INTERNAL REPORT Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop Series ... · 15.12.2010 · 11:00AM Lower Capital Investment Biomass and Smaller Log Processing Options - ... Williams, California

INTERNAL REPORT

Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop Series

Final Report

December 15, 2010

Period covered: September 1, 2007 to December 12, 2010

Gareth J Mayhead, Academic Coordinator - Forest Products John R Shelly, Cooperative Extension Advisor and Principal Investigator

Rebecca Snell, Staff Research Associate University of California, Berkeley

Richmond Field Station, Building 478 Richmond, California 94804

University of California, Berkeley 2

Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 2

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4

Summary of Workshops Held ........................................................................................ 5

Table 1: Workshops held 2007‐2009 ..................................................................................... 5

Workshop Locations...................................................................................................... 6

Figure 1: Map of workshop locations ................................................................................... 6

Workshop 1: Weed Workshop, September 19, 2007 ...................................................... 7

Agenda ................................................................................................................................ 7

Attendee List ....................................................................................................................... 9

Feedback ........................................................................................................................... 13

Workshop 2: Eureka Workshop, December 6‐7, 2007 .................................................. 19

Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 19

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 21

Workshop Evaluation ........................................................................................................ 23

Workshop 3: Sonora Workshop, May 22‐23, 2008. ...................................................... 29

Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 29


Workshop 4: Tulare Workshop, May 6‐9, 2009 ............................................................ 34

Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 34

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 35

Workshop 5a: Grant Information Workshops: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Sonora, October 8, 2009 .................................................................. 37

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 38

Workshop 5b: Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Eureka, October 19, 2009 ................................................................ 39

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 40

Workshop 5c: Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Redding, October 20, 2009 .............................................................. 41

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 42

Workshop 5d:Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Nevada City, October 22, 2009 ........................................................ 43

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 44


Workshop 5e: Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, San Bernardino, October 26, 2009 ................................................... 45

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 46

Workshop 6: Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop, Quincy, May 25‐26, 2010. .......... 47

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 49


Workshop 7: Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, Oroville, September 14, 2010 ...... 55

Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 55

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 57

Workshop Evaluation. ....................................................................................................... 59

Workshop 7a: Woody Biomass to Energy Field Tour, November 17, 2010 ................... 62

Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 62

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 64


Workshop 8: Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, Ukiah, December 2, 2010 ............ 69

Agenda .............................................................................................................................. 69

Attendee List ..................................................................................................................... 70



Introduction In September 2007 the University of California Center for Forestry/Wood Resources Group (UC) agreed to develop and present a series of eight workshops in cooperation with the California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils (CARC&DC). These workshops were designed to provide up-to-date, science-based information on woody biomass utilization technology and the opportunities and challenges relevant to the local communities proximate to the workshop locations. Discussions with the leadership of the CARC&DC was the basis for selecting the locations and content of each workshop (Table 1).

CARC&DC cosponsored the eight workshops conducted as part of this agreement and UC provided the following:

• Liaise with CARC&DC when determining workshop location, scale and content. • Assurance that workshop content is relevant to each locality • Cooperation with other organizations when planning an running workshops • Attendee lists and participant feedback • Brief report of the outcomes for each workshop

The eight workshops reached a total of 595 people over the three year period of the project. In addition to the CARC&DC and UC organizations the workshops cooperated with ten other organizations during the planning and implementation of the workshops. The list of these organizations is presented at the end of Table 1.

The agenda, attendance, results, feedback and outcomes for each of the eight workshops is presented below in pages 7 to 75.


Summary of Workshops Held Table 1: Workshops held 2007-2009 Date Location Partner* Lead Attendees

2007 Sept 19-20 1. Weed, CA CARC&DC, SBUG UC 105 Dec 6-7 2. Eureka, CA UCCE, USFS, SRNF UC 70

Total (2007): 2 workshops 175 2008 May 22-23 3. Sonora, CA SBC, RI, CARC&DC Joint 42

Total (2008): 1 workshop 42 2009

May 5-6 4. Tulare, CA SNC, SBC, USFS, CARC&DC

UC 40

October 8 - 26

5. Set of five Stewardship Contracting and grants meetings in the following California locations:

5a. Sonora 5b. Eureka 5c. Redding 5d. Nevada City 5e. San Bernardino

USFS, CARC&DC

UC

31 18 21 26 23

Total (2010): 2 workshops 159 2010 May 25-26 6. Quincy, CA UCCE, UCFS, SNC,

CARC&DCUC 76

September 14 and

7. Oroville, CA

7a. Lincoln, Woodland, Winters

UCCE, UCFS, CARC&DC, CSVRC&D UC 63

37

December 2 8. Ukiah, CA MCWBWG, USFS, CARC&DC, NCIRWMP

UC 43

Total (2009): 3 workshops + 1 Field Trip 219 Total 2007-2009

Grand total (2007-2009): 8 workshops 595 * List of Partnering Organizations: CARC&DC – California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils

SBUG – Siskiyou County Biomass Utilization Group

CSVRC&D - Central Sacramento Valley Resource Conservation and Development Council

SNC – Sierra Nevada Conservancy SBC – Sierra Business Council

MCWBWG -Mendocino County Woody Biomass Working Group NCIRWMP – The North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

SRNF – Six Rivers National Forest UCCE – University of California Cooperative Extension – local County office

RI – Resource Innovations

USFS – United States Forest Service


Workshop Locations Workshops have been held throughout California. The map below (Figure 1) shows the workshop locations.

Figure 1: Map of workshop locations

X2

X2


Workshop 1: Weed Workshop, September 19, 2007

"From Feedstock to Product" Woody Biomass and Small Log Workshop

College of the Siskiyous, Weed, CA

Agenda 8:00AM Registration and coffee

8:30AM Opening Session -Woody Biomass: Is It a Problem or a Solution? - John Shelly, University of California, Berkeley

8:50AM Panel: Feedstocks/Fiber Supply

Moderator: Bruce Goines, US Forest Service, Region 5, Vallejo, California

8:55AM The Challenge of Small Tree Harvesting and Handling - Bruce Hartsough, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of California, Davis

9:15AM Wood Supply to Industry - Michael Backes, Roseburg Forest Products Co., Weed, California

9:30AM Federal Lands Perspective - Rod Vineyard, USDA FS, Eagle Lake Ranger District, Susanville, California

9:45AM Biomass Power Generation - Gordon Draper, Biomass One, White City, Oregon (Verbal presentation)

10:00AM Discussion Facilitated by Moderator

10:20AM Refreshment break 10:50AM Panel: Biomass Conversion Technologies - Lumber, Veneer and

Composites Moderator: Gareth Mayhead, University of California, Berkeley

11:00AM Lower Capital Investment Biomass and Smaller Log Processing Options - Larry Swan, USDA Forest Service, Klamath Falls, Oregon

11:15AM Small Log Utilization: Veneer and Plywood - Scott Janni, Management Solutions and Services, Inc., Whitefish, Montana

11:30AM Small Log Utilization: Lumber - Chris Skinner, Sierra Pacific Industries, Burney, California

11:45AM Woody Biomass Utilization in Oregon - Scott Leavengood, Oregon Wood Innovation Center, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

12:00Noon Discussion Facilitated by Moderator

12:20PM Catered lunch

1:20PM Panel: Biomass Conversion Technologies Biomass to Energy - Heat, Electricity, Liquid Fuels

Moderator: John Shelly, University of California, Berkeley


1:30PM Energy for Public Buildings and Other Small Scale Applications - Rob Williams, California Biomass Collaborative Forum, University of California, Davis

1:50PM Biomass Power Plants and Other Energy Applications - Tad Mason, TSS Consultants, Rancho Cordova, California

2:10PM Liquid and Gaseous Fuels - Bryan Jenkins, Agriculture and Biological Sciences Engineering, University of California, Davis

2:30PM Discussion Facilitated by Moderator

Break

2:50PM Panel: Environmental Considerations

Moderator: Bill Stewart, University of California, Berkeley

3:05PM The Value of Carbon in Forests - Bill Stewart, University of California, Berkeley

3:30PM Air, Water and Land Use Permitting Considerations for Biomass Energy Facilities in Oregon and California - Fred Tornatore, TSS Consultants, Rancho Cordova, California

3:55PM Discussion

4:15PM Closing Session: The Pathway Forward

Moderator: Gareth Mayhead, University of California, Berkeley

4:20PM Forest Service Resources - Bruce Goines, US Forest Service, Region 5, Vallejo, CA

4:30PM Policy Direction - Doug Wickizer, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Sacramento

4:40PM Research Direction and Funding - Bryan Jenkins, Agriculture and Biological Sciences Engineering, University of California, Davis

5:00PM Discussion

5:10PM Briefing on Field Tours and Closing Remarks - John Shelly, University of California, Berkeley

5:30PM Adjourn


Weed workshop, September 19, 2007

Attendee List First Name Last Name Affiliation City State

Bob Allen Burney Forest Products Burney CA

Simona Altman California Air Resources Board Sacramento CA

Rolf Anderson Bear Mountain Forest Products, Inc. Cascade Locks OR

Marcia Armstrong Siskiyou Co. Board of Supervisors Fort Jones CA

Jonathan Arnold National Park Service Mineral CA

Ed Arredondo Stand Dynamics LLC Idyllwild CA

Michael Backes Roseburg Forest Products Company Weed CA

Stephen Bakken California Dept. of Parks & Recreation Sacramento CA

Dan Blessing USDA FS Klamath NF Yreka CA

John Blodgett Douglas County Forest Products Winchester OR

Jasmine Borgatti USDA FS McCloud CA

Deann Boyd-Snee Jamestown CA

Ron Boyd-Snee Jamestown Sanitary District Jamestown CA

Jason Brandt The University of Montana Missoula MT

Bill Branham Consultant Redding CA

Rob Budge USDA FS, Rogue River-Siskiyou NF Medford OR

Rick Castro California Energy Commission Sacramento CA

Harold Craig Renewable Energy Group/ Yu - USC Public Policy Woodland Hills CA

Thomas Deerfield Shasta Energy Group Mount Shasta CA

Peter Dempster UC Davis Davis CA

Charlie Diehl USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Yreka CA

Gordon Draper Biomass One White City OR

Bill Duke Lake County Resources Initiative Lakeview OR

Tedi Domowicz Duree Southern California Edison Rosemead CA

Jorge Enriquez USDA FS, Klamath NF, Goosenest RD Macdoel CA

Terry Fairbanks Bureau of Land Management Medford OR

Carol Fall UC Cooperative Extension - Trinity County Hayfork CA

Brennan Garrelts Bureau of Land Management Redding CA

Marcia Gifford Lake Shastina Fire Safe Council Weed CA

Pat Gilbert California Dept. of Parks & Recreation Shasta CA

Phil Giles USDA/NRCS Santa Rosa CA

Greg Giusti UCCE, Mendocino County CA


First Name Last Name Affiliation City State

Bruce Goines USDA Forest Service Vallejo CA

Jeff Halbrook Bureau of Business and Economic Research Missoula MT

Paul Hancock Rio Grande National Forest Del Norte CO

Ken Harris USDA FS, Klamath NF, Goosenest RD Macdoel CA

Bruce Hartsough UC Davis, Biological & Ag Engineering Davis CA

David Haupt USDA FS, Klamath NF Fort Jones CA

Walter Herzog Bureau of Land Management Redding CA

Robert Hoover Sierra Pacific Industries Burney CA

Sharon Hoppas Martin/Hoppas LTO Forks of Salmon CA

Patricia Houck-Talbert Tehama County Resource Advisory Committee Red Bluff CA

Scott Janni Management Solutions and Services, Inc. Whitefish MT

Bryan Jenkins University of California Davis CA

Chris Johnson WoodFirst Klamath Falls OR

David Johnson US Fish and Wildlife Service Yreka CA

Thomas Jopson Growpro Inc. Etna CA

Matt Keyes USDA FS, Klamath NF Fort Jones CA

Rich Klug Roseburg Forest Products Weed CA

James Kolesar USDA FS, Klamath NF, Goosenest RD Macdoel CA

Matthew Krunglevich Oregon Department of Forestry Central Point OR

Don Kunkel Advanced Recycling Equipment, Inc. St. Marys PA

Wayne Kunkel Advanced Recycling Equipment, Inc. Ephrata WA

Scott Leavengood Oregon State University Corvallis OR

Robert Lewis Roseburg Forest Products Weed CA

Darren Mahr Oregon Dept. of Forestry Coos Bay OR

George Martin Martin/Hoppas LTO Forks of Salmon CA

Tad Mason TSS Consultants, Inc. Rancho Cordova CA

Gareth Mayhead UC Richmond Field Station Richmond CA

Keith McIntosh Redding CA

Philip McNally ABT (Ag Biomass Technicians) Chico CA

Tony Mediati California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection Sacramento CA

