[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
INNOVATIVE WOOD PRODUCTS: PROMOTING RURAL ECONOMIES AND HEALTHY FORESTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSERVATION AND FORESTRY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 26, 2020
__________
Serial No. 116-31
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
41-278 PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota, Chairman
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas, Ranking
JIM COSTA, California Minority Member
MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
FILEMON VELA, Texas ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands Arkansas
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
Vice Chair VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia DOUG LaMALFA, California
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York TED S. YOHO, Florida
TJ COX, California RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota MIKE BOST, Illinois
ANTHONY BRINDISI, New York DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
JOSH HARDER, California RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
KIM SCHRIER, Washington TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine JAMES COMER, Kentucky
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York DON BACON, Nebraska
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California NEAL P. DUNN, Florida
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
JIMMY PANETTA, California JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa
______
______
Anne Simmons, Staff Director
Matthew S. Schertz, Minority Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry
ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia, Chair
MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio DOUG LaMALFA, California, Ranking
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona Minority Member
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
Felix Muniz, Jr., Subcommittee Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
LaMalfa, Hon. Doug, a Representative in Congress from California,
opening statement.............................................. 38
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Spanberger, Hon. Abigail Davis, a Representative in Congress from
Virginia, opening statement.................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 2
Witnesses
Goergen, Jr., Michael T., Vice President, Innovation and Director
P3Nano, U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities, Bethesda,
MD............................................................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Cover, P.E., Jennifer S., President and Chief Executive Officer,
WoodWorks--Wood Products Council, San Marcos, CA............... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Henry, Ph.D., Joshua A., President and Co-Founder, GO Lab Inc.,
Belfast, ME.................................................... 29
Prepared statement........................................... 31
INNOVATIVE WOOD PRODUCTS: PROMOTING RURAL ECONOMIES AND HEALTHY FORESTS
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2020
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:08 a.m., in
Room 1300 of the Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Abigail
Davis Spanberger [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Spanberger, O'Halleran,
Pingree, Axne, Schrier, Peterson (ex officio), LaMalfa, and
Allen.
Staff present: Prescott Martin III, Felix Muniz, Jr.,
Alison Titus, Josh Maxwell, Ricki Schroeder, Patricia Straughn,
Dana Sandman, and Justina Graff.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, A
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM VIRGINIA
The Chair. This hearing of the Subcommittee on Conservation
and Forestry on innovative wood products: promoting rural
economies and healthy forests, will come to order.
Good morning. Welcome and thank you for joining us here
today to discuss a very important topic: innovation in the wood
products industry, and what it means for rural prosperity and
forest health.
America's forests are a pillar of our country's prosperity,
delivering very important environmental, social, and economic
benefits. Forests deliver ecosystem services that are
irreplaceable: clean air and water, carbon storage, and
biodiversity. They are favored places for families and
recreation enthusiasts, and in rural areas, forests create jobs
and underpin local economies.
My home Commonwealth of Virginia understands this very
well. Across Virginia's 15 million acres of forested land,
forest-related businesses contribute $17 billion annually to
the Commonwealth's economy, and support more than 100,000 jobs.
At the national level, forestry-related businesses employ
nearly three million men and women. As it relates to wood
products, the industry accounts for approximately four percent
of total manufacturing GDP, producing nearly $300 billion in
products annually.
Yet, multiple factors complicate the health of the
industry. As markets have changed and evolved, demand for
traditional wood products have matured or declined. Plastic,
steel, and other materials have replaced products previously
made exclusively from wood. The rise of digital media has
significantly depressed newsprint and sheet paper production,
and new residential housing, which drives strong wood markets,
is now beginning to approach pre-crisis figures.
With markets facing economic stagnation, the forest sector
is looking to innovation to reinvigorate the industry and the
future is full possibilities. Innovative wood products have the
potential to develop new markets and strengthen local
economies. New markets can also provide incentives for land
managers, public and private, to implement sustainable
management practices that fully maximize forestry's social and
environmental benefits.
Recent innovations in mass timber and fiber insulation for
the construction of wood buildings are already underway. These
inventive products offer faster construction schedules and
lower emission profiles. Researchers are also discovering new
ways to use wood materials, completely changing the course of
materials science and engineering.
An area of active research is nanotechnology. Potential
applications for the use of nanocellulose include additives to
create food coatings, transparent, flexible electronics,
biomedical applications, among many other novel uses. These
products, and more like them, are benefitting from Federal
research conducted by the Forest Products Laboratory.
Innovative products that aren't even on our radar yet, will
come from investment in product development through
opportunities like the Wood Innovation Grant Program. These
investments are vital if our nation's forests are to remain
bountiful and productive for their full range of environmental,
social, and economic benefits.
I am grateful to hear and learn from our witnesses today on
the progress of the wood products industry, Federal support for
these products, and to discuss the many benefits that
innovation lends to forestry.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Spanberger follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Abigail Davis Spanberger, a Representative
in Congress from Virginia
Good morning, welcome and thank you all for joining us here today
to discuss a very important topic--innovation in the wood products
industry, and what it means for rural prosperity and forest health.
America's forests are a pillar of our country's prosperity,
delivering very important environmental, social, and economic benefits.
Forests deliver ecosystem services that are irreplaceable--clean air
and water, carbon storage, and biodiversity. They are favored places
for families and recreation enthusiasts, and in rural areas, forests
create jobs that underpin local economies.
My home Commonwealth of Virginia understands this well. Across
Virginia's 15 million acres of forested land, forest-related businesses
contribute $17 billion annually to the state's economy and support more
than 100,000 jobs. At the national level, forestry-related businesses
employ nearly three million men and women. As it relates to wood
products, the industry accounts for approximately 4% of total
manufacturing GDP, producing nearly $300 billion in products annually.
Yet, multiple factors complicate the health of the industry. As
markets have changed and evolved, demand for traditional wood products
have matured or declined.
Plastic, steel, and other materials have replaced products
previously made exclusively from wood;
the rise of digital media has significantly depressed
newsprint and sheet paper production; and
new residential housing, which drives strong wood markets,
is now only beginning to approach pre-crisis figures.
With markets facing economic stagnation, the forest sector is
looking to innovation to reinvigorate the industry--and the future is
full of possibilities.
Innovative wood products have the potential to develop new markets
and strengthen local economies. New markets can also provide incentives
for land managers, public and private, to implement sustainable
management practices that fully maximize forestry's social and
environmental benefits.
Recent innovations in mass timber and fiber insulation for the
construction of wood buildings are already underway. These inventive
products offer faster construction schedules and lower emission
profiles.
Researchers are also discovering new ways to use wood materials,
completely changing the course of material science and engineering. An
area of active research is in nanotechnology. Potential applications
for the use of nanocellulose include additives to create food coatings,
transparent, flexible electronics, biomedical applications, among many
other novel uses.
These products and more like them are benefiting from Federal
research conducted by the Forest Products Laboratory. Innovative
products that aren't even on our radar yet will come from investment in
product development through opportunities like the Wood Innovation
Grant Program.
These investments are vital if our nation's forests are to remain
bountiful and productive for their full range of environmental, social,
and economic benefits. I am grateful to hear and learn from our
witnesses today on the progress of the wood products industry, Federal
support for these products, and to discuss the many benefits that
innovation lends to forestry.
The Chair. In consultation with the Ranking Member and
pursuant to the Rule XI(e), I want to make Members of the
Subcommittee aware that other Members of the full Committee may
join us today.
The chair would request that Members submit their opening
statements for the record so witnesses may begin their
testimony, and to ensure that there is ample time for
questions.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Doug LaMalfa, a Representative in Congress
from California
Good morning, and welcome to today's Conservation and Forestry
Subcommittee hearing.
Our nation's forests are a great natural resource, and today we
will examine how innovative wood products can lead to healthy and
productive forests and improve rural economies.
Forest lands--whether they are Federal, state, or private--are
vitally important for many rural areas. Aside from the timber they
produce, our forests also provide recreational opportunities and serve
as economic drivers for the communities that surround them.
Once this timber is harvested, the forest products industry can use
innovative approaches to create products including paper, packaging,
construction material, and a variety of other items that we use on a
daily basis.
The forest products industry directly employs over 900,000 people
and accounts for about 4% of the total U.S. manufacturing GDP. Until
recently, there was a decline in the amount of timber harvested on
Federal lands. As timber harvest decreased, the number of jobs and
local businesses connected to this natural resource also decreased.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention the work that we did in the
2018 Farm Bill to foster innovation within this industry and promote
new markets for products. The 2018 Farm Bill included the Timber
Innovation Act that established a research and development program to
help advance tall wood building construction in the United States.
The 2018 Farm Bill also provided the Forest Service with tools to
improve management of forest lands and allowed more partners to help
with these activities; however, I believe we can do more to ensure we
have healthy National Forests, and that they provide economic growth
for our rural communities through innovative forest products.
One of the innovative wood products we will hear about today is
mass timber--a large wood panel composed of smaller materials. While
using mass timber may be a relatively new approach to building in the
United States, Europe and Canada have been using mass timber for over 2
decades.
One example of mass timber that is proving to be effective is
Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT). CLT and other mass timber products are
sustainable, effective alternatives to traditional structural materials
such as steel or concrete. In addition, mass timber projects can be
built quicker and require less on-site labor than the use of
traditional materials.
While there are several benefits to using mass timber, there remain
some challenges including regulatory hurdles and a poor perception
within the construction industry.
Another innovative wood product worth mentioning is biochar, a
porous carbon substance that is created from burning wood in the
absence of oxygen. Biochar has many uses including to improve soil
health and reduce invasive species growth.
These are just a couple examples of the outstanding work the forest
products industry is doing to bring jobs and economic growth to the
rural areas of our nation.
We have a great panel of witnesses before us today, and I am
looking forward to having a productive discussion and learning more
about other examples of innovative products, including insulation and
nanomaterials.
Thank you to the witnesses for taking time to be here, and to Chair
Spanberger for calling this vitally important hearing.
I yield back.
The Chair. I would like to welcome our witnesses today.
Thank you for being here.
It is my pleasure to introduce Mr. Michael Goergen, Vice
President of Innovation and Director of P3Nano at the U.S.
Endowment for Forestry and Communities. Michael joined the
Endowment in 2013 and is currently focused on taking cellulosic
nanotechnology from the lab to commercialization, advancing
mass timber construction, and is bringing together partners in
the public- and private-sectors. Prior to joining the
Endowment, Michael served as the Executive Vice President and
CEO of the Society of American Foresters.
Our next witness is Ms. Jennifer Cover. Ms. Cover serves as
the President and CEO of WoodWorks, a nonprofit program focused
on growing the market demand for wood products through project
support and education. She is a California licensed
professional engineer, and taught timber design at the
University of California, San Diego, for 8 years. She holds a
master's degree from the University of California Berkeley, and
her experience includes business development, market analysis,
project management, and structural design, all with an emphasis
on wood construction.
I would now like to recognize the gentlewoman from Maine,
Representative Chellie Pingree, to introduce our next and final
witness.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you so
much for holding this hearing, particularly coming from the
State of Maine, the most forested state in the nation, our
state has been dealing with a lot of the challenges in the
transition in this industry. We are really excited to have all
of the panelists here today.
But, we are particularly excited to have someone from
Maine, Joshua Henry, the President and Co-Founder of GO Lab, a
building products company that is based in Belfast, Maine.
Prior to founding GO Lab, Mr. Henry served as a faculty
member in the chemistry department of Bates College and the
University of Maine. He is a part of producing a very exciting
insulation product that we predict some day will be in every
home and every commercial building across the country. You are
all lucky to be in on the ground floor to hear more about it
today.
But thank you so much for taking your time, Dr. Henry, to
come spend some time with us here today, and we look forward to
your testimony.
I yield back.
The Chair. We will now proceed with hearing from our
witnesses. Each of you will have 5 minutes to present
testimony. When the light turns yellow, that indicates there is
1 minute remaining to complete your testimony.
Mr. Goergen, please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL T. GOERGEN, Jr., VICE PRESIDENT,
INNOVATION AND DIRECTOR P3NANO, U.S. ENDOWMENT FOR FORESTRY AND
COMMUNITIES, BETHESDA, MD
Mr. Goergen. Thank you, Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member
LaMalfa, and Members of the Committee. Thank you so much for
the opportunity to testify on innovation in sustainable forest
products.
I am Michael Goergen, Vice President for Innovation at the
U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities. The Endowment is a
not-for-profit public charity chartered at the request of the
governments of the U.S. and Canada as a result of the Soft Wood
Lumber Agreement of 2006. The Endowment is focused on keeping
forests as forests, and supporting the communities that depend
upon them.
I am focused on innovation in forest products because
markets bring value to forests, and we keep things that we
value.
Developing new markets, displacing current technology,
getting people to think differently about forest products,
these are daunting challenges for the forest sector. While we
have solutions that solve many of today's environmental
challenges, getting them to market requires overcoming many
obstacles. At the Endowment, we are finding opportunities to
bring together scientists from the USDA Forest Service and
their research and development program, state and private
forestry, and the National Forest System, university
researchers, and the private-sector to accelerate the
commercial readiness of a number of the innovative forest
products that we are talking about today, including mass timber
construction, low value products that utilize forest
restoration materials, and one of the most exciting
opportunities, cellulosic nanomaterials.
We are finding incredible applications for cellulosic
nanomaterials. They are made from the tiniest parts of the
tree. These are a new class of materials valued for their
mechanical properties, their sustainability, their large-scale
production potential, and their low cost.
At the nano-scale, about \1/100\ of the width of a human
hair--and we can look at Jennifer to see what hair looks like--
cellulose has really novel properties. When we get the nano-
scale for many materials, strange things start to happen. For
example, nano gold is actually no longer that golden color. It
is red or pink. In the case of cellulose, we can produce a
material that is as strong as steel, but it is only \1/5\ of
the weight of steel.
Examples include researchers at the University of Maine who
are working on several innovative products. One scientist and
his team are developing a replacement for gypsum board that was
made from sawdust and cellulosic nanofibers that act as the
binding agent. This new type of board will be lighter weight,
will not have chemical additives associated with negative human
health, and will have greenhouse gas emission profiles
significantly lower than traditional products. Another
researcher at Maine is actually developing a replacement snack
package that would be fully recyclable and biodegradable. That
means no more potato chip bags in the forest, in your streams,
or on the sides of our roads.
Researchers are investigating an improvement to lithium ion
battery technology that could be theoretically double the
storage capacity of lithium ion batteries. Imagine doubling the
range of current electric vehicles. And we can make those
electric vehicles lighter by coating fiberglass with cellulosic
nanomaterials, making that fiber stronger. That stronger fiber
means we can put less of it in the car part, making those auto
parts weigh about 20 percent less.
