DOCSLIB.ORG

Potential for Biofuel Production from Forest Woody Biomass

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Potential for Biofuel Production from Forest Woody Biomass Draft Report: Potential for Biofuel Production from Forest Woody Biomass Authors: Katherine A. Mitchell, California Biomass Collaborative, UC Davis, Nathan C. Parker, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis, Benktesh Sharma, Center for Forestry, UC Berkeley, Stephen Kaffka, Director, California Biomass Collaborative, UC Davis January 2015 Table of Contents Forest Biomass ....................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Potential for Biofuel Production from Forest Woody Biomass ........................................................... 1 Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................... 1 List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... 4 List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................... 5 List of Appendices ................................................................................................................................. 5 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 6 Motivation ............................................................................................................................................... 9 Potential of Forest Residue for Biofuel Production ....................................................................... 9 Forest residue: what is forest residue and the need for a California resource assessment 10 Forest residue: wildfire risk reduction policy effects on forest residue resource assessment ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Benefits of Using Forest Residue for Biofuels .............................................................................. 12 Wildfire in California ................................................................................................................... 12 Management for healthy forests reduces wildfire occurrence and severity. ....................... 13 Objectives .............................................................................................................................................. 16 Approach ............................................................................................................................................... 16 A Combined‐Models Forest Feedstock and Biorefinery Siting Approach .............................. 16 Description of the BioSum model .............................................................................................. 17 1 Description of GBSM ................................................................................................................... 17 Forest Products Industry Residue Market and Biofuels ............................................................. 18 Mill residues ................................................................................................................................. 18 Future availability of mill residues for biofuel production .................................................... 19 Activities and Methods ....................................................................................................................... 20 BioSum Methods .............................................................................................................................. 20 Study area, FIA plots and exclusions ........................................................................................ 20 BioSum model process flow ....................................................................................................... 21 Forest management Prescriptions Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 ................................................ 23 GBSM Methods................................................................................................................................. 26 GBSM process flow ...................................................................................................................... 27 Characterization of conversion technologies ........................................................................... 28 Results .................................................................................................................................................... 29 BioSUM Results Scenario 1: Availability of Forest Residue ....................................................... 29 GBSM Results Scenario 1: Supply, Fuel Pricing, Optimal Biorefinery Locations ................... 30 Spatial distribution of residue supply ....................................................................................... 30 Economic biofuel potential from forest residues ..................................................................... 32 Spatial results of biorefinery siting and pricing ...................................................................... 34 Value added by biofuels for forest management .................................................................... 