Integrating biomass and carbon values with soil productivity loss in determining forest residue removals

• Ericsson K, Nilsson L. Assessment of the potential biomass supply in Europe using a resource-focused approach. Biomass & Bioenergy30,1–15 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gan J, Smith CT. Availability of logging residues and their potential for electricity production and carbon displacement in the US. Biomass & Bioenergy30,1011–1020 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabuurs G, Masera O, Andrasko K et al. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (Eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and NY, USA, 541–584 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Asikainen A, Björheden R, Nousiainen I. Cost of wood energy. In: Bioenergy from Sustainable Forestry: Guiding Principles and Practice. Richardson J, Björheden R, Hakkila P, Lowe AT, Smith CT (Eds.). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 125–157 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Gan J, Smith CT. A comparative analysis of woody biomass and coal for electricity generation under various CO2 emissions reductions and taxes. Biomass & Bioenergy30,296–303 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenbies M, Vance E, Aust W, Seiler J. Intensive utilization of harvest residues in southern pine plantations: quantities available and implications for nutrient budgets and sustainable site productivity. Bioenergy Res.2,90–98 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lattimore B, Smith CT, Titus BD, Stupak I, Egnell G. Environmental factors in woodfuel production: opportunities, risks, and criteria and indicators for sustainable practices. Biomass and Bioenergy32(10),1321–1342 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Scott DA, Dean TJ. Energy trade-offs between intensive biomass utilization, site productivity loss, and ameliorative treatments in loblolly pine plantations. Biomass & Bioenergy30,1001–1010 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powers RF, Scott DA, Sanchez FG et al. The North American long-term soil productivity experiment: findings from the first decade of research. For. Ecol. Manage.220,31–50 (2005).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smethurst PJ, Nambiar EKS. Effects of slash and litter management on fluxes of nitrogen and tree growth in a young Pinus radiata plantation. Can. J. For. Res.20,1498–1507 (1990).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayfield C, Foster CD, Smith CT, Gan J, Fox S. Opportunities, barriers, and strategies for forest bioenergy and bio-based product development in the Southern United States. Biomass & Bioenergy31,631–637 (2007).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhart H, Amateis R, Westfall J, Daniels R. PTAEDA4.0: simulation of individual tree growth, stand development and economic evaluation in loblolly pine plantations. Department of Forestry, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Binkley D. Ten-year decomposition in a loblolly pine forest. Can. J. For. Res.32,2231–2235 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Carter M, Dean T, Zhou M, Messina M, Wang Z. Short-term changes in soil C, N, and biota following harvesting and regeneration of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). For. Ecol. Manage.164,67–88 (2002).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanchez F, Carter E, Leggett Z. Loblolly pine growth and soil nutrient stocks eight years after slash incorporation. For. Ecol. Manage.257,1413–1419 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vitousek P, Andariese S, Matson P, Morris L, Sanford R. Effects of harvest intensity, site preparation, and herbicide use on soil nitrogen transformations in a young loblolly pine plantation. For. Ecol. Manage.49,277–292 (1992).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avery T, Burkhart H. Forest Measurements (4th Editon). McGraw-Hill, NY, USA (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Pehl C, Tuttle C, Houser J, Moehring D. Total biomass and nutrients of 25-year-old loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). For. Ecol. Manage.9,156–160 (1984).
   Google Scholar
• Barber B, van Lear D. Weight loss and nutrient dynamics in decomposing woody loblolly pine logging slash. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.48,906–910 (1984).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preston CM, Mead DJ. Growth response and recovery of 15N-fertilizer one and eight growing seasons after application to lodgepole pine in British Columbia. For. Ecol. Manage.65,219–229 (1994).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preston CM, Mead DJ. Long-term recovery in the soil profile of 15N from Douglas-fir needles decomposing in the forest floor. Can. J. For. Res.25,833–837 (1995).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang M, Wu Y, Elgowainy A. Operating Manual for GREET: Version 1.7. Center for Transportation Research, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, IL (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Gan J, Smith CT. Coupling greenhouse gas credits with biofuel production cost in determining conversion plant size.Silva Fennica (2010) (In press).
   Google Scholar
• Perez-Verdin G, Grebner D, Sun C, Munn I, Schultz E, Matney T. Woody biomass availability for bioethanol conversion in Mississippi. Biomass & Bioenergy33(3),492–503 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tilman D, Socolow R, Foley J et al. Beneficial biofuels: the food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science325,270–271 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenbies MH, Burger JA, Aust WM, Patterson SC. Soil physical disturbance and logging residue effects on changes in soil productivity in five-year-old pine plantations. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.69,1833–1843 (2005).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar

▪ Website

• Timber Mart-South. South-wide average prices www.tmart-south.com/tmart/index.html (2009).
   Google Scholar