Another interesting application for cellulosic
nanomaterials involves concrete. People use 4 trillion tons of
concrete worldwide, but concrete is also the source of about
five to eight percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions
because it takes a lot of energy to make concrete. To make the
cement component, we actually heat limestone rocks up to about
2,600 Fahrenheit, which takes, of course, a lot of energy. And
of course, that produces greenhouse gas emissions. But the rock
itself actually has stored carbon in it, and when we heat that
rock up, that carbon gets released as well.
If we could reduce the amount of cement in concrete, we
could actually have a real environmental win, and that is where
cellulosic nanomaterials can actually help. When we add tiny
amounts of this material to the mix, we can actually reduce the
emissions from concrete by about 18 to 20 percent.
It is interesting. Concrete requires near complete
hydration. The challenge being that it is not always easy to
get that exactly right. What nanocellulose does is it acts like
a straw when it gets into that concrete mix. I am sure many of
you have made pancakes from a mix before. You mix that pancake
around, you get those dry lumps in the pancake, and they never
seem to break up, even though you added all that milk and eggs.
Same thing happens in cement. But the nanocellulose carries the
water all the way through the cement and actually hydrates all
those particles, meaning we get a stronger cement.
What does that mean? We can have stronger concrete, which
is fantastic, or we can reduce the amount of cement in
concrete, which would reduce our greenhouse gas emission
profiles from that concrete. A 20 percent reduction may not
seem like a lot, but for a 4 trillion ton product that is used
worldwide, it is a significant improvement.
We are collaborating in a town in California called Yreka.
It is northern California at the foot of Mount Shasta, and
wildfire is a real threat there. The community wants to remove
the small dying and dead trees that are there that are choking
the forest, but it is expensive to do. These trees have little
to no commercial value, and they can't pay their way out of the
woods. Cellulosic nanomaterials are emerging as a new market
for low value wood, a market that will make it economical to
improve forest health, protect that town, and create jobs.
Together, we are going to put the world's first concrete-
enhanced nanomaterial bridge in Yreka this spring. The town is
going to help us out, and together we are going to build a
better infrastructure, a better community, and a cleaner,
greener world.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Goergen follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael T. Goergen, Jr., Vice President,
Innovation and Director P3Nano, U.S. Endowment for Forestry and
Communities,
Bethesda, MD
Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member LaMalfa, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on this issue of
importance to all Americans--Innovation in sustainable forest products
that promote rural economies and forest health.
I have been with the U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities
(the Endowment) for more than 6 years where I have focused on bringing
innovation to the forest sector and accelerating the commercialization
of those innovations. Prior to that, I served as the CEO of the Society
of American Foresters, the professional society representing foresters
in the United States.
While each organization is unique, we find few organizations with
roots that compare to those of the Endowment. We are a not-for-profit,
public charity chartered at the requests of the governments of the U.S.
and Canada as a result of the Softwood Lumber Agreement of 2006. That
long-running dispute over softwood lumber production and its export/
import, in this instance, led to what we believe is the only time in
the world when a not-for-profit was created and funded as a result of a
trade settlement between two sovereign governments.
The Endowment was granted a one-time $200 million perpetual
endowment with interest and earnings to be dedicated to sustainable
management of forests and economic vibrancy of the rural communities
nested within or adjacent to those forests. We are a catalyst for
innovation that invigorates forest-rich, rural communities by keeping
working forests as forests for all their environmental, societal, and
economic benefits and values. The Endowment works collaboratively with
partners in the public- and private-sectors to advance systemic,
transformative and sustainable change for the health and vitality of
the nation's working forests and forest-reliant communities.
The forest sector represents a $300 billion/year economic impact in
the U.S. and directly employs nearly one million people. As this
Committee is aware, many of the forests that sustain this sector are in
trouble. Almost \1/4\ billion acres--fully \1/3\ of our forestland is
at risk of catastrophic wildfire. Forests are also under threat from
insects and diseases. Invasive species infest almost 40 percent of
forested acres. Therefore, we focus on creating markets. When there is
demand for forest products, the costs of restoring forest health is
significantly less as we can conduct management actions that improve
forest health and pay for that work by selling the byproducts of those
efforts for various uses. Markets bring value to forests, and we keep
things we value.
Some people think that harvesting trees is inherently a bad thing,
but that is just not true. If we sustainably manage our forests, we all
benefit. A recent study of forests in the southern U.S. concluded that
as demand for forest products increased over the past 50 years,
landowners responded by keeping their land and more than doubling their
forests' productivity. The ability to build wealth from forestlands
encourages investment in forests resulting in multiple benefits to all
stakeholders and constituents. By demonstrating economic value
creation, we reduce the incentive to convert our forests to other uses.
Markets, old and new, are vitally important to sustaining forests.
Developing new markets, displacing current technology, getting
people to think differently about forest products, these are daunting
challenges for the forest sector. While we have solutions to many of
today's environmental challenges, getting them to market requires
overcoming many obstacles. At the Endowment, we are finding
opportunities to bring together government scientists, university
researchers and the private-sector to accelerate the commercial
readiness of a number of innovative forest products including mass
timber construction, low value products that utilize forest restoration
materials, and one of the most exciting opportunities, cellulosic
nanomaterials (CN).
The Potential of Cellulosic Nanomaterials
We are finding incredible applications for cellulosic nanomaterials
made from the tiniest parts of trees. These materials will play a vital
role in solving challenges facing the planet. Cellulosic nanomaterials
(CN) are a new class of materials valued for their mechanical
properties, sustainability, large-scale production potential, and low
cost. At the nano-scale--about 1/
100,000 the width of a human
hair--cellulose has novel properties. To give context the head of a pin
is 1 million nanometers wide, and we can make crystals of CN that are
just 6 nanometers wide. When we get to the nano-scale for many
materials, strange things start to happen. For example, nano gold is no
longer a golden color, it can be red or pink. In the case of cellulose,
these nanomaterials are as strong as steel with only \1/5\ of the
weight. Making these materials is like making paper, yet more refined.
Once we have the CN, they can be used in numerous material applications
previously closed to forest products.
Some other nanomaterials have incredibly exciting properties but
are just not ready for commercialization as they have only been
produced at very small scales. That is not a challenge for cellulosic
nanomaterials. While some nanomaterials are talked about in gram
quantities, we can produce tons of cellulosic nanomaterials. Safety has
also been a primary concern. Researchers at Virginia Tech, American
University, Oregon State University, Rice University and others are
studying the environmental and human health impacts of these materials
and have many encouraging findings. In fact, the Endowment led a
consortium that pooled together the resources of several industrial
partners to conduct the research necessary to obtain Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) reviewed generally regarded as safe status (GRAS).
We submitted the necessary notification to FDA earlier this month.
Adding cellulosic nanomaterials to auto parts will make them
stronger yet lighter resulting in improved gas mileage and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions. A researcher at Georgia Tech is working on
reinforcing fiberglass-based auto parts with cellulosic nanomaterials
achieving 18-20 percent weight reductions with minimal additions of CN.
Researchers at Michigan State University are making packaging that
behaves like plastic but is a 100 percent biobased material that is
fully biodegradable. Researchers at Purdue University can make lighter-
weight bullet-proof glass from CN. Flexible microchips are being made
at the University of Wisconsin and are projected to be much lower cost
than competing materials.
Researchers at the University of Maine are working on several
innovative products. One scientist and his team are developing a
replacement for gypsum board that would be made from saw dust and CN
fibers that act as the biding agent. This new type of board will be
lighter weight, will not have chemical additives associated with
negative human health, and will have greenhouse gas emission profiles
significantly lower than products currently on the market. Another
researcher at Maine is developing a replacement snack package that
would be fully recyclable and biodegradable. Imagine no more potato
chip bags by the side of the road, in our forests, or our streams.
CN can be used in 3D printers, reducing the use of plastics and
opening new applications in the biomedical field as these materials are
biocompatible. CN materials have the power to block the sun. Using
these findings researchers are exploring topical sunscreen applications
that will not absorb into the human body. Since CN is benign in the
environment, a sunscreen produced from these materials can eliminate a
known impact to marine ecosystems. Researchers are investigating
improvements to lithium ion battery technology that could theoretically
double storage capacity. Imagine doubling the range of current electric
vehicles using a sustainable, renewable forest product.
Another interesting application for cellulosic nanomaterials
involves concrete. Gravel, sand and cement are the basic ingredients of
concrete. We use it everywhere. Four trillion tons worldwide, in fact.
But concrete is the source of five to eight percent of the world's
greenhouse gas emissions because it takes a lot of energy to make
cement. To make cement, one must first heat limestone to more than
2,600 Fahrenheit, which takes a lot of energy, which produces
greenhouse gas emissions. That hot rock itself releases even more
emissions from the carbon stored within. Since the world uses so much
concrete, even a small reduction in greenhouse gas emissions can go a
long way. That is where cellulosic nanomaterials can help. When we add
a tiny amount of this material to the mix, we can reduce emissions from
concrete production by 18 to 20 percent.
Concrete requires near complete hydration, without going too far.
If concrete is made with too much water, it will crack; not enough
water and it won't be strong enough. Adding just one percent cellulosic
nanomaterials increases the hydration of concrete. The CN acts like a
straw and carries water more completely through the concrete mixture.
Think about pancake batter. Pancake mix often has dry lumps even after
adding liquids. One might expect after adding milk and eggs the dry
ingredients would mix in easily. But, for some reason they don't.
Something similar happens in concrete; yet, by adding CN we get better
hydration. This increased hydration makes the mix 18 to 20 percent
stronger. We can have stronger concrete, and since cement is the
largest source of CO2 emissions from concrete, we can reduce
the amount of cement by about 18 to 20 percent and we significantly
reduce CO2 emissions.
Public-Private Partnerships
Listening to all these exciting end use applications for CN, you
may be wondering is there anything you can't make from CN? There may be
some things we cannot make as cost effectively, but we truly can make
almost anything from forest products. At the Endowment we are
overcoming the obstacles to commercialization by bringing together a
public-private partnership to advance this technology. Absolutely none
of the progress mentioned would be possible without the financial,
technical and scientific contributions provided by the men and women of
the USDA Forest Service, and more specifically, the agency's Forest
Products Laboratory (FPL). Together with FPL we have formed a public-
private partnership known as P3Nano that is combining the strengths of
the premier Federal laboratory working on forest products with leading
researchers and the companies that are making these products. Together
we are exploring ways to ensure safety, reduce the costs of production
and explore end use applications that leverage the unique properties of
CN. The advances made would not be possible without the contributions
of the Forest Service.
Government research is critical at so many stages of the scientific
process, but it is even more critical when it comes time to overcome
what is known as the valley of death. When scientists make new
discoveries that hold great promise there is often initial interest in
funding that explores the potential of the discovery. There is often
funding available when that product is ready for commercialization. The
valley of death in between is often short of resources to take that
initial discovery to successful commercial products. P3Nano is working
hard to bridge that valley, trying to ensure that the most promising of
these applications make it to your home to improve your life. It is
incredibly hard work and would not be possible without the
contributions of the USDA Forest Service and their Research and State &
Private Forestry programs.
Mass Timber
Mass timber is another area where the Endowment is collaborating
with partners to build the market for these innovative forest products.
In December 2018, the International Code Council voted to allow wood
structures as tall as 18-stories from the current six-story limit. What
makes these buildings possible--and safe--is cross-laminated timber
(CLT) and its kin: nail- and dowel-laminated timber, mass plywood
panels, and laminated veneer lumber. All these mass timber engineered
wood products use the same principle as plywood. Laminating layers of
wood with the fibers at right angles creates a strong material with
good acoustic, seismic, thermal, and fire performance.
Getting a code change that allows for 18-stories took a concerted
effort by, among others, the USDA Forest Service (through collaborative
efforts of its State & Private Forestry as well as Research and
Development divisions), the American Wood Council (which promotes the
use of wood through regulatory and public policy efforts), the Softwood
Lumber Board (a ``commodity check-off'' research and promotion program
initially envisions by the Endowment), WoodWorks (a nonprofit industry
program focused on education and project support) and the U.S.
Endowment for Forestry and Communities as well as a host of others.
Building more and taller buildings from wood has numerous benefits.
Tall wood buildings sequester carbon. Steel and concrete based
buildings have significant CO2 emissions. More use of forest
products brings more value to those products and the forests that grow
them. More value in the forest provides landowners with incentives to
keep their forests as forests and sustainably manage them. More value
for forest products makes it easier for the USDA Forest Service to
reduce forest health threats as the management activities often produce
lower value material needing a market. Innovation in forest products
will help create the markets we need to more fully restore forest
health across all our forest lands.
Torrefaction
At the Endowment we are constantly on the search for innovation in
forest products. Torrefied wood is an innovation that allows for the
lowest value material to find a home in markets that will make a
difference. Torrefied wood is a process where wood is roasted at
relatively low temperature in a low oxygen environment. The resulting
material has significant advantages over the raw biomass used in the
process. Torrefaction reduces moisture, increases energy density and
develops a product that stores and transports far better than untreated
biomass eliminating some of the logistical hurdles that make low value
biomass from restoration efforts a little more valuable.
The Endowment's Restoration Fuels project in John Day, Oregon is
the first, commercial scale torrefaction facility in the U.S. and the
last stage in the Endowment's and its collaborators' efforts to
commercialize this technology. In addition to proving the technology,
this effort is designed to help open a large-scale market for forest
restoration residuals and open the door to development of additional
carbon products that can be produced from thermo-chemical treatment of
biomass. This facility will not only serve to help develop the utility
market for an advanced renewable fuel, it will serve as a test bed for
other companies through our collaboration with the Forest Products
Laboratory, the National Renewable Energy Lab and over a dozen research
institutions around the country.
Summary
We are collaborating in Yreka, a small town in northern California
at the foot of Mount Shasta. Wildfire is a real threat there, so the
community wants to remove some of the small, dying and dead trees that
are choking the forest, but that is expensive to do. These trees have
little to no commercial value, so they cannot ``pay their way'' out of
the woods. Cellulosic nanomaterials are emerging as a new market for
low value wood, a market that will make it economical to improve forest
health, protect the town, and create jobs. The people of Yreka see the
possibilities, so they plan to install the first bridge deck in the
world reinforced with cellulosic nanomaterials. Later this spring,
community volunteers will conduct a test of this reinforced concrete.
We will bring the concrete truck, they will pour the concrete, and all
of us will be working together to build not just better infrastructure
and a better community but a better, cleaner, greener world. To show
our commitment to these efforts the Endowment conducted the largest
commercial application of cellulosic-infused concrete when we replaced
a more than 40 year old asphalt parking lot at our headquarters in
Greenville, SC. The results are real.