35 Scenario 2 Results: Wildfire Risk Reduction ................................................................................ 38 Regional Differences in Biomass Amounts .............................................................................. 39 Regional and Land Owner Differences in Supply‐Cost Curves ............................................ 39 Economic biofuel potential from forest residues ..................................................................... 41 Spatial results of biorefinery siting and pricing ...................................................................... 41 Advancement in Science and Measurement of Success ................................................................. 42 Insights, Observations and Conclusions ........................................................................................... 42 Environmental Impacts, Sustainability and Biofuels .................................................................. 42 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................ 43 Forest Carbon Storage and California Policy ............................................................................... 44 Carbon storage in California forests .......................................................................................... 44 Forest carbon policy in California.............................................................................................. 46 Where Will Future Forest Residues Come From? ....................................................................... 47 2 Private land vs public land ......................................................................................................... 47 CALFIRE woody biomass resource assessment ...................................................................... 48 Can biofuels help pay for forest restoration? ............................................................................... 49 Growing crisis of wildfire costs for California forests ............................................................ 49 Monetizing societal benefits helps pay for forest restoration ................................................ 50 Forest‐based Biofuels and Rural Economic Development ......................................................... 51 Overview of Key Findings .............................................................................................................. 52 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 56 APPENDIX A: California Policy to De‐Carbonize Transportation Fuels .................................... 64 APPENDIX B. BioSum Forest Management Prescriptions Scenario 2 (Packages). ................... 67 APPENDIX C. BioSum ResultsTables for Scenario 1 ...................................................................... 70 APPENDIX D. Community‐scale Forest Bioenergy Projects under Development .................... 71 3 List of Figures Figure 1. Forest Residue (Woody Biomass). ....................................................................................... 11 Figure 2. Overly Dense vs Healthy Thinned Conifer Forest Stand. ................................................. 14 Figure 3. Catastrophic Wildfires Burn Hotter than the Historic Fire Regime................................... 15 Figure 4. FIA Plot Locations. .................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 5. BioSum Model Process Flow Diagram ................................................................................ 23 Figure 6. GBSM Process Flow Diagram. .............................................................................................. 26 Figure 7. GBSM Road Network. ........................................................................................................... 28 Figure 8. Maps of Forest Residue Amounts and Distribution. ........................................................... 31 Figure 9. Variation in Forest Residue Cost and Supply ....................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role of Reforestation in Carbon Sequestration
    New Forests (2019) 50:115–137 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-018-9655-3 The role of reforestation in carbon sequestration L. E. Nave1,2 · B. F. Walters3 · K. L. Hofmeister4 · C. H. Perry3 · U. Mishra5 · G. M. Domke3 · C. W. Swanston6 Received: 12 October 2017 / Accepted: 24 June 2018 / Published online: 9 July 2018 © Springer Nature B.V. 2018 Abstract In the United States (U.S.), the maintenance of forest cover is a legal mandate for federally managed forest lands. More broadly, reforestation following harvesting, recent or historic disturbances can enhance numerous carbon (C)-based ecosystem services and functions. These include production of woody biomass for forest products, and mitigation of atmos- pheric ­CO2 pollution and climate change by sequestering C into ecosystem pools where it can be stored for long timescales. Nonetheless, a range of assessments and analyses indicate that reforestation in the U.S. lags behind its potential, with the continuation of ecosystem services and functions at risk if reforestation is not increased. In this context, there is need for multiple independent analyses that quantify the role of reforestation in C sequestration, from ecosystems up to regional and national levels. Here, we describe the methods and report the fndings of a large-scale data synthesis aimed at four objectives: (1) estimate C storage in major ecosystem pools in forest and other land cover types; (2) quan- tify sources of variation in ecosystem C pools; (3) compare the impacts of reforestation and aforestation on C pools; (4) assess whether these results hold or diverge across ecore- gions.
