Thank you for the question, Mr. Cannings.
The challenge here is that, as with all ecological systems, it really depends. When we manage and harvest wood that was already killed by mountain pine beetle, spruce beetle, wildfire, drought or other calamities, we have a very different impact on the timber and the future carbon balance than if we harvest actively growing forests or old-growth forests.
Scandinavia has much better data than we do. Canada has an ongoing debate about whether a selection cutting-based approach or a clear cutting-based approach is superior. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. I would say the jury is still out on that, and certainly in British Columbia and other parts of Canada where root diseases, mistletoe and other problems of existing stands can be perpetuated through partial cutting systems. That needs to be considered as well.
How we treat the site also matters. If we slash burn after harvesting, for example, which is often done as a fuel reduction and fire risk protection strategy...but again in British Columbia that causes some five million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year and these are clearly avoidable if we have alternative and better uses for that biomass.