“Industry News” Entries
August 10th, 2009
By Chaille Brindley
Date Posted: 7/1/2009
Amid the recent debate on fire standards for wood, plastic and composite pallets used in warehousing, a side issue arose that has further fanned the longstanding debate between wood and plastic pallet providers. A group of man-made flame retardants called polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs is drawing criticism from some consumer activists, scientists and regulators.
PBDEs can be found everywhere from consumer electronics and textiles to human breast milk to Arctic seals and local shorelines. Two forms were voluntarily phased out in 2005 due to toxicity concerns. A third formulation, deca bromine, was thought to be more stable and less toxic to people and the environment. Critics contend that deca bromide may not be as safe as first thought.
Some states are moving to ban the product for consumer goods. In 2007, Maine and Washington established bans on the chemical. Six other states, including California, are considering similar bans. Major consumer electronics manufacturers are switching to alternatives even though they may cost a little more.
CBS News reported in 2008 that the EPA's senior toxicologist Linda Birnbaum expressed concern about deca bromine. She said it causes serious health effects in young animals, which is a red flag for humans.
Supporters of fire retardants claim that the chemical saves lives by reducing fire hazards and that the toxicity risks are overstated. The real benefit of fire retardants may be more apparent for consumer items in homes than warehouse settings. In severe warehouse fires, the ignition source generally is great enough that a retardant has little effect. Remember that these chemicals just make it more difficult to catch fire with a low energy ignition source. Once ignited, a plastic pallet with a fire retardant will not burn significantly different than a plastic pallet without it.
FDA Points to Food Safety Concern
The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) recently warned about the dangers of using pallets treated with deca bromine in the hydrocooling process for fruits and vegetables. Hydrocooling is a process where produce is cooled right after harvest to retain freshness and improve shelf life.
The consumer safety officer for the FDA, Dr. Elizabeth Sanchez Furukawa, recently responded to an inquiry about the use of pallets containing deca bromide in a hydrcooling situation. Specifically, produce was vertically stacked on pallets and cooled using either ice or water so that water drips from the topmost unit to those underneath. Since there is a risk that deca bromide could leech from the pallet, FDA commented that this scenario is a food additive situation requiring pre-market approval by the government. Deca bromine has not been authorized as a food additive. Thus, any situation where it could leech into the food would require further study to identify the real risks.
The FDA didn't really address the safety of deca bromine in a pallet used to store packaged or bulk food products or many other common shipping situations. The agency was merely responding to a specific situation, although it is one that is quite common for fresh produce.
The FDA raised concerns about the potential carcinogenic effect of deca bromine based on previous research. The agency sought more information from the product manufacturer.
The EPA stated, "There is growing evidence that PBDEs persist in the environment and accumulate in living organisms, as well as toxicological testing that indicates these chemicals may cause liver toxicity, thyroid toxicity, and neurodevelopmental toxicity."
Chemical manufacturers transitioned a few years ago to deca bromine because it was supposed to be more stable than other PBDEs. However, some research suggests that algae may be able to break down deca bromine in the environment. The growing presence of these man-made chemicals in nature indicates that leakage is a problem.
iGPS, the all-plastic pallet rental company, uses deca bromine as a flame retardant to lower the fire hazard associated with its pallet. iGPS denies any serious threat pointing to the widespread use of deca bromine. Company officials could not be reached for comment.
But iGPS stated on its Web site, "While over 1,000 tests over the course of many years have confirmed the safety of deca-bromine, we nonetheless commissioned independent laboratories to confirm its safety and suitability for our pallets. These tests showed conclusively that there is no detectable transfer of deca-bromine to foods-or even to food packaging-when shipped on an iGPS pallet."
Alternatives to Deca Bromide
The two major alternatives to deca bromine are phosphorous (commonly found in fertilizers) and magnesium hydroxide (the main active ingredient for milk of magnesia). As natural occurring minerals, there is far less ecological concern with these products than deca bromine. However, too much of even these "safer chemicals" is not necessarily good for the environment.
Scientists and water quality experts have commonly pointed to excess nitrogen and phosphorous as a major cause behind water quality issues in places such as the Chesapeake Bay. Excessive amounts of phosphorous can degrade lakes through eutrophication. Eutrophied lakes frequently experience noxious algal blooms, increased aquatic plant growth, and oxygen depletion, leading to degradation of their ecological, economic, and aesthetic value by restricting use for fisheries, drinking water, industry, and recreation.
iGPS may have opted for deca bromine because less of it is needed to treat a pallet than the other major alternatives. This lowers the weight and price of the pallet. Additionally, the extra amount of additives needed for phosphorous or magnesium hydroxide can make the pallet brittle, which can affect the long-term performance of the pallet.
