next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
> Ser Quoting Stephen Shaw <srshaw@Dal.Ca>: > A question regarding Fred & Peter's point about loss of nutrients. > In a natural deciduous forest of any type that has not been > harvested at all, for a 100-year old tree (say), what proportion of > the total recyclable nutrients per tree-area will have come from the > accumulated annual leaf fall (+ fallen dead branches + feasting > caterpillar, squirrel and woodpecker turds, etc), and what > proportion will be returned only after the woody trunk and main > branches have finally died, fallen down and decayed at age 100? > If the first is dominant then the argument about loss of nutrients > by logging and tree removal is not strictly valid, whereas if the > second dominates, it is. * gosh we did this in plant ecology lab at Cornell in 1968, but I don't remember the numbers (and I didn't really understand what we were doing at the time). I think about 30% of the nutrients in a matureish forest is in the trunks of the trees - the other loss of nutrients is the disturbance that accompanies harvesting allows the release of lots of nutrients from the soil into ground water. fred. > ________________________________________ > From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] > on behalf of Fred Schueler [bckcdb@istar.ca] > Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 12:28 PM > To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca > Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry > > Quoting John and Nhung <nhungjohn@eastlink.ca>: > >> Yeah, I get the impression that the main problem with the Point Tupper >> monster is its size. A smaller operation might have fit in quite nicely. >> Of course, the NewPage surprise added to the mess, but mess it is, and I >> hope the government ad the operators can ramp back its biomass consumption >> to a more sensible, sustainable scale. > > * I was crafting a more complex reply to this thread, but I'll just > say that the problem with biomass harvesting from forests is to get > the nutrients removed in the wood back into the forest so successive > generation of trees can grow at a decent rate. We tried to deal with > this in our county forest here but certain foresters reacted so > negatively to the question of fertilization that the advisory > committee was illegally terminated as a consequence - but here's our > discussion of the nutrient question in forests that are having wood > removed - http://pinicola.ca/limnutr.htm - on sand and limestone we've > got very low intrinsic levels of nutrients, but the problem exists in > all woods if they're intensively exploited. > > fred. > ========================================================== >> >> Fingers crossed for a mild winter, with minimum demand for firewood! All >> this tells me we still need to take solar heat and other renewable sources >> more seriously. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] >> On Behalf Of Stephen Shaw >> Sent: December 24, 2015 11:59 AM >> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca >> Subject: RE: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry >> >> Ed Darby? Abraham Darby I around 1709 modified the blast furnace that had >> already been evolving for over a millenium, to consume coke instead of >> charcoal as the source of carbon that formed the carbon monoxide used to >> reduce raw iron oxide to pig iron, the starting point for other iron >> products. Charcoal gave a purer iron product, but making coke from coal >> proved much cheaper than making charcoal from harvested trees, by then a >> scarce commodity. For both charcoal and coke, a main byproduct was/is CO2 >> gas from the finally oxidised carbon, released into the atmosphere. The >> cheaper Darby coke method, later improved, caught on rapidly: a gnomic irony >> of this is that while saving some of the CO2-consuming much diminished >> forests from approaching extinction, it led rapidly to much greater iron >> production via burning fossil carbon that underpinned the Industrial >> Revolution in Britain, which in turn led to ever increasing CO2 emissions, >> eventually worldwide. >> >> On a lesser point not covered by reporter Aaron Beswick's article in the C-H >> that Dave referred to, if you had tried to get a few cords of 16" cut >> firewood for your wood stove in early 2015, as we did, you would have found >> that initially, none of the local suppliers around Halifax could get any >> logs, because they believed that such wood that had been harvested was >> nearly all going directly to Point Tupper biomass monster, because that had >> been built too large for the available supply of so-called 'waste' wood and >> bark. Central planning at its very best. Our supplier eventually got some >> logs from New Brunswick, but the price went up considerably. >> Steve >> ________________________________________ >> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on >> behalf of David & Alison Webster [dwebster@glinx.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:12 PM >> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca >> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry >> >> Hi Nick & All, Dec 23, 2015 >> I have only few minutes so will deal with the "gnomic" question first >> and return later to the rest. >> It was a new word to me so I had to consult a dictionary which referred >> me to sententious= Aphoristic, pithy, given to the use of maxims; (of >> persons) = fond of pompous moralizing; maxim= A general truth drawn from >> science or experience. >> I think we should both plead guilty to the "gnomic" charge and be >> flattered. As for the "pompous moralizing"; I am frequently inclined to >> quote the King James Bible but then remember: "Be not righteous over much, >> neither make thyself over wise: why shouldest thou destroy thyself ?"; >> Ecclesiastes 7:16; and decide not to. >> >> Merry Christmas All & A Happy New Year >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Nicholas Hill<mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com> >> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca<mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:32 PM >> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry >> >> A friend recently accused me of being "gnomic", and ill-educated lout as i >> am, i took issue at being called a gnome, but moving into this here case at >> hand, I think the gnomes have it: "And warning that use of biomass is not >> green is perhaps already an effective way to indirectly kill trees." Not >>