The bio fuel industry has been looking at the forest for a non-food feedstock to produce fuel for automobiles and aircraft. But a new study says that, if cutting carbon emissions is the goal, this is the wrong way to go.Researchers find, according to a new study, that managing forests for bio fuel production will increase carbon dioxide emissions from the forests by at least 14 percent.The study, conducted over four years and published in the journal Nature Climate Change, involved 80 types of forests in 19 regions of Oregon, Washington and California,”Most people assume that wood bio energy will be carbon-neutral, because the forest re-grows and there’s also the chance of protecting forests from carbon emissions due to wildfire. However, our research showed that the emissions from these activities proved to be more than the savings,” said Tara Hudiburg of Oregon State University.Clearing forests of their underbrush, dead trees, logging remnants and fallen branches might also affect soil health, biodiversity and wildlife habitat, the American researchers claim.Norm Johnson, forestry professor of Oregon State University tells the Seattle Post Intelligencer that in the long run, however, the biomass could still be better than burning fossil fuels. "In the long run, it's better" than burning fossil fuels, Johnson said. "In the short run, yes, we'd probably conclude it's not as efficient." /AA