I talked with representatives of CHEP USA, the other major pallet rental company that has tested various forms of plastic pallets. They told me that CHEP has never used deca bromine for its pallets. Currently, CHEP is testing a phosphorous additive in its pilot plastic pallet program.
The EPA stated, "The mechanisms or pathways through which PBDEs get into the environment and humans are not known yet." There are a number of possible sources - the processing of chemicals, food contamination, direct exposure during human use, leeching into the ground and water supply.
Despite a multitude of studies, there remain many concerns about the long-term effect of PBDEs accumulating in the environment and humans. With so many questions left to be answered, is it any wonder that deca bromine is falling out of favor, just like other PBDEs?
By contrast, wood pallets do not require any chemicals to be fire safe. Wood pallets offer a natural alternative to plastic that doesn't involve the use of harmful chemicals. With the potential public relations, legal and environmental risks associated with PBDEs, why would a product manufacturer want to ship on pallets that use deca bromine if a heat-treated, high quality wood pallet can offer similar performance without the toxicity concerns? That is the question that wood pallet companies are asking in light of the recent debate between iGPS and the wood pallet industry.
Pallet Wars - Round II
A situation is developing where the wood pallet industry finds itself competing in a public relations battle with plastic pallet providers, especially iGPS. There has always been a reasonable amount of competition between wood and plastic pallet suppliers. But it appears the friction has ratcheted up several notches with the entrance of iGPS into the market a few years ago.
The first round dealt with fire safety. The second round appears to be the toxicity concern. I believe the third round could be pallet performance.
The National Wooden Pallet & Container Association (NWPCA) launched an aggressive educational campaign on the fire and toxicity issues. A war of words has taken place in the trade press and online publications between Bruce Scholnick, the president of the NWPCA, and Bob Moore, the CEO of iGPS.
Moore fired the latest salvo when he publicly challenged the wood pallet industry to an independent analysis of wood vs. plastic pallets. He said, "In their effort to defend antiquated, dangerous and flammable wood pallets, they scurrilously have attacked the fire-retardant in our pallets, Deca-bromine - one of the most effective, widely used and extensively tested fire retardants available."
Moore directly challenged CHEP to an independent comparison examining every aspect of the pallets, including fire safety, food safety, worker safety, environmental impact and operational performance. Moore called wood pallets "dangerous and flammable."
It is not clear if this war of words will have any true winners. The thought of an "independent" analysis is interesting. The only problem is that declaring a real winner between wood and plastic will be almost impossible because the two materials are so vastly different. Both wood and plastic have positives and negatives. The conclusions all depend on the assumptions made and what attributes are valued th
Filed under Industry News
February 16th, 2009
Date Posted: 9/1/2008
Canadian and U.S. governments are moving forward with consultations on the proposed removal of the exemption of the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM-15) on wood packaging material moving between the two countries.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) are considering enforcing a standard for wood packaging to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species, such as the emerald ash borer.
On July 24, the Canadian government started a 90-day comment period for interested parties to share their concerns about a cross-border ISPM-15 requirement. Anyone can share their thoughts by visiting: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/for/cwpc/consulte.shtml
To allow sufficient time to adjust, the CFIA and APHIS are developing a strategy that involves a gradual multi-year phase-in period. Complete implementation of the ISPM No. 15 is expected by 2011.
Before the import requirement is enforced, the CFIA will address concerns raised during consultations with affected stakeholders. Industry, exporters, importers, brokers, wood packaging manufacturers and interest groups are encouraged to provide comments.
Wood packaging moving between Canada and the continental United States has been exempted from the international standard due to the similarity and contiguous natures of the forests in both countries. But a growing number of invasive species being introduced into the two countries has prompted the need to increase intercontinental prevention measures.
Requiring ISPM-15 treatment of all wood packaging material within the United States remains a viable option for the future. Federal authorities have yet to institute such a measure and instead have opted to push for the end of the U.S./Canada exemption. Domestic issues remain a concern as the emerald ash borer (EAB) continues to be discovered in new areas.
Government authorities have yet to offer any real timetable for a domestic ISPM-15 requirement.