Cellulosic nanomaterials, and other innovative forest products are
going to make an impact. They will be part of flexible electronics, 3D
printing, more sustainable packaging, new-age composites for everything
from tennis rackets to rockets. We will build tall buildings with wood,
provide markets for the byproducts of forest restoration, and reduce
CO2 emissions from several industries. Forest products are
going to contribute to a sustainable future, and it all comes back to
trees and the forest. Markets like cellulosic nanomaterials, mass
timber and others can help us demonstrate the known value of forests.
When we value forests, we keep them instead of converting them for
development, and we are encouraged to promote long-term stewardship of
those forests. Good stewardship reduces risks from catastrophic
wildfire, insects and diseases. It promotes the health of our
watersheds and the sustainability of our planet. Even the tiniest bits
of them can make a giant contribution. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify before the Committee.
The Chair. Thank you, Mr. Goergen. We appreciate your
comments.
Ms. Cover, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER S. COVER, P.E., PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WoodWorks--WOOD
PRODUCTS COUNCIL, SAN MARCOS, CA
Ms. Cover. Thank you. Good morning, Chair Spanberger,
Ranking Member LaMalfa, and Members of the Subcommittee. I
appreciate the opportunity to be here today to testify about
innovative wood products. I would like to start by thanking the
Committee for enacting the Timber Innovation Act in the 2018
Farm Bill.
As mentioned in the introduction, I lead the WoodWorks
program, which is a nonprofit entity that removes barriers to
wood utilization commercial construction. We have provided
assistance on about 700 mass timber projects that have utilized
mass timber for some aspect of their design, and we have done
this for no cost, because we are a nonprofit entity. We also
provide about 300 educational opportunities throughout the U.S.
annually, which helps architects and engineers become more
familiar with designing with this type of material.
WoodWorks is a true public-private partnership in that
industry funding matches government funding at about a 3:1
ratio. Our primary industry funder is the Softwood Lumber
Board, an agricultural check off program, and our primary
government funder is the U.S. Forest Service. Chief Christensen
has been a huge key supporter of the WoodWorks program, and
together, we have accomplished some amazing things, including
opening up an entire new market for wood products in blast
resistant design.
I would like to draw your attention today to the importance
of supporting the use of innovative wood products in the built
environment. Let's start with what these products are. Mass
timber products are large structural panel members that can be
30' to 60' in length. For example, a floor system that can be
just dropped right into place on a construction site. And these
materials are made up of much smaller diameter materials,
whether it is veneer or 2x's or 1x's that are built up and
not--these typically come from smaller diameter trees, and that
is really where the win-win situation comes from in terms of
forest health and end-use construction benefits.
Why are these products important? First, from a forest
health perspective, mass timber has the ability to change the
conversation around landscape restoration efforts. Mass timber
can help keep our private lands forested because it creates a
new--sort of a brand-new market that is high value for the
materials coming off of our forests. Additionally, on our
public lands, it creates a new opportunity that is an
economical driver to help increase the cost recovery for the
Forest Service on their restoration projects. Additionally,
mass timber manufacturing will create new high-tech jobs in
these rural communities, and this could really change the face
of some of these communities. These manufacturing facilities
will offer opportunities such as computer and software
engineering related to CAD and building information modeling,
and that provides opportunities that aren't typically in these
types of areas.
Another significant benefit of building with mass timber is
the carbon sequestration attributes of the material. I have
included an example in the testimony packet here today of the
87,000'\2\ building on the campus of UMass Amherst, and on this
project, we calculated the carbon impact of using innovative
wood products instead of alternative more fossil fuel-intensive
materials, and we found that it was equivalent of being able to
pull over 500 cars off the road for an entire year. If we think
about this, it is scale. This is one building, and taking this
to scale, it is really quite impressive what the impact could
be.
I have touched on the clear tangible benefits to our
society, the improved forest health, the carbon reduction in
our atmosphere, as well as increased and better jobs for rural
communities. But what is driving the uptake of mass timber in
the marketplace is really the benefits from the design
community's perspective, and this includes the renewability of
the material, the aesthetic appeal, the speed of construction,
being the three main ones.
The opportunity that we are looking at is about 17,000
projects are built every year in the U.S. that do not utilize
wood construction, but there is really no code limitation on
those buildings. Those buildings could be wood by the building
code requirements. The only thing really keeping these
buildings from being built in wood is perception and education.
Mass timber is relatively new in the U.S., but internationally,
this is not a new material. It has been around for 30 years.
One manufacturer in Europe had told us that last year alone,
they supplied 500 projects with cross-laminated timber. And to
put that in perspective, here in the U.S., we had 38 projects
go to construction utilizing cross-laminated timber last year.
We are just at the very beginning of this building revolution
here in this country.
WoodWorks has been working hard to identify and resolve
hurdles to market adoption, and having the support of the
agricultural check off program and the U.S. Forest Service has
been really critical to our success.
In conclusion, I would love to see our legislative leaders
commit to a more sustainable built environment. I would like to
ask each of you to consider taking the lead by building
government structures in your states using mass timber.
WoodWorks will be there as a resource to help those design
teams along at no cost.
Thank you for your time and consideration this morning.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Cover follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jennifer S. Cover, P.E., President and Chief
Executive Officer, WoodWorks--Wood Products Council, San Marcos, CA
Introduction
Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member LaMalfa, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to you
today about innovative wood products. My name is Jennifer Cover and I
serve as the President and CEO of WoodWorks. I would like to start by
thanking the Committee for enacting the Timber Innovation Act in the
2018 Farm Bill.
WoodWorks is a nonprofit entity that provides project support to
the design and construction community that is seeking a more
sustainable way to design. At no cost, we help engineers, architects,
developers and general contractors navigate both the design and
construction process when using innovative wood structural systems.
Last year alone we provided technical assistance on over 350 building
projects, helping designers successfully construct offices, schools,
hotels, and commercial projects using innovative wood solutions. We
also offer over 300 educational opportunities annually around the
country.
WoodWorks is a true public-private partnership where industry
matches government funding on a 3:1 ratio. Our primary industry partner
is the Softwood Lumber Board, an agricultural check off program funded
by the softwood lumber industry. Our second key funding partner is the
U.S. Forest Service. Chief Christiansen has been a huge champion and
supporter of the WoodWorks program and we have made some amazing
advancements with their support.
Why Innovative Wood Products in the Built Environment?
Mass Timber products are large wood structural panel members, like
a 30' long floor panel that can simply be dropped into place. These
large panels are built up from much smaller materials which is what
creates this incredible win-win situation with forest health and end-
use construction benefits. A few of the materials that are considered
mass timber are CLT--cross laminated timber, NLT--nail laminated timber
and DLT--dowel laminated timber.
Improved Forest Health
Mass timber has the ability to change the conversation around
landscape restoration efforts. Mass timber usage creates additional
market demand for multiple products, which in turn keeps private
forests as forests, and makes a greater percentage of forest-types
economical. That can, in some regions, lead to better cost recovery on
restoration projects, such as those that are a focus of the Forest
Service to reduce the risk of wildfires. There are a few manufacturers
that are currently exploring the use of alternative species such as
Ponderosa Pine or that are looking at the inclusion of insect damaged
materials and both are showing promising results. These types of
advancements can start to create a high-value end-use market for
materials that have historically been of low value.
WoodWorks is working with the Forest Service to trace material from
restoration thinning on a National Forest through the manufacturing
process and into a completed wood building.
WoodWorks has just started to engage in the French Meadows
projects, a unique partnership between the Forest Service, The Nature
Conservancy, Placer County Water Agency and numerous others, on the
Tahoe National Forest. We are working to identify ways in which
material coming out of the forest can find its way into mass timber.
Tree species in the Sierra Nevada are currently being tested to confirm
that they meet the criteria of use in mass timber. Should the results
of this testing go as expected, it has the potentially to open up a
significant volume of lumber for use in mass timber in an area where
there is a significant need for forest management.
Increased and Improved Rural Jobs
Additionally, mass timber manufacturing will create high tech jobs
in rural communities which could change the face of some of these
communities by offering opportunities that are not currently an option
in some of these areas. Such as computer and software engineering roles
for CAD and building modeling as well as building layout.
Carbon Sequestration
Another significant benefit of building with mass timber is the
carbon sequestration attributes of the material. As a tree grows it
sucks carbon dioxide out of our air and locks it into the wood fiber
where it remains stored for the lifetime of the building which is
typically more than 3 or 4 decades and even longer if the material is
reclaimed or re-used. Meanwhile, the regenerating forest continues the
cycle of carbon absorption. Additionally, wood products typically
require less embodied energy to manufacture than other building
materials, and most of that comes from renewable biomass (e.g., bark
and other residual fiber) instead of fossil fuels. Substituting wood
for fossil fuel-intensive materials is a way of avoiding GHG emissions.
Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies consistently show that wood
outperforms other materials in this area (Sathre and O'Connor, 2010).
When using a carbon calculator to evaluate the environmental impact, we
often see that the use of wood as opposed to a more highly fossil fuel
intensive material in a typical 100,000'\2\ multifamily project can
have the environmental carbon impact equivalent to pulling 500 cars off
the road for an entire year. A specific example is for the 87,000'\2\
student building at the UMass Amherst, we calculated that that the use
of innovative wood products had the environmental carbon impact
equivalency to pulling 535 cars off the road for a year. When you think
about the impact of this at scale, it is quite impressive. Especially
when you consider that this benefit is currently often overlooked but
something we are now actively educating about.
Market Drivers
I have touched on the clear tangible benefits to our society--
improved forest health, reducing the carbon in the atmosphere and
increased as well as better jobs for rural communities, but what is
driving the uptake of mass timber in the marketplace is the benefit
from the design community's perspective.
The key market drivers from the design community's perspective are:
1. Renewability: It is the only renewable and sustainable building
material that is literately grown by the sun and acts like
a sponge sucking carbon dioxide out of our air.
2. Aesthetic appeal: owners are finding mass timber office buildings
are renting quicker and at premium rates. Additionally,
there is scientific evidence linking exposed wood to
healthier work and learning environments.
3. Speed on construction: Most projects are finding that mass timber
projects can be built on average 25% faster than projects
built with what would be considered more traditional
materials. Please see attached case study Candlewood Suites
for more specific information. In this project the
structural system went up 37% faster and the overall
project was 20% faster than their historical projects with
traditional materials.
4. Field labor shortages and safer working conditions: The
construction industry today faces labor shortages. Since
much of the work for mass timber buildings is done in a
factory the labor is shifted to a controlled environment
and there are fewer laborers needed on site.
5. Elevated structural performance: mass timber is a lighter and
more ductile material so [it] performs better in earthquake
and high wind situations
Building owners are achieving all these benefits for similar or
less overall costs--this is why WW has already helped on almost 700
projects using MT for some aspect of their design.
Mass Timber Projects In Design and Constructed in the U.S.
(December 2019)
This has been an exponential growth experience. WW hosted the first
CLT symposium in 2013 and that year we had a half a dozen designers
reach out to us to try a project, now just 7 years later we are helping
on 458 projects.
The only thing keeping buildings from being built in wood is
perception and education. To put U.S. mass timber momentum in
perspective--if I just pull CLT, there were 38 CLT buildings
constructed last year in the U.S. And if we look to Europe, one
manufacturer alone supplied over 500 projects to a region not much
larger than Texas. There are 17,000 buildings that are currently being
built annually within the building types that WoodWorks focuses on.
These buildings are currently being constructed with materials that are
more fossil fuel-intensive than wood and all those buildings could be
built using wood by code. There is an incredible conversion opportunity
in front of us.
Hurdles
The role of WoodWorks is to provide project level support but also
to identify hurdles to market adoption and remove them.
Blast Testing
When we realized that wood was cut out of all conversations on
military projects because of weak performance in blast applications,
WoodWorks set out on a joint project using funds authorized by the
Timber Innovation Act with the FS to remove that hurdle. We conducted
blast testing at Tyndall [Air F]orce [B]ase and are now working with
the PDC to get the new guidelines written into the military building
code. This opens an entire new market for mass timber solutions, and we
aren't stopping there. Our next step is to help with the application
and to work with those designing military projects to educate them on
these new opportunities.
General Contractor Resistance
Another hurdle we ran across was with the general contractors and
installers of mass timber. Often the architect, engineer and building
owner were all extremely excited to move forward with an innovative
wood solution and it would be the general contractor that would be
reluctant. The response was often, that they were unfamiliar with the
material, they did not know how to price the job, how to sequence their
sub-contractors or how to handle the material. With the support of the
FS we launched an educational program within a year of conceiving the
vision and I am proud to say that our first workshop in Seattle sold
out within the first 2 weeks and we had to move it to a larger venue
where it sold out again.
Engineering Education
Currently 100% of the Universities that offer structural
engineering degrees in the U.S. require that their students take steel
and concrete design but less than 50% even offer a timber design course
and if they do it is usually an elective. This may have made sense when
wood was only used in single family homes but with the advancement of
the building codes to the point where the International Code Council
now allows up to 18 story multifamily and commercial structures with
mass timber, there is a serious knowledge gap that WoodWorks is filling
to make sure architects, engineers and general contractors have the
resources they need to successfully build these projects.
Conclusion
We are a small program, but we are also nimble which allows us to
meet the needs of this quickly evolving innovative wood product market.
Having the support of the agricultural check off program and the U.S.
Forest [S]ervice has been critical to our success in meeting the needs
of this quickly evolving industry.
Supporting mass timber means supporting a building solution that:
1. Reduces the environmental impact of the built environment by
sequestering carbon.
2. Provides a sustainable and competitive option for developers.
3. Creates a healthy and desirable work and learning environment for
occupants.
4. Increases and improves rural jobs.
5. Improves the health of our forests by creating an economic
incentive for landscape restoration [related efforts].
I would love to see our legislative leaders take the lead by
committing to build several government structures more sustainably by
using mass timber. It does not need to be preferential treatment of one
material over the other, just a level playing field that encourages the
consideration of materials that historically have not been given an
opportunity to compete. I hope you will consider encouraging government
structures in your states to consider mass timber and just know that
WoodWorks is here to help those design teams if they need it for no
cost.
attachment 1
Case Study_Candlewood Suites'
Construction Advantages Sell Hotel Developer on CLT
CLT builds faster and more safely with fewer workers
From the outside, it looks similar to the thousands of other hotels
built across the country in 2015. But when you learn that this project
was completed 37 percent faster and the structure built with 44 percent
fewer person hours than similar hotels, it warrants a closer look.
Developer Lendlease used cross-laminated timber (CLT) to build the
four-story, 62,688'\2\ Candlewood Suites' hotel at Redstone
Arsenal, a U.S. Army post near Huntsville, Alabama. Completed in
December 2015, the project exemplifies one of the biggest benefits of
CLT-construction efficiency.
