Jump to content

Evergreen Alliance Staff

Administrators
  • Posts

    470
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. A report by three unions (Unifor, United Steelworkers, Public and Private Workers of Canada) on the troubled BC forest industry as of March 2024. Authors included Ken Delaney from the Canadian Skills Training and Employment Coalition and Jim Stanford from the Centre for Future Work. (2024) A better future for BC forestry.pdf
  2. Jennifer N. Baron, Paul F. Hessburg, Marc-André Parisien, Gregory A. Greene, Sarah E. Gergel and Lori D. Daniels Abstract Background A clear understanding of the connectivity, structure, and composition of wildland fuels is essential for effective wildfire management. However, fuel typing and mapping are challenging owing to a broad diversity of fuel conditions and their spatial and temporal heterogeneity. In Canada, fuel types and potential fire behavior are characterized using the Fire Behavior Prediction (FBP) System, which uses an association approach to categorize vegetation into 16 fuel types based on stand structure and composition. In British Columbia (BC), provincial and national FBP System fuel type maps are derived from remotely sensed forest inventory data and are widely used for wildfire operations, fuel management, and scientific research. Despite their widespread usage, the accuracy and applicability of these fuel type maps have not been formally assessed. To address this knowledge gap, we quantified the agreement between on‐site assessments and provincial and national fuel type maps in interior BC. Results We consistently found poor correspondence between field assessment data and both provincial and national fuel types. Mismatches were particularly frequent for (i) dry interior ecosystems, (ii) mixedwood and deciduous fuel types, and (iii) post‐harvesting conditions. For 58% of field plots, there was no suitable match to the extant fuel structure and composition. Mismatches were driven by the accuracy and availability of forest inventory data and low applicability of the Canadian FBP System to interior BC fuels. Conclusions The fuel typing mismatches we identified can limit scientific research, but also challenge wildfire operations and fuel management decisions. Improving fuel typing accuracy will require a significant effort in fuel inventory data and system upgrades to adequately represent the diversity of extant fuels. To more effectively link conditions to expected fire behavior outcomes, we recommend a fuel classification approach and emphasis on observed fuels and measured fire behavior data for the systems we seek to represent. This study was reported in the March 3, 2024 Globe and Mail: Inaccurate data on forest fuels amy stoke wildfires, study finds (2024) Fuel types misrepresent forest structure and composition in interior British Columbia: a way forward Jen Baron et al.pdf
  3. By David Bysouth, Julee J. Boan, Jay R. Malcolm, Anthony R. Taylor Abstract Recent research has shown forest-related emissions reported in national greenhouse gas inventories are much lower than global estimates from models summarized in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports. A substantial part of this discrepancy could be explained by conceptual differences in what is counted as part of the anthropogenic forest carbon sink and the way countries report on their forest harvesting sectors. With Canada as a case study, we used published National Inventory Report and Common Reporting Format tables to isolate emissions and removals directly associated with forestry from those associated with forests more broadly. Forestry-related factors that affect CO2 emissions and removals include tree harvesting, post-harvest forest regeneration and growth, and carbon storage in long-lived harvested wood products. We found that between 2005 and 2021, forestry in Canada represented a net source of carbon (annual mean = 90.8 Mt. CO2e), and that total area logged was a significant predictor of net forestry emissions. In contrast, Canada’s NIR reported a small net carbon sink during the same time period (annual mean = −4.7 Mt. CO2e). We show this discrepancy can be explained by Canada’s GHG reporting approach that claims GHG emissions from wildfires are natural, but GHG removals from forests at the age of commercial maturity, despite being primarily natural disturbance origin, are anthropogenic. This reporting approach may lead to climate mitigation policies that are ineffectual or detrimental to reducing net carbon in the global atmosphere. (2024) High emissions or carbon neutral? Inclusion of “anthropogenic” forest sinks leads to underreporting of forestry emissions.pdf
  4. Full document can be downloaded by clicking on link below Executive Summary. (2024) Felling Short_2024_CPAWS-BC.pdf
  5. How much of the ecosection that you live in is protected? There are 139 ecosections in BC (including both marine and terrestrial). If you know what ecosection you live in—or are interested in—scroll down the list below. The “Percentage Protected” column indicates how much has been protected. The least-protected ecosections are at the top of the list. Fifty-seven ecosections have less than 6 percent of their area protected. The most-protected ecosections are toward the bottom of the list. Twenty-four BC ecosections already have 30 percent or higher protection. If you don’t know the name of the ecosection you live in, find where you live on the map below the list. Zoom into the map using the "+" button. Click on the coloured area surrounding your location. A dialogue window will appear. To find the name of your ecosection, go to the second page of the dialogue box by clicking on the outlined triangle in the grey bar at the top of the dialogue box. Are there old forest deferral areas mapped for your ecosection? Zoom into the map until you can see dark green polygons. These are “priority deferral areas” mapped by the Technical Advisory Panel. NOTE: This map is maintained by GeoBC but may not show the most recent configuration of deferral areas. What are ecosections? Learn more about ecoprovinces, ecoregions and ecosections here.