Bruce Scholnick, president of the National Wooden Pallet & Container Association (NWPCA), said that nothing is likely to happen now until after the upcoming presidential election. Of course, there is a chance that a new administration may not take up the issue. But Bruce said he believes there is enough support within the appropriate agencies by the bureaucrats that it could survive no matter who gets elected.
Melissa O'Dell, media spokesperson for the U.S. Animal Plant Health & Inspection Service (APHIS), said, "A domestic requirement remains a priority for us, and we understand the importance of it."
Melissa refused to provide a specific time frame for a domestic treatment requirement. But she said that the existence of domestic quarantines in some areas pointed to the need for further action within our borders.
Some people within local governments and the wood industry oppose efforts to institute domestic treatment requirements for solid wood packaging. There are a number of concerns including the cost, the effectiveness of any mandated standard and the ability to inspect thousands of locations. APHIS does not have enough inspectors to handle the burden caused by a domestic treatment requirement. Inspections would likely fall to local authorities or even independent organizations. This could lead authorities to utilize third party services as is currently done for the export certification program. Bruce said another option would be for state transportation departments to look for inspection marks when trucks are stopped at weigh scales.
The NWPCA continues to lead the effort for domestic requirements. Bruce pointed to the success of the international treatment program to show that it can work.
Bruce said, "If given a defined set of rules, the pallet industry will comply." He is concerned about attempts by state and local agencies to interpret proposed standards in different ways.
Another major concern for the NWPCA is the negative exposure that wooden pallets has received because of the spread of pests, such as the emerald ash borer (EAB), when firewood may be the primary culprit.
This summer government officials have discovered EAB infestations in Missouri, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Also, Canadian officials recently found the EAB in Quebec. The EAB sighting in Missouri is the farthest south and west of any other known EAB infestation. The pest was also discovered earlier in the summer in Fairfax County, Va. by a state forestry official.
Ash trees make up approximately 3% of forests and 14% of urban trees in Missouri. Since no ash trees in North America are known to be resistant to the pest, infestations are devastating to these tree species.
The EAB was discovered in Missouri in a trap set as part of a nationwide early detection program. EAB traps are purple, prism-shaped devices with sticky outer surfaces. The borers are attracted by the color and by chemical scents that mimic a stressed ash tree. To date, the EAB has not shown up on any other traps throughout the state. But that doesn't mean the pest has been contained. It is usually very difficult to detect. Ash trees typically do not show any obvious signs of infestation until one year or longer after the insect has attacked the tree and moved on.
"The discovery of this highly destructive pest at a campground is a strong indication that it probably arrived in firewood," said Missouri Conservation Department Forest Entomologist Rob Lawrence.
Virginia officials believe the reported infestations appear to have begun years ago, indicating that these wood-boring insects, which have a one-year life cycle, may have spread to many other areas of the region. An active search for signs of EAB infestation is under way in adjacent counties.
The Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) recently issued a quarantine on movement of any ash product such as trees or lumber and all hardwood firewood for numerous localities in Northern Virginia. The scope of the quarantine will be expanded if the beetle is discovered in other places. The VDACS quarantine mirrors a federal quarantine implemented by the United States Department of Agriculture to prevent the spread of this pest from Virginia to other non-infested states.
According to the VDACS, this is the second finding of EAB in Virginia. The first, which occurred in Fairfax County in 2003, was successfully eradicated.
The most recent EAB discovery in the country took place in the Osaukee County area of Wisconsin. The EAB was positively identified in the southeast region of the state, which is not a surprise since the beetle has ravaged nearby Michigan.
"We expected to find EAB in Wisconsin sooner or later, but this is still disappointing," said Wisconsin Agriculture Secretary Rod Nilsestuen. "Our focus now is to find out exactly what we're up against."
Officials announcing the find emphasized that the first steps in responding to the infestation will be to quarantine movement of hardwood firewood, ash nursery stock, timber or any other article that could spread EAB out of the infested area.
Do you want reprints or a copyright license for this article? Click here
Research and connect with suppliers mentioned in this article using our FREE ZIP Online service.