The 92-room structure, the first hotel built in the U.S. using CLT,
is part of the Privatization of Army Lodging (PAL) program, a 50 year
public-private partnership between the U.S. Army and Lendlease, a well-
known international development company. PAL is designed to provide
quality private-sector hotel lodging for soldiers and guests on U.S.
Army installations and joint bases. Along with this property, Lendlease
owns PAL hotels on more than 40 military installations. The hotels are
operated by IHG', the InterContinental Hotels Group.
Lendlease is no stranger to CLT construction. In 2012, the
company's Australian office built Forte, a ten-story CLT residential
building in Melbourne. Even so, the decision to use CLT on this U.S.
project was not automatic. As owner, developer, design-builder and
asset manager for all lodging in the PAL program, Lendlease has built
the majority of its new hotels with conventional steel stud framing.
So, before Jeff Morrow, Program Manager for Lendlease, could convince
the team to use CLT for the Redstone Arsenal property, he thoroughly
researched the idea and presented the potential opportunities of using
CLT for this commercial application.
``As an architect, I was initially skeptical of the concept,'' said
Charles Starck, Senior Architect/Design Manager of Project Management
and Construction at Lendlease, ``but the more I learned, the more I
realized this could be a game changer. It's not often that an architect
gets a chance to get in on the ground floor of something that's going
to have such a profound impact on the industry. Once I realized what
fundamental change we could affect with CLT and heavy timber, I was on
board.''
Constructability
Ease and speed of construction are two of the greatest advantages
afforded by the CLT building system. The Lendlease team not only
erected the structure 37 percent faster with 44 percent fewer person
hours than their typical hotels, they did so using just an 11-person
crew--three experienced carpenters and eight laborers. The laborers
were formerly unemployed veterans who were trained at the Redstone
Arsenal jobsite.
Construction speed was increased mainly because CLT panels arrive
prefabricated, which greatly improves efficiency. ``Coordination with
the CLT supplier allowed us to control the sequence; the trucks arrived
loaded with panels in the order we needed them,'' said Bill Tobin, Vice
President and Master Superintendent at Lendlease.
Crews were also able to work through everything an Alabama winter
could dish out. ``We worked in the rain almost half the time,'' added
Tobin. ``That's the beauty of CLT construction: we could work safely in
almost any condition and in all types of weather. We just made sure to
measure moisture content of the wood before applying finishes to the
structure.'' Most CLT manufacturers will provide a sealant on panel
edges and often on the faces. Because the end grain of the lumber is
not taking the brunt of the weather exposure, CLT panels do not readily
absorb water that can accumulate during construction.
Jobsite safety was another benefit, said Tobin. ``Lendlease is
extremely safety conscious. CLT panels allowed us to erect walls
quickly and safely, with very few crew members working in the radius
and swing fall of the crane.'' Erection crews assembled safety devices
and handrails to panels while they were still on the ground so, as each
connecting floor panel was lifted into place, the area was immediately
safe for workers. Once the floor deck was installed, crews enclosed the
exterior of the building before coming back to install the interior
walls. This allowed them to eliminate the potential for falls from
elevated heights to the exterior as quickly as possible. The approach
enabled the team to safely install almost 400'\2\ of floor every 20
minutes with just three workers.
The fact that eight members of the crew could be trained on site
opens far-reaching possibilities for Lendlease. In fact, the industry's
shrinking skilled labor force favors CLT construction. A 2015 survey of
construction personnel executives \1\ warned that labor shortages could
slow future construction; 24 percent of respondents said they would be
unable to bid more work and 32 percent said they would experience slow
growth if their companies could not reasonably meet the need for
skilled labor and tradespeople. ``It is definitely becoming harder to
find people to build,'' said Morrow. ``CLT gave us the opportunity to
build this quality building with fewer people.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Wilson, K. and P. Warner, FMI, Craft Labor Recruiting and
Retention 2015 Survey Report.
The Case for CLT Construction
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Typical New Redstone
PAL Portfolio PAL Hotel Arsenal Difference
(Actual *) (Actual)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross square feet (sf) 54,891 62,688 +14%
Average # of employees 18 (peak 26) 10 (peak 11) ^43%
Structural duration (days) 123 78 ^37%
Structural person hours 14,735 8,203 ^44%
Structural production rate/ 460 sf 803 sf +75%
day
Overall schedule 15 months 12 months ^20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* PAL New Build Hotel Historical Average.
Source: Lendlease.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Project Overview
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Candlewood Suites at Redstone Arsenal
Location: Redstone Arsenal, AL
Owner: Lendlease New York, NY
Architect: Lendlease Nashville, TN/Leidos St.
Paul, MN
Project Engineer: Schaefer Structural Engineers
Cincinnati, OH
CLT Engineer and Fabricator: Nordic Structures Montreal,
Quebec
General Contractor: Lendlease Nashville, TN
Completed: December 2015
Cost Considerations
Since Lendlease owns and is responsible for maintaining the
Candlewood Suites at Redstone Arsenal, ongoing cost was a key
consideration. ``In the past, we've used light-gauge metal stud framing
for the hotels on military installations,'' said Morrow. ``We cost-
modeled the CLT system against data collected on our buildings
constructed with metal studs and found we could save with the CLT,
mostly because we were able to frame the building so much faster.''
The cost analysis was not an apples-to-apples comparison. Labor
costs were higher at Redstone Arsenal than at some other military
installations, which further added to the advantage of CLT for this
project. ``CLT was a more expensive material but installation was
faster, so we thought this project would be our best opportunity to
take advantage of CLT's overall cost effectiveness compared to
traditional framing materials,'' Morrow said. ``In addition, Lendlease
will realize additional hotel revenues from the earlier completion,
which is another benefit of using CLT.'' Faster construction results in
lower capital costs and quicker hotel occupancy.
While some designers choose CLT out of a desire to expose the wood
structure to the building's interior, that was not the case for this
hotel as it has no exposed wood. The design team made this decision in
part so Lendlease could simplify the approval process, but also to meet
IHG's aesthetic brand. With a Type IIIB structure, wood exposure is
possible but would have changed the methods for proving fire
resistance. ``Some in the industry think that CLT is best used for
pretty, wood-focused applications. However, it can be just as effective
for core and shell structural systems, even when it is buried in
finishes and clad, because it is easy, simple and speedy to install,''
said Tobin. ``Redstone taught us that CLT has a place in the market for
non-exposed, utilitarian applications.''
Starck agreed, saying, ``We've proven at Redstone that CLT can be
made to work economically in the high end of the low- and mid-rise
sectors. Because this represents a large percentage of construction,
this is where we can make some serious changes in how we build
buildings.''
Mass Timber Structure
As is typical of a mass timber structure, the four-story,
rectangular slab-on-grade hotel used CLT for all exterior walls,
parapet walls, interior walls, elevated floor slabs and roof deck. The
structure also utilized glulam columns and beams.
While thicker CLT can span up to 25' without beams or columns, the
3\1/8\" thick roof panels of this Candlewood Suites spanned 16\1/2\'.
In a CLT structure, floors can rest directly on columns without
intermediate beams at panel edges because of the bi-directional
capacity afforded by CLT's cross-lamination. Redstone's floor panels
were 7" thick and walls came in a variety of thicknesses, with 3" and
4" thick interior and demising walls and 4" thick exterior walls. Wall
height at each level was 10\1/2\'. The entire stairwell assembly--
including shaft walls (which were protected with gypsum to meet the 2
hour fire-resistance requirement), stringers, treads, risers, support
beams and landings--was composed of CLT and glulam.
Altogether, the project used 1,557 CLT panels, 11 glulam columns,
44 glulam beams and more than 200,000 CLT fasteners. The sizable number
of fasteners was due in large part to the military's blast resistance
requirements and is not typical for most CLT construction.
CLT's Sweet Spot
Use of CLT makes the most sense when a project faces at least
three of four common conditions.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Building Design
Energy efficiency, moisture and sound protection are always
considerations for quality builders. But they were especially important
on this project since the builder, Lendlease, is also the owner of the
hotel.
``Like most architects, moisture concerns keep me up at night,''
joked Starck. ``I would rather be able to sleep well, so we took a few
simple steps to keep things dry inside.''
As with all multi-story wood construction, the team had to consider
shrinkage and swelling due to fluctuations in environmental conditions.
``But shrinkage was a not a major concern for this project,'' said Doug
Steimle, P.E., Principal at Schaefer Structural Engineers. ``CLT
shrinks very little in any direction since most of the shrinkage in the
wood has taken place during the drying process, prior to panel lay-up.
This reduces the potential for any further dimensional changes once the
panels are in place.''
They also had to consider the differential movement between CLT and
other materials. This Candlewood Suites featured a full-height, four-
story concrete brick veneer with a continuous drainage plane behind the
cladding. ``To overcome the prescriptive limits for the height of the
brick veneer, we used an engineered concrete brick product that is
self-supporting up to 85','' said Steimle. ``This means we didn't have
to support the brick at each floor, which would have complicated the
building envelope design.''
Typical detailing includes supporting the brick at each floor
level, increasing the number of possible locations for bulk water
intrusion. The advantage of supporting the brick at each floor is that
shrinkage can be isolated at each level and doesn't accumulate at the
top of the structure. ``But not supporting brick at each floor
typically forces us to address the cumulative change between the wood
structure and the brick veneer at either the top or bottom of the full-
height wall, which is not always easy,'' continued Steimle. ``Because
there was so little wood shrinkage, this was not a difficult task with
CLT. The anticipated differential movement for the four-story wall was
less than \1/4\".''
They also installed a weep and vent system to ensure air
circulation behind the cladding. The continuous brick veneer allowed
them to maintain the drainage plane from top to bottom without being
interrupted by shelf angles attached to the structure at every floor.
``That was unusual,'' said Starck. ``You don't see a lot of buildings
with a continuous drainage plane like that. Our goal was to make sure
that any condensation which does get into the envelope has free passage
down to [the] weep holes, where it can exit the system.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Force Protection
Candlewood Suites at Redstone Arsenal required extensive design
collaboration between Lendlease and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Protective Design Center (USACE PDC). Because it is located on a U.S.
military base, the structure needed to meet Anti-Terrorism and Force
Protection (ATFP) standards. Since CLT is not listed as a conventional
building type for meeting ATFP standoff, blast resistance and
progressive collapse, the design team needed to seek approval from the
USACE PDC. Lendlease, their design consultants and the CLT manufacturer
supplied extensive engineering analyses to prove compliance with the
standards.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLT Overview
CLT is an innovative engineered wood product originally developed in
Europe, but gaining popularity among North American building designers.
It can be used for walls, floors and roofs of both residential and
commercial structures. CLT panels consist of layers of dimension lumber
or structural composite lumber (SCL) glued together under pressure with
the grain of the boards in one layer running perpendicular to the grain
in adjacent layers. CLT is typically manufactured in three-, five-,
seven- and nine-ply panels up to 10 wide and 64 long, and then cut to
exact specifications. Panels are engineered for specific use in a
building and can be pre-cut with window and door openings.
CLT is dimensionally stable and strong, creating an effective
lateral load-resisting system. Panels perform exceptionally well in
multi-story applications.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tobin added, ``We didn't use intermediate weeps or drains except
around the flashing details of windows and penetrations. We used the
mechanical flashing plus a peel-and-stick counter flashing as well as a
fluid-applied membrane.''
Energy efficiency was also important to Lendlease. By design, CLT
systems are intended to provide a tighter building envelope with less
air infiltration than conventional light-gauge steel framing. CLT
panels for the hotel were manufactured to a tolerance of less than \1/
16\", which is far tighter than anything that can be achieved in the
field using conventional construction and materials. ``I think quality
control was much easier to manage in this building,'' said Tobin. ``It
was simple to train the crew on correct installation and, since the
panels were true, it gave us a tighter core and shell.''
To further improve energy performance, Lendlease installed 1\1/2\"
of mineral wool as continuous insulation. The high R-value and
airtightness of this system reduced the size of the HVAC equipment
required to heat and cool the building. Lendlease projects that the
Redstone Arsenal Candlewood Suites will be 31 percent more energy
efficient than previously-built PAL hotels of similar size. In
addition, the hotel achieved LEED Silver certification.
Sound control is also critically important in hotels. On its own,
CLT could not meet IHG's acoustical requirement between units. However,
field testing showed that the CLT floor and wall assemblies used at
Redstone Arsenal produced a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating
substantially greater than that required by code. ``The building code
requires a minimum 50 STC between units, but our hotel operator
requires an STC of 55 so that is what we designed for, using an
assembly engineered by an acoustical consultant,'' Starck said. ``After
we completed construction and had our assemblies in place, we did some
field testing. Our lowest Field Sound Transmission Class (FSTC) for the
wall came in at 63. The CLT floor assembly achieved a Field Impact
Insulation Class (FIIC) rating of 74, which was also substantially more
than the Impact Insulation Class rating of 50 required by code.'' Field
tests typically yield results which are one to three points lower than
laboratory tests. The high FSTC rating demonstrates that this CLT
assembly has better sound absorption qualities than originally
determined by theoretical analysis.
Interior Wall and Floor Assembly
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: Lendlease.
One of the issues of CLT design is choosing where to run conduit
for electrical, HVAC and other utilities. Rather than routing out the
CLT panels, the design team decided to run 1\1/2\" furring strips on
the inside of the assembly, adding additional insulation in the cavity
and supporting a gypsum board finish. A \1/4\" air gap between the CLT
and furring wall allowed conduit to fit between the gypsum board and
the face of the CLT panel.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Understanding the Fire Performance of CLT
Candlewood Suites at Redstone Arsenal was designed and built
to IBC 2012, Type IIIB construction, R-1 occupancy
(hospitality), and was also required to comply with the Unified
Facilities Criteria (UFC), which incorporates the requirements
of the IBC plus Department of Defense-specific and anti-
terrorism provisions. While it is standard that all Candlewood
Suites be sprinklered regardless of height and area, fire
resistance was still a consideration because of both the
occupancy and requirements of the construction type.
While it has been used in Europe for more than 20 years, CLT
is still relatively new to North America and was not an
approved structural material under the 2012 IBC. To use CLT at
the Candlewood Suites hotel, Lendlease took advantage of
Section 104.11, Alternative Materials, Design and Methods of
Construction and Equipment, of the 2012 IBC. Using this code-
approved procedure, Lendlease had to prove that the building
had structural, fire protection and seismic resistance
equivalent to the prescriptive requirements of the building
code; this required extensive engineering analysis and rigorous
design methodologies. Since fire-rated assemblies for CLT did
not exist in the IBC, Lendlease used the Calculated Fire
Resistance provisions of IBC Section 722, to determine assembly
fire-resistance ratings.
