The government needs to fund pine as the future in ethanol. The cost pressures on the food supply, as a result of using food staples for ethanol, simply do not make it a practical alternative in the long run.

The future of ethanol is in Prince George, and the pine beetle killed wood, and the sooner the government gets on board the better for not only our local economy but also the air the world breaths.

IMO Investments by government needs to be made in the business model certainties so real economic models can be made that determine the level of tax favorability to the business model.

Time Will Tell

"One acre of corn can produce 1135 litres of ethanol. An acre of pine trees could produce about 10,000 litres of ethanol."

Looks good. 9 times as much from an acre.

Until you realize it a rotation of pine takes about 80 years and a rotation of corn in this part and south of the province takes one year.

Thus, over an 80 year period one can produce about 9 times as much ethanol from corn as one can from pine.

Think of it in another way. One needs 1/9th of the acreage, which means less travel to the plant, which means less wasted fuel and pollution in the transportation.

There are other considerations to round out the comparison including harvesting cost, road maintenance, carbon sequestering, contribution to CO2 to O2 conversion, best economic use of each product, etc.

Then there is the regional ability to grow each. Corn is likely a lost cost in much of the regions in this area which can grow pine and other evergreens.

Then there is the question of whether growing a faster growing tree would be better. Pines and other evergreen are higher quality wood than some of the faster growing deciduous trees.

I'm interested in finding out more about the total picture in order to find out which one to support.

I wonder whether anyone can attend and where and when it is. Guess I'll check with UNBC.

"Researchers at Colorado State University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service have completed an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from biofuel production. Study results revealed that when compared with the life cycle of gasoline and diesel, ethanol and biodiesel from corn and soybean rotations reduced greenhouse gas emission by nearly 40 percent, reed canarygrass by 85 percent, and switchgrass and hybrid poplar by 115 percent."

http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=48083&src=rss

This is another part of the equation which looked at the harvesting methods - I wonder where pine falls?

Then we have this statement:

"Greenhouse gas savings from biomass gasification for electricity generation are even greater."

Well Ben, you have finally looked into what I've been suggesting in your blog for a few weeks now. Like I have said this ethanol development is a viable way to keep some mills open..it will cost money to convert them, but the federal monies could be used.

A similar story was in the Province newspaper about a month ago. And guess what? They're already perfecting the process...where? In the lowermainland at one of the big universities there.

I think that once they factor in the cost of the woodchips they will see that this is probably not a viable operation. All the woodchips that are produced at present are used in the making of woodpulp. Chips are hauled to the local pulp mills for processing. Cheap woodchips are what keeps the pulp mills running.

Woodchips are a by product of lumber processing and if you were to spin off some of these chips for ethanol production you would probably see a rise in the cost of chips. The altervative to using the chips that are a byproduct of the lumber process would be to chip whole trees. This of course would again raise the price of woodchips, because of the handling and shpping costs of the trees.

It will be interesting to see what the outcome of this study will be, however I suspect it is a lot of to-do about nothing.

Owl makes some interesting comments that show there is more to this than appears on the surface.

Well palopu, I would rather try to make it work as opposed to sitting around and reading studies and not doing anything.

I dont disagree with you Imorg, however the problem is that these beetle killed trees probably have a lift span of approx 7/10 years after which they will be rotten and useless, and certainly no good for woodchips, or ethanol. These trees have to be processed immediately in order to get any value out of them. Even so they are becoming an increasing cost to lumber mills because they are splitting and causing problems in the processing.

If we cant come up with a solution in the very near future, then we may as well knock them all over and allow them to rot into the ground and replant the area with new trees. This would produce thousands of jobs and over time we would have new forests growing.

I think that you have to look at the fact that this problem has been with us for over 5 years (longer in some areas) and we have yet to come up with any solutions, other than to increase the cut allowance for the lumber Co.,s If the price of lumber hadnt dropped into the cellar Im sure we could have processed a large portion of this timber in the next 3/4 years, however if the price doesnt come up, it will just sit in the bush.

I guess it would be to difficult for us to make a life style change to get away from our gas guzzlers.

The Middle East, the off shore gas rigs, the tar sand and the oil wells around the world cant keep us supplied with our needs and we are thinking that 10,000 liters of ethonal will solve our problems.

We are now going to use our agricultural lands and forest to support a life style thats out of this wrold. Get a life wake up and smell the coffee. Will we ever put our brain into gear and start living.

Cheers

Much agreed Kimbo.

Whatever we do, it will be for a comparatively short period of time. This will be unlike some marble quarries which have been around and mined since the times of the Romans and the product still used for building.

In fact, any kind of manufacturing plant relying solely on MPB wood, and having no replacement in mind once that is gone, will be lucky if it lasts for a decade.

The key whether something will go or not is in the business case. If there were a viable business case, there would have been companies jumping all over this a long time ago. That is something many people seem to forget.

Half the biomass from current logging is left in the bush to rot. I would say that is a significant renewable source for any ethanol plant operating on S-P-F. Any pine beetle kill should be viewed as a short term subsidy to get the industry up and off the ground.

Talk about diverting wood chips to fuel an ethanol plant misses the point IMO about were the resources we would be looking at using for ethanol production. Simple regulations could protect the wood chip from the economics of ethanol. I see it as an issue to be addressed, but not an issue that makes ethanol a bad investment for our communities.

IMO we need to really think outside of the box and abandon our pre-programed mindset that was put in place by the cotton industry. Than we could see that hemp fiber is the fastest growing fiber in the world putting even corn to shame, and could be a huge source for ethanol production utilizing existing cut blocks for production.

Time Will Tell

Kimbo provides a very interesting and valid opinion.
Somebody was wearing the thinking cap today.

:-)

"Half the biomass from current logging is left in the bush to rot." on purpose to sustain future tree growth and leave the forest relatively intact.

Notice the distinction between forest and trees. Many people forget that little fact of ecology, biology and silviculture.

From the curretn article in Canadian Siliviculture linked below ...

"In highly altered landscapes, we have clearly exceeded the capacity of natural systems to absorb the changes associated with certain activities, resulting in a loss of integrity and associated values .....

If we assume that the goal of sustainable forest management is to maintain the integrity of forested ecosystems and the socio-economic systems they support, and we accept the premise that natural ecosystems support a high level of ecological integrity, we can then frame the problem as one of determining how much resource development can be supported by natural ecosystems without compromising ecological integrity ....."

http://www.canadiansilviculture.com/spr07/benchmarking.html

Blah, Blah, Blah. Lots of good and educated points in your posts everyone. Nonetheless, the main issue is economics and our government. Please bear in mind that the shareholders/investors run the show and our government certainly doesn't give a damn of our woes. This is demonstrated daily. Forget the MTB issue and alternatives for its use. The kill wood will be heading to Washington State's mills that have been retrofitting to handle it, think of it as a dead log export. Why replant trees and wait, Russia has an enormous supply of trees and are easily accessible, and add to that cheap labor to offset any shipping costs. Russians don't need benefits or pensions. The KGB(read FSB)takes care of labor problems. HMM we sold off BC RAIL to our neighbours, now be good Canadians and fill the cars with our wood, minerals, oil and water for processing there. The timing of the Rail sale was orchestrated perfectly. Ever wonder why West Fraser purchased 13 sawmills in the US? How long will it be before a deal is made to send illegal immigrants from the US to take your job? How do you kill a union? Shut down the industry it serves? No im not a conspirasist, or like others that claim to be well educated. I'm like many out there, part if the middle aged, middle income families watching the destruction from the fence. Not ready to leap yet. Hope i have a well paying job until i can afford to retire.