“Developing Our Energy Future: Residential Heating With Wood in

Hancock County, Maine”

1.Are there ecological, economic and/or social reasons to burn more local wood for residential heating?

2.If so, how might a community based approach to this best be undertaken?

Motivating questions

Some Initial Hypotheses:

• Use of local wood could increase economic security – especially for low income folks – and economic development

• Use of local wood could increase energy security – locally, regionally and nationally

• Use of local wood could reduce carbon footprint and help with climate change

1. Background research

2. Ethnography

3. Risk analysis

4. Economic analysis

Research methods

•Hancock County •is ~1,000,000 acres•~450,000 acres = hardwoods

•It has 52,000 people in 22,000 households

•If 50% use 4cord/yr & harvest ½ cord/acre/yr, you’d need to manage ~100,000 acres•This is ~10% of the county or ~23% of hardwood land

The US census reports ~11% of county residents now use wood for heat

1. Background research

2. Ethnography

3. Risk analysis

4. Economic analysis

Research methods

a) House to house survey

Add a picture of survey team

b) Focus groups and informal polls

a picture?

Date Setting #

October Acadia Senior College 34

NovemberHancock County Planning Commission

27

February

Ellsworth Rotary Club 29

Public Forum Ellsworth Town Hall

22

DownEast RC&D 13

March

Bar Harbor Rotary Club 28

State EPSCOR ??

Hancock Cty Soil & Water Conservation

??

April Society for Human Ecology ??

The H.C.F.P. and Local Schools: Helping To Inspire The Helping To Inspire The Innovators Of TomorrowInnovators Of Tomorrow

The H.C.F.P will present lesson plans on energy, efficiency, and local home heating.

Students will also collaborate with the H.C.F.P by creating a survey that will be used to collect data throughout the Hancock County.

The H.C.F.P, through it’s interactive classroom workshops dedicated to forest ecology, management, and sustainability will inspire Maine’s energy innovators of tomorrow.

This is much higher than the census data It suggests that demand for wood may be relatively elastic

Preliminary Results:

Role of Economic Reasons in fuel choice (sample of 67):

• 29 have things other than economy as first reason

• Of the 25 who mention cost as first reason, 14 use at least some wood, 11 heat exclusively with other fuels

Important Conclusion: Choice of heat is often tied strongly to culture, values and identity

•This may make demand less elastic for some

Next steps

Develop:•Public Lands Wood Supply Project •Neighborhood Forests Project

Complete: •Household Survey•In-depth Ethnographic Interviews•School Collaborations

The Airline School, Aurora Possible Neighborhood Forest

1. Background research

2. Ethnography

3. Risk analysis

4. Economic analysis

Research methods

FACTOR

infrastructure

fire safety

Aesthetics

element cycling

hydrology

wildlife

other vegetation

soils

harvester health

REASONS PROBABLY OK

local harvest should decrease impacts on highways & fuel use

Clearing undergrowth = smaller fires

Managed forests are nicer

effects on flow minimal with <20% harvest

harvest spreads out snowmelt less flooding

selective harvest more diverse habitats more diverse wildlife

may increase value of what is not harvested

can decrease fire danger

most nutrients are in unharvested tree parts

weathering can replace those removed

2007 injury rates: logging only~4% vs wood products~9%, paper~10%

REASONS TO WORRY

Un-managed forests are nicer

N, Si runoff may eutrophy, red tide…

unclear effects of faster element cycling

must beware of vernal pools

May spread insects & pathogens

Unsure about invasive species

not sure about injuries at smaller scales

Harvesting

FACTOR

Air emissions

Ash

Actual Burning

Home transport

Wood storage

REASONS PROBABLY OK

Rustic appeal

Nutrient sourceDecrease acidification

Exercise

Rustic appeal

REASONS TO WORRY

Adverse health effects

May contain toxins (Cd)

May increase Al & nitrate leaching

Stove accidents

Chimney fires

Injury

Insects? Rodents?

Lyme disease?

Started looking at

Burning

2002

County

Ton/yr

Fire place

Non-catalyst

stove

Catalytic stove

Pellet Oil

CO X 37345 10.2 7.9 6.0 0.54 .014

Non- methane organics

X X 9800 23 3.1 2.34 0.95 .004

NOx X 4272 0.85 1.03 0.47 0.84 0.749

SO2 X 1621 0.34 0.17 0.37 0.25 2.653

PM

<2.5 X 1447 37.8 42.3 16.6 2.5 0.27

CH4 X X 897 17.8 29.4 13.4 0.45 .045

PAH

(soot)X .1003 877 29910 2392 89.7 50

Dioxin &furans (gTEQ)

X .65 50 152 ? 0.18 1.3

Estimated emissions as %s of current emissions (if 50% use the BTU equivalent of 4 cords/yr)

smo

g

toxi

city

GH

G

>100%41-100%

1-40%<1%

So we’ve been measuring levels of particles throughout the county

MDI EAST WEST

Particle levels vary from week to week in Hancock County:

Average levels of <.25 particles over 9 weeks

2170

22721917

18702092

1797

1441

2120

26671279

1403 1176

1629

11391522

13691483

2549

1472

1423

2012

2397

2758

2572

2621

2633

22222628

1626

17821761

2246

1385

1618

2852

2852

1932

>25002001-25001500-2000

<1500

Condition % morbidity increase per

“2000” particle units

Asthma 1.05

Pneumonia 1.25

COPD 1.9

•Current Maine asthma rate is ~15%

•15% of 55,000 = 8250

•Current particle levels of ~”2000” could account for ~1% or ~80 cases

•An increase of “2000” particle units could cause an additional ~80 cases

So what?

To assess impacts of different heating methods, we’re trying to model local air using STELLA

Next steps:

Collect particles Assess their toxicity(MICROTOX method)

1. Background research

2. Ethnography

3. Risk analysis

4. Economic analysis

Research methods

•Economic Development Approaches•Demand side: self-development approaches such as RMI’s Economic Renewal•Supply side: economic gardening, technical assistance approaches

• Successful economic development requires:•assets within the community, mobilized through self-interest, awareness, leadership, and volunteer commitment (bonding and bridging social capital)•assets from outside the community, in the form of grants, technical assistance, and other resources (linking social capital)

Background

Current and next steps

• Determine the industrial structure of local firewood production – number and size of firms– ease of entry and exit– level of investment, technology– cost structures, pricing power, profit levels

• Determine cross price elasticity of demand for firewood: how much does demand for firewood change with the price of heating oil?

• Use this information to assess opportunities for expanded local production

Where are we headed?

 One person is economically distressed and in need of heating assistance. Paying bills is a struggle each month and work is hard to find. They would be interested in switching away from oil to wood or other options, if they had the money to do it. “If I had the money I would put up a wind turbine & solar panels.” 

Another person is moderately wealthy, owning a large home outside of town. This person grew up locally, heating with firewood. Throughout their childhood they had to cut wood in they forest and haul it to the house to be dried and stored. They heat with 100% oil now. “I heat with oil because I can afford it”

A third person heats almost exclusively with wood, notes that it involves lots of hard work -- but enjoys the family activities associated with harvesting, splitting and burning and comments, “The nice thing about wood is that it heats you three times. Once when you cut it, once when you split it, and once when you burn it.”

A fourth says: “I don’t heat with wood. My time is worth more than that!”