A great deal of research is available on the fire performance
of CLT and other mass timber products. For example, the
American Wood Council (AWC) conducted a fire-resistance test on
a load-bearing CLT wall in 2012, which contributed to the
inclusion of CLT in the 2015 IBC. Conducted in accordance with
ASTM E-119-11a (Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of
Building Construction and Materials), the test evaluated CLT's
fire-resistance properties. A five-ply CLT wall (approximately
6\7/8\" thick) was covered on each side with a single layer of
\5/8\" Type X gypsum wallboard and then loaded to 87,000
pounds, the maximum load attainable by the testing equipment.
The 10x10' test specimen lasted 3 hours, 5 minutes and 57
seconds--well beyond the 2 hour goal.
More recently, AWC sponsored two demonstration fire tests \2\
of typical residential occupancies. The test compartments were
8' 7" high, with a footprint of approximately 6x12'. One
compartment was made with CLT walls and ceiling, and the other
with CLT walls and a nail-laminated timber ceiling; both were
fully protected with gypsum wallboard. After approximately 180
minutes of burning and temperatures reaching 2,000 F, the
gypsum was removed. The structural wood had remained below char
temperature throughout the test, demonstrating that protected
mass timber can provide adequate fire performance in
residential construction, even under the extreme scenario in
which automatic fire sprinklers fail and fire service is unable
to respond quickly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ American Wood Council, Technical Data in Support of G165-PC2:
NLT-CLT Compartment Fire Tests Summary, September 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information on CLT research, visit the mass timber
section of the reThink Wood website (www.rethinkwood.com), or
download the paper, CLT Research: Available and Accessible to
North American Building Designers.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Podesto, L. and S. Breneman, CLT Research: Available and
Accessible to North American Building Designers--Wood Design Focus,
Volume 26, No. 1, 2016, www.woodworks.org/wp-content/uploads/CLT-
Research_Podesto_Breneman.pdf.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Advantages Add Up
Quicker to build. Cost effective to construct. Quieter. More energy
efficient. Easier and safer to erect. Environmentally friendly.
CLT's advantages added up.
Even with the additional requirements of blast protection, the
Candlewood Suites at Redstone Arsenal demonstrates that CLT is an
effective option for non-military hotels and other mid-rise projects.
``Utilization of CLT is an extremely collaborative process,'' said
Morrow. ``A lot of the success with this project was due, not only to
what Lendlease did, but also to the fact that we had some very
competent, able and willing partners, including Nordic Engineered Wood
and Schaefer, who were both willing to help us succeed. You can't build
with new materials in a vacuum; you must have good partners along the
way.''
Morrow added, ``CLT gave us the opportunity to build a more robust,
higher quality and higher performing hotel than we've built in the
past. It's just better building.''
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Carbon Benefits
Wood lowers a building's carbon footprint in two ways. It continues
to store carbon absorbed by the tree while growing, keeping it out of
the atmosphere for the lifetime of the building--longer if the wood is
reclaimed and reused or manufactured into other products. When used in
place of fossil fuel-intensive materials such as steel and concrete, it
also results in `avoided' greenhouse gas emissions.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Volume of wood products used: 935,696 board feet (equivalent)
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. and Canadian forests grow this much wood in: 5 minutes
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Carbon stored in the wood: 1,276 metric tons of CO2
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Avoided greenhouse gas emissions: 494 metric tons of
CO2
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Total Potential Carbon Benefit: 1,770 metric tons of
CO2
Equivalent To:
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
374 cars off the road for a year
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Energy to operate 187 homes for a year
Source: U.S. EPA.
Estimated by the Wood Carbon Calculator for Buildings, based
on research by Sarthre, R. and J. O'Connor, 2010, A Synthesis
of Research on Wood Products and Greenhouse Gas Impacts,
FPInnovations. Note: CO2 on this chart refers to
CO2 equivalent.
Use the carbon calculator to estimate the carbon benefits of
wood buildings. Visit woodworks.org.
Disclaimer: The information in this publication, including,
without limitation, references to information contained in
other publications or made available by other sources
(collectively ``information'') should not be used or relied
upon for any application without competent professional
examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, code
compliance and applicability by a licensed engineer, architect
or other professional. Neither the Wood Products Council nor
its employees, consultants, nor any other individuals or
entities who contributed to the information make any warranty,
representative or guarantee, expressed or implied, that the
information is suitable for any general or particular use, that
it is compliant with applicable law, codes or ordinances, or
that it is free from infringement of any patent(s), nor do they
assume any legal liability or responsibility for the use,
application of and/or reference to the information. Anyone
making use of the information in any manner assumes all
liability arising from such use.
WoodWorks Case Study WW-020 Candlewood
Suites' at Redstone Arsenal
2016 WoodWorks Image
credits: (photos) Lendlease
Attachment 2
powerpoint presentation
714 Mass Timber Building Projects
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Blast Testing
Removing Hurdles and Opening New Markets
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Image Credit: USDA FS FPL/SLB/WoodWorks Live Blast Testing at
Tyndall Air Force Base http://www.woodworks.org/publications-
media/blast-testing-research/.
Working closely with partner organizations, WoodWorks
provides technical support to advance wood research in North
America. When Lendlease began considering mass timber for what
became the first CLT hotel on a U.S. army base, WoodWorks
initiated blast testing research and CLT is now included in the
military building code.
The CLT blast testing shows just how strong this material can
be. It performed exceptionally well and Lendlease is now
utilizing CLT to construct Candlewood Suites hotels and guest
lodging at U.S. Army bases across the country.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Photos: LEVER Architecture.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Cover.
Dr. Henry, please proceed with your testimony.
STATEMENT OF JOSHUA A. HENRY, Ph.D., PRESIDENT AND CO-FOUNDER,
GO LAB INC., BELFAST, ME
Dr. Henry. Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member LaMalfa, and
Members of the Committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to
appear before you today to discuss the key role that innovative
wood products can play in strengthening rural economies and
promoting healthy forest management.
My name is Joshua Henry. I am a materials chemist and the
President of GO Lab, a building products company based in
Belfast, Maine. Next year, our company will become the first in
North America to manufacture a recyclable, renewable, non-toxic
construction insulation made from softwood residuals, the
byproduct of lumber production.
I am thrilled to be here because our story is one that is
going to need to become more common if rural communities and
economies are going to be able to succeed. GO Lab started over
4 years ago when my business partner, Matt O'Malia, and I
realized that there was a suite of construction insulation
products in Europe made from softwood fiber that were doing
roughly $600 million in annual revenue, and yet not being
manufactured anywhere in North America. The realization was
both interesting and confusing to us because the technology to
manufacture these products had been around for over 20 years,
and had resulted in a renewable, recyclable, and non-toxic
insulation that, from a performance and application standpoint,
was a great fit for the North American building market.
Matt and I did not intend to become manufacturers. At the
time, I was a professor in the chemistry department at the
University of Maine. Matt, an architect, had founded a company
that designed and built the first certified Passive Haus
building in Maine, 12th in the United States, and has since
grown exponentially and achieved national prominence in the
field of energy efficient building design and construction.
We just wanted to answer one question: why had these
products, which are both cost and logistically prohibitive to
import, never been manufactured in North America? I am here
talking to you today because there is no good answer to this
question. In fact, what we have found out is that due to the
cost of energy, raw materials, and labor in the United States,
this suite of products can be manufactured and distributed here
at a lower cost relative to Europe, and more importantly, can
be cost competitive with all the other construction insulations
on the U.S. market. That revelation led me to, somewhat
prematurely, quit my job in academia and focus on bringing the
technology to manufacture these products to the United States.
The other substantial motivator was the challenging
situation that has transpired over the last 4 years in Maine's
forest products industry. During this time, six paper mills
have closed and over 5,000 jobs have been lost, resulting in
$1.5 billion in reduced economic impact in this sector. Maine
is the most forested state in the country, and our forests are
our greatest natural resource, and they are also a large part
of our identity as a state. And Matt and I felt like we had a
meaningful, achievable concept for bringing new economic
opportunity, jobs, and sustainability to this critical
industry.
That was 3 years ago. Today, the demolition and renovation
phase of GO Labs first U.S. manufacturing facility in one of
those closed paper mills, the former UPM facility in Madison,
Maine, is underway and at this time next year, that facility
will be manufacturing the first of three wood fiber insulation
composites.
We have gotten to this point thanks to a substantial
private equity raise, robust support from Maine's Department of
Economic and Community Development, and grants from both the
Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Forest Service.
That support has allowed us to employ many of the top
manufacturing personnel from that mill. Once up and running,
our operation in Madison will employ more than 120 people,
generate over $100 million in revenue, and will have introduced
a new value-added manufactured forest product to the nation
that will inevitably result in future plants in rural
communities across the United States.
In closing, I should note that our success, unfortunately,
is not the norm. While there are many reasons for this, two
have particularly stood out as an obstacle to attracting the
investment that meaningful projects like ours require. The
first is the migration of our nation's economy away from
manufacturing. The second is the increased concentration of
wealth in the hands of very few. While I could probably write
you a treatise on each topic, I will simply note that both
factors have the same effect: to diminish the pool of qualified
investors that have the capacity, understanding, and interest
in unleashing the dormant economic potential of our rural
communities.
Thank you for the opportunity to share our story.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Henry follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joshua A. Henry, Ph.D., President and Co-Founder,
GO Lab Inc., Belfast, ME
Introduction
Chair Spanberger, Ranking Member LaMalfa, and Members of the
Committee, I'm grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today
to discuss the key role innovative wood products can play in
strengthening rural economies and promoting healthy forest management.
My name is Joshua Henry. I'm a materials chemist and President of
GO Lab, a building products company based in Belfast, Maine.
Next year, our company will become the first in North American to
manufacture a recyclable, renewable, nontoxic construction insulation
made from softwood residuals--the byproduct of lumber production.
The GO Lab Story
I am thrilled to be here because I think our story is one that is
going to need to become more common, if rural communities and economies
are going to be able to succeed.
GO Lab started over 4 years ago, when my business partner Matt
O'Malia and I realized that there was a suite of construction
insulation products in Europe-made from softwood fiber--that were not
being manufactured anywhere in North America. That realization was both
interesting and confusing to us because the technology to manufacture
these products had been around for over 20 years and had resulted in a
renewable, recyclable, and nontoxic insulation that--from a performance
and application standpoint--was a great fit for the North American
building market.
Matt and I did not intend on becoming manufacturers.
At the time, I was a professor in the chemistry department at the
University of Maine. Matt, an architect, had founded a company that
designed and built the first certified Passive Haus building in Maine
(12th in the U.S.) and has since grown exponentially and achieved
national prominence in the field of energy efficient building design
and construction.
We just wanted to answer one question: why had these products,
which are both cost and logistically prohibitive to import, never been
manufactured in North America?
I am here talking to you today because there is no good answer to
this question.
In fact, what we have found out is that--due to the cost of energy,
raw materials and labor in the United States--this suite of products
can be manufactured and distributed here at a lower cost, relative to
Europe, and most importantly, can be cost competitive with all of the
other construction insulations on the U.S. market. That revelation led
me to, somewhat prematurely, quit my job in academia and focus on
bringing the technology to manufacture these products to the United
States.
The other substantial motivator was the challenging situation that
has transpired over the last 4 years in Maine's forest products
industry. During this time, six paper mills have closed and over 5,000
jobs have been lost, resulting in $1.5 billion in reduced economic
impact.
The forests are Maine's greatest natural resource.
They're a large part of our identity as a state.
And Matt and I felt like we had a meaningful, achievable concept
for bringing new economic opportunity, jobs and sustainability to this
critical industry.
That was 3 years ago.
Today, the demolition and renovation phase at GO Lab's first U.S.
manufacturing facility, at the former UPM Paper mill in Madison, Maine,
is underway and at this time next year, that facility will be
manufacturing the first of the three wood fiber insulation products.
We have gotten to this point thanks to a substantial private equity
raise, robust support from Maine's Department of Economic and Community
Development and grants from both the Environmental Protection Agency
and the U.S. Forest Service.
That support has allowed us to employ three of the top
manufacturing personnel from that mill. Once up and running, our
operation in Madison will employ more than 120 people, generate over
$100 million in revenue and will have introduced a new, value-added
manufactured forest product to the nation that will inevitably result
in future plants in rural communities across the U.S.
That outcome is virtually assured by ongoing changes in code
requirements for energy efficiency in buildings. Motivated by a desire
to reduce the operational and environmental cost of our built
environment--and to contribute to our shared national objective of
energy independence--states and municipalities have adopted building
codes, vetted by the U.S. Department of Energy that, on average, reduce
the energy consumption of new buildings at a rate of 3% per year.
But that reduction in operational energy consumption, achieved by
the insulation that currently dominates the $11 billion U.S. market, is
substantially offset by the energy consumed during the manufacturing
process used to produce these products.
The insulating wood composites GO Lab is bringing to market are
different.
They require minimal energy to make.
As the only scalable insulation made from organic matter, wood
fiber insulation has the unique ability to sequester carbon dioxide.
The end result is a group of manufactured products with the unusual
distinction of having an environmental footprint that is actually
positive.
Thank you for the opportunity to share our story.
The Chair. Thank you very much for your testimony.
This is such an incredibly exciting topic and I am grateful
for you all being present here today. Members will be
recognized for questions in order of seniority for Members who
were here at the start of the hearing, and after that, Members
will be recognized in order of arrival.
I will begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
I am so excited to be holding this hearing today, and I
thank you all for your enthusiasm on what I think to be a
really fascinating topic.
Mr. Goergen, I would like to start with you because in my
notes, when you were talking, I was really just tremendously
impressed by the possibility that exists when we are looking at
cellulose technology. I am a mother of three children, and when
you mentioned snack packs and replacements for snack packs, you
might not have been able to see it from here, but my eyes lit
up: so I am excited about that possibility.
But I was wondering if you could speak at a little bit more
length about two things: first, specific to my district in my
state, we have talked about innovative wood products and how
they can make more forest types economical. One of the most
abundant tree species in my home State of Virginia is the
yellow poplar, and while this tree species has many desirable
traits, the market for hardwoods isn't as robust as some
softwoods. Can you discuss some of the ways that nanotechnology
could expand potentially options for hardwoods in places like
Virginia? First portion of my question, and then my second is
could you dive in a little bit more about the growth that you
all are pursuing in Yreka, California?
Mr. Goergen. Sure. Thanks for the question, and I am
concerned about snack packaging too for my kids, both in terms
of the impact on the world, but also the plastics that are in
those containers that actually can transfer into the food as
well. Those are the kinds of solutions that we are offering,
and it is pretty exciting.