Scott Miller Price BIOstock Services Studio City CA

Blair Moody Bureau of Land Management Medford OR

Gary Nakamura UC Berkeley, Center for Forestry Redding CA



Kelly Pavlica USDA FS, Klamath NF, Goosenest RD Macdoel CA

Heidi Perry USDA Forest Service Susanville CA

Bruce Petty Stream Age Equip. Co. Dunsmuir CA

Steve Roach Collins Pine Company Klamath Falls OR

Brandon Rogers USDA FS, Klamath NF Fort Jones CA

Ron Rolleri North Coast RC&DC Santa Rosa CA

April Rose CHP Montage CA

Jean Saffell Oak Run CA

William (Bill) Saffell Bureau of Indian Affairs, DOI Oak Run CA

Mike Schmidt John Deere Construction & Forestry Chetek WI

Brad Seaberg Continental Resource Solutions, Inc. Redding CA

John Shelly UC Cooperative Extension Richmond CA

Xiongfei Shen Intematix Corp. Fremont CA

Chris Skinner Sierra Pacific Industries Burney CA

David Smith Evergreen Engineering Eugene OR

Joan Smith Freeman CA RC&D CA

Errol Solomon USDA Forest Service Oroville CA

Bob Sourek Bear Mountain Forest Products, Inc. Cascade Locks OR

Jess Spradley Douglas County Forest Products Winchester OR

Bill Stewart UC Berkeley, Center for Forestry Berkeley CA

Susan Stresser US Forest Service Yreka CA

Larry Swan USDA FS Fremont-Winema Nat. Forests Klamath Falls OR

Wilkie Talbert Tehama County Resource Advisory Committee Red Bluff CA

Julie Titus USDA Forest Service Mt. Shasta CA

Fred Tornatore TSS Consultants Rancho Cordova CA

Michael Vanderberg Oregon State University Corvallis OR

Carl Varak USDA FS, Klamath NF Fort Jones CA

Rod Vineyard USDA FS, Lassen NF Susanville CA

Thamar Wherrit Mt. Shasta CA

Doug Wickizer California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Sacramento CA

Bruce Williams NW CA RC&D Weaverville CA

Rob Williams California Biomass Collaborative Forum Davis CA

Sandy Williams Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources Olympia WA



DeAnn Wise Jamestown CA

Heather Wood USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Yreka CA

Joanna Yu Renewable Energy Group/ Yu - USC Public Policy Woodland Hills CA

Glenn Zane Continental Resource Solutions Inc. Redding CA

Nicholas Zettel City of Redding, Electric Utility Redding CA

Steve Ziegler Mason, Bruce & Girard, Inc. Yreka CA


Weed workshop, September 19, 2007

Feedback

Q1. What was your overall impression of the workshop?

Excellent 55%

Good45%

Poor0%

Adequate0%

Q2. How would you rate its usefulness to you?

High Value49%

Good39%

Adequate12%

Low value0%


Q5. Was the inclusion of the field tour valuable?

High Value68%

Good32%

Low value0% Adequate

0%

NB: The above chart is based on the responses of those that attended the field tour

Q6. Would you like to be kept informed of future developments in woody biomass utilization in California and Oregon?

97%

0%

3%

YESNoBlank

Q7. Are there specific needs with respect to the woody biomass utilization challenges facing California and Oregon?

YES88%

NO3%

Blank9%


Comments on the speakers/sessions

V good most speakers good. Slides on web would be good.

Excellent organization, v good experienced, knowledgeable speakers. Some of the content redundant from speaker to speaker ie what is biomass, biomass products etc

Re: energy for public buildings - small scale apps - would have appreciated more in depth discussion and positive examples of installed systems working effectively & efficiently - are there any out there? Good to indicate examples of concerns & problems of existing systems but wanted positive examples too

Great group of speakers and great content

Tours very good. Able to network

Speakers sessions were all interesting and presented valuable info

While some presentations overlapped my knowledge, several items I had forgotten thanks for refreshing my memory!

Excellent presenters. Good content

Speakers and topics logical, informative and very interesting

Good organization and attention to schedule. All food great although did run out of coffee Wed am.

Format on 9/19 was very conducive for learning and interaction with the concepts presented. Handouts illustrating the various processes would be helpful for the field trip

Good cross-section of topics - learned a lot

All speakers were prepared, approx 50% of content applicable to my work

More speakers regarding removing biomass from the woods. Improvements in woods equipment technology (inc processing) discussions

Panel on feedstocks/fiber supply valuable to me. Con tech (lumber, veneer) was not

Some overlap in presentations.

I liked the wide ranging content of the conference. It got me thinking about issues related to our biomass efforts that I had not previously considered to be relevant.

Concise and dense.

Lots of talk on where we have been but little on where we are going and how to get there

All were very good. Some were too technical for my needs.

Lots of information presented in a short time. Good stuff, but hard to absorb it all and keep track of it in a short time frame. Good to have the presentations posted on the web for follow-up

The content of the sessions was focused primarily upon the viability of biomass as a product. It would be helpful during future workshops to discuss the availability of biomass in regards to the economics and feasibility of its removal. I was hoping to hear some discussion regarding any research that has been conducted to help create new means of removing biomass that are economically feasible in areas outside Plumas/Lassen counties, especially on steep terrain.

Good mix of speakers and presentations, but there was no speaker from any power company that actually buys or negotiates for power produced by biomass. Also, there wasn't as much discussion of small log utilization as I hoped.

I thought the speakers were all well-prepared and knowledgeable in their areas of expertise.

Good, all of them were knowledgeable, so much of it was for me, general review

Always more information than time to discuss. Is it possible to have the presentations/power points before or after the Workshop on CD?


For the most part all speakers were knowledgeable and kept interest

Comments on venue/organization

V good and adaptation to bad weather

Excellent organization. Excellent location and facilities. V good idea to include food - lots of networking during breaks.

V well organized - good facilities

Good

Excellent facilities

Workshop well organized and individuals guiding and directing did a fabulous job

Well organized

Very well planned. Networking opps were great

V well organized

No recycling done - why?

Exceptionally well organized, time management well planned and adhered to. Comfort and needs of attendees attended to

Sound occasionally too loud on mobile mikes. Otherwise location and facilities were great (beautiful campus)

Venue was v good. Really appreciated dinner at the lake to visit with folks. A good portion of business happens this way

Good location

Venue was good, organization of event was excellent

V good. Food was excellent. Shame about weather

Excellent location, terrific speakers

Well done. Nice to take a trip to California.

As is always true, conversing with both participants and is very important. There was sufficient opportunities for this, even though the large theater was not well suited to participant interaction

I was unable to attend, but sent a person to replace me due to fires. It would be excellent to hold this in the winter when fires do not interfere! We would have been able to send more folks.

Lousy weather! Otherwise it worked fine.

Weed is a terrible location for amenities such food and things to do. The college location was not conducive to networking - unless you like being a sardine.

none

Excellent

Mostly good. A little cold for an outside lunch, but kind of out of control of the organizers. Otherwise, well done.

The event was well organized. I would have liked to have more time for discussions at the end. It appeared that there were many questions remaining after the brief period of time allotted.

Well organized. Great location.

I liked the location. It is appropriate for the subject. The organization was excellent. I could tell that a lot of effort was put into the event, which I think was a success. The theater, however, was a bit too dark for me.

Excellent location, decent meals


outstanding. Too bad the weather didn't cooperate.

Good location with adequate room. One of the better sawmill tours I have been on; Roseburg tour also good.

Is there a need for training/support Q7a Comments

Feedstocks: harvest and transportation technology. Local regs. Comparison to open burning re: air quality and cost

To me the challenge is making it economical to get the biomass out of the woods. We deal with steep slopes & long haul distances (trinity and W Shasta Co)

Permitting red tape - timelines of getting permits for sure. Financial assistance to purchase/install small scale systems. Needs and feasibility assessments

CARB, clean air act, regulatory trade off

Biomass on steep slopes!

It would be great to have a workshop geared towards the FS that would discuss contracting authorities and give examples of how successful forests are dealing with the biomass issue

Give us list of persons, groups, agencies with specific information and expertise. Discussion of CA regs. Speculation about the future. Information on how to encourage appropriate state action. What can we do to help? Provide us with succinct accurate information we can use in discussion groups and news articles, tell us about failures, stumbles as well as successful ventures. Prepare guides for introducing concepts to students the caretakers of the future

Bruce Goines discussion on aid for projects - both CA and FS, support, recognition, even engineering aid for biomass projects is v encouraging. Supplying practical "dirty hands" experience from the field should help more projects work as intended. CPC development problems often typical but can be avoided.

1/ Establishing long term supply, 2/ technology for cellulosic ethanol, 3/ Impacts of biomass removal on forest and soil health and vigor

Tools to assist with economic analysis of feasibility of timber sales with biomass components. Eg how much sawlog volume is needed to make biomass removal feasible for a given location

Harvesting and removal (economically). In woods processing of biomass. Steep slope harvesting.

1/ Education at all levels of society. 2/ Infrastructure to facilitate logistics of supply & distribution. 3/more effective political advocacy

Implementation of projects (funding, technology transfer). Putting a value on the mitigation of anthropogenic CO2 emissions through hazardous fuels reduction activities, integrating the probability of wildfire in at-risk stands as well as in the residual stand following treatment.

In areas where there is large quantities of woody biomass available, there is not sufficient economic uses within a reasonable distance to use even a fraction of it.

problem of sustainable stream of raw product under Northwest Forest Plan - California options like Oregon's CROP. Issues with net metering rate structure which currently acts as a disincentive. Need for articulated chip vans. Need for equipment that will remove the small diameter stuff from steep slopes. Problem of sizing unit and dispersing units to overcome 40 mile circle of drop dead transportation costs. Financial assistance to start a fueld for schools program in California. Education of regulators to overcome bias that the units are high emitters. Studies to show the carbon offsets of biomass utilization compared to forest fires and burning slash. Overcome the designer chip requirement (uniformity of size and moisture content requirements) that make using logging or forest biomass difficult for small systems. CA incentives to collect biomass tied to removal of fuels around communities.