Filed under Industry News
February 1st, 2009
By: Elizabeth Grey Morrison
Date Posted: 11/1/2008
your company has not been asked whether or not your products are
"green," it may be coming. Increasingly, packaging users want suppliers
to reflect an eco-consciousness even though they may not want to pay
extra for it. Smart companies are developing answers before customers
problem is that it can be hard to separate truth from spin when it
comes to environmental claims about pallets. Both wood and plastic
advocates tout green advantages. One thing is for certain - there are
no easy answers because transport scenarios vary widely depending on
the desires to effectively run a business and be environmentally
friendly are not mutually exclusive, as many practices actually help to
simultaneously achieve both ends. This article will
examine the basic advantages and disadvantages of both wood and plastic
pallets. The goal is to provide a framework for comparison between the
two materials considering efficiency, the environmental impact of the
materials used, the amount of energy consumed, the waste generated, the
products' durability and their various costs.
looking at these dynamics, Dr. Peter Mooney, founder and president of
Plastics Custom Research Services, said it is important to note that
comparing wood and plastic pallets is, in a sense, like comparing
apples and oranges given the many different types of plastic pallets.
very hard to argue what are the differences between plastic and wood
pallets because there are so many types of pallets," Mooney said.
terms of available data, discrepancies also exist between wood and
plastic pallets. While a good deal is known about wood pallets in terms
of environmental impact, Derek Hannum, director of marketing for CHEP USA, said that there is less information available about plastic pallets.
variations, however, Mooney said there are still general advantages and
disadvantages of the two types, but the single most important factor is
whether or not the pallets can be reused.
Like Mooney, John Clarke, director of technical sales for
Nelson Company which markets both wood and plastic pallets, said the
way to use the least energy and be the most environmentally friendly is
to reuse the same pallet, wood or plastic, in its original form.
think you have to evaluate the application rather than just whether
[the product] is good or bad," Clarke said. This requires a thorough
analysis of the process used to obtain the raw material, the
manufacturing process, the effects of using the pallet, and the
environmental implications at the end of the product life cycle. These
factors can vary depending on the amount of virgin material utilized,
the number of trips for each pallet, the fuel used to ship or retrieve
the pallet, etc.
packaging may not always be ideal for every supply chain situation.
One-way packaging exists for a reason. Shingle pallets are a perfect
example of an application where pallets are made for one-time use. In
many cases, those pallets are sent to new housing developments. This is
not a typical closed loop situation. Unlike retail, where there are
repeat patterns and processes, this is a one-time shot. A pooled pallet
would make no sense. Who would send a truck to get one or two pallets?
Is it more environmentally friendly to retrieve every pallet? What
about the gas involved to do so? Or is better to only retrieve the
pallets that are in closed loops and are easy to get?
factor to be considered is which product's materials are the least
harmful to the environment. To that end, Mooney said the classic answer
is that wood is replaceable since lumber, a renewable resource, is used
in the construction of wood pallets. Petroleum, on the other hand, is a
non-renewable resource that is used to create plastic pallets.
"The thing that people forget about wood is it's 100% recyclable," Hannum said. "It's also biodegradable. Plastic isn't."
pallets may be one of the most recycled products on the planet. Many
recyclers buy little virgin material. They get the most they can out of
each board and then turn every non-usable board into some type of
pallet advocates point to the advances in recycling plastics and use of
recycled resins to reduce the amount of virgin material used in some
designs. iGPS, the leading plastic pool operator in the United States, claims it recycles all of its damaged pallets to produce new ones.
Gary Garkowski, vice president of marketing for iGPS, said that nearly 40% of all hardwood harvested in the United States
is used for limited-use pallets. He also suggested that deforestation
is a significant contributor to carbon dioxide gas emissions. iGPS has
recently launched a tree planting program with the National Forest
Foundation. These trees will help absorb carbon and will revitalize the
landscape providing for critical wildlife habitat.
forest products industry maintains that timber harvests are a necessary
part of preserving forest health and contributing to carbon
sequestration and wildlife habitat diversity. While it is true that 40%
of all hardwood is used for pallets, classifying these pallets as
"limited-use" is somewhat misleading. Many wooden pallets are designed
for multiple trips and are rebuilt as necessary to provide for a
maximum use of resources. It seems for every argument that one side
brings up, the other counters with a strong rebuttal.
Judd Michael, associate professor of sustainable wood-based enterprises at Penn State University,
said that only a small percentage of trees get cut down solely for the
purpose of making pallets. He contends that wood pallets are an
effective way to ensure complete utilization of harvest material that
would otherwise go to waste. Although it is true that most trees are
not cut down to make pallet lumber, increasingly the use of scragg
mills to process low grade material has increased the amount of trees
that are harvested for this purpose. Again though, this is not old
growth trees that have become the major concern for environmentalists.