    [Show full text]
  • Barriers, Opportunities, and Research Needs Draft Report
    Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program FINAL PROJECT REPORT TASK 5. Biomass Energy in California’s Future: Barriers, Opportunities, and Research Needs_ Draft Report Prepared for: California Energy Commission Prepared by: UC Davis California Geothermal Energy Collaborative DECEMBER 2013 CEC‐500‐01‐016 Prepared by: Primary Author(s): Stephen Kaffka, University of California, Davis Robert Williams, University of California, Davis Douglas Wickizer, University of California, Davis UC Davis California Geothermal Energy Collaborative 1715 Tilia St. Davis, CA 95616 www.cgec.ucdavis.edu Contract Number: 500‐01‐016 Prepared for: California Energy Commission Michael Sokol Contract Manager Reynaldo Gonzalez Office Manager Energy Generation Research Office Laurie ten Hope Deputy Director Energy Research & Development Division Robert P. Oglesby Executive Director DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The California Goethermal Energy Collaborative would like to thank the California Energy Commission and its Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER) for sponsoring this important work as well as the Geothermal Energy Association for assisting in tracking down the most up to date data both within the United States and abroad.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Estimating Profitability of Two Biochar Production Scenarios
    Estimating Profitability of Two Biochar Production Scenarios: Slow Pyrolysis vs. Fast Pyrolysis Tristan R. Brown1 *, Mark M. Wright2, 3, and Robert C. Brown2, 3 Iowa State University 1Biobased Industry Center 2Department of Mechanical Engineering 3Center for Sustainable Environmental Technologies * [email protected] Iowa State University Ames, IA 50011 Tel: (515) 460-0183 Fax: (515) 294-6336 ABSTRACT We estimate the profitability of producing biochar from crop residue (corn stover) for two scenarios. The first employs slow pyrolysis to generate biochar and pyrolysis gas and has the advantage of high yields of char (as much as 40 wt-%) but the disadvantage of producing a relatively low-value energy product (pyrolysis gas of modest heating value). The second scenario employs fast pyrolysis to maximize production of bio-oil with biochar and pyrolysis gas as lower-yielding co-products. The fast pyrolysis scenario produces a substantially higher value energy product than slow pyrolysis but at the cost of higher capital investment. We calculate the internal rate of return (IRR) for each scenario as functions of cost of feedstock and projected revenues for the pyrolysis facility. The assumed price range for delivered biomass feedstock is $0 to $83 per metric ton. The assumed carbon offset value for biochar ranges from $20 per metric ton of biochar in 2015 to $60 in 2030. The slow pyrolysis scenario in 2015 is not profitable at an assumed feedstock cost of $83 per metric ton. The fast pyrolysis scenario in 2015 yields 15% IRR with the same feedstock cost because gasoline refined from the bio-oil provides revenues of $2.96 per gallon gasoline equivalent.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomass Basics: the Facts About Bioenergy 1 We Rely on Energy Every Day
    Biomass Basics: The Facts About Bioenergy 1 We Rely on Energy Every Day Energy is essential in our daily lives. We use it to fuel our cars, grow our food, heat our homes, and run our businesses. Most of our energy comes from burning fossil fuels like petroleum, coal, and natural gas. These fuels provide the energy that we need today, but there are several reasons why we are developing sustainable alternatives. 2 We are running out of fossil fuels Fossil fuels take millions of years to form within the Earth. Once we use up our reserves of fossil fuels, we will be out in the cold - literally - unless we find other fuel sources. Bioenergy, or energy derived from biomass, is a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels because it can be produced from renewable sources, such as plants and waste, that can be continuously replenished. Fossil fuels, such as petroleum, need to be imported from other countries Some fossil fuels are found in the United States but not enough to meet all of our energy needs. In 2014, 27% of the petroleum consumed in the United States was imported from other countries, leaving the nation’s supply of oil vulnerable to global trends. When it is hard to buy enough oil, the price can increase significantly and reduce our supply of gasoline – affecting our national security. Because energy is extremely important to our economy, it is better to produce energy in the United States so that it will always be available when we need it. Use of fossil fuels can be harmful to humans and the environment When fossil fuels are burned, they release carbon dioxide and other gases into the atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioenergy Action Plan for Ireland
