Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal

There are a lot of similarities between the timber and coal industries. They use essentially the same raw material. They both have contributed a lot to past economic growth, but now mostly do more harm than good. They both generate wide-ranging environmental damage, receive massive subsidies and emit large amounts of carbon dioxide. To avoid climate catastrophes, we must quickly rein them in.

Trees and coal are essentially the same thing: carbon, which comes from photosynthesis that has removed carbon dioxide from the air. But one is young and green and the other old and black.

Nobody denies that both have done a lot of good for human society. Coal fueled the Industrial Revolution and generated vast amounts of electricity. The lumber from Oregon’s trees has built a lot of houses.

But the industries that produce these benefits impose great costs on individuals, communities and society as a whole. Among these is the carbon dioxide emissions, which worsen the deaths, illnesses, economic disasters and environmental catastrophes of climate change.

Coal’s role as the largest source of these emissions has long been recognized. In contrast, the timber industry’s emissions have been overlooked. Last year, for example, the Oregon Global Warming Commission (OGWC) wouldn’t say what effect industrial timber production has on emissions. This year, all that changed. Prominent researchers at OSU showed that industrial timber production emits about 33 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. These are the net emissions, after accounting for the carbon dioxide removed from the air by small trees planted after logging and the amount of carbon kept out of the air by wood products.

By comparison, the OGWC reported that Oregon’s 2015 emissions from other sources totaled 63 million tons and the largest source, the transportation sector, emitted 23 million tons. Hence, it looks like the timber industry is Oregon’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide, just as the coal industry is elsewhere.

Timber’s emissions have economic consequences. Two years ago, the Bureau of Land Management developed data showing that carbon-dioxide emissions from logging on its lands cause climate-related economic damage that exceeds the value of the logs by more than four to one. More recent scientific research suggests the actual ratio may be closer to 50 to one. In other words, a truckload of logs is worth about $1,200, but the accompanying emissions, by intensifying wildfires, smoke, heat waves etc., generate costs of at least $5,000 and perhaps $70,000. Think about that the next time you see a log truck on the highway.

Think also about the money the timber industry takes from you in the form of subsidies. Perhaps the most important of these is tax breaks. When the industry doesn’t pay taxes, you and I fill in the gap, either by paying more ourselves, or by seeing shrinkage in governmental services like schools and healthcare. The Oregon Department of Revenue has estimated that, for the 2017-19 biennium, these subsidies total $700 million. This is equivalent to more than $430 per log truck and $230 per household each year.

That’s right. Every year, the timber industry costs your family $230 in higher taxes or smaller government services.

Of course, the timber industry, like the coal industry (and the tobacco industry before it), has a quick comeback. It puts forth different numbers to create confusion. It also argues that harmful practices and subsidies are an unavoidable necessity, because industrial logging is the only way to generate jobs in rural communities and reduce wildfires.

Don’t believe it. The cost and subsidy numbers are solid. The most intense fires occur not in old forests but in industrial clearcuts, where little trees crowded together burn fiercely. And we can do far more to generate jobs and improve wildfire safety by making homes and communities less likely to burn when fire occurs, rather than by logging trees.

The similarities between timber and coal include the steps we must take to make things better. The legislature and governor must roll back the subsidies. They must put a price on carbon-dioxide, so that the timber industry has incentives to reduce its emissions. And they must develop smart programs to make rural communities safe and prosperous.

Ernie Niemi is president of Natural Resource Economics in Eugene.

This column originally appeared in the Register-Guard.


More articles by:


June 19, 2019
Matthew Stevenson
Requiem for a Lightweight: the Mayor Pete Factor
Kenneth Surin
In China Again
Stephen Cooper
Abolishing the Death Penalty Requires Morality
George Ochenski
The DNC Can’t Be Allowed to Ignore the Climate Crisis
John W. Whitehead
The Omnipresent Surveillance State
William Camacaro - Frederick B. Mills
Guaidó’s Star Fades as His Envoys to Colombia Allegedly Commit Fraud With Humanitarian Funds for Venezuela
Dave Lindorff
What About Venezuela’s Hacked Power Grid?
Howard Lisnoff
Try Not to Look Away
Binoy Kampmark
Matters of Water: Dubious Approvals and the Adani Carmichael Mine
Karl Grossman
The Battle to Stop the Shoreham Nuclear Plant, Revisited
Kani Xulam
Farting in a Turkish Mosque
Dean Baker
New Manufacturing Jobs are Not Union Jobs
Elizabeth Keyes
“I Can’t Believe Alcohol Is Stronger Than Love”
June 18, 2019
John McMurtry
Koch-Oil Big Lies and Ecocide Writ Large in Canada
Robert Fisk
Trump’s Evidence About Iran is “Dodgy” at Best
Yoav Litvin
Catch 2020 – Trump’s Authoritarian Endgame
Thomas Knapp
Opposition Research: It’s Not Trump’s Fault That Politics is a “Dirty” Game
Medea Benjamin - Nicolas J. S. Davies
U.S. Sanctions: Economic Sabotage that is Deadly, Illegal and Ineffective
Gary Leupp
Marx and Walking Zen
Thomas Hon Wing Polin
Color Revolution In Hong Kong: USA Vs. China
Howard Lisnoff
The False Prophets Cometh
Michael T. Klare
Bolton Wants to Fight Iran, But the Pentagon Has Its Sights on China
Steve Early
The Global Movement Against Gentrification
Dean Baker
The Wall Street Journal Doesn’t Like Rent Control
Tom Engelhardt
If Trump’s the Symptom, Then What’s the Disease?
June 17, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
The Dark Side of Brexit: Britain’s Ethnic Minorities Are Facing More and More Violence
Linn Washington Jr.
Remember the Vincennes? The US’s Long History of Provoking Iran
Geoff Dutton
Where the Wild Things Were: Abbey’s Road Revisited
Nick Licata
Did a Coverup of Who Caused Flint Michigan’s Contaminated Water Continue During Its Investigation? 
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange and the Scales of Justice: Exceptions, Extraditions and Politics
John Feffer
Democracy Faces a Global Crisis
Louisa Willcox
Revamping Grizzly Bear Recovery
Stephen Cooper
“Wheel! Of! Fortune!” (A Vegas Story)
Daniel Warner
Let Us Laugh Together, On Principle
Brian Cloughley
Trump Washington Detests the Belt and Road Initiative
Weekend Edition
June 14, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Michael Hudson
Trump’s Trade Threats are Really Cold War 2.0
Bruce E. Levine
Tom Paine, Christianity, and Modern Psychiatry
Jason Hirthler
Mainstream 101: Supporting Imperialism, Suppressing Socialism
T.J. Coles
How Much Do Humans Pollute? A Breakdown of Industrial, Vehicular and Household C02 Emissions
Andrew Levine
Whither The Trump Paradox?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: In the Land of 10,000 Talkers, All With Broken Tongues
Pete Dolack
Look to U.S. Executive Suites, Not Beijing, For Why Production is Moved
Paul Street
It Can’t Happen Here: From Buzz Windrip and Doremus Jessup to Donald Trump and MSNBC
Rob Urie
Capitalism Versus Democracy
Richard Moser
The Climate Counter-Offensive: Secrecy, Deception and Disarming the Green New Deal