  6. by Henry C. Pham, Younes Alila Abstract A century of research has generated considerable disagreement on the effect of forests on floods. Here we call for a causal inference framework to advance the science and management of the effect of any forest or its removal on flood severity and frequency. The causes of floods are multiple and chancy and, hence, can only be investigated via a probabilistic approach. We use the stochastic hydrology literature to infer a blueprint framework which could guide future research on the understanding and prediction of the effects of forests on floods in environments where rain is the dominant form of precipitation. Drawing parallels from other disciplines, we show that the introduction of probability in forest hydrology could stimulate a gestalt switch in the science of forests and floods. In light of increasing flood risk caused by climate change, this probabilistic framework can help policymakers develop robust forest and water management plans based on a defensible and clear understanding of floods. (2023) Science of forests and floods: The quantum leap forward needed, literally and metaphorically.pdf
  7. By Huy Tran, Edie Juno and Saravanan Arunachalam Abstract: Despite a significant increase in United States biomass energy sector activity, including domestic bioenergy deployment and wood pellet production for overseas exports, the associated criteria pollutant emissions are not well quantified in current regulatory emissions inventories. We present an updated U.S. emissions inventory, with emphasis on wood-based biomass pretreatment (e.g., drying, condensing, storage of wood pellet) and the use of biomass for energy generation. As a significant number of wood pellet production facilities are not included in current inventories, we find that this sector’s emissions could be potentially underestimated by a factor of two. Emissions from biomass-based facilities are on average up to 2.8 times higher than their non-biomass counterparts per unit energy. We estimate that 2.3 million people live within 2 km of a biomass facility and who could be subject to adverse health impacts from their emissions. Overall, we find that the bioenergy sector contributes to about 3–17% of total emissions from all energy, i.e., electric and non-electric generating facilities in the U.S. We also review some drivers of bioenergy expansion, such as various feedstocks and technologies deployed with an emphasis on wood-based bioenergy and discuss their implications for future air quality and health impacts. (2023) Emissions of wood pelletization and bioenergy use in the United States.pdf
  8. By John D Sterman, Lori Siegal and Juliette N Rooney-Varga Abstract Bioenergy is booming as nations seek to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union declared biofuels to be carbon-neutral, triggering a surge in wood use. But do biofuels actually reduce emissions? A molecule of CO2 emitted today has the same impact on radiative forcing whether it comes from coal or biomass. Biofuels can only reduce atmospheric CO2 over time through post-harvest increases in net primary production (NPP). The climate impact of biofuels therefore depends on CO2 emissions from combustion of biofuels versus fossil fuels, the fate of the harvested land and dynamics of NPP. Here we develop a model for dynamic bioenergy lifecycle analysis. The model tracks carbon stocks and fluxes among the atmosphere, biomass, and soils, is extensible to multiple land types and regions, and runs in ≈1s, enabling rapid, interactive policy design and sensitivity testing. We simulate substitution of wood for coal in power generation, estimating the parameters governing NPP and other fluxes using data for forests in the eastern US and using published estimates for supply chain emissions. Because combustion and processing efficiencies for wood are less than coal, the immediate impact of substituting wood for coal is an increase in atmospheric CO2 relative to coal. The payback time for this carbon debt ranges from 44–104 years after clearcut, depending on forest type—assuming the land remains forest. Surprisingly, replanting hardwood forests with fast-growing pine plantations raises the CO2 impact of wood because the equilibrium carbon density of plantations is lower than natural forests. Further, projected growth in wood harvest for bioenergy would increase atmospheric CO2 for at least a century because new carbon debt continuously exceeds NPP. Assuming biofuels are carbon neutral may worsen irreversible impacts of climate change before benefits accrue. Instead, explicit dynamic models should be used to assess the climate impacts of biofuels. (2018) Does replacing coal with wood lower CO2 emissions? Dynamic lifecycle analysis of wood bioenergy.pdf