    BioEnErgy Action PlAn for irElAnd Report of thE MinistEriAl Task forcE on BioEnErgy Table of Contents Foreword 2 Executive Summary 3 Chapter Energy Trends in Ireland 990 to 2005 8 Chapter 2 Land Use in Ireland 3 Chapter 3 Bioenergy for the Transport Sector - Biofuels 6 Chapter 4 Bioenergy for the Heat Sector - Biomass 2 Chapter 5 Bioenergy for the Electricity Sector 26 Chapter 6 Public Sector Leadership - Driving Bioenergy Demand 32 Foreword Ireland has a significant bioenergy potential in the form of agricultural land, forestry and recycled waste from municipal, agriculture and industrial sources. All of these sources can be used to generate electricity, refined into fuel for the transport sector, provide heating/cooling for the building sector or as a source for biochemical raw materials for Irish industry. The development of our bioenergy resources will contribute to our overall security of energy supply and fuel diversity objectives. Increased use of these resources will also contribute to our renewable energy targets, our climate change mitigation policies, our waste policies and, at a time of great change in our agricultural sector, assist in rural development by providing new markets and employment development opportunities for our farming and forestry sectors as well as community enterprise. The sustainable development of our bioenergy potential and its deployment in the electricity, transport, heating and chemical sectors requires a fully coordinated approach across a number of Departments and State Agencies, working together across the sectors and with all stakeholders. In light of this challenge, the Government established a Ministerial Bioenergy Task Force which oversaw the delivery of the Action Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007: the Role of a Low Carbon Fuel Standard in Reducing Greenhouse
    FINAL The Role of a Low Carbon Fuel Standard in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Protecting Our Economy Executive Summary Transportation accounts for more than 40% of California’s annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the state relies on petroleum-based fuels for 96 percent of its transportation needs. Petroleum use contributes to climate change and dependency on oil leaves workers, businesses and consumers vulnerable to price shocks from an unstable global energy market. No business should be hostage to a single supplier for its most critical raw materials; neither should any state or nation. To protect our jobs and wages, clean our air and maintain our way of life, we must diversify our fuel sources and reduce our reliance on oil. As one of the world's largest energy consumers and the national leader in energy efficiency, alternative energy and greenhouse gas reduction, California has the opportunity and ability to diversify its transportation fuel supplies, decrease the greenhouse gases emitted from those fuels, and establish a sustainable market for cleaner-burning fuels. Accordingly, by Executive Order the Governor will establish a first-of-its-kind policy to reduce the greenhouse gas impact from California's use of transportation fuels and in so doing diversify the state's transportation fuels portfolio. Specifically, Executive Order S-XX-07 will establish: 1. A Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels sold in California, and 2. An initial LCFS goal of reducing the carbon intensity of California's passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. The LCFS is the world’s first global warming standard for transportation fuels, and as with other groundbreaking California policies, it may serve as a model for state, federal and international standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Listing of All EMS Agencies with Their Agency Codes
    Agency Name (D1.2) A.B. Shaw Fire Department (1099) A.E. Crandall Hook and Ladder Co., Inc. (0212) Ace Ambulance Service, LLC (Hunter Ambulance) (0884) Adams Fire Company, Inc. (3199) Addison Volunteer Fire Department Ambulance Corps (5015) Afton Emergency Squad (0811) Air Methods Corp. Rocky Mountain Holdings (LifeNet New York; Albany Med Flight; Stat Flight) (0767) Akron Fire Company, Inc. (1426) Akwesasne Mohawk Ambulance (4498) Alabama Fire Department (1899) Alamo Ambulance Service, Inc. (1311) Albany County Sheriff's Department Advanced Life Support (0184) Albany County Sheriff's Office EMS Unit (6229) Albany Department of Fire & Emergency Services, City of (0142) Albany-Schenectady-Greene Co. Ag. Societies, Inc. (Altamont Fair Ambulance) (0139) Albertson Fire Department (2998) Albion Fire Department Emergency Squad (3619) Alden EMS Department (1437) Alert Engine, Hook, Ladder & Hose Co., No. 1, Inc. (0253) Alexander Fire Department, Inc. (1818) Alexandria Bay Volunteer Fire Department (2212) Allegany Fire District, Town of (0775) Allegany Indian Reservation Vol. Fire Department (Seneca Nation Rescue) (0433) Allegany Rescue and EMS, Inc. (0982) Almond Volunteer Fire Department (0225) Alplaus Fire Department (4693) ALS Services, Inc. (7199) Altamont Rescue Squad, Inc. (0117) Altmar Fire Department (3799) Alton Fire Company of Alton, New York, Inc. (5813) Altona Volunteer Fire Department Rescue Squad (0930) Amagansett Fire Department Ambulance (8139) Amber Ambulance Inc. (3313) Amber Fire Department, Inc.