Forest Products Industry

The TurnPos Log Turner & Positioner is the latest development in USNR’s sawmilling solutions.  Usable in the same applications as the Rotary Log Turner 750E and LogPos S4, TurnPos offers a powerful two-in-one approach for smarter, faster production.

TurnPos integrates USNR’s state-of-the-art optimization technology with a modern approach to automation to address some of the most common concerns of today’s sawmills. All this using less energy and sporting a smaller footprint

Built with Paragon

TurnPos was shaped by the five core values of the Paragon Design Standard, USNR’s official design philosophy.  These values drive the development of every piece of equipment we build, setting a new bar for performance, reliability, and innovation.  Every component must reflect superior quality to create something not just great, but Paragon

More accurate rotation

TurnPos offers more accurate log rotation with a precise transition control system.  Turn accuracy is within ±4,5 degrees at 200 mpm (when paired with the Precision Geometric Log Rotation optimizer).  This makes it 36% more accurate than other log turning systems

Enhanced with PGLR

USNR’s Precision Geometric Log Rotation (PGLR) optimizer communicates with the turn cylinders on TurnPos to make fine adjustments to the log’s rotation in real time.  PGLR is a real-time rotation verification and correction system and has a long history of optmization success in log turner machines.

This makes it ideally equipped to maximize TurnPos benefits.

Additional Specs and Benefits

• Handles logs 2,4m to 6,2m long and 100mm to 700mm in diameter
• Roll pairs side shift ±50mm for ±3 degree skew from centerline
• Accommodates smaller log gaps than other turning systems
• Reduces maintenance and upkeep costs

To read previous USNR related posts click here

Follow IFI on Facebook | LinkedIn | Instagram

The post TurnPos: Faster turn accuracy and more precise positioning appeared first on International Forest Industries.

In the wake of wildfires, bringing affected areas back into production poses a major challenge, particularly in remote or hard-to-reach areas. In Canada, wildfires affect an average of 2.8 million hectares of forest each year, underscoring the importance of exploring innovative solutions to support restoration efforts. Source: Timberbiz With financial support from the Quebec Ministry of Natural Resources and Forests (MRNF), FPInnovations is evaluating the potential of aerial seeding using drones as a complement to traditional reforestation methods. In the spring of 2026, field trials were conducted to test various drone systems and validate several aspects of this approach: their operational capability, the accuracy of remote sensing technologies in targeting the most suitable sites, and the germination performance of different seed capsules and seeds. The goal is to assess not only the technical feasibility of this technology but also its economic viability and the contexts in which it could offer the greatest benefits. The results of this study will help determine the role that drone seeding could play in future reforestation strategies. Conducted in collaboration with government, academic, and industry partners, this project could expand the toolkit available to forest managers and offer new options for accelerating the regeneration of fire-affected areas. The preliminary results of the study will be released in the fall of 2026.

The post Forest seeding by drone after major wildfires appeared first on Timberbiz.

Rottne has launched its new Rottne H13F – a harvester that steps into a new machine class, combining the agility of the proven H11 platform with increased capacity, higher performance, and a completely new level of operator comfort. Source: Timberbiz With the H13F, Rottne has a machine developed for operators who want more power and greater capabilities without compromising flexibility. The machine builds on the H11E platform but has been upgraded with larger 26.5-inch bogie wheels, improved stability, and significantly enhanced terrain performance. In the 8WD configuration, the machine is also extended by 250 mm, further improving stability and operator confidence in demanding terrain. “The increased working pressure of 280 bar combined with a 10.3-meter crane gives the H13F the capacity to handle larger harvesting heads such as the SP661 Lite and Log Max 6000V,” said Mathias Paulsson, Product Manager at Rottne Industri. “At the same time, a 6WD version is available for operators who prioritize maximum agility and a compact machine format. For those who prefer a larger chassis for thinning operations, the machine can also be equipped with an 11.3-meter crane combined with smaller harvesting heads.” To match the demands of the larger machine class that the Rottne H13F is now entering, tractive force has also been upgraded to a full 200 kN ensuring the right conditions even in tougher environments. With the Rottne H13F, Rottne also introduces the next step in the F-series harvester cab. The cab features extensive upgrades with a focus on ergonomics, comfort, and the working environment. New features include a new control system, a new electrical centre, updated control panels with 7-button harvester joysticks, and an electric mini steering wheel integrated into the right armrest. The interior has also received a redesigned dashboard layout with an improved sense of space and enhanced visibility. Practical features such as smart storage solutions, cup holders, and a lunchbox heater are included as standard. Climate comfort has also been improved through a more efficient climate control system and smarter airflow management. At the same time, safety has been further enhanced with stronger safety glass and larger opening rear emergency exits, improving both safety and visibility. The Rottne H13F will be the first machine in Rottne’s new F-series and marks the direction for the harvesters of the future, where productivity, power, and operator comfort go hand in hand.

