0 Comments
Attached is a little, almost unnoticeable notice, that was in Friday's Herald. Northern Pulp labeled this a "Vegetation Management Notice" but it translates more accurately to: 'Northern Pulp set to aerial spray glyphosate throughout Colchester and Halifax Counties.'
Although the spray compound may be called 'Vision' and sound rather harmless, its main active ingredient is glyphosate which is the same active ingredient used in RoundUp. The herbicide is used to promote the growth of softwoods by killing the foliage and hardwood trees that compete with the desired spruce trees that Northern Pulp uses to make their product. Basically anything with a leaf dies or is substantially set back and only the trees with needles prosper. Although this chemical has been banned for some uses in some Canadian Provinces and other regions of the world it will be aerial sprayed over large amounts of woodland areas here in the Province between August 25 and October 10. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the use of this chemical. You could read articles for days about it's carcinogenic effects to humans but on the other hand, its 'importance' in the agriculture and pulp and paper industries. There are also concerns about its effects on honey bees and other critters of the wild -http://action2.davidsuzuki.org/glyphosate The bottom line is that Northern Pulp / Paper Excellence / Asia Pulp and Paper is using it to kill foliage and hardwood trees. This herbicide spraying had mostly stopped when the Government of Nova Scotia had stopped footing the bill for it. But we did hear that Northern Pulp had been pressuring the government to begin paying for this procedure again. Has the provincial government also caved on this? Write to Premier Stephen MacNeil, PREMIER@novascotia.ca - Natural Resources Minister, Lloyd Hines mindnr@novascotia.ca - Environment Minister Margaret Miller Minister.Environment@novascotia.ca and ask them. https://www.theguardian.com/…/controversial-chemical-roundu…
Published Tuesday, August 02, 2016
by Common Dreams 'The impacts of climate change are no longer subtle. They are playing out before us, in real time' Climate Change is Here and Now, Dire NOAA Report Warns by Nadia Prupis, staff writer Nebulous response from NS Minister of Energy to questions about CO2 emissions from forest biomass7/27/2016
Back in April, Peter Ritchie wrote Hon. Michel Samson Minister for the NS Department of Energy, outlining the evidence that forest biomass actually produces more CO2 than coal, and asking “At a time when Canada, along with 195 other countries, has committed to reducing its green house gas emissions, how can the Nova Scotia government actively support the generation of electricity from a fuel which is (at least) 50% more CO2-intensive than coal? At a time when carbon pricing is finally set to become a national priority, how can Nova Scotia justify the attendant costs, ultimately borne by ratepayers, which will come with this essential price on carbon?
Receiving no response, Peter wrote again on June 21 and finally received a response on July 25 prepared by Nova Scotia Depts. of Natural Resources, Environment, and Energy. The best they could come up with was “We recognize that the science around forest biomass carbon accounting is evolving”, while touting the amendment of Renewable Electricity Regulations so that the Port Hawkesbury biomass plant is no longer a "must-run" facility and stating that “harvest of primary forest products for all uses from Nova Scotia… remains within sustainable harvesting levels.” I guess we should all sleep well. Read correspondence... Since the Paper mill half-reopened at Point Tupper, we have looked on in disbelief at the vast areas that have been clear cut, especially the hardwoods in Cape Breton. NSP have built and run a very large biomass electric power generating plant alongside the mill so as to provide steam and electric power for the mill. Many transport trailer loads every day arrive at the mill from Nova Scotia Crown land forests. Last week we read a Government announcement that they are looking for other uses for N.S. forests. This is baffling because the huge biomass clear cutting to feed the point Tupper boiler left at least four sawmills in eastern N.S. short of logs. When sawmills shut down, there is less waste wood material available to ship for the Point Tupper boiler. The result is more trees must be cut to sustain power and steam production. Apparently saw logs were being chipped to feed the NSP plant. Let's look at CO2 absorption by trees. Saplings store as much as 48 pounds of CO2 by age 10. By age 40 each tree may be storing one tonne of CO2. These numbers are highly variable depending upon the soil nuitrients, soil water during growing season, sunlight days, air quality and length of growing season. An acre of trees may sequester 2 to 6 tonnes per year as well as some sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and ozone. (International Society of Arboriculture) The typical Acadian forest is mixed species and of multiple age trees. White Birch, Poplars and Balsam Firs have short life spans of 30 to 75 years. Spruce and Pines have medium life spans of 100 to 200 years. Hard Maples, Oak, Beech, Yellow Birch have longer lives of 100 to 325 years. As they grow bigger and taller, they capture and store more CO2 from the air. An acre of mixed species trees of varying ages can absorb enough CO2 over a year to equal the amount of CO2 produced by a medium size car or pickup truck driven 42000 KM. Driving an economy car on gasoline for 20,000 KM/year puts about 6 tonnes of CO2 out into the air. A heavy truck fuelled by diesel driven 80,000 KM/year puts out about 104 tonnes of CO2/year. (North Carolina State University) Thus, if we do the math, we see that it may take 400 saplings growing robustly to absorb the CO2 from an economy car per year. Trees only absorb CO2 during the growing season. Other seasons the CO2 falls into the oceans or rises far up into the upper atmosphere and adds to the greenhouse gases there. The heavy diesel truck above will need as many as 7600 saplings to absorb the CO2 it puts out. Or about 104 of the age 40 years plus trees to absorb its output of CO2. Forest acreages contain from 150 to 700 maturing trees per acre. Here's where I'm going with this: The biomass-fuelled electric/steam plant at Point Tupper is hauling in excess of 20 trailer loads per operating day (some say as many as 50 loads/day). Often these loads include prime mature hardwoods, which make more BTUs than softer woods. Each load contains 50 to 100 trees of ages 30 to 150+ years of age. Two or three loads can clear an acre of hardwood. Thus removing about 175+ tonnes/acre of storage for CO2 for a very long time. The highway tractor trailer, like the one above driving 80,000 to 100,000 KM/year, is one of many hauling the cut wood from the forest to the mill. Each puts out in excess of 104 tonnes of CO2/year. Then we add the CO2 put out by the cutting and forwarding machines plus the road building machines and the various service trucks. Cutting machines often run 20 hours a day. I can't estimate what this total might be, but it's a very big number. The Paris agreement says that Canada will reduce CO2 emissions. Our Premier, however, didn't bother to attend this conference. His government continues to allow the clear cutting of vast forested areas thus allowing huge outputs of CO2 so that a biomass plant can make electricity and steam. And the Province has lost an incalculable amount of trees that could be absorbing CO2 in the stems, trunks and roots. That's a double loss. The roots slowly give up the CO2 over many years after the tree is cut. And they plan to increase biomass cutting of trees. When the totals are counted, clear cutting for biomass is anything but GREEN. It's madness. There are affordable alternatives if only they would stay up-to-date on technologies. HRM / Solar City are showing one way forward. Townhomes using geothermal for heat and cooling is another. Guest blogger, D.G. Wilson, Brule Point, N.S.
