1 / 20

Biomass Harvesting and Forest Site Productivity

Biomass Harvesting and Forest Site Productivity. Eric D. Vance National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Biomass/Bioenergy Workshop February 24-25, Houston, TX. Biomass Harvesting. Emerging markets for bioenergy Removal of biomass previously left on site Shorter rotations

elsa
Download Presentation

Biomass Harvesting and Forest Site Productivity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Biomass Harvesting and Forest Site Productivity Eric D. Vance National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Biomass/Bioenergy Workshop February 24-25, Houston, TX

  2. Biomass Harvesting • Emerging markets for bioenergy • Removal of biomass previously left on site • Shorter rotations • Concerns over site productivity, water, wildlife

  3. Sustaining Site Productivity by Manipulating Site Resources • Water, nutrients, sunlight • Allocation of existing site resources • Competing vegetation, root growth • Increasing site resources • Artificially removing biomass and nutrients • Cannot always rely on natural replacement

  4. Management Intensity and Site Resources Intensive Extensive Available Resources Resource Capital

  5. Intensive Utilization of Harvest Residues in Southern Pine PlantationsM.H. Eisenbies, E.D. Vance, W.M. Aust, J.R. SeilerBioenergy Research (2009) 2:90-98 • 32 million Mg yr-1 residues available in the South • 50-85 Mg ha-1 on site after stem-only harvest • 45-60% increase in mid-rotation fertilization may be needed to replace nutrients if residues removed

  6. South Carolina Wet/Dry Harvest Study (Virginia Tech, MeadWestvaco, NCASI)Residue-Soil Disturbance Matrix

  7. Ten-Year Effects of Harvest Residue Removal on Relative Rank of Stand Biomass

  8. Fall River Long-Term Soil Productivity ProjectUniv. of Washington, Weyerhaeuser, USFS, NCASI • Conventional bole-only removal • Total stem (bole-only to a 5cm top) • Total-tree removal • Total-tree + legacy-wood removal • All cable-yarded

  9. Fall River StudyDouglas-fir Age 5 Tree Volume Index

  10. Forest Service Long-Term Soil Productivity Network Core Sites Affiliated Sites

  11. Competing Vegetation: A Critical Factor

  12. Lake States AspenNutrient Depletion and Rotation Length • Deficiencies rare • Older studies • Multiple, short-rotation cycles • Concluded 10-15 yr rotations sustainable • Reduced soil/foliar Ca on some sites • Indices underdeveloped

  13. Aspen in the Lake StatesNutrient Budgets for Whole-tree Harvesting over 50 years(Mineral soils (lb/ac); Minnesota GEIS, Grigal 2004)) Ca capital = 15,125

  14. Short Rotation Aspen on Sandy Soils: A Worst-Case Scenario? • < 1% Ca drain • (Grigal, 2004) • Three 20-yr rotations • < 5% Ca removed • 1 ton/ac wood ash

  15. The Forest Calcium Cycle(Likens et al. 1998)

  16. Over a Century of Forest Nutrition Management in Scandinavia • Science-based • Forest productivity • Forest health • Nutrient imbalances • Foliar, soil analysis • Biomass harvesting

  17. Intensive Harvest and Site Productivity: What Do We Know? • Many sites remarkably resilient • Little evidence for productivity declines • Preconceived notions often incorrect • Managers often know best

  18. But, More Work is Needed! • Sensitive sites • Fundamental impacts • Long-term, repeated removals • Indicators • Prevention, mitigation

  19. A Range of Management Intensities to Meet Society’s Needs

More Related