"The province has an energy plan that calls for new electrical energy to come from clean, green and renewable sources."

And exactly how does this fit in with bioenergy?

It is not clean. While the trees are green, it is not green in the notion of environmentally sustainable. Unless only the waste is used, such as that which used to be put inot, and still is in some cases, beehive burners, it is not cost effective use of the type of wood we have here.

"Energy security - increasingly from clean, green renewable sources - is steadfastly on the agenda of US President Obama. “There will be export opportunities we should not only consider, but pursue with vigor."

I would like to see a scenario of what level of cut is sustainable. We must rememberr that we have a fall down of about 40% of our forests for the next half century or so. We were htting the edge of sustainble cut before that. That means a 40% cut back of what we were doing.

Using the dead pine is a short term situation of 10 years or less. Don't know how many are ready to build plants on only a 10 year opportunity to recoup the inestment.

If I hear the notion of "leading edge" one more time with this stuff ........ burning wood for fuel is not exactly leading edge. has been done since humans first discovered fire in the woods.

Right on the money Gus!

We must remember that any of these schemes will go no where until and unless someone make a lot of money on the deal. That is the real hold up on these issues. BC Hydro is a water (hydro) generated resource and this province lags behind mostly because of that. They feel that any other generation scheme threatens their monopoly on power generation.

We have been spoiled so long with ample hydro power that we have been able to export to the USA. That is the real reason we are now in an energy deficit. We have more than ample generation capacity for ourselves, but California wants more.

I recently heard about the objections to Wind/Solar/Geothermal is all about how much more it would cost to generate. When all the numbers have been crunched it turns out that it would cost a whopping $3.00 per month more. This was shown to be the case in Ontario.

Right now its only feasible to haul fiber within about a radius of 60-80km from the pellet plant. Anything over then that the trucking costs over run the profit margin. Gus is also right about the fiber suply. It all sounds like a really great idea but once you start getting into the DNA of the bio energy industry reality and feasibility start to set in. But on the other hand its still good to capture energy where we can instead of lighting the beehive burners and slash piles and walking away. The whole bio energy craze seemed to die off after the election.

I agree with Gus. Note that all the Partners that are going to develop this emerging industry are Government funded entities. I wouldnt hold my breath for any big results.

There will be some big energy producing projects in the next 10 years, however these are already in the works by Private Business, and they will be developed, and produce electricity, without the aid of the above mentioned entities.

Mackenzie chip plant sends their hog fuel to Northwood, so thats 160km radius for co-gen uses of the fiber. Bio-energy can be as profitable as government allows it to be in regards to its taxation. IMO its about utilizing the resources and adding to our energy security with a product that is produced locally and the costs are spent locally creating employment opportunities, as well as keeping energy expenses local.

Spoke with an old time logger recently. He's recently retired. When I brought up the issue of being close to the fibre, he made a very valid point.
The cleanup, chipping, and transport of hog, should be done while the logging is going on, while everyone's on site. Why come in after the fact? Have all the personnel, equipment, and road maintenance come in once during the show. Clean up, haul it, hog it and take it away. Let the government credit stumpage to reflect these......ahem...."green initiatives".