Early stage funding for RD&D is still sparse. We need less focus on bottom-line economics. Biomass will not compete with conventional energy until $100 a barrel or so, but if we wait until then, we will be even further behind the curve than we already are.

I would like to see Washington brought into the mix and more emphasis on how to bring niche markets to life. We need citizen involvement and government cooperation -


The cost of delivered biomass to a plant is high because most of the land is steep and distance to the plants are long. I have hopes for more small plants working in local areas.

The remoteness of our region and the steepness of the terrain make collection and delivery of raw material difficult and expensive.

We have lots of material on the property we manage, but limited outlets for it. Need to have more utilization avenues so we can do some thinning and management

It would appear that cooperation from power companies in purchasing biomass power at break-even prices is a missing link. If biomass power can't sell for enough to reach break even, then stand-alone non-mill connected biomass power is doomed to failure. There should have been a representative speaker from the power companies to discuss issues of marketing biomass power.

I'm not sure if I understand the question, but I am particularly interested in regulatory challenges to the industry, as well as ideas on how to increase the value of biomass-to-energy projects.

Supply of biomass

Assured supply and the economic feasibility of utilization

See below

financing infrastructure juniper processing logging feasibility (especially federal contracts)

General Comments

More bio, digestion and trash/hog fuels, ash utilization, marketing small wood products and technology

There is a need to develop more environmentally sound technologies to extract biomass on steep slopes

The individuals responsible for this workshop did an outstanding job

Very good forum for industry and gov employees to interact in a "non-threatening" neutral environment

Practicalities of chip usage from forest directly need ?? thought, proof testing and attention to detail. Biomass supply is so enormous , of v high value & impact to economics (global warming) - it must be used

Benefited more from the biomass portion of field trip than sawmill

Need focus on consequences of: a/ lack of stewardship & reforestation, 2/wildfire impacts on forest timber yield (also bug infestation), 3/delaying true utilization including burned timber, 4/ how private and public agencies can do business together

A subject that presently demands attention.

More please.

In my opinion, this is the future. I think it would be beneficial to highlight all the success stories from the National Fire Plan Small Diameter grants and get folks excited about being involved while connecting resources.

It can be a very good tool for land managers. We just need more users in the Northern California area to make it economically feasible

I was surprised that more progress hasn't been made in biomass utilization the last 30 years. Mills have done excellently in co-gen and log utilization at the mill site, but small progress has been achieved in viable stand-alone biomass utilization or dealing with excess woody biomass in the field.

Excellent workshop. Very well organized and impressive panelists. It really expanded my knowledge of the current biomass and forestry issues in the northwest.

USFS needs to recognize the need to actively manage there forests

I believe there are many studies, reports, research and very talented people within the UC system. I find it difficult to access these resources. A data base on information that is available, people with the time, funding resources would be helpful. How about a grant coordinator matching needs and funds?


Workshop 2: Eureka Workshop, December 6-7, 2007

Woody Biomass Utilization: Techniques and economic considerations for the North Coast.

Agenda Morning Session Understanding Woody Biomass: defining terms and characterizing the nature of woody biomass – John Shelly, UC Berkeley

The North Coast Woody Biomass Resource Base – Yana Valachovic, UC Cooperative Extension

1. Public Lands: resource availability – Roy Bergstrom, Six-Rivers National Forest

2. Tribal lands perspective – Jeff Lindsey, Hoopa Tribal Forestry

3. Private sector perspective on the woody biomass component of land management:

1. Geronimo Zuniga, PALCO (verbal presentation)

2. Greg Blomstrom, BBW Associates (verbal presentation)

Forest management and carbon – Bill Stewart, UC Berkeley

GIS as a tool for resource inventory and characterization – Peter Tittmann, UC Davis

Lunch - Ed Burton Company small scale equipment demonstration

Afternoon Session Getting Biomass to Market: harvesting techniques and alternative treatment costs – Han Sup Han, Humboldt State University

A glimpse of European biomass collection techniques – Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

Matching wood properties to woody biomass markets – John Shelly, UC Berkeley

Panel: Current woody biomass markets in the north coast area – Gareth Mayhead (moderator)

1. Pulp markets – Rex Bohn, Evergreen Pulp

2. Energy markets – Bob Marino, DG Fairhaven (verbal presentation)

3. Mill Residues – Art Harwood, Harwood Products (verbal presentation)

Panel: Future Opportunities

1. Wood Pellets – Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

2. Bio-Fuels – John Shelly, UC Berkeley

3. Small scale energy – Jim Zoellick, Schatz Energy Research


Public Funding

1. Farm Bill – Bruce Gordon, NRCS

2. USFS Woody Biomass Grant Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

Mill Tours

December 7, 2007, 8:00 AM to 3:15 PM Various forest products operations in the Eureka area will be toured, including the Pacific Lumber Company Sawmill in Scotia and DG Fairhaven's biomass-fueled powerplant in Samoa. Lunch will be at the Samoa Cookhouse. Following this we will tour the Evergreen Pulp mill in Samoa


Eureka Workshop, December 6-7, 2007

Attendee List Speakers

Roy Bergstrom USFS - Six Rivers National Forest Eureka CA

Rex Bohn Evergreen Pulp CA

Bruce Gordon NRCS Eureka CA

Art Harwood Harwood Products Branscomb CA

Jeff Lindsey Hoopa Tribal Forestry CA

Bob Marino DG Fairhaven Samoa CA

Gareth Mayhead UC Berkeley Richmond CA

John Shelly UC Berkeley Richmond CA

Bill Stewart UC Berkeley Berkeley CA

Han Sup Han Humboldt State University Arcata CA

Peter Tittmann UC Davis Davis CA

Yana Valachovic UC Cooperative Extension Eureka CA

Jim Zoellick Schatz Energy Research Center Arcata CA

Geronimo Zuniga Pacific Lumber Company Scotia CA

Attendees

James Archiniega USDA Forest Service Willow Creek CA

Renee Babros US Forest Service Fortuna ECC Fortuna CA

Bob Bailey NRCS-Ore-Cal RC&D Redding CA

Kenneth Baldwin Forest Guild Douglas City CA

Lauri Barnwell Humboldt County Resource Conservation District Eureka CA

Thomas Blair Blair Forestry Consulting McKinleyville CA

Greg Blomstrom Arcata CA

Jason Brandt The University of Montana Missoula MT

Rebecca Cape Willow Creek/Lower Trintiy Fire Safe Council Willow Creek CA

Ann Cardinal Humboldt/Trinity ReCreation Alliance Sacramento CA

David Carter Winzler & Kelly Eureka Ca

Ruthanne Cecil Center for Environmental Economic Development Arcata CA

Mark Collns James Able Forestry Consultants, Inc. Eureka CA

Andre' Combs Humboldt/Trinity ReCreation Alliance Zenia CA


Glenn Combs Combs Trucking Co. Zenia CA

Alex Cousins Trinity County RCD Weaverville CA

Nancy Curran Six Rivers National Forest Bridgeville CA

Robert Deal PNW Research Station, USDA FS Portland OR

Ranjit Deshmukh Schatz Energy Research Center Arcata CA

Neggie Fallis III Round Valley Indian Tribes Covelo CA

Stormer Feiler North Coast Regional Water Board Santa Rosa CA

Nancy Gard US Forest Service Upper Lake CA

Jared Hammatt Bureau of Land Management Arcata CA

Hunter Harrill Trinity County RCD Orick CA

Hank Harrison BLM Arcata Field Office Arcata CA

Fred Hays USDA Forest Service Bridgeville CA

Fred Hays USDA Forest Service Bridgeville CA

Robert Hurst Green Diamond Resource Company Orick CA

Cybelle Immitt Eureka CA

Greg Jennings Bureau of Land Management Arcata CA

Tim Jones Bureau of Land Management, Arcata Field Office Arcata CA

Jeff Lane Green Diamond Resrouce Company Korbel CA

Matthew Marshall Taiga Design Trinidad CA

John McClelland Redwood National Park Orick CA

Patricia Murphy Humboldt/Trinity ReCreation Alliance Eureka CA

Joe O'Hara Willow Creek/Lower Trinity Fire Safe Council Willow Creek CA

Dwayne Peterson USDA Forest Service Orleans CA

Stanton Reynolds Green Diamond Resource Company Korbel CA

Clarence Rose R & R Timber Co., Inc. Weaverville CA

Caerleon Safford Sonoma Co. Dept. Emergency Services Cazadero CA

Lucy Salazar Six Rivers National Forest Eureka CA

Josh Schmalenberger U.S. Forest Service Fort Jones CA

West Tim John Deere - Forestry Division Bonners Ferry ID

Kristina Vigna Raven's Hill Foundation Point Arena CA

Andrew Whitney Economic Development, County of Humboldt Eureka CA

Frank Wilson Pacific Lumber Company Scotia CA

Reinhold Ziegler Ed Burton Company Willits CA


Eureka Workshop, December 6-7, 2009

Workshop Evaluation Q1. What was your overall impression of the

workshop?

Excellent 59%

Good41%

Poor0%

Adequate0%


High Value46%

Good45%

Adequate9%

Low value0%


Q5. Was the inclusion of the field tour valuable?

59%23%

0%

0%18%

High ValueGoodAdequateLow valueNA

Q6. Would you like to be kept informed of future developments in woody biomass utilization in California and Oregon?

100%

0%

0%

YESNoBlank

Q7. Are there specific needs with respect to the woody biomass utilization challenges facing California and Oregon?

YES86%

NO5%

Blank9%



Great

Maybe add an extra day so presentations don't have to be rushed

I would like to see (and hear) a better sound system.

Schedule time fore speakers to allow for overrun/questions. This is almost always a problem. Possibly communicate prior to workshop to reduce redundant background/introductory material.

A well rounded line-up of speakers and a good range of content

Speakers were excellent, Harwood, Marino, and Bohn - great panel

Some Excellent speakers who really knew their subjects

A bit rushed for most speakers, good variety of presentations, need more time for discussion

Best Value - Panel - North coast woody biomass Resource bas and current woody biomass markets in north coast. I value the panel format "real life" also Jim Zoellicts - very good info for this area

Too tightly packed

good

Good variety and knowledgeable speakers.

Liked all the sessions--All contained valuable info. It would have been great if Han Sup Han's pres had come earlier on the agenda. His talk had a lot of nuts & bolts info that clarified the earlier talks. For example, being from a non-logging area, I wasn't sure what a chip hauler looked like until his presentation. Was there no talk on high-value end products such as flooring because it has not proven to be economically viable?

All speakers did a good job a presented relevant information.

Art Harwood was a really refreshing speaker he presented some very interesting concepts. Some of the PowerPoint’s were a little pat... we herd some concepts a few times too many.

The speakers were great, especially since they were local. I would encourage speakers from out-of-state as well, to get a perspective on successful projects executed in other states (e.g. fuel for schools, community pellet or biomass utilization projects, small-scale heat and power projects)

Speakers and their topics were invaluable. Unfortunately talks were cut short and speakers had to condense their topics.