  9. The Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship issued the following press release today: B.C. prioritizing ecosystem health, biodiversity VICTORIA - The Province is taking more steps to conserve nature for the long-term health and well-being of communities with the release of a draft biodiversity and ecosystem health framework. “People in B.C. share a deep connection to nature, from our ancient forests and diverse wildlife, to our coastal waters and mountain ranges,” said Nathan Cullen, Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship. “Together, we are charting the next steps for conserving B.C.’s rich biodiversity and healthy ecosystems that support us all.” B.C. has the greatest diversity of species, ecosystems and habitats of any jurisdiction in Canada. The resilience of the province depends on an integrated and inclusive approach to stewarding B.C.’s water, land and natural resources. The framework is another action the Province is taking as part of ongoing work to improve stewardship of B.C.’s lands, forests and water, to implement the recommendations of the Old Growth Strategic Review and to honour B.C.’s commitments under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. “Our government is building comprehensive and integrated initiatives to protect the environment, including conservation financing, our accelerated action to protect old-growth forests and our commitment to conserve 30% of B.C.’s land base by 2030,“ Cullen said. “All these efforts are fundamental to protecting against the worst effects of climate change and creating a healthier future for everyone.” The draft framework was developed through engagement throughout 2023 with First Nations and other parties, including industry, non-governmental organizations, local communities, municipal leaders and academia. The Province is formally consulting with First Nations Rights and Title Holders, and engaging with multiple natural resource sectors and industry, as well as local governments, and other partners on the draft framework. Members of the public can access the draft framework here: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/plants-animals-ecosystems/biodiversity/bc-s-draft-biodiversity-and-ecosystem-health-framework Provide comments by contacting: biodiversity.ecosystemhealth@gov.bc.ca The framework is expected to be finalized in early 2024, following consultation. B.C. will co-develop new or update existing legislation to achieve the vision and intent of the framework. Quotes: Garry Merkel, co-author, Old Growth Strategic Review - “The biodiversity and ecosystem health framework provides a clear strategy for establishing the management and conservation of ecosystem health and biodiversity as an overarching priority for British Columbia. Achieving this priority will result in a new stewardship approach for land and water, which, in turn, requires an essential prerequisite - a deep change in our thinking about land. This paradigm shift that will be accelerated by the implementation of this framework and will help guide us toward a much more certain and stable social and economic relationship with lands, waters and the resources that they provide.” Chief Harry F. Nyce Sr., co-chair, Minister’s Wildlife Advisory Council (MWAC) - “The Minister’s Wildlife Advisory Council endorses the draft biodiversity and ecosystem health framework for British Columbia. This visionary and collaborative initiative underscores the importance of adopting a co-ordinated, inclusive approach to conserving ecosystem health and biodiversity in our province. The draft framework serves B.C.’s commitment to reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples and highlights the urgent need for a transformative paradigm shift toward shared decision-making, fostering a sustainable, equitable and resilient future.” Nancy Wilkin, co-chair, Minister’s Wildlife Advisory Council - “MWAC has been involved in shaping this framework and commends the ministry’s commitment to transparency, co-operation and adaptive, ecosystem-based management and stewardship - all of which are vital in our journey toward a healthy environment, stable communities and prosperous economies. MWAC looks forward to continued involvement as the framework’s detailed implementation plan and enabling legislation are developed.” George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - “Ecosystem health and biodiversity are deeply connected to our own well-being. We are proud to work with our federal partners and the First Nations Leadership Council on this initiative as we protect beautiful British Columbia.” Bruce Ralston, Minister of Forests - “Forests are at the heart of our identity here in B.C., and essential to a thriving and diverse ecosystem. We are using the best science and data available, and collaborating with First Nations, local communities, and industry to create stronger, more sustainable forest stewardship. This new framework is another step to enhance our forests and natural systems for the generations to come.” Murray Rankin, Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation - “The work we are doing together with First Nations to develop a biodiversity and ecosystems framework centres upon listening and learning from those who have been stewards of the environment for generations. The framework also responds to a key action item in our Declaration Act Action Plan.” Anne Kang, Minister of Municipal Affairs - “The conservation of our ecosystems and biodiversity is essential for the health and well-being of communities. That’s why my ministry’s commitment extends not only to investing in locally owned infrastructure, enhancing services for communities, but also to making sure provincial investments safeguard our clean air, land and water resources.” Learn More: For information about this work and to read the draft framework, visit the biodiversity and ecosystem health framework website: https://www.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/plants-animals-ecosystems/biodiversity/bc-s-draft-biodiversity-and-ecosystem-health-framework
