Burning wood for energy is not renewable

As a member of the board of Golden State Natural Resources, maybe he really believes the party line here, that forests are a renewable resource and wood pellets a safe and sane alternative to coal. However, most likely he is looking at the profit line of his business, which relies on logging resources that take decades to renew themselves. Much longer than the turnaround time to harvest a million tons a year from our California forests. Logging may be renewable, but the amount GSNR has committed to producing ensures clearcuts, not scrap wood will be the resources used in these wood pellet plants.

And GSNR proposes that wood pellets are a “cleaner energy source” than coal, which is manifestly not true when you consider they are removing a carbon sink that burns dirtier than coal. Plus transporting that resource across the planet with all the usage of oil resources that brings. Burning wood for energy is neither carbon-neutral nor truly renewable. While cutting trees to convert them to wood pellets to produce energy is ultimately carbon-neutral — if an equal number of new trees are planted — the regrowth process requires 50-100 years.

Wood pellets burned today won’t be carbon neutral until their re-planted stores have absorbed the equivalent amount of carbon. Please help to keep GSNR from destroying California forests for a worse alternative.

Janet Doherty

Sacramento