Great mix with most biomass related backgrounds covered. The content of the presentations were pertinent to many aspects of biomass utilization and kept my interest throughout the workshop. I especially appreciated the inclusion of smaller operators (Art Harwood, Jeff Lindsey, Greg Bloomstrom, Ed Burton) and not solely big business personnel/interests.

This should be round #1, let us know when we meet again!

The information was interesting, well presented, clear, and informative. Enjoy listening to everyone.

There were almost too many really good speakers for this event. If the panels and presenters could have been spaced over a day and half it would have provided more time for discussion which was every bit as valuable as the presentations.

Comments on venue/organization

Great

Pertinent info, same as comment above Expand on time between sites during field trips

It would be good to split the class time with the field trips

Field trips, lunches, and conference room were all good. Even was smooth.

Although some of the speakers tended to go long and break the schedule there was a lot of info in two days and the


facilities were great

Very good workshop

Very well organized- A+ for trying to stay on schedule

There was some confusion about registration. I was told that if I hadn't received a packet then I was registered and the workshop was full. A friend of mine came and called to tell me I was registered

Outside demo seemed inappropriate - why just that company especially when it seemed like a very slow processor, list of email addresses/ phone numbers would have been useful

Very nice - this room works well and you folks did a good job with a packed agenda. But you all need to listen to Yana more! : )

good

good location and organization

Excellent. Moved along. Enough time to chat.

This was a well organized and enjoyable workshop. Although no set solutions were suggested as to the utilization of biomass the workshop was informative and helped keep things in prospective.

excellent

Good venue, good organization

The venue was decent.

Good/comfortable venue. Seemed to be well organized.

Excellent

Great workshop. Would definitely attend a follow event.

The event was very well organized and adhered very well to our set schedule. The venue was excellent.

Is there a need for training/support Q7a Comments

I think there are opportunities out there if financial help is available

Trainings/financial help

Extraction on steep slopes: any technologies available? Somewhat covered in workshop a very difficult issue. Possibly combine with a more in-depth discussion about hauling problems and solutions

At Hoopa we are open to what biomass options are available and handle. We make hat work feasible especially considering transportation costs

More pressure on legislation to subsidize the utilization of biomass. More research and development of ways to make it pay its way to facilities where it could be utilized

Transformation from the coastal mountains to receptors still a problem; need to focus on local possibilities; I.e. ethanol production, electricity production on a small local community level if possible

Steep slopes, bad or no access to slash piles costs of getting certified

Facilitation of cross boundary (private/public land) collaboration. Need sequence of future workshops on specific issues - equipment small scale energy production, collaboration techniques, etc. Biofuel technology

Small scale biomass use for small landowners to support forest health and fire safety projects

I'm located on Westside of Mendocino NF. We lack a reliable outlet for biomass that is within economic range. With emphasis on Fuel reduction we're trying to treat sub-merchantable/ ladder fuels but can't find buyers

Cost of getting material to market.


Geography--In Sonoma County, we are so far from any facilities, that it will be v. difficult to make it viable to move chips without spending our precious few vegetation management dollars--broadcasting chips in place is almost always a viable option and free of additional costs. Development of urban waste stream potential and a facility for same would make sense for the greater bay area.

The biggest issue on the north coast is getting the product from the woods to the plants without loosing money.

creating new accounting processes that include the value of, fire hazard reduction, carbon sequestration, ecosystem restoration, and air quality considerations.

Financial assistance for projects, Policy changes for long term stewardship contracts to ensure long term availability of biomass (in a sustainable way, of course). Need to provide incentives for biomass utilization to subsidize fuel reduction efforts.

One would be infrastructure, if we had more co-gen plants or a ethanol distillery locally, many more biomass operations would be happening. Two would be price of product versus cost of hauling, this could improve if a better infrastructure were to be developed which could increase demand, or more efficient equipment were to be developed/used. Third would be government incentives, if there were more government funding for these projects they would become more feasible and as a result become more common.

The raw material supply seems to be limited due to the financial limitations of recouping transportation costs, which could be considered a technical issue based on the limitations, cost or otherwise, of operating equipment. We may need to develop equipment that runs directly from RAW (little to no processing requirements) biomass (see Producer Gas: Another Fuel for Motor Transport. By: the Advisory Committee on Technology Innovation, Board on Science and Technology for International Development, Office of International Affairs, National Research Council) in our operations here on the North Coast. Why rely on fuel that requires generous processing and shipping when there is plentiful (alternative) fuel sufficient to operate our machinery or at least our vehicles?

Rural...rural...rural issues; transportation, availability, consistent supply, new inventive ways to keep it local. We should all be thinking this to alieve fuel costs, etc.

Cost! What is cost to a employ crew, pay for equipment and equipment operating costs, and trucking far exceed the market price. There is no lack of woody debris in Humb. Co.

Comments

I would like to see the concept of biomass introduced into the school, elementary and up as they're the ones that will be inheriting the forest

Typically biomass becomes large scale projects but are there smaller (almost backyard) scale options available besides the "fuels for schools" programs

The only possibility is to have a plant at Hoopa or maybe Happy Camp

There needs to be economically feasible methods to get rid of the slash in (illegible). For innovative ways to use the slash - new uses and profitable to assist in and be beneficial to the owners

Need to include political players in the audience Incite PG&E as a presenter especially since they say they support renewable energy

For bioenergy still big question of getting biomass from forest to plant. We just aren't there yet on this issue. Thank you!

Get power deregulated so the real price supports biomass

I think DFG may have issues with removal of biomass from the environment.

Seems like it's going to be a long time coming because of easy availability of other energy sources. However, if defensible space requirements are increasingly enforced, urban vegetative waste will keep on rolling in, and something will have to be done with all that debris. It will be very important to keep the dialog in the ears of fed., state and local officials.

There are plenty of issues surrounding woody biomass. Luckily there is a high level of interest in this county on this topic. There needs to be more research and discussion on the topic.


Perhaps land managers need to accept biomass removal (for utilization) as an inherent cost. Brush disposal requires some of the revenues from production, why not consider biomass removal as brush disposal? Fuels reductions require funding and generally do not generate revenue so let's accept biomass removal on fuel reduction projects as an inherent cost.

Although we have been talking about this for over 20 years, I believe that now we have really begun. Pat, Joe and myself were very impressed, and hope everyone will make it to our rural Biomass Meeting, part 2 & 3, in February, and then in April. We will follow-up with our Community Fire Safe Day Fair & Kid's Environmental Camp on Memorial Week-end, Sat. at Veteran's Park, Willow Creek, Ca. Be there or be square!

Great Workshop. Thought it was great, even with an overload of information-everything worked well together. The field trip was a perfect ending. My only suggestion would be to add a Logger owner/operator to your panel that actually does whole log chipping in the wood to explain the complexity of the process and cost associated with it (crew, equipment, trucking)

Woody biomass will be utilized more as the extraction procedures and methods are developed and made financially competitive.


Workshop 3: Sonora Workshop, May 22-23, 2008.

Biomass Utilization and Stewardship Contracting Workshops

Agenda Biomass Utilization Program of Events, Thursday May 22, 2008 8:30 AM Breakfast and Registration

9:30 AM Welcome and Introduction to Day - Betony Jones, Sierra Business Council

9:45 AM Local Resources, Issues and Constraints - Kathy Hardy, Forest Supervisor, Stanislaus National Forest, Mike Price, Sierra and Stanislaus National Forest

10:20 AM Biomass Opportunities on the Local National Forests - Deb Romberger, Stanislaus National Forest, Mike Price, Sierra National Forest

10:40 AM Questions and Discussion

11:00 AM Refreshment Break

11:30 AM Current Markets and Challenges - Mike Albrecht, Sierra Resource Management, Sonora, Jim Burk, Pacific Ultra-Power, Chinese Station

12:00 PM Questions and Discussion

12:15 PM Lunch (Provided)

1:15 PM Environmental Community Perspective - Warren Alford, Sierra Forest Legacy

1:40 PM Woody Biomass Utilization Challenges and Opportunities-What Makes Sense? -Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

Biomass Power Plants and Other Applications - Tad Mason, TSS Consultants, Rancho Cordova


2:25 PM Refreshment Break

2:55 PM Project Development—Permitting for Biomass Energy Facilities - Tad Mason, TSS Consultants, Rancho Cordova

Densified Fuel Manufacturing in the Sonora Area - Andrew Haden, Bear Mountain Forest Products, Portland, OR

Wood Shavings Production in the Sonora Area - Bob Brewster, California Wood Shavings, Sonora (Invited)


4:00 PM Financing and Incentives—Private Sector Funding - Bryan Redd, Upstream 21, Portland, OR

Public Funding Opportunities - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley


Stewardship Contracting Program of Events, Friday May 23, 2008 Learning Objectives: By the end of day two participants will understand:

• How can stewardship contracting be used to meeting local ecologic, economic, and community goals.

• The authorities, guidelines, opportunities, and limitations

• How other communities have used stewardship to meet multiple objectives

• How to successfully engage contractors in stewardship

• What to expect when engaging in Stewardship Collaboratives

• Have identified initial steps to foster successful stewardship contracting

8:30 AM Networking Breakfast

9:30 AM Welcome Back and Agenda Review - Marcus Kaufman, Resource Innovations, University of Oregon

9:40 AM Overview of Stewardship Contracting - Marcus Kaufman, Resource Innovations, University of Oregon

10:10 AM Regional perspectives on stewardship contracting - Don Golnick, USFS Region 5 Stewardship Contracting Coordinator


10:45 AM Refreshment Break

11:00 AM Stewardship Projects and Opportunities - Jim Whitfield , Sequoia National Forest—Alaska Flat Stewardship, Deb Romberger, Stanislaus National Forest—Upcoming Projects

11:30 AM Integrated Resource Contract Examples - Dave Horak, Stanislaus National Forest, Mike Price, Sierra National Forest


12:30 PM Lunch (Provided)

1:30 PM Contractor Perspective on Stewardship Contracting - Mike Albrecht, Sierra Natural Resource Management


2:10 PM Case Study: Post Mountain: Stewardship Collaborative - Nick Goulette, Watershed Research and Training Center

2:30 PM Visioning Exercise: Bringing the Pieces Together - Marcus Kauffman, Resource Innovations


Sonora Workshop, May 22-23, 2008

Workshop Evaluation

Feedback Response (Total attendees 42)

40%

60%

TOTAL RETURNED

TOTAL NOT RETURNED

Q1. What was your overall impression of the workshop?

Excellent 71%

Good29%

Poor0%

Adequate0%



High Value59%

Good41%

Adequate0%

Low value0%

Q5. How valuable was the day 2 training workshop?

High Value47%Good

53%

Low value0% Adequate

0%


Q6. Would you like to be kept informed of future developments in woody biomass utilization and stewardship contracting in California ?

70%

6%

24%

YESNoBlank


More Biomass Electrical generation info

Great speakers, organization, and material (many comments like this)

Comments

What’s being done with biomass at National Energy Lab in Golden, Co

More organization of biomass reduction in WUI for private land/homeowners

More biomass use in electrical production

Tech assistance, training, financial help

Could use some line office training

There needs to be a re-evaluation of the requirements for fire control in light of wildlife habitat preservation. The idea of corridors for fire control vs. corridors for wildlife- and not just a focus on endangered species, but the whole ecosystem.

Has attended 2 stewardship contracting workshops and this was the best.

