| The  Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Chattawood forest health  sale covers two areas: Chattaroy and Chattawood.  Chattaroy is located in the vicinity of Deer  Park, Washington and Chattawood is located approximately 10 miles north of Deer  Park on State Route 395.   These timber  sales were designed to reduce fire risk to adjacent communities by removing the  smaller diameter materials while maintaining an overstory of mature ponderosa  pine for amenity values.  The headline  photo taken as a panorama view of the Chattawood sale illustrates the multiple  benefits of forest biomass use.  From  right to left we see the transition from an untreated high density forest  condition that is prone to fire (far right), a post harvest view of the treated  stand (middle) with an open forest structure that is resilient to fire and pleasing  to look at; the byproducts which are forest products (not shown), including  forest residuals (slash) that has been processed into a co-product (middle  left), suitable for producing energy (left).   The  Chattawood Timber Sale provided a unique opportunity to determine the potential  for economic recovery of slash for use as a bio-energy feedstock.  The sale is on a major highway, is within a  reasonable haul distance to a bio-energy facility and local businesses were  willing to invest in removing the biomass as a test case.   The DNR, Vaagen Brothers Lumber Inc, and  Avista Corporation agreed to remove and grind the biomass using Vaagen Brothers  equipment and ship it to Avista’s energy generation facility in Kettle  Falls.  Figures 1 to 3 show the collection  and aggregation process for removing the slash, and Figures 4 and 5 show the  equipment used and the output of the biomass removal process.   This  photo essay highlights both the simplicity and the challenges of removing  forest residuals.  Discussions with  contractors on the Chattawood test case identified the need for modifications  in equipment configuration and system balance (ratio of different kinds of  equipment needed for slash removal) to increase efficiency, and changes to  harvest layout and piling protocols to reduce in-woods travel times and  recovery costs.  These needs can be met  with planning if removal of biomass becomes a routine part of forest harvest  operations.  Greater challenges will be  in finding adequate on-site processing locations, and in finding sufficient  operational efficiencies that economic recovery is possible given the often  long distances to bio-energy facilities.  
 
   
                    
                      |  |  
                      | Figure 1: A load of harvest  residue ready for transport to the main processing location
 |    
                    
                      |  |  
                      | Figure 2: Hauling the load –  increasing distances substantially increase the cost of removal |    
                    
                      |  |  
                      | Figure 3: Residual pile at  the main processing deck |     
 
                    
                    
                      |  |  
                      | Figure 4: Processing  equipment  |    
                    
                      |  |  
                      | Figure 5: Slash ground into  a uniform product ready for transportation to the biomass facility
                       |  Data  on residual biomass in piles and dispersed slash has been collected from other  harvest units in northeastern Washington covering dry, moist and cold forests  and several types of logging systems, including seven DNR sites (Figure 6).  The residual biomass in these samples ranged  from 16 to 55 tons/acre depending upon a number of site specific conditions. Thus  far our sampling indicates that the volume of biomass potentially available  from current harvesting operations could provide a substantial raw material  input for renewable energy initiatives.   By identifying where biomass exists and in  what size classes, the analysis will clarify how existing management goals for  post harvest retention of standing trees and downed wood can be incorporated  into systems that will remove biomass to meet market demand for bio-energy and  biofuels.   
                    
                      |  |  
                      | Figure 6:  Tons/acre of harvested biomass by type |  Given that our samples include (1) sites where forest health  improvement is the focus, (2) sites that were harvested during a range of  market conditions, and (3) sites where timber values alone support the harvest  including variations in transportation costs, we have a wide range of inventory  conditions to compare to the biomass samples and will be able to derive useful  relationships for predictive modeling of future biomass supply relative to  standing inventory.  This modeling step  will provide the estimate of available biomass that can be calculated from  pre-treatment inventory of potential forest health sites (specific to forest  types) as well as quantifying likely biomass availability from current harvest  operations.   SummaryThe DNR Chattawood sale  provided an excellent case study of the potential for biomass recovery to  augment forest health improvement treatments, reduce wildland fire risk, reduce  smoke emissions from post-treatment pile burning, increase economic activity,  and meet renewable fuels mandates.  The  test case provided a unique set of data for the biomass availability study as  well as an opportunity to learn ways to improve our recovery of this important  natural resource. 
 |