Sunday, August 18, 2019

Two parts to the story


Now the second part.

Environmentalists push back against PG&E tree cutting in Santa Cruz Mountains

PG&E tree trimming draws mixed review from neighbors in Sonoma County

Cutting Trees, PG&E Strikes Nerve on Ocean Street Extension

Judge proposes tighter tree-trimming oversight for PG&E

And these:

These consolidated appeals involve claims by plaintiff landowners that Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PGE) engaged in excessive trimming of commercially productive walnut trees located under the utility's power lines. The first appeal is taken by plaintiffs William R. Sarale and Julie Ann Sarale from a judgment of dismissal entered by the San Joaquin Superior Court. The second appeal is taken by plaintiff Richard G. Wilbur, as a trustee, from a judgment of dismissal entered by the Yuba County Superior Court.
PGE won, at the expense of three trials.
Forfbeds blames California environmentalists:

California's Devastating Fires Are Man-Caused -- But Not In The Way They Tell Us

The theory that regulations put enough a burden on forest products that our logging industry went away. This problem ties in with long term carbon management.  A stack of lumber is sequestered carbon, not sequestered for a long time, but it's not unsequestered carbon, like fossil fuels. If you know it will burn, then cut it down and burn it for energy, rather than blow up up, and get sued for being ungreen. Paint it, make cabins, mix it with carbon laminate and get floor tiles, improve fermentation, get alcohol. Otherwise Colorado will sue us, out here in California, the next time we go CO2 polluting.

Relative greenness hear means we might want to subsidize the forest product industry, get the forest service involved and moving wood products out, for a while. The alternative is a sudden burst of Californi CO2 adding two percent to the nations emissions. Make the carbon at least go through adiabatic degredation, we can use it to offset other carbon emitters.

No comments: