Yes it is true that this was included, and it will probably be
amended. The Renewable Biomass Facilitation Act (H.R. 5236), on Feb
06, 2008: was referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality,
and then referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Hopefully it will make it out of committee......
Regardless the probation is not quite as bad as it sounds, almost all
of our forests are planted and managed.... That is why we have a
forestry department, and almost all privately planted timber would
qualify. Almost all public and private forest in the Pacific
Northwest are second growth timber (planted) and the wording of
actively managed can be so loosely interrupted that it is almost
irrelevant to the bill, thinning the trees once, and maintaining
logging road access, certainly would qualify . And honestly the
forests that are true virgin old growth are already protected from
almost all logging anyway, and a lot of second growth is still
protected by our lovely spotted owl.
--- In WoodGas@yahoogroups.com, "xr71fan" <xr71fan@...> wrote:
> Ok, as I read more I noticed this.
> Unfortunately, current law prevents biofuels made from biomass that
> originates on public lands or any biomass from private land that is
> not `planted' and `actively managed' from being counted toward the
> RFS. This is unfortunate, unnecessary, and unjustified."
> --- In WoodGas@yahoogroups.com, "xr71fan" <xr71fan@> wrote:
> > here is the link.
> > http://westinstenv.org/sosf/2008/02/11/bipartisan-house-coalition-
> > introduces-legislation-to-fix-biomass-definition-in-renewable-
> > standard/
> > Sneaky bastards. This applies to federal lands as I understand
> > still worrisome. I am not entirely sure it could not be
> > people like you.