Didn’t quite get it


Workshop 4: Tulare Workshop, May 6-9, 2009 Stewardship Contracting and Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop: Opportunities

for Sierra and Sequoia National Forests Agenda Tuesday 5th May - Setting the Scene and Stewardship Contracting Morning Session Opening remarks - Tina Terrell, Sequoia National Forest, Edward Cole, Sierra National Forest Existing programs and opportunities on the Sierra and Sequoia National Forests- Mike Price, Sierra/Sequoia National Forest, Jim Whitfield, Sequoia National Forest Overview of Stewardship Contracting - Marcus Kauffman, Resource Innovations Regional perspectives on stewardship - Don Golnick, USDA Forest Service Region 5 Afternoon Session Integrated Resource Contract Examples - Don Otis, USDA Forest Service Region 5 Contractor perspectives on stewardship - Larry Duysen, Sierra Forest Products, Mike Albrecht, Sierra Resource Management Local Forest Service experience with stewardship - Mike Price and Paul Miller, Sierra/Sequoia National Forest Environmental community perspectives - Warren Alford (Invited) Case studies - Marcus Kauffman, Resource Innovations Product and market opportunities for woody biomass General overview - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley Electrical generation and liquid fuels - John Shelly, UC Berkeley Wednesday 6th May - Markets for Woody Biomass Morning Session Panel: current and potential markets California overview - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley Sawmilling and residuals - Larry Duysen, Sierra Forest Products Local biomass powerplant opportunities - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley Niche products - Jon Wagy, Wagy Forest Products Densified wood fuels - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley Air quality issues for forests and use of woody biomass - Scott Nester, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Invited) Forest Service programs to support market development - Bruce Goines, USDA Forest Service Region 5 Visioning exercise: bringing it all together Afternoon Session Sierra Forest Products field tour


Tulare workshop, May 5-6, 2009

Attendee List First Last Organization: Mike Albrect Sierra Resource Management

Warren Alford Sierra Forest Legacy

Keith Ballard Sierra National Forest

Brian Bergman USDA Forest Service

Larry Burd USFS Sequoia National Forest

Stephen Byrd Southern California Edison Company

Edward Cole USDA - Sierra National Forest

Pat Dauwalder US Forest Service

Larry Duysen Sierra Forest Products

Kent Duysen Sierra Forest Products

Patrick Emmert Southern California Edison Company

Mike Garcia Sierra National Forest

Paul Gibbs USFS

Jeff Gletne Sierra Forest Products

Bruce Goines US Forest Service

Don Golnick Forest Service Region 5

Steve Hanna US Forest Service

Betony Jones Sierra Business Council

Marcus Kauffman Resource Innovations

Rick Larson US Forest Service

Roy Leach USFS Sequoia National Forest

Brian Mattos USDI National Park Service

Gareth Mayhead UC Berkeley

Paul Miller US Forest Service

Kirby Molen Sierra Forest Products

Jill Mross North Fork Community Development Council

Scott Nester San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

Don Otis Forest Service Region 5

George Powell Sequoia National Forest, Western Divide Ranger Dis

Michael Price Sierra National Forest

Robert Sanders USDA Sequoia N. F.

John Shelly UC Berkeley


David Strawn Forest Service USDA, SQF, HLRD

Tina Terrell Sequoia National Forest

Wayne Terry Millennium Energy, LLC

Guy Van Gaasbeek

Debbie Van Gaasbeek

Jon Wagy Wagy Forest Products

Jim Whitfield Sequoia National Forest

Total 40


Workshop 5-a: Grant Information Workshops: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Sonora, October 8, 2009

Time: 4pm-6pm

Location: Forest Supervisor’s Office, Stanislaus National Forest,

19777 Greenley Road, Sonora, CA 95370

This short workshop aims to provide information on the Forest Service 2010 Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Grants program.

This national program is intended to help improve forest restoration by using and creating markets for small-diameter material and low-valued trees removed from hazardous fuel reduction and forest health activities.

Funds are targeted to help communities, entrepreneurs, and others turn residues from hazardous fuel reduction and forest health projects into marketable forest products and/or energy products.

Individual grants can be from $50,000 to a maximum of $350,000. Half of the funds will be targeted towards “high priority national forests” which includes the Stanislaus National Forest.

Topics will include: • Background

• Application process

• Eligibility

• Obligations

• Timeline

• Examples of successful projects (including locally)

• Assistance available to help with applications

• Questions

The workshop is organized by the Center for Forestry at UC Berkeley and the Stanislaus National Forest with the assistance of the California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils and USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Region 5. We will start promptly at 4pm.

There is no cost for this workshop but we would appreciate it if you could register in advance either online or by completing and returning the registration form.

For further information please see the Woody Biomass website or contact Gareth Mayhead: [email protected].

Sponsored by: University of California Berkeley, Center for Forestry

California Association of Resource Conservation & Development Councils USDA Forest Service, Region 5


Sonora WBUG Workshop, October, 2009

Attendee List First Last Organization: Sean Bitner

Marji Feliz Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Cathy Koos Breazeal Amador Fire Safe Council

Dave Wilson Sierra Nevada Construction Co.

Vivian Wilson Sierra Nevada Construction Co.

Ruanne Mikkelsen Arete

Steven Crook Crook Logging Inc.

Karen Balmain Balmain Enterprises Ltd.

Gary Balmain Balmain Enterprises Ltd.

Brandon Sanders Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Dennis Serpa Pacific Ultrapower Chinese Station

Richard Tanner Tanner Logging

Ronald Tanner Tanner Logging

Wil Humphries Pinecrest Hydropower Co., Inc.

Dorene Paoluccio Inventive Resources Inc.

John A Paoluccio Inventive Resources Inc.

Dore Bietz Tuolumne Band of MeWuk Indians

Terry Poston Poston Logging

Carol Smith Smith's Grinding

Robert Smith Smith's Grinding

Robert Smith Smith's Grinding

Terry Northcutt Timberline Environmental Services

Joe Pluim

Ron Brooks Dambached Const

Neil Fray Fray Logging Inc

Randy Fray Fray Logging Inc

Wayne Young Youngs Logging

Jim Blunt New Hounonsland Clearing (?)

Rick Breeze-Martin

Nick Keith

Shaun Crook Crook Logging Inc.

Total 31


Workshop 5-b: Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Eureka, October 19, 2009 Time: 5.30pm-7.30pm

Location: Six Rivers Forest Supervisor’s Office, 1330 Bayshore Way

Eureka, CA 95501




Individual grants can be from $50,000 to a maximum of $350,000. Half of the funds will be targeted towards “high priority national forests” which includes the Six Rivers

National Forest.



• Eligibility

• Obligations

• Timeline



• Questions

The workshop is organized by the Center for Forestry at UC Berkeley and the Six Rivers National Forest with the assistance of the California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils and USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Region 5. We will start promptly at 5.30pm.

There is no cost for this workshop but we would appreciate it if you could register in advance either online here or by printing and returning the registration form.





Eureka WBUG Workshop, October 19, 2009

Attendee List First Last Organization Eric Almquist ERA Forest Products, Almquist Lumber Company

Les Barnwell Chalk Mountain Ranch

Roy Bergstrom Six Rivers National Forest

Sam Boyd Adage Biopower

Michael Burke INDIANS

Barbara Hooper Blue Lake Garbage Co. Inc.

Clint Hooper Blue Lake Garbage Co. Inc.

Allie Hostler Hooper Valley Tribe

Gary King

Rick Martin North Coast Air Quality

Gwen Morris Steve Morris Logging and Contracting

Todd Morris Steve Morris Logging and Contracting

Kai Ostrow Elk Ridge Forestry

Bill Renfroe Tri-Agency Economic Development Authority

Stan Reynolds Green Diamond Resource Company

Lucy Salazar Six Rivers National Forest

Tom Schultz Humboldt Redwood Company

Daniel Stein Elk Ridge Forestry

Total 18


Workshop 5-c: Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Redding, October 20, 2009 Time: 4-6pm

Location: Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Forest Supervisor’s Office,

3644 Avtech Parkway, Redding, CA 96002

This short workshop aims to provide information on the Forest Service 2010 Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Grants program. This national program is intended to help improve forest restoration by using and creating markets for small-diameter material and low-valued trees removed from hazardous fuel reduction and forest health activities. These funds are targeted to help communities, entrepreneurs, and others turn residues from hazardous fuel reduction and forest health projects into marketable forest products and/or energy products. Individual grants can be from $50,000 to a maximum of $350,000. Half of the funds will be targeted towards “high priority national forests” which includes the Shasta-Trinity National Forest.

Topics will include:

• Background


• Eligibility

• Obligations

• Timeline



• Questions

The workshop is organized by the Center for Forestry at UC Berkeley and the Shasta-Trinity National Forest with the assistance of the California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils and USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Region 5.

There is no cost for this workshop but we would appreciate it if you could register in advance either online or by printing and returning the registration form.

The workshop will start at 4pm.


Woody Biomass Website: http://ucanr.org/WoodyBiomass




Redding WBUG Workshop, October 20, 2009

Attendee List First Last Organization: Richard Clapp CHC

Tim Dempewolf Wolfpack Wood Recycling

Julie Dowell Kurt Dowell Custom Shearing

Thomas Esgate Lassen County Fire Safe council, Inc.

Carol Fall

Pat Frost Trinity County RCD

George Jennings NCRC (sponsor for SISKIYOU Biomass Utd. Group SBUG)

Jim Jungwirth WRTC

Doug Lindgren Tubit Enterprises, Inc.

John Miller John Wheeler Logging Inc.

Bill Niemann

Ben Snyder Headrick Logging

Wilkie Talbert Global Forest Energies

Gary Warner Warner Enterprises, Inc

Lisa Media Media Logging Inc

Tony Impact Impact Resources

Russ Hawkins

Sharmie Stevenson

Toby Mills

Bruce Olsen

Wes Taylor

Total 21


Workshop 5-d:Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, Nevada City, October 22, 2009

Time: 5.30pm-7.30pm

Location: Tahoe National Forest, Forest Supervisor’s Office,

631 Coyote Street, Nevada City, CA 95959




Individual grants can be from $50,000 to a maximum of $350,000. Half of the funds will be targeted towards “high priority national forests” which includes the Tahoe National Forest.



• Eligibility

• Obligations

• Timeline



• Questions

The workshop is organized by the Center for Forestry at UC Berkeley and the Tahoe National Forest with the assistance of the California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils and USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Region 5. We will start promptly at 5.30pm.






Nevada City WBUG Workshop, October 22, 2009

Attendee List First Last Organization Jennifer Alger Far West Forest Products

Nathan Bamford JW Bamford Inc

Steve Carpenter Green Planet Power Solutions

Mike colomb Green Planet Power Solutions

Chris Fichtel The Nature Conservancy

Richard Frey Stiller Brothers Inc.

Bryon Hadwick Northwest California RC&D

Wayne Helm Stiller Brothers Inc.