When we look at yellow poplar as a potential source for
nanocellulose, the great news is nanocellulose can be made from
any material. It doesn't matter. We can make it from any tree
species that is out there. There is a huge window for us, and
what is really interesting too----
The Chair. And has there been research in all different
tree species at this point?
Mr. Goergen. Yes.
The Chair. Wow. Okay.
Mr. Goergen. We have looked at hardwood, we have looked at
western woods. Typically the easiest method to make
nanocellulose is from paper, and you have paper manufacturing,
of course, in Virginia. But, we can actually make it from raw
wood as well, which we have demonstrated.
The Chair. And can you make it from recycled paper,
previously utilized paper?
Mr. Goergen. Yes, yes, and we have done that, again, in
this project in Yreka, California. I am glad you asked about
Yreka.
What is really interesting there is what we have done is we
looked at the forests in California and we said, ``There is a
huge problem here. There is no market for a lot of these
materials. They are really low value. Can we take raw wood from
Yreka and turn it into nanocellulose?'' We did that. We
actually used some recycled fiber in combination with that as
well, so we could demonstrate all those things at once.
And what we are trying to do there is we are actually
building a bridge deck that is completely made from
nanocellulose. We have done it. We made the deck; we just need
to install it and we are waiting for----
The Chair. And when you are talking about bridge deck, you
are talking about the actual bridge that cars and people would
cross?
Mr. Goergen. This is the full deck that they--people will
drive over. In fact, actually it is a logging road, so logging
trucks will drive over it. It is kind of a nice symbol for
sure.
But what is exciting about it is the whole community is
behind this effort as well. They are really committed to trying
to utilize that forest, figure out ways that they can bring
real value to their town. And so not only are they excited
about that particular bridge deck that we are going to put in
for them, we are actually building a facility at their baseball
field so that parents can actually sit at their baseball games
and sit on a concrete pad as opposed to sitting on the ground
or whatever. And they are going to build that with us out of
cellulosic nanomaterial enhanced concrete.
It is a really exciting project--we are really excited to
be a part of it, and the whole effort is designed to do exactly
what we are talking about today. How can we get more forest
products into all kinds of applications that really matter and
can reduce the environmental footprint that we have in the
world right now? And products like mass timber and some of the
things that we are talking about with cellulosic nanomaterials
can actually do that.
The Chair. And from your experiences, can you discuss the
importance that Federal support plays in the development of
these products? And I will open it up to all of you to comment
on that.
Mr. Goergen. There is no way that we would be where we are
right now without the support of the USDA Forest Service. We
often talk about how there are all these exciting new products
that are coming to the market, and they are always 5 years out,
right? And then 5 years comes around, and it is still 5 years
out. Well, the work that we are doing, because we have the
support of the Forest Service, we have grade A scientists that
are doing this work. They have a pilot facility at the Forest
Products Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin that is making this
material in quantities that we can actually use it in that 4
trillion ton concrete industry. They are right there with us
doing this work together. Without that government support,
there is no way we would be there. And of course, without the
private-sector we wouldn't be there as well. It is that
marriage between us with all of us working together, we can
actually take those steps forward.
If we had more time, I would talk about what we are doing
with FDA and how we are bringing companies together to actually
solve that problem there as well. Exciting opportunities for
the future, and it is only because of the collaboration between
government and the private-sector and university researchers.
The Chair. Thank you, and Ms. Cover and Dr. Henry, in the
second round we will come back to you. But briefly, you would
agree with his assertion that the Federal support is necessary?
Ms. Cover. Oh, definitely, yes, the U.S. Forest Service has
been an incredible partner on our journey. We would not be able
to accomplish what we have done, both from an education
perspective with the architects and the engineers, developers,
general contractors, but also just on the way we have been able
to open markets that were just previously not available to wood
at all.
The Chair. Fantastic.
Dr. Henry. Yes, I would say we received a Wood Innovations
Grant from the U.S. Forest Service last year, a Federal grant
from the EPA, SBIR Development Program. We are working on the
Wood Innovations Program with WoodWorks on adoption and code
issues associated with our products, so it has been extremely
helpful in bringing in a new product market.
The Chair. Thank you.
I now recognize the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Allen, for
5 minutes.
Mr. Allen. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for your
insight this morning. I come from the construction world. I was
in the construction business for 40 years before being a Member
of Congress.
From the standpoint of government involvement, most of the
building codes are written by the government agencies. What
progress have you made there on getting your products
introduced, and of course, from a code standpoint, you have to
meet certain requirements; and then also, the architects and
the engineers are the folks that do the design work in the
construction industry. Give me some background on your
progress, and I will just give that question to all three and
how your product is being developed. Because we do need to keep
this free market. Price obviously has something to do with it
as well, and you are competing with steel and concrete, so give
me your sales pitch on that as well.
Ms. Cover. Is it all right if I go first?
On this topic in terms of codes, there has been extensive
development on the code front. In the 2015 IBC cross-laminated
timber, mass timber has included actually in the body of the
code, and in the 2021 code, you will be seeing an adjustment
for tall wood. It will allow for up to 18 stories with mass
timber construction in the built environment.
Mr. Allen. Will that be nationwide?
Ms. Cover. That will be nationwide, yes. As the various
jurisdictions accept the code, that is when it will come into
play in each area of the country. There are a number of
jurisdictions that are already pre-adopting it because
engineers and architects are so excited to start moving forward
with this building opportunity.
We are providing assistance on over 70 projects right now
that are over the current code limitations in the height. There
is already extreme excitement before the code is even fully
adopted, so that has been really exciting to watch.
In addition of terms of progress being made, WoodWorks
educates. We provide over 300 educational opportunities a year,
and that allows us to award about 46,000 practitioner education
hours every single year. It is incredible the number of people
that we are touching, again thanks to the support of the Forest
Service.
And then in terms of cost and projects, since you come from
a construction background, one of the things to note is that
mass timber tends to be 20 to 30 percent faster to construct
than alternate materials, and right now, the actual--if you
look at just direct costs, there is a range. It is anywhere
from five percent less than traditional materials up to ten
percent premium to go with a mass timber solution, and that is
for direct costs only. And the difference that you see there is
generally due to whether or not the building was originally
designed in mass timber. There is a lot of efficiencies that
can be found if the building is set out with how you do your
column lines, how you lay out your spans, based on the panel
size themselves.
Mr. Allen. Do you have span limitations more so than steel
and concrete?
Ms. Cover. Not necessarily. It depends on the loads that
you are looking at for the particular building you are
designing----
Mr. Allen. I am sorry we are getting in the weeds, here,
but----
Ms. Cover. It just--I mean, there are limitations and the
column lines, depending on the loads that you are dealing with
might be slightly closer, but what we find is with exposed
wood, it has a much more open feel. In a lot of these office
spaces, even if the column line is maybe 3 less than it would
be if it was a concrete column or steel column, you are still--
the room itself feels very open, and so there is a huge driver
there.
On the cost, one other thing just to keep in mind is that
additionally, you have to look at the value. You have speed of
construction that is much quicker, so there are savings there
in cost in terms of construction loans, and you are also able
to rent the buildings out quicker and generally at a premium.
When a developer is analyzing this, they really look at the
value, the overall value to the owner.
Mr. Allen. Okay. Comments from Dr. Henry?
Dr. Henry. I would just add to that that we come at it from
the free market side. We have a design construction business.
We built more CLT buildings than any firm in the State of
Maine, and we recently completed a building in Connecticut that
went up in 3 days. It gives you an idea of how this
technology----
Mr. Allen. Are you talking about structure?
Dr. Henry. It was a residential structure.
Mr. Allen. I got you.
Dr. Henry. But the onsite construction of that building
went up very quickly. It was a great success, also used all
wood fiber insulation, unfortunately imported from Europe.
As far as codes go, this product has been existent in
Europe for over 20 years, as I said in my testimony. We know
what the code challenges for insulation manufacturers--the
challenge is really code adoptions. And so, advancing this sort
of product and sort of wood products in general--I would say
dimensional lumber manufacturing, it is important for us to--
for districts that that code adoption, which happens on the
state level, to keep pace with the publishing of new codes.
Mr. Allen. Okay. We will continue--I guess we are going to
do a second round. Okay. I will continue--we will continue this
discussion on the second round, but I need to yield back. Thank
you.
The Chair. Perfect. I would like to welcome Chairman
Peterson of the full Agriculture Committee, who has just joined
us, and we will continue with questions from my colleague from
Arizona. Mr. O'Halleran is recognized.
Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Chair Spanberger.
Today's hearing focuses on an issue of great importance to
northern Arizona. I am looking forward to discussing innovative
forest products. These products are instrumental in building a
restoration economy that provides sustainable jobs and improves
forest health.
The district I represent, Arizona's First Congressional
District, includes all or part of six National Forests, each of
which is filled with ecological beauty. They play an important
role in Arizona's rural communities and our state's water
supply. I have actively supported forest restoration policies
for over 20 years.
While in the Arizona legislature, I co-chaired the
governor's Forest Health Oversight Council. Together, we
produced a report with recommendations for stakeholders, local
governments, the state, and Congress to maintain forest health
and prevent natural disasters. Today, U.S. Forest Service's
4FRI Initiative is the largest restoration effort in our
nation. It serves as a testbed for innovation in forest
management and efficiency development.
Identifying a valuable use for biomass and low-value small
diameter ponderosa pine remains the major issue to the success
of 4FRI, and the establishment of a sustainable restoration
economy.
I remain optimistic that creative minds will develop--such
as yours--efficient and sustainable uses for biomass and small
diameter ponderosa pine so we can reduce the fire risk of
Arizona's forests and improve the health of Arizona's
watersheds.
Ms. Cover, I heard that--when I was out in the meeting
here, I heard that you mentioned ponderosa pine, so I am
heading towards you for my first question. It burns through
forest fires. We burn it in biomass. We try to find products,
we ship it, and that is just beginning. There is so much we do
with it, but as you know, it is a product that has its
problems. I would like to hear your evaluation of what we can
do.
Ms. Cover. That is a great question. Thank you very much.
The manufacturing standard for CLT is called PRG-320, and
it is set up to allow for innovation. It is not limited to any
specific species. Currently, in the U.S., we do have certain
species that are more typical. You have Douglas fir, large
spruce pine fir, and southern pine is your more typical species
used in CLT, but it is not limited to those. There are only a
few limitations in terms of the way it is graded that will
limit what materials can be used.
I am aware of one manufacturer that has already started to
test ponderosa pine for use in CLT, and they are seeing really
positive results. Assuming that that advancement moves forward,
it would be a great opportunity for ponderosa pine in CLT
materials.
Mr. O'Halleran. Along those same lines, we have been trying
to find those particular types of people. I am going to send
our people to you to do some further investigation.
But can you identify any specific areas that you think are
the most important for us to pinpoint and identify for use?
Because this is just millions and millions and millions of
acres, and we have a density issue within the environment. We
have distance issues as far as cost goes. And so, we are trying
to identify how we are going to reach those levels of need in
order to get that forest clear as far as being able to save it.
Ms. Cover. Yes. We started to have some conversations with
Chief Christensen in regards to what are some opportunities to
connect these materials to the manufacturing facilities. That
goes a little bit beyond what WoodWorks expertise is. We do the
education and try to grow the market demand, but we are looking
at ways that we can support the Forest Service in that effort
to try to find that solution.
As soon as we get the certification where it can be
utilized in the material, then hopefully the market demand will
drive it, and that will help in some of the increasing of the
cost recovery efforts, in trying to get the material off the
forest land and into these products. We are trying to work on
the demand side and get it to the point where it is certified
and able to be used, and then hopefully then that will help
drive to make those connections.
Mr. O'Halleran. And for the other two panelists, I would
like your opinion on if the Forest Service has come to you and
tried to identify the challenges of ponderosa pine?
Dr. Henry. I would just say that the technology that we are
bringing to the U.S. market, Mr. Allen talked about market
solutions. This is--so far, our testing has been doing this.
This is a softwood species that is species agnostic in terms of
the technology and the implementation, so we look forward to
our second plant in Arizona.
I would just say that in terms of a market solution that we
have tried to bring to Maine with our challenges is what really
is needed for driving people to go into the woods, which is a
challenge in Arizona as much as it is a challenge in Maine, to
harvest that wood. You need value-added products. The
importance of this meeting here today is to drive products that
are more than just dimensional lumber that have such thin
margins.
Mr. O'Halleran. My time is over and I yield back. Thank
you.
The Chair. I now recognize my colleague from California,
Mr. LaMalfa, the Ranking Member, for 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DOUG LaMALFA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, thank you, ma'am.
This is a great topic today. I appreciate the panelists
here. We, of course, have a lot of challenges with the whole
forestry issue, especially in the West and my home State of
California where it seems like if we are not burning \1/2\
million acres in a year, then we are having a light year. And
at the same time as a country, we are the number two importer
of wood products, I am just wondering what are we doing?
The cross-laminated timber, that is an exciting technology
we can move forward and more and more into nontraditional
thought on construction. I know that we are going to have some
perceptions, perhaps, with the regulatory side, with
construction side, with certifications. I would like to hear
just a little more from the panel on that. Also, a product
called biochar, I have heard a little bit about that over the
years, but it seems like there is just a lot of potential
there.
Bottom line for me is that more material we are getting out
of the woods into some type of positive use, and as Mr. Goergen
was talking about up there in Yreka, which is my home area, as
you know, by the way, this is really exciting that we can
change the terminology from Eureka whenever there is an
invention made to Yreka, I have found. Eureka is on the coast;
Yreka is in the upper central part by Oregon there. Let's get
more Yreka going here.
Anyway, I appreciate that.
The situation of replacing steel and concrete more and
more, how is that going to be met by--again, Mr. Allen was kind
of talking about code enforcement, engineers, accepted--how
long will that take to become an accepted, certified part of
building code, for example? Mr. Goergen, and all three
panelists?
Mr. Goergen. On the code issues, Jennifer might be best to
start.
Ms. Cover. Perfect. In terms of codes, it has been accepted
so it is already in the 2015 building code. It has been
accepted and mass timbers called out in that building code.
Mr. LaMalfa. How tall of a building can--are we talking
about?
Ms. Cover. That is within current code limits, which is
85.
Mr. LaMalfa. Eighty-five feet?
Ms. Cover. Yes.
Mr. LaMalfa. What is that in stories for us that----
Ms. Cover. It is six to seven stories. But then with the
2021 code, the adoption of that will go up to 18 stories. And
California is one of the states that is looking at early
adoption.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. Now, a question that is going to come
up--and I am sorry to bring it up. Every picture of an old
building you see from 1880, 1890, isn't around anymore because
always the story is there was a fire. And so, what are we--what
can you build into this for fireproofing or at least fire--a
higher level of fire resistance, because again--I mean, maybe
it is an unfair question, but it is one that is going to be out
there on the table by the general public.
