James Roumasset made a sound argument that utilizing trees to make wood products is a great way to sequester carbon (“Will the real sustainable forestry policy please stand up?,” Star-Advertiser, Island Voices, March 17). Indeed, it is not unreasonable to expect that wood in the wall of a house or in a piece of fine furniture could lock that carbon up for a century or more.

Portions of most harvested trees are suitable for utilization in some type of solid wood product. But portions such as the sawdust or pieces too small for wood products are not suitable. However, they still have value and can be put to beneficial uses.

The Hawaii Forest Industry Association supports and continues to work toward the development of an integrated forest products industry that will produce construction lumber, lumber for fine furniture and floors, as well as byproducts that can be used to produce renewable energy. Typically, about half of the wood in a mature tree can be utilized for construction and furniture, with the other half suitable for energy production.

The reality of launching an industry, or even a business, in Hawaii is the enormous difficulty of working through the layers of bureaucratic regulation to build anything. Even when an entrepreneur overcomes bureaucratic hurdles, activists of various stripes have almost unlimited opportunity to kill projects through protracted litigation, contested case hearings and other regulatory processes.

It’s for these reasons that Hawaii continues to top the lists of most difficult states in which to do business. Consider the fate of the Superferry, Thirty Meter Telescope and now Honua Ola Bioenergy (“Hawaii lawmakers stir debate over controversial wood-fueled energy project,” Star-Advertiser, March 7).

The first question any entity considering building a sawmill in Hawaii will be, “Is business welcome in Hawaii?” The next question is, “What would we do with the residuals from harvesting and from the sawmill and manufacturing?”

On Hawaii island, the answer to the second question is Honua Ola, which can turn waste from these activities into renewable energy. The income from sale of residuals to Honua Ola provides the revenue necessary to make projects like sawmills and other wood manufacturing feasible.

If Honua Ola does not start up after investing almost $500 million, any sawmill considering a startup here would quickly see that failure as a strong indicator that years of work and investment will likely come to nothing. Further, if they were successful in building a sawmill, they would then have to pick up where Honua Ola left off and build a facility to produce renewable energy.

If, however, Honua Ola is approved again, that would send a strong signal to prospective sawmill investors and manufacturers that it is indeed possible to do business in Hawaii.

At that point, a market would already exist for mill residuals and additional investment in a renewable energy plant would not be needed. Honua Ola would be a critical component in an integrated industry, like the one Roumasset proposes.

An additional benefit to the approval of Honua Ola would be the growth of our nascent forest industry, which would be continuously planting carbon-sequestering trees, both because new plantations would be required to meet raw material needs and because Honua Ola has committed to do so.

Don Bryan is president of the Hawaii Forest Industry Association.