The Carbon Cycle is Misunderstood and Misrepresented - Mar 1, 2012 

            Misleading information about sustainable forestry, bioenergy and how the carbon cycle works is prevalent in American society.

            Information recently posted on the website of the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC) is an example of just such information and illustrates clearly the lack of understanding of forest ecosystems and the carbon cycle in general.

            A video and its accompanying text on the website decry the use of forest harvesting for biomass energy. However, they admit that “Biomass can be harvested and utilized in ways that reduce pollution and protect forest habitats, but only with sustainability safeguards and proper accounting for carbon emissions -- including carbon released due to deforestation.” This definition of sustainable biomass production includes agricultural biomass and woody biomass from short-rotation biomass plantations, but not natural forests.

            A “biomass carbon deficit” argument is put forward, along with an overly-simplistic example of one forest harvested, and one left to grow. The claim is that the harvested forest creates an immediate carbon deficit compared to the one that is left, and that the deficit is closed slowly over the years, until eventually, the harvested forest will start producing carbon reductions.
            What this comparison fails to take into account is the cumulative effect of multiple forest stand harvesting over continuous time periods. Rather than comparing one forest harvested immediately and one left for fifty years, consider the forest as one comprised of fifty different forest stands harvested one per year, and growing at a rate of 2% each year. This is closer to reality and yields a cumulative impact of a sustainable harvest in perpetuity, with no real starting or ending point to the carbon cycle.
            Also consider that each of these stands was collecting carbon from the atmosphere before they ever reached harvesting age. In the example, the stand harvested in Year One had been growing for at least fifty years on the harvest date. It will be ready to be harvested again at the end of another fifty-year cycle. Thus, the "carbon deficit" is only real if you ignore the fact that the trees gobbled up carbon before they were harvested.

            By following sustainable harvest guidelines, society will benefit from the capture of woody conversion of carbon stock to energy in our homes and businesses. Ultimately, if we don't, the carbon is returned back to the atmosphere anyway, one way or another.

            You can read more about the carbon cycle and the real impacts of timber harvesting on Dr. Ray’s blog Go Wood at http://gowood.blogspot.com