  10. Organizations call on Premier David Eby to keep his promise to accelerate action on old growth and deliver needed paradigm shift. səl̓ílwətaʔɬ (Tsleil-Waututh), xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam), and Skwxwú7mesh (Squamish) Territories (Vancouver, BC) – Today marks the third anniversary of the BC NDP’s commitment to implement all 14 recommendations of the 2020 Old Growth Strategic Review (OGSR) on a three year timeline. To date, none of the recommendations have been fulfilled, while at-risk old growth forests continue to fall. Clearcut logging of old-growth in a priority deferral area on Nootka Island (Photo by Alex Tsui, Wilderness Committee) The Union of BC Indian Chiefs (UBCIC), Sierra Club BC, Wilderness Committee and Stand.earth are calling on the BC government to make up for years of delays and further loss of threatened old growth by fast-tracking implementation milestones for all 14 recommendations from the OGSR, including immediate logging deferrals for the most at-risk old growth forests. “We are at an urgent crossroads amidst the rampant wildfires that have destroyed many communities in BC this year and many more are still rebuilding from previous wildfires,” said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, UBCIC President. “The sheer number of forests that we have lost to the climate crisis already, is devastating. The BC government cannot ignore this any longer; stop logging our old growth trees and help us start rebuilding in an ethically and environmentally friendly manner. The OGSR recommendations are merely a stepping stone; we must go above and beyond. At this rate, there will be nothing left for our children. Stop putting profit and votes over people and get to work on saving our land, water, and air.” The OGSR outlined the need for a paradigm-shift in forest stewardship to prioritize community and ecosystem values above timber. As part of its commitment, the province pledged to work with First Nations on long-term solutions, and immediately pause harvest in the most at-risk old growth forests. Despite those promises, forests mapped as candidates for deferral continue to be targeted by logging companies. The three-year anniversary of the OGSR falls during an unprecedented drought and record wildfire season, with more than 2.2 million hectares burned in BC, fueled by the climate crisis and exacerbated by industrial logging. “The last three years have been devastating in terms of escalating biodiversity and climate crises in forests in BC, with continued habitat loss of at-risk species like caribou and spotted owl and two of the worst wildfire seasons on record,” said Jens Wieting, Senior Forest and Climate Campaigner at Sierra Club BC. “Old growth forests are more resilient to the impacts of climate change, but the window to preserve them is closing and the BC government must double its efforts to end the delays and make the promised paradigm shift a reality.” The BC NDP made its commitment to protect old growth and implement the OGSR in advance of the 2020 election. Despite announcements about long-term steps like an upcoming ecosystem health framework and conservation financing, BC has routinely failed to implement measures to keep forests standing and ensure transparency. “Since Premier Eby promised to ‘accelerate action on old growth’ last November, we’ve seen thousands of hectares of old growth forests destroyed. Our satellite surveillance tool Forest Eye is getting alerts for new clearcuts and road-building every day, in the same forests this government said it would put off limits to logging,” said Tegan Hansen, Senior Forest Campaigner at Stand.earth. “If this government wants to keep its promises, it has to move beyond empty words and start taking real action to keep forests standing.” BC’s unfulfilled promises on old growth have been met with criticism and community-led mobilizations throughout the province. On Sept. 28, communities are planning a day of action to call on elected officials to uphold their government’s old growth pledge. “The public is exhausted with ‘talk and log,’ with the endless commitments and new processes accompanied by photos of fresh clearcuts in irreplaceable old growth forests,” said Torrance Coste, National Campaign Director at the Wilderness Committee. “People can connect the dots between the biodiversity and climate crisis and irresponsible forest management, and thousands remain committed to reminding the NDP of the promises they seem to be hoping we’ll forget.” The BC government has not yet shared how much old growth has been logged in 2022 or how much old growth logging has been stopped through the deferrals process since 2020. The latest available provincial data from 2019 to 2021 showed an annual old growth logging rate equivalent to approximately 150 soccer fields per day. The organizations state that in order to deliver on his promise to accelerate