(1083) Ambulance Committee of the Moriches, Inc. (East Moriches Community Ambulance) (5158) Ambulance Service of Fulton County, Inc. (1712) AmCare Ambulance Service, Inc. (3217) Amenia Rescue Squad (1320) Amity Rescue Squad, Inc. (0213) Amityville Fire Department (5137) Amsterdam Fire Department (0554) Andes Fire Department, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomass to Biochar
    BIOCHAR AN ELEGANT SOLUTION FOR COMPLEX PROBLEMS THE COMPLEX PROBLEM Climate change from too much CO2 and other GHG’s in the atmosphere 1. Excess CO2 from burning fossil fuels 2. Methane (CH4) from livestock, landfills & decomposition 3. Nitrogen/phosphorous run-off and N2O off-gassing from fossil fuels converted to fertilizer 4. Temperature and moisture regime change deleterious to plant health, benefitting disease & insect life-cycles 5. Concentrations of biomass “waste” in agriculture and forestry 6. High forest density & increasing wildfire risk Climate Benefits: Carbon and More FOCUS ON BIOCHAR CHARCOAL WITH A PURPOSE Support soil biology & nutrients Protect biology from heavy metals & toxins BIOCHAR is CARBON CARBON WITH AMENITIES B x xx SUSTAINABLE OBTAINABLE SOLUTIONS 6 ? ALGAE www.prosandconsbiomassenergy.org BIOCHAR: the carbon-rich residue of heating biomass without oxygen 75% mass loss Pyrolysis 40-55% 75-90% carbon carbon 50% carbon loss BIOMASS BIOCHAR Lehmann, 2007, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7, 381-387 PRODUCTS OF PYROLYSIS Non-Fossil Fuel Energy • Syngas - substitute for propane • Bio-oil - bunker fuel, pre-cursor to bio-diesel • Heat - space heating, steam production, producing electricity More Climate Benefits • Biochar - carbon sequestration, soil amendment, less NPK fertilizer use, GHG capture, carbon credits • Waste – reduce by conversion • Emissions – captured and recycled FULL CIRCLE SOLUTION MINIMAL EMISSIONS Actual Emissions from University of Montana BioMax System Putting the Bio in the Char SOILS, PLANTS & ANIMALS Nutrients Habitat Water Biochar in Soil GHGs pH Carbon Texture BIOCHAR in COMPOST 10% by volume reduces CH4 and N2O off-gassing and nutrient run-off Reduces odors Retains well-distributed moisture in production piles Absorbs more radiant heat Compost charges biochar with nutrients Enhances soil fertility long-term BIOCHAR IMPROVES PLANT GROWTH 20t/ha biochar 8t/ha biochar No biochar Cornfield in Colombia Plants absorb CO2.
    [Show full text]
  • Cal Fire: Creek Fire Now the Largest Single Wildfire in California History
    Cal Fire: Creek Fire now the largest single wildfire in California history By Joe Jacquez Visalia Times-Delta, Wednesday, September 23, 2020 The Creek Fire is now the largest single, non-complex wildfire in California history, according to an update from Cal Fire. The fire has burned 286,519 acres as of Monday night and is 32 percent contained, according to Cal Fire. The Creek Fire, which began Sept. 4, is located in Big Creek, Huntington Lake, Shaver Lake, Mammoth Pool and San Joaquin River Canyon. Creek Fire damage realized There were approximately 82 Madera County structures destroyed in the blaze. Six of those structures were homes, according to Commander Bill Ward. There are still more damage assessments to be made as evacuation orders are lifted and converted to warnings. Madera County sheriff's deputies notified the residents whose homes were lost in the fire. The Fresno County side of the fire sustained significantly more damage, according to Truax. "We are working with (Fresno County) to come up with away to get that information out," Incident Commander Nick Truax said. California wildfires:Firefighters battle more than 25 major blazes, Bobcat Fire grows Of the 4,900 structures under assessment, 30% have been validated using Fresno and Madera counties assessor records. Related: 'It's just too dangerous': Firefighters make slow progress assessing Creek Fire damage So far, damage inspection teams have counted more than 300 destroyed structures and 32 damaged structures. "These are the areas we can safely get to," Truax said. "There are a lot of areas that trees have fallen across the roads.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy Development Strategy and Investment Plan for Western Africa Region
    AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE UNIÃO AFRICANA Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, P. O. Box 3243, Telephone: +251-11-551 7700, Fax: +251-11-5517844, website: www. africa-union.org REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy development strategy and investment plan for Western Africa region Procurement No: AUC/IED/C/011 April 2019 May 2019 1 AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE UNIÃO AFRICANA Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, P. O. Box 3243, Telephone: +251-11-551 7700, Fax: +251-11-5517844, website: www. africa-union.org Section I: Letter of Invitation 9 May 2019 Dear Sirs, REF: REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST: Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy development strategy and investment plan for Western Africa region 1. The African Union would like to engage the services of a consulting for Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy development strategy and investment plan for Western Africa region. The African Union Commission invites interested and eligible bidders to submit technical and financial proposals for the assignment as per attached Terms of Reference (TORS). 2. An Individual Consultant will be selected under the Consultant Qualification Selection procedures described in the AU Procurement Manual available on https://au.int/en/bids. The pass mark shall be 70%. 3. The deadline for submission of EOIs is 31 May 2019 at 1500hrs. Late submissions will be rejected. 4. Bidders may request for clarifications no less than 7 days from the deadline for submission, from The Chairperson, Internal Procurement Committee, African Union Commission, Telephone number (+251) 11 5517700, Ext 4341, Email tender@africa- union.org with a copy to [email protected] 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomass Resources Using Published Forestry Data from the UN Forestry and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
    World forest and agricultural crop residue resources for cofiring Paul Baruya April 2015 © IEA Clean Coal Centre World forest and agricultural crop residue resources for cofiring Author: Paul Baruya IEACCC Ref: CCC/249 ISBN: 978–92–9029–571-6 Copyright: © IEA Clean Coal Centre Published Date: May 2015 IEA Clean Coal Centre 14 Northfields London SW18 1DD United Kingdom Telephone: +44(0)20 8877 6280 www.iea-coal.org 2 IEA Clean Coal Centre ‒ World forest and agricultural crop residue resources for cofiring Preface This report has been produced by IEA Clean Coal Centre and is based on a survey and analysis of published literature, and on information gathered in discussions with interested organisations and individuals. Their assistance is gratefully acknowledged. It should be understood that the views expressed in this report are our own, and are not necessarily shared by those who supplied the information, nor by our member countries. IEA Clean Coal Centre is an organisation set up under the auspices of the International Energy Agency (IEA) which was itself founded in 1974 by member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The purpose of the IEA is to explore means by which countries interested in minimising their dependence on imported oil can co-operate. In the field of Research, Development and Demonstration over fifty individual projects have been established in partnership between member countries of the IEA. IEA Clean Coal Centre began in 1975 and has contracting parties and sponsors from: Australia, Austria, China, the European Commission, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Thailand, the UK and the USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland
    NATIONAL SYSTEM OF PUBLIC LANDS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Department of the Interior March 2020 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Draft Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland Restoration in the Great Basin Volume 3: Appendices B through N Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EIS $2,000,000 The Bureau of Land Management’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands. Appendix B. Acronyms, Literature Cited, Glossary B.1 ACRONYMS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Full Phrase ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AML appropriate management level ARMPA Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment BCR bird conservation region BLM Bureau of Land Management BSU biologically significant unit CEQ Council on Environmental Quality EIS environmental impact statement EPA US Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ESR emergency stabilization and rehabilitation FIAT Fire and Invasives Assessment Tool FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act FY fiscal year GHMA general habitat management area HMA herd management area IBA important bird area IHMA important habitat management area MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MOU memorandum of understanding MtCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NIFC National Interagency Fire Center NRCS National Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWCG National Wildfire Coordination Group OHMA other habitat management area OHV off-highway vehicle Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland Restoration in the Great Basin B-1 B.
    [Show full text]