The post Rottne steps up with a new harvester appeared first on Timberbiz.

In a statement Nippon Paper Industries Japan has expressed its deepest condolences to those who lost their lives in the Reiwa 8 (2026) Kumamoto Earthquake that occurred on 28 July, and its heartfelt sympathies to the bereaved families. Source: Timberbiz The company provided the following update on 29 July, regarding the impact of this earthquake on its Yatsushiro Plant (Yatsushiro City, Kumamoto Prefecture). Eleven individuals were trapped inside the plant building, and seven were rescued to date. Of the seven rescued, two are in moderate condition, and, with the deepest regret, five fatalities were confirmed. Nippon is continuing to verify the safety of the remaining four individuals. The safety of all other personnel who reported to work yesterday (including those from partner companies) has been confirmed. Operations at the Yatsushiro Plant have been suspended due to the earthquake as the company investigates the damage. Nippon Paper is assessing the impact of this incident on business performance, and an announcement will be made as soon as any matter requiring disclosure arises. To ensure the safety of affected employees, provide necessary support, and grasp the accurate status of the damage through a company-wide effort, the company established a Crisis Response Headquarters headed by Nippon Paper’s President Akira Sebe. The mill in southwest Japan is down following a magnitude 6.8 earthquake with numerous aftershocks, the main quake occurred close to the mill site. Japanese media reported eight deaths at Nippon Paper. The company’s chimney stacks partially collapsed due to the quake and fell into nearby buildings.

The post Nippon Paper caught up in Japan’s earthquake appeared first on Timberbiz.

The British Columbia Council of Forest Industries (COFI) in Canada has put together a comparison of annual harvest levels in British Columbia (BC), New Zealand, and Finland. Source: Timberbiz This analysis also provides context on differences between these three major forest jurisdictions such as forest types, ownership structures, Indigenous participation, forest management practices, wildfire impacts over a 10-year average, and the value of forest sector exports. BC is home to one of the largest forested areas in the western world, with 57 million hectares of forests, 95% of which are publicly owned. Of this total, 22 million hectares are available for sustainable timber harvesting. Finland has a total forested area of 23 million hectares with 20 million hectares available for harvesting. New Zealand has 10 million hectares of forests with 1.7 million hectares available for harvesting. Despite these differences in size, the annual harvest from New Zealand in 2023 was 31 million cubic meters, nearly matching the 35 million cubic metres harvested by BC, while Finland produced nearly double that volume, with 66 million cubic metres. This comparison suggests that notwithstanding BC’s larger forest area and strategic focus on diversifying and enhancing manufacturing of higher value forest products, other forest jurisdictions are excelling in capturing the growing demand for low-carbon and sustainably produced wood products and biomaterials. By examining key differences in ownership, forest management, and the manufacturing profiles across these jurisdictions, BC can identify opportunities to develop a more robust and competitive forest sector. The chart of the jurisdiction comparison is available here – COFI Forestry Jurisdiction Comparison August

The post Canada compares its annual harvests to Finland and New Zealand appeared first on Timberbiz.

