

Features
Index Page
Contractor Profile 1
Contractor Profile 2
Contractor Profile 3
Guest Column
Manitoba Mill Upgrade
Industry Training
Sawmill Innovations
Small Sawmilling
Spotlight
Supplier Newsline
Mill Drying
Bridges & Culverts
----------------
Departments
Calendar of Events
Reader Service
Classified Ads
tech_update
-----------------
Site Information
Contact List
Past Issues Archive
Join our Listserve
Search Our Site
---------------------
|
September 2006 - The
Logging and Sawmilling Journal
GUEST COLUMN
By Avrim Lazar
Deep re-engineering — rather than a
shallow approach — has been the key to the
Canadian forest industry’s success story in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions
In my previous column in Logging &
Sawmilling Journal, I talked about
the effects of climate change and
how it has—and will—impact the forest
industry. From here, it’s clear that Canada
needs to adapt policies to the reality of
climate change. We need to “go deep.”
Our history with environmental
problems somehow tends to drive us
toward a fairly shallow approach. For the
most part, we have come to understand
environmental pollution as a hygiene
thing, put a filter on top of the stack and
scrub out the dirt, and you are fine. We
have basically thought of pollution as that
bit of dirt that comes out of the process.
Because of that, we have tried to think of
how to fix climate change with small fixes
to our processes.
But the truth of the matter is that we
have integrated the use of fossil fuels
into the very structure of our society, our
lives, and our economy. All our industry
depends upon fossil fuels. So we have
to go beyond this kind of concept that
you have to clean up a little bit of the
dirt or find some new filter and we
have to understand that this requires
going deep—rethinking, re-engineering,
retooling in a way in which we are less
dependent upon fossil fuels.
Let’s take a look at the forest products
industry, what we have done and how
have we done it.
We have reduced our greenhouse
gas emissions since 1990 by 30 per cent.
We have also increased production by
28 per cent. As a result our greenhouse
gas efficiency has increased over 40 per
cent since 1990. We have done it only a
little bit by becoming more efficient. We
are getting more efficient every year, but
you don’t get to 40 per cent with minor
process changes.
We have done it through deep reengineering—
we have reduced, yearby-
year, our dependence on fossil fuels
and gone to biomass, biofuel. We have
reinstated ourselves in the carbon cycle.
Instead of sending sawdust, bark, black
liquor (which is part of the production of
pulp and the sludge that comes out of it)
to landfill, it all goes in the burners and
gets used for energy—reduced emissions
are the result. Additionally, we have
reduced air pollution.
We have reduced what we send
to landfills by 30 per cent. But most
importantly, we have re-thought where
we get energy from. Instead of using
fossil fuels, we are using the fuels that
have resulted from our manufacturing
processes. We are right inside the active
carbon cycle.
We have not done this just a little
bit—in fact, we produce enough
renewable energy today to replace almost
three nuclear reactors. We produce
enough energy from green sources,
completely renewable sources in our
mills, to power all the electricity needs of
the city of Vancouver, forever.
We are going to become energy selfsufficient
in our industry. We have that
as part of our medium-term plan. In fact,
we plan to be net exporters of electricity
so the remote communities don’t have
to take the inefficient route of those long
power lines. They can actually use the
local mill, burning local biomass, as an
energy source.
I am not going to say that we did
this because we are smarter and we are
righteous. We did it because it made
sense. But it certainly illustrates the point
that unless you go deep, unless you reengineer,
unless you get radical with your
approach, you cannot make the sort of
projects that have to be made with the
size of the problem we have. So we need
to “go deep.”
But the forest industry is just one part
of the equation. With climate change,
we have the most dramatic challenge to
our capacity to be a community, a global
community.
We have to adapt to climate change
as a global community, not just a local
community. There is the temptation to
say, “I really believe in fighting climate
change,” and then let your neighbour pay
the price and not do your share. In some
countries, it shows up as comments like,“You have to be kidding, I am not doing
this,” other righteous statements and little
action.
Perhaps central to all this is we
have not yet figured out how to live in
a globalized world. We have not really
solved the puzzle or dilemma of adapting
to the technology which has made us a
global village with some kind of global
community spirit. But if we could do it
for climate change, we might be able to
figure out how to do it for a number of
other things.
Maybe Canada, with our history,
our values, our international reputation,
and our history in global public affairs,
can actually make a made-in-Canada
contribution to the global community’s
capacity to behave itself.
Avrim Lazar is president and CEO of the
Forest Products Association of Canada.
|