While you're reviewing the sunny stats put forward by NSDNR in their 5-year review of their Natural Resource Strategy, "The Path We Share," cited elsewhere on this blog, do take a close look at the National Forestry Database, Canada's official "Compendium of Forestry Statistics." It serves as our national source of credible, accurate, and reliable forestry statistics." http://nfdp.ccfm.org/index_e.php
On the menu along the left side of the page you need to click Silviculture >> Jurisdictional Tables >> and then "NS" in the row labeled "6.1.0.0 Area harvested by ownership and harvesting methods" (Here is a direct link -http://nfdp.ccfm.org/data/detailed/html/detailed_6100_p_NS.html) Stats current to 2014 for now. Since this website breaks down the various types of clearcutting (including "shelterwood" - a two-stage clearcut, and "seed tree" - a clearcut with a few standing trees left), you need to scroll down a bit for the totals. For 2014, it reports that clearcutting was used on 8,035 of 9,364 ha cut on Crown, and 20,315 of 22,823 ha cut on private, or 28,350 of 32,187 ha total (88%). The footnotes at the bottom provide some background on where the data comes from.
My petition against the use of forest biomass for power generation grew out of my frustration with the "green-washing" of policies that keep us going down the same old paths, rather than seeking new ways to mitigate our impact on the environment. Specifically, this winter, at a gathering of provincial ministers seeking a national climate change strategy, Nova Scotia’s Minister of the Environment claimed that our province had made great strides in increasing the proportion of electricity generated from renewable sources. She announced that by 2017, Nova Scotia would triple its use of forest biomass for power generation as part of our increasing use of renewable energy. After having seen the forest biomass arriving at the Port Hawkesbury Mill, piles of green, wet wood in truck after truck, after hearing folks speak of the nearby lands being harvested for biomass, after reading about of our poor soils and the slow regeneration of our forests, it just seemed ridiculous. After thinking about this for a while, the only avenue I saw was this electronic petition. It was quite an experience, particularly the period during which the petition went "viral" increasing by 5000 signatures in a few hours, and reaching nearly 29,000 signatures. Many folks provided comments to accompany their signature. These comments strengthen my resolve to work against this misguided practice and for better forestry practices.
While you're reading DNR's sunny 5-year review of the province's Natural Resource Strategy, "The Path We Share," you might want to take a boo at the National Forestry Database, Canada's definitive "Compendium of Forestry Statistics, serving as our national source of credible, accurate, and reliable forestry statistics." http://nfdp.ccfm.org/index_e.php
On the menu along the left side of the page you need to click Silviculture >> Jurisdictional Tables >> and then "NS" in the row labeled "6.1.0.0 Area harvested by ownership and harvesting methods" (For your convenience, here's a direct link: http://nfdp.ccfm.org/data/detailed/html/detailed_6100_p_NS.html) Stats current to 2014 for now. Since this website breaks down the various types of clearcutting (including "shelterwood" - a two-stage clearcut, and "seed tree" - a clearcut with a few standing trees left), you need to scroll down a bit for the totals. For 2014, it reports that clearcutting was used on 8,035 of 9,364 ha cut on Crown, and 20,315 of 22,823 ha cut on private, or 28,350 of 32,187 ha total (88%). The footnotes at the bottom provide some background on where the data comes from.
Big announcement today, with taxpayer dollars going to study “innovative uses of [Nova Scotia] forest products and new market opportunities…Being studied are things including new market opportunities and alternatives for petroleum products with bio-based fuels in marine diesel and heating oil applications. Another initiative is looking at how forestry contractors can integrate technology, innovation and best practice to help improve their performance.” It would be nice if words such as “while maintaining forest life and the productive base of forestry” could be added to such statements but perhaps they can’t.
View Innovacorp/Natural Resources Press Release |
Blog Archives
October 2020
Blog Index
All
|
Photo used under Creative Commons from DaveW99999