“To establish forest management, reforestation, and utilization practices which lead to the sequestration of greenhouse gases, and for other purposes.” – H. R. 5859
On February 12, 2020, right after the January 21 World Economic Forum summit in Davos, Switzerland, Rep. Bruce Westerman [R-AR] introduced the Trillion Tree Act before the House of Representatives. Wow, that was fast, in less than 10 working days, Westerman magically had a piece of legislation ready to go.
Truth be told, I have some concerns about the Act. The title mentions the sequestration of greenhouse gases, but the last three words, “for other purposes” open the door for whatever Westerman wants to do.
For six years, Westerman has proposed, unsuccessfully, the “Resilient National Forests Act” to “protect” National forests from wildfires by giving the US Forest Service the power to bypass environmental reviews and public comments required by the National Environmental Policy Act. Westerman says prescribed burns and commercial logging will keep America safe. Weyerhaeuser or any other timber company could log up to 30,000 acres without an environmental review.
Did Westerman just change the name of the Act? What if the 2015 Resilient Act and the 2020 Trillion Tree Act are just a way to show some “appreciation” to Big Timber and the US Department of Agriculture?
How many trees?
You would think the Act is to plant a trillion trees, but you would be wrong. Trees are not mentioned in the Act, the language is about how much wood will be available. Trees have several parts – roots, trunks, limbs, leaves, and canopies. Logging trucks transport dead posts, which used to be the trunk of a live, growing tree.
Westerman says young trees capture more carbon dioxide than old trees. This is false and meaningless. The planting process starts with a seed or a seedling and a hole in the ground. After 10 years you may have a small tree. Ecologists say a 100-year-old tree with deep roots and large mass will capture and sequester more carbon than a 20-year-old tree.
Trees like to live in forests, they communicate and care for each other and the web of life above and below the soil.
Only nature knows how to grow a forest, with the best types of trees for the soil and water, attracting unique wildlife. What Westerman plans to do using industrial logging machines and clearcutting forests in a few days is criminal. The USFS budget is based on the number of acres burned. Timber is sold at a loss, ignoring the high cost of logging roads.
Our forests are not fuel
Biomass energy burns U.S. Southeastern forests as wood pellets at the UK Drax power station. To make this racket work, Drax pays subsidies, and wood pellet mills demand funds to create jobs from federal, state, and county economic development agencies. Pollution and destruction of our forests is ignored, and the total carbon footprint is disregarded.
Last week, Bloomberg Energy & Science posted, “Burning Wood Can Be a Clean Source of Power After All, and could lead to better forest management.” How can increasing the demand for trees benefit the forest? The “study” ignores the damage to the soil from logging and the loss of biodiversity.
USDA funded the study used by Bloomberg. The link to the study is on the UK Drax website, “Forests: Carbon sequestration, biomass energy, or both?” Why is that?
Fake demand, false solutions
We are running out of time to sequester carbon emissions. We have solar and wind energy and a glut of oil and gas. The price of oil is below $20 barrel.
Logging is a high energy intensive process creating a market for diesel fuel, noise, pollution, road destruction, and driving hazards. In 2016 logging created over one billion tons net emissions of CO2 equivalent to the total emissions from burning coal nationwide.
Healthy forests, healthy people
Healthy forests grow a variety of trees with deep roots, creating carbon-rich soil. Forests are life, they provide food, clean water, and oxygen. Without forests, we die. Sometimes, you need to face the facts and tell the naked truth.
Dr. Luis Contreras