PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 059
most favored timber production, Massachusetts was ranked in the middle of this group, and Connecticut and Rhode Island owners were least oriented toward timber production. There appears to be a fairly high degree of correlation between parcel size and landowner interest and willingness to pursue commercial timber harvests. A recent study by Butler et al. (2010) developed a methodology to combine these factors in a manner to eliminate double counting in the presence of multiple constraints. Harvest “participation rates” from this study are shown on the last line of Exhibit 3-21: Vermont had 57% of family forest land available for harvest (ranking the highest of all 20 northern states); New Hampshire was second of this group with 43% available; Massachusetts had only 32% of land available; Connecticut and Rhode Island were the lowest with only about 20% of land available (and ranked among the lowest of the 20 northern states). Some question the validity and usefulness of landowner surveys, so it is useful to have additional information from other sources. Participation rates in current use programs provide further insights into the level of interest in forest management and related income incentives. The Chapter 61-61A-61B program in Massachusetts has had limited success relative to its coun- terparts in New Hampshire and Vermont. In Massachusetts, about 15% of private forest lands were enrolled in this program in 2009 (Massachusetts Department of Conservation, 2009). This is in stark contrast to New Hampshire where about 27,000 landowners participate in the current use program, covering nearly 3 million acres (New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association, 2010). In Vermont, more than 1.6 million acres of forest land were enrolled in their current use program in 2009 (Vermont Department of Taxes, 2010). Ownership attributes clearly reinforce the patterns shown earlier on the basis of area, inventory and harvesting. The potential for forest biomass fuel from border counties in Connecticut and Rhode Island appears limited. On the other hand, the border counties of New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York are similar in size to Massachusetts (on the basis of timberland area, inventory, and growth) and their forest products industry and industrial roundwood harvests are significantly higher. Furthermore, land- owner surveys for New Hampshire and Vermont show family owners in these states to be more supportive of timber harvesting. 3.6.5 SUMMARY OF FOREST BIOMASS SUPPLY POTENTIAL IN BORDER COUNTIES In order to assess potential forest biomass supplies from the coun- ties surrounding Massachusetts, we have looked at several key measures relative to Massachusetts. The general conclusion from our analysis of timberland area, timber inventory, and timber growth is that private lands in the border counties have the ability to supply about 50% more biomass than Massachusetts. When the analysis is expanded to account for landowner char- acteristics and the development of the forest products industry, the potential biomass contribution of border counties becomes more difficult to evaluate. It is certainly the case that New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York would be much more conducive to increased harvesting than Massachusetts based on landowner attitudes and the distribution of ownership by parcel size. This already manifests itself in a much larger forest industry and much higher roundwood production. Thus we are faced we this analytical dilemma: these regions may be more attractive for timber harvesting, but given that more harvesting is now taking place, how much further expansion is likely? Has investment to date put the production in these regions in equilibrium relative to Massachusetts? Are there still more promising opportunities in the border counties? Or are they already approaching production levels that make it more difficult to expand further? Whole-tree harvesting already has a long history in southern New Hampshire for example, suggesting that future increases might be more difficult to achieve and come only at higher cost. While this issue will not be settled in this analysis, we have made an effort to better understand the situation in southern New Hampshire: it has been suggested that New Hampshire has the most potential for increasing supplies of forest biomass because of its inventory, harvest rates, and favorable stance toward timber production. Our evaluation of recent harvest relationships and price trends is provided in Appendix 3-D. We did not find any obvious pockets of opportunity or expansion possibilities in the southern counties, nor any evidence to support claims that southern New Hampshire may be in an advantageous position to produce more biomass compared to neighboring areas. Since we have considered the availability of biomass from border counties in relation to supplies from Massachusetts, it is important that we consider these supplies in the context of our two scenarios for Massachusetts. In our Low-Price Biomass scenario, we expect that biomass supplies in Massachusetts will increase as a result of more intensive harvesting using whole-tree harvesting. Given the development that has already taken place in some of the border areas, we would not expect that increased biomass demand at current biomass prices would spur additional harvesting to the same extent that we might see in Massachusetts. However, in our High-Price Biomass scenario, more land is harvested and more timber is harvested from that land. We would expect that this will cause a substantial response in the border counties, just as we expect in Massachusetts. Given landowner characteristics in the region, one might argue that the response in border counties might be greater than in Massachusetts. Mindful of the numerous uncertainties involved in projecting the potential supply of biomass in the counties bordering Massa- chusetts, we consider a reasonable “guesstimate” to be 50% more than can be produced within this state. In our Low-Price Biomass scenario, this would suggest the border counties could produce an additional 225,000−375,000 green tons of forest biomass annually. If the High-Price Biomass scenario unfolds, border county supply would jump to an annual average of 1.0−1.3 million green tons. BIOMASS SUSTAINABILITY AND CARBON POLICY STUDY MANOMET CENTER FOR CONSERVATION SCIENCES 59 NATURAL CAPITAL INITIATIVEPDF Image | NATURAL CAPITAL INITIATIVE AT MANOMET
PDF Search Title:
NATURAL CAPITAL INITIATIVE AT MANOMETOriginal File Name Searched:
manomet_biomass_report_full_hirez.pdfDIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing
NFT (Non Fungible Token): Buy our tech, design, development or system NFT and become part of our tech NFT network... More Info
IT XR Project Redstone NFT Available for Sale: NFT for high tech turbine design with one part 3D printed counter-rotating energy turbine. Be part of the future with this NFT. Can be bought and sold but only one design NFT exists. Royalties go to the developer (Infinity) to keep enhancing design and applications... More Info
Infinity Turbine IT XR Project Redstone Design: NFT for sale... NFT for high tech turbine design with one part 3D printed counter-rotating energy turbine. Includes all rights to this turbine design, including license for Fluid Handling Block I and II for the turbine assembly and housing. The NFT includes the blueprints (cad/cam), revenue streams, and all future development of the IT XR Project Redstone... More Info
Infinity Turbine ROT Radial Outflow Turbine 24 Design and Worldwide Rights: NFT for sale... NFT for the ROT 24 energy turbine. Be part of the future with this NFT. This design can be bought and sold but only one design NFT exists. You may manufacture the unit, or get the revenues from its sale from Infinity Turbine. Royalties go to the developer (Infinity) to keep enhancing design and applications... More Info
Infinity Supercritical CO2 10 Liter Extractor Design and Worldwide Rights: The Infinity Supercritical 10L CO2 extractor is for botanical oil extraction, which is rich in terpenes and can produce shelf ready full spectrum oil. With over 5 years of development, this industry leader mature extractor machine has been sold since 2015 and is part of many profitable businesses. The process can also be used for electrowinning, e-waste recycling, and lithium battery recycling, gold mining electronic wastes, precious metals. CO2 can also be used in a reverse fuel cell with nafion to make a gas-to-liquids fuel, such as methanol, ethanol and butanol or ethylene. Supercritical CO2 has also been used for treating nafion to make it more effective catalyst. This NFT is for the purchase of worldwide rights which includes the design. More Info
NFT (Non Fungible Token): Buy our tech, design, development or system NFT and become part of our tech NFT network... More Info
Infinity Turbine Products: Special for this month, any plans are $10,000 for complete Cad/Cam blueprints. License is for one build. Try before you buy a production license. May pay by Bitcoin or other Crypto. Products Page... More Info
CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@infinityturbine.com (Standard Web Page)