Ms. Cover. It is a very fair question. I am happy to
address it.
Really what is exciting about what took place with the
testing and the research in order to go taller with wood is
there was extensive requirements on the fire side in terms of
fire safety testing. With the acceptance of these new code
requirements, you have a much higher level of safety than is
required historically on a lot of the different construction
practices.
One of the things that was done was a two-story apartment
building was built, and five different tests were done. It was
fully loaded so that you were simulating as if it was an 18-
story building, and it performed exceptionally well. A five-ply
CLT panel in one of those tests was exposed to 1,800 F in the
fire. It lasted for 3 hours and 6 minutes, which is much longer
than the 2 hour code requirement. The results have been
phenomenal. Mass timber burns differently than traditional wood
materials, and that is why you can go taller with it, because
it actually chars and then it protects that wood against
further heat damage.
If you think about when you are camping, you try to hold a
lighter to a giant log, it won't ignite. That is the idea here
is that it self-extinguishes because it creates a char layer
once it does burn, and it protects itself.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay, thank you.
Also, please, panelists, what I am looking at, too, is we
have just--as was mentioned here--an overloading of material in
our forests of an increased density and the market isn't always
there for some of the lesser products. That is what is exciting
about some of this, too. Do we see that we are going to use
what is already coming out of the forests more intensely, or
does this mean that we are actually going to be going in and
getting a bigger net of all tree material, whether it is the
less marketable stuff, less usable, or saw logs in conjunction
with that? Are we going to get a net increase of material
coming out of the forests?
Mr. Goergen. Yes, I hope the answer to that question is
both, right, so that we are better utilizing what we are
already harvesting, and we are harvesting more, especially that
problematic restoration requirement material that we need to
remove from our forests. There is such a gigantic backlog of
material that needs to be removed, and having markets to
address that removal is critical to it.
Mr. O'Halleran mentioned this from northern Arizona. You
have lost so many mills in that area. When we lose the mill
infrastructure, we lose the loggers, we lose all sorts of
different parts of the system, and then we can't remove that
material. These products are going to be able to help us
restore the market pool that is going to help us actually
manage those forests and remove more material from them over
time.
Mr. LaMalfa. So, you believe that it is an unknown right
now then?
Mr. Goergen. It is unknown to some extent, but I am very
bullish on it. It is absolutely going to increase the amount of
wood that we are removing from forests.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you. I will come back in the second
round. I appreciate it.
The Chair. The chair now recognizes my colleague from
Maine, Ms. Pingree.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you so
much. All of your testimony and questions answered have been
really interesting, and I greatly appreciate having you here
today.
I will start with my hometown visitor. I think, because so
many of us represent rural communities, we have a really good
understanding of what happens when manufacturing jobs are lost.
And when you lose an entire sector, as you mentioned, four
mills in 6 years, that is staggering in a state of 1.3 million
people, especially in the most forested state in the nation. We
are just such a heavily dependent state on forest products.
And so, really all of what you have been talking today has
been really exciting in Maine, as some of these opportunities
are opening up to us. Getting them from great idea university
research to the end-stage of manufacturing, as all of you have
attested, is really complicated.
Perhaps, Dr. Henry, you could just talk a little bit more
about the project you are doing in Madison, a town of 5,000
people, and the impact this could have, and maybe some of the
challenges of getting it to the stage of actually producing the
materials next year.
Dr. Henry. Yes, thank you.
As Mr. Goergen mentioned, when something as traumatic as
what happened in Maine over the last 4 years happened, the
critically important thing, urgency to act at that point is to
maintain that infrastructure. There are people whose jobs,
whose livelihoods depend on that industry, and it is not a
simple thing to just bring that back. Once it is gone, it is a
much bigger investment to rebuild that infrastructure. That
infrastructure dies because there are not value-added products
that can enter the market effectively and support that
manufacturing infrastructure. That is why what we are talking
about today is so important is having innovative products that
have the value-add that allows them to enter new markets and
incentivize the investment in manufacturing infrastructure.
As I mentioned in my testimony, I can speak directly to the
challenge of getting investment into the manufacturing
infrastructure and how difficult that is. But having value-
added products, having the whole stream of support that you are
seeing here today is absolutely vital. The support for the
government for research and development to develop those
products and find new markets, that is what is necessary. If
you want to solve problems like the challenge that you have in
California or Arizona, there needs to be new products that
enter new markets for wood products, otherwise, you are not
building that new infrastructure.
The project in Madison has been immensely gratifying to
everyone on our team. The work that we have done with the
community of Madison to bring that back, we have reemployed a
number of the people who worked at that mill in designing the
project. They have real ownership on a literal basis of our
company in bringing that project together, and the state has
really galvanized behind this project to make it happen,
because they realize the critical need to act quickly when
something like this happens.
We immensely value the work that you do in terms of
bringing funding to these projects and the work that all of my
fellow testifiers here today do as well.
Ms. Pingree. I will get a chance--we are going to have a
second round, too. I am just going to follow up on all the
other guys questions later, but I want to reinforce what my
colleagues have said, which you did. I mean, one of the things
we hear about a lot is this whole issue of both losing the
infrastructure once the facilities are turned into something
else or they are demolished, which has happened with some of
them, you don't have that plant to rehabilitate and bring back
the jobs. Also, the skills and training--not everybody wants to
work in the woods. These are dangerous jobs. It takes a lot of
training. It is expensive equipment to harvest wood today. The
people who drive the trucks, every stage for the way, we hear
about labor shortages and the challenges that are already
coming up. Having a sense of urgency about how quickly we need
to move on this. This isn't something we can kind of wait out
into the future.
I thought, since the Ranking Member mentioned it, it would
be interesting for you to talk a little bit about. It is
counterintuitive to think about an insulation material that is
made out of wood products, because again, people think about
fireproofing and how it even works. Could you just describe
that a little bit and how and why it is going to be safe?
Dr. Henry. Sure. This is a suite of insulation products.
One of the exciting things is that it addresses all phases of
the built infrastructure, interior insulation, exterior
insulation, the batt product is a direct replacement for
fiberglass. The board is a direct replacement for foam. These
products, the board, for example, has a better fire rating than
foam does. People have a perception of wood as being dangerous
from a fire perspective, but if you talk to any firefighter,
they would prefer a house made--residential construction--
constructed house made entirely of foam. The danger of fire to
firefighters is really the--gassing of non-organic material to
them. Really, it depends on what you are looking at, but our
products meet all the safety code ratings for residential
construction and small multi-family construction. There is no
issue there. As CLT has faced, it is a perception issue. It is
not a reality issue.
Ms. Pingree. Great. My time is up, but thank you so much.
The Chair. The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from
Washington, Congresswoman Schrier, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Madam Chair.
These are really interesting questions. Thank you all for
being here today.
My question, really is very similar to Mr. LaMalfa's,
because we have, in many ways, similar districts. Washington
State has this tricky combination of overgrown forests, too
much fuel potential for these massive fires, a desire for
cross-laminated timber, and a real market for it now that we
can build up to 18 stories.
But, we also have this crumbling infrastructure without
mills, small diameter mills, and even the notion that even if
we could do this and mill this locally, the transportation
makes it cost-prohibitive.
We have this kind of a forest health crisis coupled with
the lack of mills, and I wanted to just paint a picture, which
is the State of Washington has been losing mill infrastructure
over the past few decades. A recent report from the Washington
Department of Natural Resources showed that between 2006 and
2016, the number of mills in my state declined from 137 to 88,
down 36 percent. And in central Washington in particular, we
have a really big gap in wood products infrastructure, and we
also have about a 30 percent higher cost of construction that
could be solved if we had local cross-laminated timber.
In my district, forestland owners often have to truck their
logs 150 miles or more to the nearest mill, making it
impractical, increases cost, et cetera.
And so, I am excited that we have companies in Washington
State producing these innovative wood products, and I am
excited to hear about the ones you talked about today. We have
two new facilities doing cross-laminated timber in Spokane and
in Colville, and I am wondering, looking at the practicalities
here, wanting the smaller diameter trees pulled from our
forests, knowing that we need these small diameter mills, and
knowing that we need private industry to kind of partner with
forestry. I was wondering if you have examples of partnerships
between the U.S. Forest Service and private industry to fill
these gaps? Whoever would like to answer that question.
Dr. Henry. Sure. Yes, we work with the U.S. Forest Service
on--we received a Wood Innovations Grant. Maine is a state in
which most of the lands are privately owned, but we work
intimately with dimensional lumber manufacturers. This is a
technology that is totally complimentary to CLT manufacturing,
two-dimensional lumber manufacturing. We use the residuals of
softwood lumber production for our product, and--I am getting a
little off target for what you are looking for, but you touched
on a very key issue, which is transportation. We need to create
sufficient markets for the investment in mill infrastructure.
If you don't have the market there, it doesn't matter--well,
nothing matters. If you don't have the market to sell the
product, you can't invest full stop.
As to code, I don't know if my fellow members here would
agree, but from our perspective, code is essential to creating
that market for an insulation product, keeping up with code.
From the IECC Energy Code, that really it does two goods, which
is it supports the wood products industry, and it also supports
energy independence for our country. The built infrastructure
uses about 30 percent of the energy that we use as a society.
If we were to all implement code up to 2018 to the 2021 code,
that would be a huge boon to the insulation industry, and this
suite of products is a perfect fit for our 100 percent wood
frame construction residential market.
Mr. Goergen. Let me tell you a quick story, too, about the
Forest Service and working with partners in Washington State.
The Colville National Forest where Vaagen Brothers Timber--and
I am sure you know them very well--there is a collaborative
there that is working on solving some of the restoration
challenges in that area. They are looking. They are saying we
have to reduce these risks. This is environmentalists working
with industry, working with a whole bunch of different folks,
all coming together to try to solve these problems. And the
Forest Service doesn't always have the funding that is
necessary to conduct the environmental analysis that needs to
be done, the archaeological studies that need to be done, et
cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
This collaborative actually found ways--I don't know if
they were doing bake sales for forestry or what they were
doing, but they found ways to gather money together and pay for
some of that up-front cost of the environmental analysis that
was necessary to harvest timber to reduce the risk of
catastrophic wildfire. They raised that money. The Forest
Service went through the process. The Forest Service still made
the decision, but the community came together, paid for the
analysis, paid for the ideas behind it, reduced the cost to the
government in some ways. They sold that timber. That timber
actually paid for all the costs of that up-front analysis. At
the end of the day, they reduced the fire risk, and that is an
effective partnership between the Forest Service, the
community, and industry. And we need to replicate that 1,000
times throughout this country and we will start to solve some
of these challenges.
Ms. Schrier. Thank you so much, and thank you for pointing
that out.
The Chair. We will now begin a second round of questions,
and I will begin by yielding myself 5 minutes for the first
question.
Dr. Henry, I appreciate the distinction that you and others
have made between embodied carbon in the manufacturing process
of materials used in constructing a building versus the
operational carbon emissions once a building is in use. It is
estimated that roughly 11 percent of global greenhouse gas
emissions come from building materials and construction, and
that the other 28 percent comes from the building operations.
Can you explain why tackling the operational carbon
emissions is also critical to reducing the emissions of the
built environment, and how can innovative wood fiber insulation
products like those made by GO Labs help to effectively reduce
the carbon footprints of buildings?
Dr. Henry. Yes, there is--so, thanks for drawing the
distinction. There is energy expended in the manufacturing,
obviously, of all building products and there is energy used in
heating these buildings, and all of our built infrastructure.
When it comes to operational energy, we are sort of experts in
that. My partner, Matt O'Malia started this firm 10 years ago
in 2008 at that great time for the building construction
industry that focused on the ultra-energy efficient design and
construction that could reduce energy consumption by 90
percent.
It is important to point that out because that 30 percent
of energy consumption that we use as a society--everyone wants
to talk about self-driving cars and battery technologies and
things like that. That is a technology that could be
implemented today to reduce our environmental footprint on
society, but it has to be done very carefully. You see in the
building industry an increasing push towards tighter buildings,
so buildings that have a significant air sealing component to
add significant amounts of insulation. But it is important to
recognize that that is a living environment that--we are not
just trying to reduce energy consumption. People have to
actually live in those buildings, so there is actually not just
energy flow, but mass flow through those systems as well. We
shower in those buildings. We cook in those buildings. We
produce a lot of moisture, and that moisture has to be
breathing through those buildings. What is very unique about
wood fiber insulation is that it transmits moisture better than
any insulation product out there on the market today. You see
with increasing building code foam products being strapped to
the exterior of wood frame insulation buildings. In our
opinion, that is a horrible idea. You are basically wrapping a
building in cellophane, and that means that those are zero perm
products, which means that they don't breathe at all. That
moisture is going to get trapped up against that wood. It is
going to contribute to mold and rot of our buildings. So, the
endurance of buildings is less.
It is a little bit counterintuitive to think of. We think
of wood products manufacturing as an old industry, but these
products are really the Gor-Tex, the future of building
industry. They allow that product--just like you used to have
these rubber rain jackets and you would run outside and you
start sweating, and you are wetter on the inside than you would
have been on the outside. Gor-Tex allows you to move outside
and not trap moisture on the inside. That is what these
materials are able to do.
The Chair. Thank you for that explanation.
I would like to bring it back for the remainder of my time
to my district. I represent a central Virginia district. We are
ten counties in total, majority land mass rural, forested land
included, but we have growing suburbs. And in the suburbs, the
area of town where I grew up used to be farmland. Now there are
neighborhoods everywhere.
My question for you is what--and I will start with Dr.
Henry and Ms. Cover, and Mr. Goergen, you can join in as well.
What is your vision for where these are being applied? Do you
have a vision for this being in these suburban neighborhoods
that are popping up and growing 100, 200, 1,000 homes at a time
that we are using these technologies, or are we still focusing
on individual house construction by interested parties and
potentially large building structure by a developer who wants
to use these technologies? Where do you see this going, and
where would you love to see it in 5 years?
Dr. Henry. I have two daughters under 5 years old. If I
thought this was a niche product that we were bringing to
market, I would not have quit my job. We fully expect this to
be a $1 billion product and a mainstream product for the United
States. It uses the residual products that the wood products
industry needs to use to motivate getting people into the woods
to harvest those products that are such a danger in terms of
forest fire risk and things of that nature.
I absolutely think this is going to be in every home, as
you mentioned, across the nation. We anticipate it will all be
GO Lab product.
Ms. Cover. Yes, for mass timber, I would say the market is
a slightly different focus in terms of it could be used in
residential construction; but, as we were talking before in
terms of the cost, where you are going to find it most cost-
effective is going to be in the commercial market. And when I
mentioned the 17,000 buildings annually earlier, that is a
commercial market. That is not residential.