Michael said, "The sustainability of wood versus plastic comes out in
favor of wood if you take some basic assumptions into account about
carbon sequestration rates and the negative impact of using a
type and source of material can make a big difference when calculating
the environmental impacts. For example, tropical wood shipped over long
distances may require greater energy to use than wood procured locally.
Recycled material reduces the ecological impact as long as the energy
used to process does not cancel out the benefit of reducing virgin
judging the energy footprint of a plastic pallet, most calculate the
amount of petroleum that goes into shaping the material itself. What is not as often considered, Mooney said, is the amount of energy it requires to actually power the process. At
each level of production-from extracting oil and natural gas to
converting the raw materials into plastic to shaping it into
pallets-energy is consumed.
"Wood would be arguably less energy intensive in terms of turning that material into a pallet," Mooney said.
though the production of wood pallets requires less fuel, it is
important to keep in mind that the process typically still requires
energy consumption. And, as Nelson Company's Director of Marketing and
Sales Mike Cunneen pointed out, recycling both wood and plastic pallets
requires energy. While wood does decompose on its own, such pallets are
still bulky and cannot just be dumped into recycling bins. Rather, wood pallets must often still go through fuel-powered grinders in order to be recycled.
of Penn State said that his research could not conclusively determine
whether wood or plastic ultimately require more energy to produce and
pallets also save energy in one important way: gas. With fuel prices
shooting through the roof, plastic pallets are generally lighter than
wood ensuring more bang for the buck when transporting goods. Nestable
designs can also reduce transportation costs. Many plastic or composite
grocery pallets are made with a nestable design. CHEP pallets tend to
be some of the heaviest pallets on the market; they also have a taller
design than most white wood pallets, which means you can get fewer on
an empty trailer.
"The plastic pallet is about a third less in weight, which lowers the amount of fuel consumed to transport," said Gary Garkowski, vice president of marketing for iGPS.
Waste is another factor to be considered. Don Remmey, a Pennsylvania pallet manufacturer, said wood has an advantage over plastic in that little waste is generated in its production. Nearly
all of the lumber is used, with the highest grade being reserved for
furniture, the second highest reserved for flooring and fencing, and
the third and lowest grade reserved for the creation of pallets.
in production, Remmey said manufacturers use the wood waste for other
materials. Bark, for example, is used in mulch, while the side slabs of
wood are chipped and sent to paper mills. Wood waste from pallet
manufacturers is also put to use, going through grinders to become
mulch or animal
"It's totally recyclable," Remmey said. "We like to think that we are responsible from cradle to grave."
terms of durability, both Mooney and Cunneen said that plastic has an
edge over wood since it is not as prone to splintering or
decomposition. As an added plus, Mooney said the majority of commercial
resins today are thermo plastic materials, which can be heated and
cooled in various sequences without losing its strength. This can be a real eco-advantage for plastic in terms of longevity.
"I think the key would be you can get more turns out of a plastic pallet," Cunneen said. "Its value is going to be retained."
but certainly not least, cost is another factor that weighs heavily on
the minds of manufacturers and consumers. Remmey said a wood pallet
generally costs about $8, while a plastic pallet costs approximately
costs can be all over the board. Some plastic pallets can be in the
ballpark of wood although those are generally lower-strength tolerance
designs for limited use. "Overall, there is no question that a new
wooden pallet will, 95% of the time, cost you less than a plastic
pallet," Mooney said.
since plastic pallets are not as prone to splintering as wood pallets,
Garkowski said the product eliminates the need for special repair
trips, which can also save money on fuel and repairs.
why our pallet can exist [at a higher price]; we've eliminated all
those extra miles, and we've put those savings into the value of the
platform itself," said Garkowski.
marketing director for PalletOne, said that cost is such a significant
factor in choosing pallets that it usually outweighs environmental
"While the intention of sustainable practices is to reduce environmental impact, it must also be economically viable," Daniels said. "Our customers have communicated that they're not ready to pay more for a pallet solely to reduce environmental impact. Of course, if it saves them money, then that's another story."
As a result, Daniels
said the focus at PalletOne has been on making production facilities
more efficient, using less energy and fewer raw materials in the
pallets themselves. This has two benefits: less wood in a pallet is
good for the environment and reduces cost.
