; HAUL DISTANCE; OPERATIONS; TREATMENT COSTS;

BIOMASS;

BIOENERGY; BIOMASS; FIRE MANAGEMENT; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FOSSIL FUEL; HARVESTING; SILVICULTURE; TWENTY FIRST CENTURY; WILDFIRE;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 79958138130     PISSN: 17571693     EISSN: 17571707     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2009.01013.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Arnosti D, Abbas D, Current D, Demchik M (2008) Harvesting Fuel: Cutting Costs and Reducing Forest Fire Hazards Through Biomass Harvest. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, MN.
2. Barbour RJ, Zhou X, Prestemon JP (2008b) Timber product output implications of a program of mechanical fuel treatments applied on public timberland in the Western United States. Forest Policy and Economics, 10, 373-385.
3. Covington WW, Moore MM (1994) Southwestern ponderosa forest structure: changes since Euro-American settlement. Journal of Forestry, 92, 39-47.
4. Cram DS, Baker TT, Boren JC (2006) Wildland Fire Effects in Silviculturally Treated Vs. Untreated Stands on New Mexico and Arizona. RMRS-RP-55, U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.
5. DOE (2006) Vision for Bioenergy and Biobased Products in the United States. Department of Energy, Washington, DC.
6. Domke GM, Ek AR, Becker DR et al. (2008) Assessment of Carbon Flows Associated with Forest Management and Biomass Procurement for the Laskin Biomass Facility. University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN.
7. Eriksson E, Gillespie AR, Gustavsson L, Langvall O, Olsson M, Sathre R, Stendahl J (2007) Integrated carbon analysis of forest management practices and wood substitution. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 37, 671-681.
8. Evans AM, Perschel RT (2009) An Assessment of Biomass Harvesting Guidelines. The Forest Guild, Santa Fe, NM.
9. Fulé PZ, Cocke AE, Heinlein TA, Covington WW (2004) Effects of an intense prescribed forest fire: is it ecological restoration? Restoration Ecology, 12, 220-230.
10. Grushecky ST, Wang J, McGill DW (2007) Influence of site characteristics and costs of extraction and trucking on logging residue utilization in Southern West Virginia. Forest Products Journal, 57, 63-67.
11. Haq Z (2002) Biomass for Electricity Generation. Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC.
12. IPCC (2007) Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
13. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
14. Kashian DM, Romme WH, Tinker DB, Turner MG, Ryan MG (2006) Carbon storage on landscapes with stand-replacing fires. Bioscience, 56, 598-606.
15. Lezberg AL, Battaglia MA, Shepperd WD, Schoettle AW (2008) Decades-old silvicultural treatments influence surface wildfire severity and post-fire nitrogen availability in a ponderosa pine forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 255, 49-61.
16. Livingston J (2008) Small-Diameter Success Stories Iii. FPL-GTR-175, U.S. Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI.
17. Lynch DL, Mackes K (2003) Costs for reducing fuels in Colorado forest restoration projects. In: Fire, Fuel Treatments, and Ecological Restoration (eds Omi PN, Joyce LA), pp. 167-176. USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO.
18. Malmsheimer RW, Heffernan P, Brink S et al. (2008) Preventing Ghg emissions through biomass substitution. Journal of Forestry, 106, 136-140.
19. Martinson E, Omi PN, Shepperd W (2003) Effects of fuel treatments on fire severity. In: Hayman Fire Case Study (ed. Graham RT), pp. 7-13. RMRS-GTR-114. US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT.
20. McIver JD, Adams PW, Doyal JA et al. (2003) Environmental effects and economics of mechanized logging for fuel reduction in northeastern Oregon mixed conifer stands. Western Journal of Applied Forestry, 18, 238-249.
21. MDC (2008) Missouri Woody Biomass Harvesting Best Management Practices Manual. Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, MO.
22. MFRC (2007) Biomass Harvest Guidelines. Minnesota Forest Resources Council, St Paul, MN.
23. MFS, University of Maine, and TCNF (2008) Biomass Retention Guidelines for Timber Harvesting in Maine. Maine Forest Service, University of Maine, and the Trust to Conserve Northeast Forestlands, Orono, ME.
24. Murphy K, Rich T, Sexton T (2007) An Assessment of Fuel Treatment Effects on Fire Behavior, Suppression Effectiveness, and Structure Ignition on the Angora Fire. R5-TP-025, US Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Vallejo, CA.
25. Norton G, Abraham S, Veneman A (2003) Memorandum of Understanding on Policy Principles for Woody Biomass Utilization for Restoration and Fuel Treatments on Forests, Woodlands, and Rangelands. U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, Washington, DC.
26. Noss RF, Franklin JF, Baker WL, Schoennagel T, Moyle PB (2006) Managing fire-prone forests in the Western United States. Frontiers in Ecology, 4, 481-487.
27. Omi PN, Martinson EJ (2002) Effect of Fuel Treatment on Wildfire Severity. Western Forest Fire Research Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
28. PA DCNR (2008) Guidance on Harvesting Woody Biomass for Energy. Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Harrisburg, PA.
29. Perlack RD, Wright LL, Turhollow AF, Graham RL, Stokes BJ, Erbach DC (2005) Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply. US Department of Energy, US Department of Agriculture, Oak Ridge, TN.
30. Perschel RT, Evans AM, Summers MJ (2007) Climate Change, Carbon, and the Forests of the Northeast. The Forest Guild, Santa Fe, NM.
31. Pollet J, Omi PN (2002) Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 11, 1-10.
32. Reijnders L (2006) Conditions for the sustainability of biomass based fuel use. Energy Policy, 34, 863-876.
33. RISI Inc (2008) Emerging Biomass Industry: Impact on Wood Fiber Markets. RISI Inc., Boston, MA.
34. Rummer B (2008) Assessing the cost of fuel reduction treatments: a critical review. Forest Policy and Economics, 10, 355-362.
35. Skinner CN, Ritchie MW, Hamilton T, Symons J (2005) Effects of prescribed fire and thinning on wildfire severity: the cone fire, blacks mountain experimental forest. In: 25th Annual Forest Vegetation Management Conference (ed. Cooper S), University of California Cooperative Extension, Redding, CA.
36. Snider G, Daugherty PJ, Wood D (2006) The irrationality of continued fire suppression: an avoided cost analysis of fire hazard reduction treatments versus no treatment. Journal of Forestry, 104, 431-437.
37. 2 Sequestration-Comparing the Energy Balance, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economics. NREL/TP-510-32575, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.
38. USFS (2005) A Strategic Assessment of Forest Biomass and Fuel Reduction Treatments in Western States. GTR-RMRS-149, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.
39. 2 from fires in the United States: implications for carbon management. Carbon Balance and Management, 2, 10.