Ronald Hutchinson

Keith Logan North Sierra Biomass Utilization Task Force

Dick McCleery USDA-NRCS-CSRC&D

Jeff Rodriguez Central Coast RC & D Council

Mark Steffek USDA NRCS

Steve Sudtell Sudtell and sons logging

Ken Wilde Sierra Pacific Industries

Bruce Woodworth CSRC&D

Jim Evans Far West Forest Products

Gary Douglas D G Logging

Paul Violett Soper LLC

Jim Anstrong

Ed Walicer

Gale Dupree

Eric Carleson

Coleman Cassel

Tom Amisbury

Helen Wayne

Total 26


Workshop 5-e: Grant information workshop: Hazardous Fuels Woody Biomass Utilization Grant, San Bernardino, October 26, 2009 Location: Forest Supervisor’s Office, 602 South Tippecanoe Avenue

San Bernardino, CA 92408




Individual grants can be from $50,000 to a maximum of $350,000. Half of the funds will be targeted towards “high priority national forests” which includes the San Bernardino National Forest and other national forests in Southern California.



• Eligibility

• Obligations

• Timeline



• Questions

The workshop is organized by the Center for Forestry at UC Berkeley and the San Bernardino National Forest with the assistance of the California Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils and USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Region 5. We will start promptly at 6pm.






San Bernardino WBUG Workshop, October 26, 2009

Attendee List First Last Organization: Paula Bates Colmac Energy, Inc.

Amber Blackwell-Bingham

Sheila Burns-Argueta

Justin Cecil Justin Cecil Logging

Mark Christiansen

Jerry Davis Bradco Environmental

Graeme Donaldson Colmac Energy, Inc.

Jacqueline Empasis CAL FIRE

Kip Kincaid Kincaid logging company, inc,

Vic Leader Arrowhead Enterprises, Inc.

Val Mahabir County of San Bernardino Dept of Economic Development

Lisa Medici Medici Logging, Inc.

Peter Parks Greenlight Electric Big Bear W2E Plant Project

John Stevens County of Tulare

Justin White ArborWorks

David Yegge Big Bear Lake Fire Department

Hal Carey USFS

Elaine Miller Stand Dynamics

Wesley Ullmann Wesley Wayne Services

Micheal Berry Cecil logging

James Gannon BLM

Joe Wood Joes logging

Kevin Miller Stand Dynamics

Total 23


Workshop 6: Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop, Quincy, May 25-26, 2010.

Time: 9:00am-5:00pm.

Regional Biomass Supply Potential Welcome - Lori Simpson, Supervisor, Plumas County; Lee Anne Schramel Taylor, Plumas National Forest; Mike De Lasaux, UC Cooperative Extension

Forest Ownership Pattern - Mike De Lasaux, UC Cooperative Extension

Regional Biomass Assessments - Tad Mason, TSS Consultants

National Forest Supply - Nancy Francine, Plumas National Forest

Private Forest Supply - Bill Stewart, UC Cooperative Extension

Biomass Utilization, Markets & Challenges Moderator John Sheehan, Plumas Corporation

SPI - Jim Turner, Sierra Pacific Industries, Loyalton

Collins Pine Co. - Jay Francis, Collins Pine Company

Biomass Opportunities Biomass Utilization Basics - John Shelly, UC Cooperative Extension

Densified fuel - Gareth Mayhead, UC Cooperative Extension

Small Scale Energy - Rob Williams, UCD Calif. Biomass Collaborative

Bio-Fuel - John Shelly, UC Cooperative Extension

Environmental Considerations Forest Structure & Diversity - Kevin O'Hara, UC Berkeley

Soil - Gary Nakamura, UC Cooperative Extension

Habitat - Pat Manley, US Forest Service

Air Quality - George Ozanich, Northern Sierra Air Quality (Verbal Presentation)

Funding Opportunities BCAP - Joe Gassaway, USDA Farm Services Agency (Verbal Presentation)

Wednesday May 26 - 8:00am-4:30pm, (classroom and field tour)

Funding Opportunities (continued) Woody Biomass Utilization Grant - Gareth Mayhead

PNF Bio-Energy Project - Nancy Francine (Verbal Presentation)

Workshop Summary - Gareth Mayhead


Field Tour Participants toured the Sierra Pacific Industries small log mill and biomass cogeneration facility in Quincy. The planned visit to the forest to observe active biomass harvest operations was cancelled due to bad weather conditions.

*Lunch and refreshments provided both days*

Sponsors * USDA Forest Service, State & Private Forestry, Region 5 * California Association of Resource Conservation & Development Councils * Sierra Nevada Conservancy * Plumas National Forest * UC Berkeley, Center for Forestry * UC Cooperative Extension

Supporters * Northern California Society of American Foresters * Sierra Pacific Industries * Plumas Corporation * Plumas Rural Services * Sierra Institute for Community and Environment * Sierra County Fire Safe & Watershed Council * Plumas County Farm Advisor Department


Quincy Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop, May 25-26, 2010

Attendee List Name Entity Bill Banka Banka Forestry

Brian J Hindman U.S. Forest Service

Bill Stewart University of California

Bill Smith Plumas NF, Silviculturist

Chris Sokol JWTR, LLC

Crista Stewart Greenville Rancheria


Jimi Scheid CAL FIRE

Jay Francis Collins Pine Company

Janice Gauthier U.S. Forest Service

John Hafen Private citizen

Jim Holst TSD Engineering

Jonathan Kusel Sierra Institute for Community & Environment

Jim Marty Forester

Joe Gassaway USDA Farm Service Agency

Jan Prichard Alliance for Workforce Development, Inc

Janice Sangunitto USDA Forest Service


Jim Turner Sierra Pacific Industries

Jeff Watson USDA Forest Service

Kimberly Pruett Rep. Tom McClintock

Kevin O'Hara University of California - Berkeley

Linda Hansen Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Linnea Hanson Feather River Ranger District Plumas National Forest

Laurie Litman Infowright

Keith Logan North Sierra Biomass Taks Force

Mike Freschi Sierra County Fire Safe and Watershed Council

Mike Travis Chabin Concepts / AFWD

Megan Martinez Plumas National Forest

Martin Nichols City of Red Bluff

Gary Nakamura UC Cooperative Extension

Nancy Francine U.S. Forest Service, Plumas National Forest

Phil Nemir Forestry Consultant


Name Entity John Sheehan Plumas Corporation

Paul Mrowczynski

Lisa Medici Medici Logging, Inc.

Philip Sitze USFS

Pete Thill Self

Paul Violett Soper-Wheeler Company, LLC

Gerd Ebeling

Rob Williams CA Biomass Collaborative / UC Davis

John Schramel

Traci Holt Alliance for Workforce Development, Inc

Tad Mason TSS Consultants

Kelly Holt Holt Logging, Inc.


Jeff Withroe Sustainable Forestry, Inc.

Walter Levings Tahoe NF

Ali Abbassi City of Red Bluff

Lee Ann Taylor USDA Forest Service

Serge Birk Lassen NF

Dave Bricker Lassen NF

Bob Carrel City of Red Bluff

Bob Carter

Chris Christofferson Plumas

Richard Clapp Global Forest Energies

Mike De Lasaux UC Cooperative Extension

Colin Dillingham USDA Forest Service

Pete Duncan USDA Forest Service

Forrest Flynn City of Red Bluff

Joe Franco Lassen NF

Jeronme Houck Global Forest Energies

Gary Howard JWTR, LLC

Bob Kingman Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Charlie Knight

Pat Manley US Forest Service

Becky Snell UC Berkeley

Cindy Noble Sierra County Fire Safe and Watershed Council


Name Entity Erin Paxton Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Ann Simon Lassen NF

Joe Smailes USDA Forest Service

Scott Stawiarski Lassen NF

Rick Stumps USDA Forest Service

Elaine Vercruysse USDA Forest Service

David Wood USDA Forest Service

Tim Holabird Congressman McClintock

Total 76


Quincy Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop, May 25-26, 2010

Workshop Evaluation Over 75 people attended the workshop held at the Mineral Building, Fairgrounds, Quincy, CA on 25-26th May 2010. Requests for feedback were made at the event, and all attendees were given the on-line survey website address. The following is the result of the feedback information.


Most people who responded found the workshop to be of high value with excellent speakers and presentations. But many commented that there were too many speakers for the limited time available. Many liked the location of the workshop but found the room to be rather crowded and the screen too small.

Feedback from respondents follows:

Comments on speakers • A lot of information in a rapid fire format • The private business perspective was very helpful. • I learned an invaluable amount of information. Thank you. • Very good and right to the point. • Knowledgeable and informative speakers. • Content was timely • Good diverse group of speakers. I got a lot of good information. • Some of the best speakers I have encountered in this area of interest.


• Feds need to incorporate common sense. Most of the speakers were very interesting and had some good ideas.

Comments on future biomass workshops

• One with more information on the use of landfill and Agric. waste. • I would like to see about more feasibility of logging with different equipment which are

capable of going on steeper slopes and use of forwarders such as Ponsse which is small agile and can carry a large load.

• Maybe a little more info with pictures or video or equipment on-site of the actual equipment being used and what the different processes look like.

• Seeing a portable sawmill demonstration would have been of great interest. Possibly set this up near the venue so weather doesn't cancel this valuable portion of the tour.

• Would be good to reach out to engage more people who are skeptical about the value of biomass to energy and alternative uses. Most of us are already on the page.

• I think it would be interesting to bring people to the table that aren't necessarily the cheer leaders of biomass in the Sierras. It might create more challenging discussions, but I think it would also provide a greater learning opportunity for all parties involved.

• With nearly 4 million acres between them, (many in great need of thinning) I would like to see more involvement by the Forest Service.

More than half of respondents expressed an interest in future workshops on Grant programs.


Workshop 7: Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, Oroville, September 14, 2010

Agenda 8:15am Registration and Coffee

8:30am Welcome and introductions (Gareth Mayhead)

8:50am Woody biomass utilization basics (Gareth Mayhead)

9:20am Electricity and combined heat and power (CHP) (Tad Mason)

9:50am Biomass thermal applications (Gareth Mayhead)

10:20am Coffee and refreshment break

10:50am Densified fuels (Gareth Mayhead)

11:20am Gasification (Rob Williams)

11:50am Pyrolysis (Gareth Mayhead)

12:20pm Lunch

1:20pm Biofuels (Rob Williams)

1:50pm Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) (Gareth Mayhead)

2:10pm Discussion and questions

2:30pm Close

Speaker Contact Details:

Rob Williams University of California Biological and Agricultural Engineering California Biomass Collaborative One Shields Avenue Davis, CA 95616 Tel: (530) 752-6623 E-mail: [email protected] http://biomass.ucdavis.edu Tad Mason TSS Consultants 2724 Kilgore Road Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Tel: (916) 638-8811 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.tssconsultants.com Gareth Mayhead University of California Berkeley Woody Biomass Utilization


Richmond Field Station 1301 South 46th Street Building 478 Richmond, CA 94804 Tel: (510) 665 3662 E-mail: [email protected] http://ucanr.org/WoodyBiomass http://twitter.com/WoodyBiomass Workshop presented by: University of California Berkeley, Center for Forestry USDA Forest Service, Region 5 California Association of Resource Conservation & Development Councils Central Sacramento Valley RC&D


Oroville Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, September 14, 2010

Attendee List First Last Organization: Larry Akin Central Sacramento Valley RC&D

Janie Akin Central Sacramento Valley RC&D

Tom Amesbury Foresters Co-op

Gary Apple

Nathan Bamford JW Bamford Inc

Francisco Barriga Pacific Oroville Power (Covanta Energy)

Gordon Bauer Pacific Oroville Power (Covanta Energy)