"The more raw material you put into a pallet, the higher the price is going to be," Daniels
said. "At the end of the day, we're still trying to sell a product with
as little raw material as possible to do the job well."
biggest problem with the "who's greener debate" is that everyone claims
to be the champ. There are very few standards that can be used to
effectively level the playing field and consider all the variables
needed to make an accurate, fair assessment.
of Penn State said, "The trick is how many trips does a pallet take in
its life time and how many pallets go to landfills." He claimed that
many of the estimates out there overstate the number of white wood
pallets going to landfills and underestimates the number of trips that
most white wood pallets make. Obviously, if you claim the average wood
pallet makes only 1-2 trips while a pooled rental pallet makes 20 or
more, the math will work out in favor of a rental pallet. These
calculations may not take into account the fuel used to recover stray
rental pallets or other key variables. How do you know how your company
is doing? It requires a thorough assessment of your entire supply
chain. Most wood pallet companies cannot afford this testing. However,
you can put together basic information about the environmental benefits
of your products. Michael of Penn State said that a group of
enterprising wood pallet companies could work together to develop a
white wood life cycle analysis. Maybe this is something that a trade
association or other group could further develop.
that CHEP has recently launched a Web site, which enables companies to
check their environmental footprint based on three areas: solid waste,
energy consumption and green house gas emissions.
can essentially do your own input and check your results based on the
number of pallet loads shipped annually," Hannum said.
Hannum said the Web site, www.Chep.com/onepallet, is a result of a lifecycle inventory analysis provided by Franklin Associates.
has also developed a green calculator, which not surprisingly touts the
benefits of plastic over wood pallets. The question to ask with any of
these cost calculators is, "What are the assumptions?" The number of
trips for a pallet in its lifetime and the number of turns in a year
can be manipulated to drastically change the outcome.
discussion about sustainability is only starting to heat up. Retailers,
led by Wal-Mart, are starting to rate suppliers based on their
environmental performance. Michael said that the Wal-Mart green
scorecard has not directly addressed pallets yet, but he said that
earlier this year the retail giant indicated that pallets are on the
while both wood and plastic pallets have individual, unique properties,
the most important aspect of "going green" is "getting clean"-reducing
the amount of pallets and waste materials that hit the landfills. If
manufacturers can find ways to continually reuse products and reduce
the amount of waste as a result of production, then, wood or plastic,
the product is ultimately eco-friendly.
either one, the wooden pallet or the plastic pallet, it's
environmentally friendly if it goes through many cycles and if it's
going to be reused over and over again," Mooney said. "The number one factor is efficiency."
Copyright 2009 Industrial Reporting
Filed under Industry News
February 1st, 2009
The most important thing is to reduce fossil fuel consumption.
When fossil fuels - including coal, oil and natural gas - are burned for energy, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are released into the environment. These emissions are thought to be the leading cause of human-induced climate change.
However, industrial society relies to an enormous degree on fossil fuels, and reducing their consumption is a major challenge.
As individuals, we can contribute by reducing our energy consumption and, where possible, using renewable energy and materials.
In some parts of the country, consumers can choose to buy 'green' energy produced by wind, hydro and biomass (usually wood waste).
One of the most environmentally friendly technologies is the ground source heat pump, which uses renewable earth energy from beneath the home to provide hot water, heat and air conditioning. Heat pumps can be specified for new homes and many existing homes can be retrofit.
In terms of materials, all resource use has an environmental impact - but some have a much greater impact than others.
Wood is a renewable material produced with natural solar energy, compared with steel, cement and plastics, which are non-renewable and require the consumption of fossil fuels to produce. Where it makes sense, like in construction, substituting or continuing to use wood in place of these other materials can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Lessening our dependence on fossil fuels will be a gradual process. In the meantime, forests also have a major role to play in reducing greenhouse gases - and societies should be doing what they can to maximize these benefits.
Put simply, trees grow by taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and converting it into sugars, which are then used to build the wood. When a tree decays or burns, the carbon contained in the wood is released back into the environment and the cycle is complete.
Although trees continue to store carbon dioxide for as long as they're growing, scientists agree that it isn't possible to completely offset human fossil fuel consumption by planting more trees.
On the other hand, deforestation is responsible for about 20% of global carbon dioxide emissions. This is occurring primarily in the tropics where forests are permanently cleared for agriculture or urban settlement. By reforesting some of the areas cleared for farming, we could add a significant amount of new carbon storage - enough to have a positive impact on climate change.
To become part of the climate change solution, I believe that a sensible environmentalist would reduce energy consumption, use renewable energy and materials, and support policies and practices that lead to forest abundance.
(Questions may be sent to Dr. Moore at the following e-mail address: Patrick@SensibleEnvironmentalist.com.)
Copyright 2009 Industrial Reporting
Filed under Industry News