Forest & Wood Communities Australia (FWCA) says the NSW Government’s latest Great Koala National Park announcement offers little comfort to timber workers, their families and regional communities already losing secure employment. Source: Timberbiz The Government has announced almost $1 million for councils to prepare a five-year “transition action plan” focused on nature-based tourism, small business development, job creation and retraining. The plan is not expected to be completed until mid-2027. FWCA Chair Steve Dobbyns said the announcement amounted to another plan to develop a plan while timber businesses continued to lose workers, contracts and confidence. “Timber workers do not need another planning process. They need certainty about future wood supply, their employment and the survival of the mills, contractors and small businesses that support their communities,” Mr Dobbyns said. “The industry is also still waiting for the NSW Government’s long-promised Forest Industry Action Plan or, as it increasingly appears, its Forest Industry Inaction Plan. “Redundancies began almost immediately after the Government announced its supersized koala park on Father’s Day. Workers have continued to lose their jobs, including this month, yet the Government now proposes to spend nearly another year studying impacts that were entirely predictable.” The Government describes the Great Koala National Park as a “generational economic opportunity” that will boost tourism, small businesses and employment across the Mid North Coast. However, an independent review by Professor Oswin Maurer of the University of Newcastle’s economic assessment of the park found major shortcomings in the data, assumptions and multipliers used to estimate its tourism benefits. The review concluded that the tourism projections were largely based on statements unsupported by evidence and that many of the figures used inflated the projected economic benefits. One of the most serious problems was the treatment of the number of visits to North Coast national parks as though they represented individual visitors. A single person visiting several locations can be counted multiple times, substantially exaggerating the number of tourists available to generate additional spending. “The Government cannot simply declare that changing the tenure and name of forests where koalas already live will produce a tourism boom,” Mr Dobbyns said. “Koalas, walking tracks, scenic areas and recreational opportunities already exist across these State forests and neighbouring national parks. Rebadging them does not automatically create new visitors, longer stays or higher spending.” The review also found that the original tourism analysis failed to account for “cannibalisation” where visitors attributed to the new park are simply diverted from existing attractions and destinations elsewhere in the region rather than representing genuinely new economic activity. It further noted that almost nine in 10 visits to NSW national parks were day trips, undermining assumptions that park visitors would necessarily stay overnight and generate substantial accommodation and hospitality expenditure. The review found that delivering the projected increase in tourism would require approximately 1,000 additional accommodation rooms within the first three years and around 3,500 rooms within 14 years. It estimated that between $100 million and $150 million would be required for additional accommodation in the early years, rising to between $250 million and $350 million over the longer term – not including the cost of upgrading existing rooms or developing the additional tourism experiences and infrastructure needed to attract higher-spending visitors. The review found that the original study did not explain where this substantial private investment would come from or whether it was likely to materialise. “The Government is talking about a tourism-led transition without identifying who will invest the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to deliver it,” Mr Dobbyns said. “A $995,300 grant to prepare another plan does not build thousands of hotel rooms, create premium tourism experiences or guarantee that visitors will come.” The review also identified fundamental labour-market problems with relying on tourism as a replacement industry, including low pay, part-time and seasonal employment, irregular working hours and persistent difficulty attracting workers. “Nobody should celebrate permanent, skilled and well-paid forestry and manufacturing jobs being replaced with lower-paid, insecure or seasonal tourism employment,” Mr Dobbyns said. “That is not economic diversification. It is a government-sanctioned pay cut for workers and families who have built their lives around a renewable, productive industry.” The review found that the forests proposed for the original park concept supplied approximately 60% of the North Coast’s hardwood timber harvest and warned that removing such a large share of supply would have serious consequences for downstream businesses, competitiveness and consumer prices. The Government’s latest announcement still does not explain how remaining mills will obtain secure long-term wood supply or how the timber previously produced from the forests will be replaced. “Closing sustainable production forests does not eliminate the demand for timber. It transfers production interstate or overseas,” Mr Dobbyns said. “That means greater reliance on imports, increased exposure to international supply disruptions and the export of environmental impacts to jurisdictions with weaker regulatory standards. “The NSW Government must stop announcing plans to write plans and provide certainty on future wood supply, viable employment and the promised Forest Industry Action Plan. “Until then, this is not a credible transition strategy. It is a transition away from secure employment, regional manufacturing and sovereign timber-producing capacity, based on tourism benefits that the Government has still not demonstrated.”

The post More plans with dubious figures for Great Koala park fails forestry workers appeared first on Timberbiz.