Casey Boespflug BLM

Ross Branch Office of Rep Tom McClintock

Ray Bryars Clean Power Cooperative

Bill Burrows Sunflower Coordinated Resource Mgt Plan (CRMP)

Chris Christofferson USDA Forest Service Plumas National Forest

Jim Ciaffoni Engineer/Public Administrator

Richard Clapp Global Forest Energies

Dustin Coughlin North Valley Ag Services

Rob Crummettt Wheelabrator Shasta Energy

Christopher Dallas Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Ted Decker US Forest Service

Adam Dellinger Central Sacramento Valley RC&D

George Emmerson Sierra Pacific Industries

Gerry Enwards Pacific Oroville Power (Covanta Energy)

Lyz Ericksen Rightmyer Consulting Services

Norman Gonzales Office of Rep Tom McClintock

Steven Handy Redding Electric Utility

David Heppe Environmental Capital Group

Scott Hickman Nevada County Clean Power Coop

Jerome Houck Global Forest Energies

George Janssen

Jerry Johnson

Duane Knighton BLM

Greg Kostick Trinity River Lumber Company

Garrett Liles California Biomass Collaborative - UCDavis

Tad Mason TSS Consultants


First Last Organization: Gil Mathew Nevada County Economic Resource Council


Dick McCleery USDA-NRCS

Bob Mertz Sierra Pacific Industries

Dave Meurer U.S. Congress

John Middlebrook

Timothy Mitro Feather River AQMD

Joe Muller Teichert Materials

Glenn Nader University of Calif. Cooperative Extension

Darla Niemi Rightmyer Consulting Services

David Pettis Clean Power Co-op

Mark Pierce North Valley Ag Services

Alberto Ramirez Teichert Materials

Mike Ray Teichert Aggregates

Brenda Rightmyer Rightmyer Consulting Services

John Romena Buena Vista Biomass Power LLC

Dan Roskopf USDA Forest Service Plumas National Forest

Lee Ruth California Orchard Wood Co-Op (COWCO)

Marston Schultz

Steven Seidenglanz

Jerry Shadinger

Ted Silberstein

Brent Smith SEDCorp

Anna Marie Stephens Butte County Fire Safe Council


Mike Travis Chabin Concepts, Inc.

Peter Van Zant Sierra Watch

Robert Williams UC Davis

Darrel Wilson Butte County Fire Safe Council

Daniel Worden

Total 63


Oroville Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, September 14, 2010

Workshop Evaluation. Over 65 people attended the Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop held at the Checkers Italian Restaurant in Oroville on September 14, 2010. Feedback surveys were distributed at the event. Twenty three surveys were completed at the event and one was received electronically. The results of the feedback are as follows.

Overall the impression of the workshop was very good. People commented that the speakers did an excellent job and covered the subject areas clearly and consisely. The


workshop, in general, was of good value to most attendees. A couple of respondants said the workshop was of adequate value to them, but one had been to many biomass meetings before and the other said the technologies were not relevant to him personally.

Comments on the speakers. “The speakers really are informed and prepared.”

“Good speakers and appropriate content.”

“Very knowledgeable”

“Very thorough coverage of a complex subject.”

“Informed, informative, comprehensive.”

Knowledgable Speakers

“Well organized. Knowledgeable speakers. Good mix of attendees for networking.”

“Information was excellent. Speakers were well informed and articulate.”

“Well presented, a great overview of the industry - a great introduction!”

Comments on the venue/organization. “Really appreciate the location and facility.”

“A good job of condensing large subject into time allocated.”

“More than adequate; reasonable price extremely affordable!”

“Acoustics in main room were very bad! Even sitting close to speakers it was hard to understand. Volume was ok, but poor comprehension.”

“Audio system was a weakness. Speakers had to hold mike just right or speakers would cut in/out. Food was great.”

“Good low cost.”

“It covered quite a bit of information.”

“Location must be good based on turn out.

“I liked the venue and format- 20-30 min presentations 10-15 mins questions.”

“I value the ability to review all presentations on the website later as the most valuable. Too hard to take in everything in real time with technical subjects.”

“Very good.”

“Good atmosphere great food.”

“Short BUT sweet - right to the point.”


Suggestions for future workshops. “I work for Fire Safe Council and am interested to find the best ways to utilize the biomass created from our projects of brush clearing and utilizing the many trees damaged in our recent fires.”

“It still appears that the economics of biomass are questionable. Price increase of fossil fuels could change quickly however. Continuing research & establishing a limited number of plants is a good strategy to help prepare for reduced availability of fossil fuels.”

“Put USFS on the spot as to lack of resource/Biomass contracts & restrictions on what you can do with stumpage.”

“How high diesel fuel has to go up before this is economical.”

“Better sound system.”

“More on relationship where convenient subsidies incentivize business expansion. Potential for sugar extraction in woods for shipment to market.”

“Where is biomass conversion in the woods and haul out a high quality product? Herbivores as biological mastication and sell product (meat) - Highest Omega 3 meat on the marked - demand increasing because of ethnic change - proven process for thousands of years.”

“It is a shame fast pyrolisis is not coming along faster.”

“Field trips to actual facilities.”

“Hope there is comprehensive reference bibliography on website, if not that would be my only suggestion.”

“More of the same.”

“For future workshops - start with intro then break into specific sub-groups focused upon unique technologies.”

General Comments. “Have presentations files available (on website) immediately - or availabe @ workshop on CD.”

“Probably not practical for our purposes.’

“All these biomass meetings/workshops focus on burning. No emphaisis given to processes other than combustion, which avoids discussions of reducing CO2 additions to atmosphere. There are processes using fast pyrolysis to generate bio-oil and then fuel cells for electricity production. Also biochar uses in agriculture (and others) are never mentioned!!”

“Looking forward to this decade of development.”

“Keep pushing - Gareth thanks for your continued efforts.”

“Helped to clarify my understanding of the various biomass conversion methods.”

“How to present the topic of a Biomass facility to the foot hill area where I live.”

“Very interesting. I will look for more information on this subject.”

“The start of a new industry. Words for the day - In confusion there's profit!”


Workshop 7-a: Woody Biomass to Energy Field Tour, November 17, 2010

Agenda This field tour is the follow up to the Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop held in Oroville in September 2010. Places on the field tour will be prioritized towards those attended the workshop.

We will visit the following woody biomass to energy conversion facilities in the Davis area.

* Sierra Pacific Industries sawmill and power plant, Lincoln

* West Biofuels, Woodland

* Dixon Ridge Farms, near Winters

The tour will start in the Lincoln area where we will board a motor coach. Lunch will be provided. The registration fee is $20.00 payable in advance.

The focus is on showing you some practical examples of a number of the technologies discussed at the workshop. Representatives from each site will show you the technology – questions and discussion are encouraged. Rob Williams (UC Davis), John Shelly and Gareth Mayhead (UC Berkeley) will facilitate the tour and will also be available to answer questions.

Advance registration is essential for this tour – no walk-ins. Attendees of the Oroville workshop will receive priority for this field tour so long as you register before November 1st 2010.

Tour Schedule 9.00 am Assemble at car pool location in the Lincoln area (TBA prior to tour)

9.15 am Board motor coach

9.30 am Arrive at the Sierra Pacific Industries sawmill in Lincoln. Tour of sawmill and cogeneration facility (sawmill provides fuel for power plant and waste steam is used to dry lumber). http://www.spi-ind.com

11.30 am Board motor coach. Depart for Woodland. Comfort break at rest area en-route. Bag lunches and drinks available

1.00 pm Arrive at West Biofuels site near Woodland. This is a biomass gasification to liquid fuels project. http://www.westbiofuels.com/Main.html

2.00 pm Board motor coach. Depart for Winters area.

2.30 pm Arrive at Dixon Ridge Farms near Winters. Tour Community Power Corporation Biomax 50 biomass to energy unit. http://www.dixonridgefarms.com/farmingandprocessing/sustainability.html http://www.gocpc.com

3.30 pm Board motor coach and return to Lincoln


4.50 pm Arrive at Lincoln

5.00 pm Close

We will meet at a car pool location in the Lincoln area, then take a bus to the facilities. The bus will leave promptly at 9.15am. The tour will cover approximately 132 miles and will finish at 5pm.


Woody Biomass to Energy Field Tour, November 17, 2010

Attendee List First Last Organization: Alan Abbs Tehama County APCD

Larry Akin Central Sacramento Valley RC&D

Cliff Brown

James Bryant Coffee Party

Richard Burton

Jacquelyn Button California Fuel Cell Partnership

Bob Carrel City of Red Bluff

Jim Ciaffoni Engineering Administration Consultant

Richard Clapp

Charles Clark Oregon Renewable Energy Center

Jeff Evans National Park Service

Forrest Flynn City of Red Bluff

Gary Freeman Central Sacramento Valley RC&D

Bill Goodwin County of Tehama

Steven Handy Redding Electric Utility

Karen Hayden USDA Forest Service

David Heppe Environmental Capital Group

Brittany Juergenson Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Wally Kronland


Dick McCleery Central Sierra RC&D and NRCS

Martin Nichols City of Red Bluff

Kristina Miller Tehema County/Red Bluff Landfull Mmt Agency

Anshuman Roy UC Santa Barbara

Leland Ruth California Orchard Wood Co-Op

Steven Seidenglanz Hwy 70 Industrial Park, LP


Ted Silberstein Sierra Cascade Logging Conf.

Daniel Smith USDA Forest Service


Michael Theroux JDMT, Inc

Mel Thompson Sierra Farms


First Last Organization: Janet Cohen Sierra Nevada Conservancy

Tim Wilkinson Ingersoll Timber Ent LLC

Robert Williams UC Davis

Darrel Wilson Butte County Fire Safe Council

Daniel Worden

Total 37


Woody Biomass to Energy Field Tour, November 17, 2010

Workshop Evaluation Thirty seven people attended the field tour in the Lincoln area. A bus was charted to facilitate the tour. Feedback forms were distributed on the bus after the last site visit, 27 completed forms were collected (73% response rate).

The following facilities were visited.

Sierra Pacific Industries sawmill and power plant, Lincoln

West Biofuels, Woodland

Dixon Ridge Farms, near Winters.

In general, most of the attendees thought the field tour was excellent and of high to good value to them (see graphs below). Many commented on how well the event was organized and appreciated the complexities of the logistics involved. Attendees felt that the sites visited were interesting and varied, and the hosts were very particularly informative. Many commented that they had learned a lot of useful information.


A selection of feedback from respondents follows:

Comments on organization, logistics/food • Good selection and organization

• Well done! Obviously a lot of work which was well executed

• Excellent food. Went on a bit too long.

• Very well organized and the food was good

• This was a lot to put together and it was well done, especially in view of the complexities.

• Excellent organization & logistics - very impressive! Food was great. Thank you organizers, in particular Gareth and Rob.

• Great sandwich! Organization excellent. Gareth was a talented tour leader.

• Good perhaps too long even without running late

• Good lunch, schedule went fine

• Food was great. Organization went well. The only lacking part might have been some of the individual hosts acting as tour guides. Logistics, chartering a bus had to have been the easiest way - Thanks!

• Generally great. However, since many discussions with facility managers were in noisy areas or places where not everyone could hear, it would be useful afterwards or on the bus to reiterate details with whole group. (ie costs, size, legal issues, air standards etc. A quick but thorough site sum up). Well planned & great food.