And where it will be--the sweet spot where it will work out
for mass timber is likely going to be in that 17 to 18 story
range. That is where right now there isn't a cost-effective
solution when it comes to cost per square footage. If you look
at our urban environments, you typically see that dichotomy of
buildings that maybe cap out at six stories that are light
frame construction, and then you get to 20 to 50+ stories of
steel or concrete. Because typically, the alternative materials
don't become cost-effective until 20 stories. Now you have a
gap from seven to eighteen stories that now mass timber can
fill. I think that will end up being--when we talk about cost,
most likely where it will be most cost-effective.
The Chair. Thank you very much.
I will now yield 5 minutes to the Ranking Member, Mr.
LaMalfa, for a second round of questions.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just coming back to the usage of more and more biomass. We
also, in my--south of Yreka in the area of Paradise,
California, you have all heard of the situation there where
there is still just hundreds of thousands of trees to be
disposed of that are going to be a hazard. Either they are
falling over or a fire hazard in the future. They are looking--
one group is looking at creating a pelletized fuel product in
order to further the restoration going on from the Camp fire
and the Paradise, Miguela, and surrounding areas up there. What
do you think of that, panelists, of that as part of a solution
on usage of these materials: partially burned, partially
charred timber, et cetera?
Mr. Goergen. The good news is that we can make these
pelletized wood fuels from really low-value materials, and that
is a terrific option for us in some places. The problem is
cost, right, always. When you are competing with other fossil
fuels, it is very difficult to make wood energy cost-effective.
But, there are solutions. This one right here is actually
torrefied wood, so this is wood that we have actually roasted
in a low oxygen environment, and it turns into a black powder.
Mr. LaMalfa. Is that basically biochar or something----
Mr. Goergen. It is very similar to biochar. We can actually
make biochar or we can make this pelletized fuel. We actually
have a facility going in, in John Day, Oregon right now. It is
going to start up in the spring.
What is interesting about it is it turns into this black
powder, or we can make biochar from it. And what we can do is
densify it, and we actually fueled a coal-fired power plant for
12 straight hours using a forest biomass product just like
this. That plant required no changes whatsoever. Basically,
what we did was we said here is a coal-fired power plant that
is going to be decommissioned by the state because Oregon
doesn't want coal-fired power anymore. We can use a wood
product that has a huge environmental footprint throughout the
entire West, and we can fuel it with this material. It is a
really exciting project. It is a demonstration project that we
have right now, but there are so many utilities across the
world that are interested in this----
Mr. LaMalfa. I bet you can't wait to tell me what the
difference in emissions are from the coal versus that.
Mr. Goergen. It depends on how you do the calculations and
depends on who you talk to, but I mean, this is a very low
carbon-intensity fuel, because it is a waste product, right?
Mr. LaMalfa. What about other emissions? I mean, just
percentages, concerns with----
Mr. Goergen. There is no mercury, there is no
SO2. It is a very, very clean fuel compared to any
fossil fuel that is out there. And the other thing that is
exciting about it is----
Mr. LaMalfa. Because Arizona has a big problem. They are
getting ready to close a plant if they haven't already, a large
coal plant down that way.
Mr. Goergen. Oh, they are slated all over the West right
now.
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, many of them.
Mr. Goergen. I mean, California is like the giant sucking
sound in the evening, because they have so much solar power
during the day and they pull in so much fossil fuel energy at
night, and they want to eliminate that. This is how we can do
it.
Mr. LaMalfa. In my neighborhood, too, there are a lot of ag
orchard, orchards are constantly being removed and changed out,
so you have that as an issue. A lot of times, they are dealing
with that by chipping. Is ag tree waste or even straw from
fields, is that something that fits in with----
Mr. Goergen. We can torrefy all that, including things like
almond husks and those kinds of things as well. We can use
those materials.
Mr. LaMalfa. And open field materials, straw, things like
that?
Mr. Goergen. I don't know about straw so much, because it
would burn too fast; but, a woody material would be no problem
whatsoever.
Mr. LaMalfa. And as far as turning into the nanofibers?
Mr. Goergen. Again, nanofibers--you can make it from
anything that has cellulose. The question is what is cost-
effective to make it, and again, we can make it from any kind
of an ag byproduct, but it makes most sense out of wood.
Mr. LaMalfa. Right, right. Okay, very good.
Ms. Cover, would you like to touch on any of this?
Ms. Cover. In terms of the application for mass timber, we
are looking at wood products for the application here.
Mr. LaMalfa. Right, and Dr. Henry?
Dr. Henry. I would just say that you need a complete suite
of manufactured materials to really incentivize investment in
manufacturing and the wood products space. You need something
like CLT, dimensional lumber manufacturing, and then you need
products like ours that are based on the residuals from those,
from the engineering of those materials and from the
dimensional saw mills.
Yes, you need all of these products. You need the pellet
manufacturing, you need the CLT manufacturing, you need the
insulation. And you need to create markets for those in order
for the mills to be successful.
Mr. LaMalfa. Right, long-term markets. Anything you wish to
touch on, on Paradise's problem with, again, hundreds of
thousands of dead and charred trees that could be incorporated
into this thinking on a more immediate basis, too?
Dr. Henry. Yes, so we actually participated in a venture
competition in California that was supported by the U.S.
Endowment for California in terms of finding new innovative
ways to take those problem materials and turn them into value-
added materials. That was very helpful in terms of our company
getting exposure to investors. More things like that need to
happen to get these stories out there. This Committee is very
helpful in terms of our exposure in terms of all of these types
of start-up companies that need the exposure to investors, to
people who are interested in solving problems in the wood
products space.
Mr. LaMalfa. All right. Thank you, panelists. I yield back.
The Chair. The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from
Maine for 5 minutes.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you very much. I have a couple more
questions, although I could go on all day. So, thank you so
much.
In Maine, we have something called the Maine Mass Timber
Commercialization Center, and it is an effort to bring some of
the stakeholders together to talk about the economic potential
of the forest economy. They are currently working on a life
cycle analysis to compare cross-laminated timber construction
to traditional steel and concrete. I know we have been talking
a lot about that today. One of the challenges currently in the
marketplace, besides general acceptance by builders and
contractors, is also that we don't have a lot of standards
right now that talk about carbon sequestration and building
materials. But I fully expect, whether it is consumer demand or
just how the codes change, we are going to see a lot more of
that.
Ms. Cover, I am just interested--you have talked a little
bit about that, but do you think this is starting to change,
that we are not going to keep overlooking the carbon
sequestration benefits and can you just say a word about why
that is so important in CLT?
Ms. Cover. Yes, 100 percent. Operational carbon emissions,
as we start to get more control over that, embodied carbon is
really what is going to be the conversation. We see that
shifting with the architectural community quite consistently,
and one of the things is interesting is in foreign governments,
there has been a lot of motivation to look at that embodied
carbon impact. Vancouver, Canada, for instance, set a goal to
reduce their embodied carbon in their new buildings by 40
percent by 2030, and so, this is new. This is a shift. People
are starting to recognize embodied carbon and the value of
reducing that in the built environment.
One of the things that may be suggested here in the U.S. is
to consider benchmarking the carbon that is in the buildings,
Federal buildings, for example, that are currently being built,
and then set a target on how to decrease that carbon.
Ms. Pingree. That is great.
On a somewhat different topic, but it is related--I know in
my state, it is related to one of the challenges that you were
just mentioning about how you put together the whole package
and have solid lumber and all these other products and make a
deal that is interesting to investors. And I don't know exactly
how this impacts California and some of the other states, but
this deals with the RFS standards, so the renewable fuel
standard. And I know in Maine, traditionally a lot of our paper
facilities--paper mill facilities could use some of the
byproducts to generate electricity. They were basically burning
them.
And so, when we talk about pellets or other ways to use
some of the residuals, that is--it can be an important part of
putting the package together.
But, the way it is currently interpreted in the EPA rule,
it is only accessible to plantation grown trees. A lot of what
people have been talking about today, I don't think is grown on
a plantation. That is pretty specific to some southern states,
so it really cuts a lot of the forest industry out of this. And
I know it is not even under our Committee's jurisdiction
because it is an EPA rule, but do you guys want to make any
comments about that? I just think it is maybe important for my
colleagues to understand better that it is something maybe we
should tackle together, because it is really critically
important that we have a full package when we are trying to
convince investors of this. Maybe you don't want to comment.
Mr. Goergen. It is so important, and my colleagues have
talked about this before, but that integrated system, right, of
all the different products that we are producing from our
forests. And these are very low margin businesses. We are not
making a lot of money. Most of what we are talking about are
really commodity products. The value-added products that
Jennifer and Josh are talking about obviously bring more value,
but we need those really low value systems as well so we can
take advantage of the whole product, because the margins really
are not there. Anything that helps and can make a significant
impact, and those kinds of incentives really do help us make a
go of it all.
There are unintended consequences. You don't have to talk
to Congress about that. You all know that better than most of
us. But, the unintended consequences of adding a word in there,
it may be a really good idea in terms of what we are trying to
do, what we envision. But the on-the-ground consequences are
significant. In this case, cutting off a lot of potential where
we could actually have that marginal gain that would make a
company actually viable versus 4 mills in 6 years.
Ms. Pingree. Right, exactly.
Dr. Henry. Yes, that is a very good point. I think that
those low margins are extremely critical to the base of the
manufacturing chain for wood products. The loggers that are in
there in the woods, those margins, as Mr. Goergen explained,
are extremely small for them. When something like 2008 happens,
when four mills close down, that is the first impacted group,
and the least flexible groups in terms of--and so, any
standards that help to increase their margins, that is really
where those small changes go to. And it is extremely--but it is
an extremely critical link in the chain.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you. I have run out of time, but if any
of my colleagues are interested in understanding that standard
better, it has been a real challenge for the Maine delegation,
and we would love to work with anyone else who sees it as
potential value for their state.
So, thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. The chair now recognizes the
gentleman from Georgia for 5 minutes.
Mr. Allen. In listening to the discussion, there are some
things that this Congress can do. In fact, the 115th Congress,
previous Congress, when we had the Majority, we worked on
legislation to deal with forest management. Unfortunately, it
was entirely partisan. The environmentalists fought it, and so,
here we are in a situation where we can't seem to agree on what
the solution is. But this Congress can do something about
forest management.
I would like to hear from you all, would you tell this
Congress how important that is to get this done, and done
quickly? I would like to hear from all three of you on that.
Mr. Goergen. About \1/3\ of the country's forests are at
risk of catastrophic events: either wildfire or insect and
disease infestations. We have a significant challenge that we
all need to meet together. This is not a partisan issue. This
is not environmentalists versus industry. This is a real crisis
in our forests that we need to attack.
And so, the bottom line is we need a suite of solutions
that include forest products, that include just flat out
management, that includes supporting our logging
infrastructure, that includes supporting family-wage jobs in
rural America, which you all know how important that is,
because a family-wage job in rural America is worth about 20
family wage jobs in urban America. This whole suite of
solutions needs to be addressed. And we know that we can do
this work. It is a question of time and money. And if we
actually create the markets, we can start to address some of
those money issues. The time issues are a little harder, but we
will get there.
Congress can add some significant weight to this
conversation, both in terms of reducing, not eliminating, but
reducing some of the regulatory burden that makes it harder for
the Forest Service to do their job. These are dedicated
professionals that are out there managing these forests in
pretty significant ways. The private-sector does a remarkable
job of managing forests. They are not always perfect. Family
landowners, sometimes it is hard for them, too. The Forest
Service has some of the biggest challenges in this country
because of the regulatory environment. If we could reduce that
burden, it would be helpful, and if we could give them more
money, it would be helpful.
Mr. Allen. Exactly. Any others that would like to comment
on this?
Ms. Cover. Yes, I 100 percent agree with Mr. Goergen. Some
specific tactics that would be helpful to building on what
Michael mentioned would be definitely supporting the Forest
Service in their ability to support programs like WoodWorks and
the Wood Innovation Grants. I mean, that really is a catalyst
for a lot of companies that are looking at being innovative in
this space.
Modeling in your individual states by encouraging projects
to be built with mass timber that are the government
buildings--in California, there has been a commitment to build
three government buildings with mass timber, which is a
fantastic move to be seen there to show some leadership.
Also, in terms of looking at ways to benchmark and then
target reduced carbon, embedded carbon in these structures is
another approach, as well as competitions. Again, referring to
California because that is my home state, we are about to
announce a competition there in the state that the results of
it for a mass timber building competition in the state, and
that really motivates folks. We have six amazing projects that
are going to be showcased as a part of that that are trying to
really move the dial, and it shows that that is something that
wants to be championed by the state and locally, and then that
really helps architects and engineers want to engage. And then
additionally, encouraging local code adoption in each of your
states. I mean, that is something that is really important.
There are some jurisdictions that are way behind on the code.
Mr. Allen. Right, right. Dr. Henry?
Dr. Henry. I would second the adoption of code. I would
just point out one example. Unfortunately, in our area of a
Federal building, which I believe is the Maine Veterans Home
which is being built in Augusta, is being made of steel and
concrete, and it doesn't have to be.
Mr. Allen. Augusta, Maine.
Dr. Henry. It doesn't----
Mr. Allen. I am from Augusta, Georgia. There are two
Augusta's in this nation.
Yeah, and real quickly, just wanted to add about this, the
sawmill problem. It is a trade problem. Timber is one of the
largest industries in the State of Georgia. What do we do? The
Chinese go in the sawmill business, so we start shipping whole
logs through the Savannah port to China. Guess who bought our
sawmills, rather than going out of business? The Canadians,
because they have a massive insect infestation problem in their
forests because of the problem with management, so they are
coming to Georgia now and have bought our sawmills. Can you
believe it? I mean, you can't make this stuff up.
Anyway, thank you. It has just been great and yes, Congress
needs to act. We need to get this done. There are lot of
opportunities. Thank you very much.
The Chair. I want to thank everyone for a productive
hearing today. I especially want to thank our witnesses for
their dedication to ensuring our nation's forests continue to
drive the rural economy. Federal support for wood products is
crucial if we want to ensure the success and sustainability of
the industry. And for my part as a Representative from central
Virginia, I will continue to look for ways to shine a light on
the great work happening in this industry across the country. I
look forward to seeing more of these innovative ideas prosper
in the future in this sector, and I am so grateful for the time
that you all have spent with us answering our questions. The
conversation has begotten many additional questions, but I have
found it to be a really intriguing conversation, and I am
delighted by the work that you all are doing, and I am grateful
for the time that you have spent with us here today. Thank you.
Under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's
hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive
additional material and supplementary written responses from
the witnesses to any question posed by a Member.
This hearing of the Subcommittee of Conservation and
Forestry is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]