The maths does not add up: forest carbon method risks millions of low-integrity credits. Forestry Australia is raising serious concerns about the new Improved Native Forest Management in Multiple-use Public Native Forests Method (INFM Method), after technical analysis by its forest carbon experts identified material flaws that could systematically, and significantly, overstate carbon abatement. Source: Timberbiz Analysis by Forestry Australia’s forest carbon experts indicates the INFM Method could potentially over-credit projects by 40% to 100%, even before the full effects of leakage and carbon stored in harvested wood products are taken into account. Forestry Australia President Dr Michelle Freeman said the findings raise serious concerns about whether credits issued under the INFM Method would represent genuine climate benefit. “There are fundamental problems with this Method. Its prescribed accounting and modelling framework is structurally biased towards issuing more carbon credits than the genuine climate benefit achieved,” Dr Freeman said. “Forestry Australia supports credible investment in forest carbon and does not dispute that avoiding native forest harvesting can generate genuine abatement in some circumstances. But every ACCU issued must represent a real, additional and accurately measured tonne of emissions reduction. “That is why the maths must add up.” Forestry Australia’s assessment identifies three central problems: The 15-year accounting period is too short: This is significantly shorter than the periods commonly used in forest carbon accounting; for example, the Plantation Forestry Method uses a 100-year accounting period. While harvesting causes an initial loss of forest carbon, regrowth captures carbon over many decades. Ending the accounting after 15 years excludes much of this regrowth, making the baseline appear to store less carbon and inflating the estimated carbon benefit of the Method. The accounting structure over-credits projects upfront and relies on future deductions: The INFM Method over-credits projects up front. Later reporting periods then deduct some of the earlier credits as regrowth occurs to claw back some of what was over-credited. The appearance of continuing carbon benefit therefore depends on repeatedly adding new areas; if that flow slows or stops, the underlying shortfall becomes visible. FullCAM is applied incorrectly: The Method prescribes clearfall harvesting assumptions to be implemented in FullCAM, Australian Government’s tool for estimating greenhouse gas emissions and carbon stored in forests and land. Given the vast majority of native forest harvesting in Australia is implemented as selective or partial harvest, the INFM Method adopts an approach that does not reflect on-ground outcomes and is inconsistent with the settings used in Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory. This misapplication of the model in FullCAM exaggerates the difference between the project and baseline forests and inflates the estimated carbon benefit.   Forestry Australia’s testing indicates that correcting the short accounting-window issue alone could reduce estimated abatement by more than 40%. Correcting the FullCAM modelling could reduce estimated abatement by more than 50%. “These are not marginal differences arising from professional judgement. They are material and cumulative problems embedded in the Method’s prescribed calculations,” Dr Freeman said. Millions of ACCUs could be issued without a genuine carbon benefit. The consequences could be significant because ACCUs generated under the Method may be used to offset real greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere in the economy. “If the Method overstates the carbon benefits achieved, emissions offset through the purchase of ACCUs will not be balanced by an equivalent climate benefit. That weakens confidence in the ACCU Scheme, makes it harder for Australia to genuinely meet its emissions-reduction targets and means the Safeguard Mechanism will not work as intended,” Dr Freeman said. New South Wales has promoted that it could generate approximately 22 million ACCUs over 15 years by ending timber harvesting in relevant public native forests. If the Method overstates abatement by around half, approximately 11 million ACCUs could be issued beyond the genuine carbon benefit achieved. Forestry Australia raised its concerns more than 12 months ago and repeatedly requested representative FullCAM files, modelling assumptions and sufficient technical detail to independently reproduce and test the claimed abatement outcomes. These materials have not been publicly released by the proponent, and material changes introduced by the proponent after consultation were not exposed to further independent testing. “A method with the potential to materially affect Australia’s carbon market should be transparent, reproducible and scientifically defensible. This is what is expected of a high-integrity ACCU Scheme method, yet the INFM Method has not met this bar,” Dr Freeman said. Forestry Australia has also identified broader integrity risks relating to leakage, additionality and double counting. The Method caps indirect leakage at 40% even where an independent assessment might find a higher rate. Furthermore, it does not provide sufficient safeguards to objectively demonstrate that harvesting reductions would not have occurred anyway. In addition, it creates a risk that state governments could generate and sell ACCUs while also counting the same emissions reductions towards their own reporting and targets. “In raising these concerns, Forestry Australia is seeking to safeguard the ACCU Scheme, not undermine it. The fastest way to damage confidence in a carbon market is to issue more abatement than is really there and try to resolve the problem later. It is far better to address it openly now,” Dr Freeman said. Based on the evidence currently available, Forestry Australia considers that the INFM Method should not be relied upon for ACCU issuance until its accounting and modelling problems have been resolved. Forestry Australia remains ready to provide technical expertise to government and supports the development of credible carbon methods that reward genuine improvements in forest management, health and resilience across all forest types and land tenures. Download the Forestry Australia Briefing Note: Forestry Australia’s analysis of Improved Native Forest Management Method (INFM Method)

The post The maths does not add up for the forest carbon method appeared first on Timberbiz.