action on old growth, Eby must: • Immediately stop logging in at-risk old growth forests, including all areas mapped for deferral by the Old Growth Technical Advisory Panel where logging and road building is continuing, as well as any areas identified by First Nations. • Provide full and urgent financial support to First Nations to ensure deferrals are economically viable, including compensation for revenue-sharing agreements and employment, and work with the federal government to secure a substantial increase in funding to support Indigenous-led land use planning and protection. • Ensure fully accessible and transparent information about forests and logging — including by releasing updated maps and data showing where recent, ongoing and planned logging overlaps with at-risk old growth — and full compliance with Free, Prior and Informed Consent and the rights of Title holders. A recent clearcut in old growth on Kwakwakaʼwakw territory, northern Vancouver Island. (Photo by Mya Van Woudenberg)
  11. Economic modelling of the global carbon cost of harvesting wood from forests shows a much higher annual cost than that estimated by other models, highlighting a major opportunity for reducing emissions by limiting wood harvests. By Liqing Peng, Timothy D. Searchinger, Jessica Zionts, Richard Waite Abstract: After agriculture, wood harvest is the human activity that has most reduced the storage of carbon in vegetation and soils1,2. Although felled wood releases carbon to the atmosphere in various steps, the fact that growing trees absorb carbon has led to different carbon-accounting approaches for wood use, producing widely varying estimates of carbon costs. Many approaches give the impression of low, zero or even negative greenhouse gas emissions from wood harvests because, in different ways, they offset carbon losses from new harvests with carbon sequestration from growth of broad forest areas3,4. Attributing this sequestration to new harvests is inappropriate because this other forest growth would occur regardless of new harvests and typically results from agricultural abandonment, recovery from previous harvests and climate change itself. Nevertheless some papers count gross emissions annually, which assigns no value to the capacity of newly harvested forests to regrow and approach the carbon stocks of unharvested forests. Here we present results of a new model that uses time discounting to estimate the present and future carbon costs of global wood harvests under different scenarios. We find that forest harvests between 2010 and 2050 will probably have annualized carbon costs of 3.5–4.2 Gt CO2e yr−1, which approach common estimates of annual emissions from land-use change due to agricultural expansion. Our study suggests an under-appreciated option to address climate change by reducing these costs. (2023) The carbon costs of global wood harvests.pdf
  12. By Robbie S.H. Johnson and Younes Alila Abstract Drawing on advances in non-stationary frequency analysis and the science of causation and attribution, this study employs a newly developed non-stationary stochastic paired watershed approach to determine the effect of forest harvesting on snowmelt-generated floods. Moreover, this study furthers the application of stochastic physics to evaluate the environmental controls and drivers of flood response. Physically-based climate and time-varying harvesting data are used as covariates to drive the non-stationary flood frequency distribution parameters to detect, attribute, and quantify the effect of harvesting on floods in the snow-dominated Deadman River (878 km2) and nested Joe Ross Creek (99 km2) watersheds. Harvesting only 21% of the watershed caused a 38% and 84% increase in the mean but no increase in variability around the mean of the frequency distribution in the Deadman River and Joe Ross Creek, respectively. Consequently, the 7-year, 20-year, 50-year, and 100-year flood events became approximately two, four, six, and ten times more frequent in both watersheds. An increase in the mean is posited to occur from an increase in moisture availability following harvest from suppressed snow interception and increased net radiation reaching the snowpack. Variability was not increased because snowmelt synchronization was inhibited by the buffering capacity of abundant lakes, evenly distributed aspects, and widespread spatial distribution of cutblocks in the watersheds, preventing any potential for harvesting to increase the efficiency of runoff delivery to the outlet. Consistent with similar recent studies, the effect of logging on floods is controlled not only by the harvest rate but most importantly the physiographic characteristics of the watershed and the spatial distribution of the cutblocks. Imposed by the probabilistic framework to understanding and predicting the relation between extremes and their environmental controls, commonly used in the general sciences but not forest hydrology, it is the inherent nature of snowmelt-driven flood regimes which cause even modest increases in magnitude, especially in the upper tail of the distribution, to translate into surprisingly large changes in frequency. Contrary to conventional wisdom, harvesting influenced small, medium, and very large flood events, and the sensitivity to harvest increased with increasing flood event size and watershed area. (2023) Johnson&Alila-Clearcut-Logging-Effects-on-Floods.pdf
