Effect of increased wood harvesting and utilization on required greenhouse gas displacement factors of wood-based products and fuels

Seppälä, Jyri; Heinonen, Tero; Pukkala, Timo; Kilpeläinen, Antti; Mattila, Tiina; Myllyviita, Tanja; Asikainen, Antti; Peltola, Heli

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.031

Cited by 108 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Less attention is paid to actions increasing the carbon sink in the technosystem in terms of increasing substitution benefits and carbon storage which, however, is needed to efficiently reach net negative emissions. To obtain net negative GHG emissions in the forest sector in a time scale of 100 years, the substitution benefits of increased harvesting should be higher than the loss of forest carbon stock in Finland (Seppälä et al 2019). In case of a 17% increase in harvesting levels, Seppälä et al (2019) concluded that a ton of harvested forest carbon should substitute on average two tons of fossil carbon in GHG emissions from non-wood products.…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To obtain net negative GHG emissions in the forest sector in a time scale of 100 years, the substitution benefits of increased harvesting should be higher than the loss of forest carbon stock in Finland (Seppälä et al 2019). In case of a 17% increase in harvesting levels, Seppälä et al (2019) concluded that a ton of harvested forest carbon should substitute on average two tons of fossil carbon in GHG emissions from non-wood products. This is referred as Required Displacement Factor (RDF = 2 tC/tC) which measures the required avoided emissions per unit of wood used when replacing non-wood products with equal functionality.…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The DFs were determined considering the current substitution impact in 2016 and the potential impact in 2050. The DFs account only for fossil emissions, since the DF=2 scenario target is based on the article by Seppälä et al (2019), where the DF refers to fossil emissions. DFs were calculated on an annual basis according to Equation 1 (Equation 1)…”

Section: Data Collection and Quantitative Target Scenario Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Wood utilization scenarios and their sustainability impacts in Finland

Kunttu¹

2020

Diss. For.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social, economic and environmental impacts vary in different wood utilization patterns, and national level strategies should consider possible trade-offs and regional needs. This thesis explored a variety of wood utilization scenarios in Finland and assessed their possible future benefits and trade-offs in environmental, economic and social sustainability, forming plausible pathways to actualize preferred outcomes reflecting different priorities in the goal setting. The research was conducted by using model-based sustainability assessment tools, material flow based Tool for Sustainability Impact Assessment (ToSIA) and Lifecycle Assessment (LCA), and explorative participatory scenario methods visualizing the targets quantitatively. The participatory methods utilized actor and researcher stakeholders from industry, policy, and multiple R&D fields. The results showed that cascading and shifting secondary wood flows e.g. industrial side streams and end-of-life wood-based products from energy uses to material uses, results in increased climate benefits and economic competitiveness. Energy use of wood had lower employment, value added, and substitution benefits as well as shorter carbon storing time compared with material uses of wood. Thus, modern wood-based construction, chemicals, textiles and composites need to increase their share in the product portfolios. National policy tools can support this development only to a limited extent, because the global markets set the market framework for wood uses. To change the global market environment, internationally renewed policies aiming at restricting fossil uses are needed to make wood-based material applications more competitive. European Union (EU) policies should also apply incentives to support factor integrates supporting renewable resource savings. Public financial support to develop new processing technologies and product design of wood-based modern applications are needed to boost cost-competitiveness. Industries and other private investors can contribute to sustainable development by focusing on improving existing processing technologies and making them more resource and energy efficient. However, international policy efforts are still needed to increase the mix of alternative clean energy forms in Finland.

show abstract

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Collection and Quantitative Target Scenario Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Wood utilization scenarios and their sustainability impacts in Finland

Kunttu¹

2020

Diss. For.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent research has shown that decreasing cuttings would increase the net biomass growth and carbon sequestration of Finnish forests (Heinonen et al 2017;Pukkala 2018;Seppälä et al 2019). This conclusion would hold for at least 100 years although decreasing cutting level would eventually lead to the decrease of the net growth of the living biomass and the increase of the DOM decomposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

At what carbon price forest cutting should stop

Pukkala

2020

J. For. Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

increased sequestration divided by the cost of carbon payments). The benefit/cost ratio of carbon subsidies was higher in the northern part of boreal zone than in the southern parts. Subsidizing within-forest carbon sequestration by 50 € t −1 would increase the carbon sequestration of Finnish forestry by 50%, ranging from 36% (south Finland) to 116% (north Finland). A payment of 100 € t −1 or more would increase carbon sequestration by 70%, which is nearly the maximum possible increase that can be obtained by carbon subsidies.

show abstract

“…Secondly, when assessing the climate change mitigation potential of forest and wood use at a local, regional, national or global scale, a current practice is to apply "displacement factors" (DFs) to large segments of the HWP production [e.g. [18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. "Displacement factors" (or "substitution coefficients") are averaged differences between the absolute value | | of the carbon footprint of non-wood products and that | | of functionally equivalent wood products, normalised for convenience to the carbon mass content of the wood products [25]:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GHG displacement factors of harvested wood products: the myth of substitution

LETURCQ¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A currently held idea is that substituting wood for fossil fuels and energy intensive materials reduces greenhouse gas emissions. This is supported by the values usually attributed to the displacement factors that normalise the emission reduction to the wood carbon mass (typically, 0.5 tC/tC for fossil fuel substitution, 2 tC/tC for building material substitution). These values are based on the “carbon neutrality” assumption of harvested wood, which is claimed valid as long as forests are sustainably managed, but holds true in static conditions only. Harvesting disturbs forest growth and wood carbon storage for a long term. Therefore, the carbon footprint of harvested wood and related displacement factors must be assessed as time-dependant quantities, and the effect of substitutions should be appreciated relatively to specific time horizons. In this study, the meaning, values and use of the displacement factors are reconsidered according to this new line of thinking. Results: When taking into account the forest carbon dynamics, the presumed values of the displacement factors under the carbon neutrality assumption are achieved only in steady-state conditions, a very long time after harvest. Shortly after harvest, and even for time horizons comparable with climatic deadlines, the transient values of these factors appear much less than the steady-state values, and may even be negative. This is especially the case for the substitution of wood for fossil fuels which first increases the carbon emission for the same energy released. An additional weakness of the ordinary concept of displacement lies in possible misevaluations of carbon benefits from substitution, especially when large sectors of wood products are concerned or when the market conditions are disregarded. Corrective measures are proposed for this. Conclusions: The use of inadequate constant values of displacement factors under the carbon neutrality assumption and the supposition that wood substitution for other fuels or materials is always possible and effective leads to overestimations of carbon benefits. These overestimations erroneously incite the increase in harvesting and wood utilisation, which may be counter-productive for climate change mitigation objectives, especially when wood is used as a fuel. Keywords: Forest carbon, Harvested wood products, Carbon accounting, Carbon neutrality, Sequestration parity, Energy and material substitution, Displacement factors, Climate change mitigation.

show abstract

Effect of increased wood harvesting and utilization on required greenhouse gas displacement factors of wood-based products and fuels

Cited by 108 publications

References 29 publications

Wood utilization scenarios and their sustainability impacts in Finland

Wood utilization scenarios and their sustainability impacts in Finland

At what carbon price forest cutting should stop

GHG displacement factors of harvested wood products: the myth of substitution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About