• Excellent. Bus, food, timing, rest stops all done very well.

Comments on the sites visited • SPI very informative. Ear protection would have helped. Site 2 - A little too much Q & A's but

great visit. Site 3 - Best of all

“Great! Good diversity of technologies”


• Surprising details released in each case, hard data to get. Excellent mix of sites, from LG to SPI

• Would have been nice if the last two sites had been operational

• SPI - very good for first time visitors & good for my third time for refreshment. West Biofuels was good though not of prime interest to me. Dixon Ridge Farms was particularly interesting to me for the farm operation & Russ Lester's talk on problems of using multiple renewable energy sources using walnut for fuel and bio max 50 cost & efficiency.

• Good variety, good choices especially cutting edge Dixon Farms

• Good mix of sites. I enjoyed the presentation of the farmer at the Dixon Ridge Farm.

• SPI and Dixon Ridge Farms were the most interesting and informative.

• Sites provided s good variety of technologies. The hosts were informative and responded to all our questions. Had expected we would see great advances in bio-diesel. Value is for long term planning and thinking. Good foundation for following progress in technology/ industry.

• SPI was fantastic, real, operating plant at scale. West Biofuels was also very interesting, but it would have been much better if operating. Walnut farm was interesting, but not worth the time, especially since not operating.

• Nice variety of types of facilities and technologies. Hosts were very knowledgeable and patient with questions.

Other comments • More please! Well done!

• Long trip, but worthwhile

• Thanks! I learned a lot.

• Perhaps a few more pick up/drop off points would make more sense.

• Some of the owner/operators/proponents of the sites gave overly optimistic and simplistic descriptions of the benefits of their systems - some of it was too good to be true!

• More cutting edge tours.

• I am hoping there will be enough momentum to develop a biomass generation facility in Nevada City.

• Start at the site farthest away and work back.

• Interesting to find that there are barriers to integrating the technology into the grid. Workable models currently required use of the power on site. There needs to be an organization that can advocate for legislation changes.

• At West Biofuels, I was unable to understand why they decided to go forward with co-gen instead of liquid fuels. They were referring to economics of scale, I understand, but I would appreciate it if I could be told some more details.

• Need more information on the economics of the technologies.

• Thank you for the tour. Definitely worthwhile. Operating plants or demos are ideal.

• For the second two facilities which used the more complex technology, it would have been helpful to have a handout maybe with diagram or picture describing the process.

• I really learned a lot!


Workshop 8: Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, Ukiah, December 2, 2010 Location: Ukiah Valley Conference Center 200 S School St, Ukiah, CA 95482

Agenda This workshop will help bring the audience to a common level of understanding of selected woody biomass to energy conversion technologies.

10.30am Registration and Coffee

11.00am Welcome and introductions - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

11.15am Local framing - Judy Harwood, Mendocino County Woody Biomass WG

11.25am Biomass utilization basics - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

11.55am Energy conversion pathways - John Shelly, UC Berkeley

12.10pm Lunch (provided)

1.00pm Densified fuels (pellets, bricks, fire-logs) - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

1.30pm Electricity, combined heat and power (CHP) and gasification - John Shelly, UC Berkeley

2.10pm Comfort break

2.20pm Pyrolysis - Gareth Mayhead, UC Berkeley

2.50pm Liquid fuels - John Shelly, UC Berkeley

3.20pm Facilitated discussion

3.30pm Close

All of the presentations on technologies include 10 minutes for questions and discussion.

Presented by: University of California Berkeley, Center for Forestry

University of California Cooperative Extension Mendocino County California Association of Resource Conservation & Development Councils

Mendocino County Woody Biomass Working Group North Coast Resource Conservation and Development Council The North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

USDA Forest Service, Region 5


Ukiah Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, December 2, 2010

Attendee List First Last Organization: Naheed Ali Sonoma County Water Agency Chad Atwood USDA Forest Service Craig Blencowe Christopher Blencowe David Casey USDA-NRCS Jason Cushman USFS Tim Easterbrook David Estrada Alan Falleri City of Willits Jonah Freedman Phil Giles USDA - NRCS Greg Giusti UC Cooperative Extension Art Harwood Redwood Forest Foundation Judy Harwood Mendocino County Woody Biomass Working Group Bill Heil Interested Citizen John Holt Madelin Holtkamp Arcata Economic Development Corp. (AEDC) Robert Horvat CAL FIRE Charlie Kelly South Ukiah Rotary Club Donald Kemp Redwood Forest Foundation, Inc. Heidi Knott Gundling Redwood Forest Foundation Inc. Roger Krueger Mendocino Redwood Company Mary Anne Landis Ukiah City Council/MCWBWG Gareth Mayhead UC Berkeley Brian McCrory USFS Guiness McFadden WBWG Rick McGehee Jere Melo City of Fort Bragg Andrew Mishler USFS Clifford Paulin Linda Perkins Julie Price C & S Waste Solutions Ben Provan Ron Roleri John Shelly UC Berkeley Richard Shoemaker Tucker Sierzega USFS


First Last Organization: Mike Steele Gary Urdahl USFS Steve Vanderhorst Orion Walker Susanne Zechiel Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Steve Zuieback MendoFutures

Total 43


Ukiah Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop, December 2, 2010

Workshop Evaluation Thirty seven people attended the Woody Biomass to Energy Workshop held at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center in Ukiah on December 2, 2010. Feedback surveys were distributed at the event. Twenty six surveys were completed and returned. The results of the feedback are as follows.

Excellent27%

Good73%

Impression of Workshop

High Value23%

Good73%

Adequate4%

Value of Workshop

The feed back received about the workshop was very good. The overall impression of the workshop was good or excellent to all attendees and it was mainly of high or good value (see above graphs). The attendees commented on how knowledgable the speakers were and found the presentations to be very informative.


Comments on the speakers. “Clear, fast, confident.”

“Speakers did a good job presenting the material in the allotted time. They covered the variety of Biomass processes and I learned quite a bit.”

“Excellent - Tailored well to audience.”

“Good alternating speakers - good coverage.”

“Condensed - lots of material covered.”

“Very knowledgeable about subject matter.”

“Well informed, good delivery, up to date information, honest.”

“Both speakers were very informative and provided a great overall presentation of biomass and all it forms. Especially the pros &cons of each 'real world' application. There was some overlap but it was all relevant information.”

“Speakers knowledgeable on subjects. Important to know what does not work, as well as what does - good job explaining this point.”

“Very knowledgeable, well spoken. I thought it was a good basic course - just what I needed.”

“Timing was an issue. Appreciated the focus on pyrolysis and info on pellets/ bricks & densified wood products. Some good info for us to consider.”

“All very well spoken & attention keeping presenters.”

“Good speakers, kept me interested.”

Comments on the venue/organization. “Adequate space, good length for presentations.”

“I like this conference center for this size event. It was well organized and comfortable.”

“Nice venue.”

“Very good.”

“Good gathering and good mix of community.”

“Tired to cram too much information into too short a time.”

“Excellent.”

“Great venue. Great food. People I think stay more engaged with these variables addressed.”

“Very good venue, comfortable, good food.”

“Well done, friendly & accessible.”

“Good location.”

“Good venue. Great lunch!”

“A lot of info crammed into a short time. Could have used another hour or two for presentaions/dialogue.

Solid.”

“Very good - well presented.”

“Venue was good, food was great. Appreciated the opportunity to meet people during breaks.”


Suggestions for future workshops. “Focus more on the most economical processes for the presentation area.”

“Presenting information on what are the factors that make a biomass project attractive or not for investors, developers, etc. How can we overcome these obstacles regionally and/or nationally?”

“Community will is a very important topic - How to achieve this would be a good topic. Forest health is a big issue as related to biomass utilization.”

“Time for structured discussion of local opportunities/challenges/networking.”

“More focus on feasibility of technologies in local region. How to assess feasibility in particular projects/situations.”

“Add economic analysis as it becomes available.”

“More information on Gasification and Fermentation like butanol. What kind of other crops can be grown as fuel stock like beets or Jerusalem artichokes.”

“Something similar, but focus on a local scale.”

“Like to see more manufacturing and equipment.”

“Presentation of basic science of biomass to energy is required for these diverse audiences. Don’t under estimate this need, which is crucial for communities to continue the discussion.”

“A workshop from the perspective of producing energy from woody biomass, looking at down time power generation from all angles - feedstock source, policies, engineering, economics.”

“Less on specific technical elements - more on interaction of biomass of forest management and realities of actually siting a plant here (i.e. economics).”

“Request a short paragraph on why participants of the class are coming (pre workshop). Pull out a couple of them and do a very short feasibility explanation.”

“Integrating geographic information systems into the presentations.”

“One or two more breaks to stretch.”

“Cover fewer topics with more depth & time for questions.”

“I would like to have gone into economic models & how these various models pencil out.”

“More time spent on emissions data of different processes/comparisons.”

“If it applies, is there interest in Jatropha?”

General Comments on Woody Biomass Utilization. “This must happen - cost and production balance must change.”

“Very complicated subject & there aren't any set/standard across the board. The biggest issue, as always, is the economics of a biomass utilization project.”

“I believe that our region (Mendocino County - North Coast) has the biomass material to make a biomass project(s) possible. I believe this region can supply the feedstock necessary for appropriately sized project(s).”

“Seems like there are significant opportunities but lots of questions - plus a lot of environmental unknowns.”

“This was an introduction for me to the possibilities of using our forest resources - this is a discussion which will be very important for the future of Mendocino County. Thanks.”


“Costs of producing products from woody biomass seem high compared to fossil fuels but we don’t include external costs of fossil fuel production (including wars) so not comparable. Also need to emphasize use of woody biomass reduces dependence on foreign oil; national security issues; developing locally sustainable energy sources provide local security.”

“I am having trouble visualizing woody biomass becoming a viable energy source at any time. Even the producing process seems like a limited benefit other than to cover forest ecology/fire suppression benefits. To proceed with char would require more info on its benefits and possible commercial uses and financial breakdowns.”

“Educating, informing and getting as much of the public involved, (local, regional, state, nationwide) will be one of the best investments in seeing biomass become a reality. Are government subsidies necessary to see significant developments on small or large biomass installations?”

“Extremely important for this area.”

“I was more interested not as a producer of woody biomass producer, but as a potential consumer for an energy product.”

“I want to come up with a method to heat Manville fiberglass Co. in Willows. Willing to listen to any suggestions - [email protected]”

“The questions remain - how can we cut the costs of removing material from the forest and reducing the cost of production.”

“There is some potential but still has a ways to go to compete with more traditional forms of energy.”

“It is good to hear what is going on with the development of biomass. I think that as far as woody biomass goes it isn't economical.”

“Field seems undeveloped. Going to be challenging to sell to the public in the current state.”

“Promising for our area, but complex.”

“I want a silver bullet. I think that the people in this area could create something that hasn’t been developed productively before. Though I felt a dip in the potential because of their cautioning perspective, I still think we're on to something - may have to do more work on considering markets and gathering data on biochar use and on pellets.”

“All very interesting but I need to digest & do more research.”

“What measures are being taken to inform and educate communities? It seems it would be difficult to convince the public with the debates over climate change and global warming.”

Documents

INTERNAL REPORT Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop Series ... · 15.12.2010 · 11:00AM Lower Capital Investment Biomass and Smaller Log Processing Options - ... Williams, California