  13. Groups call on Province to suspend pellet mill permit: company misled public and government about improved air quality. A pellet mill in the northwestern interior of BC that converts whole logs into pellets for thermal generation of electricity. CONSERVATION NORTH and Bulkley Valley Clean Air Now are calling for the provincial government to suspend a permit given to a company making wood pellets in Smithers because the company misled both the government and the general public about key aspects of the mill’s future operations. In a letter today to Environment Minister George Heyman, the two organizations say that the pellet mill proponent, NewPro, told the BC government, Smithers town council and the general public that the mill would help to substantially reduce “slash burning” in the Smithers area. NewPro applied for a permit amendment under the Environmental Management Act for a conversion from a particle board plant to a wood pellet mill based on particulate matter emissions. Every year in the Bulkley-Nechako airshed, thousands of slash piles—the woody debris left behind at logging operations—are deliberately set on fire, filling the Bulkley Valley with smoke containing fine particulate matter that can cause serious lung and heart ailments. NewPro claimed that the pellet mill plan would dramatically reduce the smoke associated with slash burning because the mill would use much of the slash as material to make wood pellets. In one presentation it claimed that it would take the slash from 1,200 such piles each year and turn the wood waste into pellets. The company explicitly said in a public presentation that this would “help reduce debris burning . . . the largest contributor” to air pollution in the valley. The BC government subsequently issued NewPro an amended permit under the provincial Environmental Management Act, paving the way for the pellet mill to be built. But no apparent reductions in slash burning resulted after the pellet mill opened late in 2018. “We are extremely concerned at what has unfolded. Despite the company’s assertions, the slash burning continues and our airshed continues to be choked with smoke for months on end. Instead of chewing through slash, the local pellet mill is chewing through whole logs,” says Len Vanderstar, co-founder of Bulkley Valley Clean Air Now. Bulkley Valley Clean Air Now along with Conservation North have asked the government to suspend the pellet mill’s permit. Vanderstar notes that the pellet mill yard is stacked full of whole logs that are generally considered to be pulp wood or Grade 4 logs. “Such logs have never been considered to be ‘logging slash’ before,” Vanderstar says. The organizations say that upon suspension of the permit, the government should require the pellet mill’s current owner – the United Kingdom’s Drax Group - to fully disclose exactly how many logs and actual logging slash it uses at its Smithers facility and to clearly show how many slash piles have not been burned as a direct result of its operations. “We also want to see the Environmental Management Act amended so that it is clear that permits will be cancelled outright if companies make misleading claims in support of their applications,” Vanderstar says. “We are losing on so many fronts, not just with this pellet mill but others in BC. Contrary to claims that they use ‘residual’ wood including logging slash and sawmill waste, pellet makers like Drax use hundreds of thousands of logs per year. Those logs all come from BC’s rapidly disappearing primary forests, which partly explains why we are in the ecological crisis we are,” says Conservation North Director, Michelle Connolly. The BC government’s own data shows clearly that large quantities of whole logs are turned directly into wood pellets at the Smithers’ mill, along with pellet mills in Burns Lake, Houston and Quesnel. After receiving the amended permit, NewPro sold its Smithers particle board plant to Pinnacle Renewable Energy and local sawmill owner, West Fraser. The pellet mill, which opened in 2018, became the newest of a number of such mills owned by Pinnacle in BC’s interior region. Pinnacle was later purchased by Drax. Drax operates the largest single-point source of wood pellet consumption in the world, a giant thermal electricity plant in North Yorkshire England, where wood pellets are burned to generate steam that then spins the facility’s turbines. Drax holds a clear monopoly in BC. It owns or co-owns seven of BC’s 12 pellet mills, which account for about two thirds of all of the province’s wood pellet production. Last fall, investigative documentaries by CBC’s Fifth Estate (watch video below) and BBC’s Panorama both chronicled the large volume of whole logs being run through Drax’s BC pellet operations and also noted the large piles of slash that continued to be left behind at logging operations and burned. “Clearly, the Smithers pellet mill has not contributed to a dramatic reduction in slash-burning in our airshed. Unfortunately, slash-burning continues to be the single-worst source of air pollution in our valley,” Vanderstar says.
×
×
  • Create New...