Global warming potentials of stemwood used for energy and materials in Southern Finland: Differentiation of impacts based on type of harvest and product lifetime

GCB Bioenergy

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 334-345

  Helin, Tuomas ^a   Salminen, Hannu ^b   Hynynen, Jari ^b   Soimakallio, Sampo ^a   Huuskonen, Saija ^b   Pingoud, Kim ^a  

^a VTT TECHNICAL RESEARCH CENTRE OF FINLAND   (Finland)

^b FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Boreal forest; Climate impacts; Forest bioenergy; Forest growth model; Global warming potential; Landscape; Long lived wood products; Stemwood; Thinning wood

Indexed keywords

FORESTRY; GLOBAL WARMING; HARVESTING; LIFE CYCLE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; WOOD; WOOD PRODUCTS;

BIO-ENERGY; BOREAL FORESTS; CLIMATE IMPACTS; FOREST GROWTH MODEL; GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL; LANDSCAPE; STEMWOODS;

CLIMATE MODELS;

BIOENERGY; BOREAL FOREST; CLIMATE EFFECT; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FOREST PRODUCT; FORESTRY PRODUCTION; GLOBAL WARMING; GROWTH; HARVESTING; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; THINNING; WOOD;

FINLAND;

EID: 84959573310     PISSN: 17571693     EISSN: 17571707     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12244     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Agostini A, Giuntioli J, Boulamanti A, Marelli L (2013) Carbon accounting of forest bioenergy. Conclusions and recommendations from a critical literature review. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. JRC Technical Report EUR 25354 EN.
2. BirdLife (2010) Bioenergy. A carbon accounting time bomb. Birdlife International. Available at: www.birdlife.org/eu/pdfs/carbon_bomb_21_06_2010.pdf (accessed 20 September 2013).
3. Brandão M, Clift R, Cowie A, Greenhalgh S (2014) The use of life cycle assessment in the support of robust (climate) policy making: comment on 'using attributional life cycle assessment to estimate climate-change mitigation ...'. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 18, 461-463.
4. Bright RM, Cherubini F, Astrup R et al. (2012) A comment to 'Large-scale bioenergy from additional harvest of forest biomass is neither sustainable nor greenhouse gas neutral': important insights beyond greenhouse gas accounting. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 4, 617-619.
5. Cajander AK (1909) Über Waldtypen [About forest types]. Fennia, 28, 1-175. (in German).
6. Cajander AK (1926) The theory of forest types. Acta Forestalia Fennica, 29, 1-108.
7. Cajander AK, Ilvessalo Y (1921) Über Waldtypen, II [About forest types, II]. Acta Forestalia Fennica, 20, 1-77. (in German).
8. 2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 3, 413-426.
9. 2 fluxes in life cycle assessment. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 4, 784-798.
10. Cowie A, Berndes G, Smith T (2013) On the timing of greenhouse gas mitigation benefits of forest-based bioenergy. IEA Bioenergy Executive Committee statement 2013:4. Available at: http://www.ieabioenergy.com/LibItem.aspx?id=7787 (accessed 20 September 2013).
11. Davidson EA, Janssens IA (2006) Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, 165-173.
12. Faustmann M (1849) Berechnung des Werthes, weichen Waldboden sowie nach nicht haubare Holzbestande f€ur de Weltwirtschaft besitzen. Allgemeine Forst und Jagd Zeitung, 25, 441.
13. Finnish Forest Research Institute METLA (2013) Finnish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry. Chapter 8 Wood Consumption. Metsäntutkimuslaitos METLA, Vantaa. ISBN 978-951-40-2450-4.
14. Finnveden G, Hauschild MZ, Ekvall T et al. (2009) Recent developments in life cycle assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 1, 1-21.
15. Guest G, Cherubini F, Strømman AH (2013) The role of forest residues in the accounting for the global warming potential of bioenergy. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 5, 459-466.
16. Haberl H, Sprinz D, Bonazountas M et al. (2012) Correcting a fundamental error in greenhouse gas accounting related to bioenergy. Energy Policy, 45, 18-23.
17. Helin T, Sokka L, Soimakallio S, Pingoud K, Pajula T (2013) Approaches for inclusion of forest carbon cycle in life cycle assessment - a review. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 5, 475-486.
18. Holtsmark B (2012) Harvesting in boreal forests and the biofuel carbon debt. Climatic Change, 112, 415-428.
19. 2 emissions from wood fuels. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, (in press) doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12110.
20. Hudiburg TW, Law BE, Wirth C, Luyssaert S (2011) Regional carbon dioxide implications of forest bioenergy production. Nature Climate Change, 1, 419-423.
21. Huuskonen S (2008) The development of young Scots pine stands - precommercial and first commercial thinning [In Finnish]. Dissertationes Forestales 62. 61 p.
22. Huuskonen S, Ahtikoski A (2005) Ensiharvennuksen ajoituksen ja voimakkuuden vaikutus kuivahkon kankaan männiköiden tuotokseen ja tuottoon. Metsätieteen aikakauskirja 99-115.
23. Hynynen J, Ojansuu R, Hökkä H, Siipilehto J, Salminen H, Haapaka P (2002) Models for predicting stand development in MELA system. The Finnish Forest Research Institute. Research Papers 835, ISBN 951-40-1815-X, ISSN 0358-4283.
24. Hynynen J, Salminen H, Huuskonen S et al. (2014) Impact of alternative management and utilization of Finnish forest resources on the raw material supply for forest and energy industry. Working papers of Finnish Forest Research Institute 302. 106 pp.
25. IPCC (2007) Fourth Assessment Report (AR 4). Working Group I Report 'The Physical Science Basis'.
26. IPCC (2013) Working group I contribution to the IPCC fifth assessment report (AR5), Climate change 2013: the physical science basis.
27. IPCC (2014) Working group III contribution to the IPCC fifth assessment report (AR5), Climate change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change.
28. Jonker JGG, Junginger M, Faaij A (2014) Carbon payback period and carbon offset parity point of wood pellet production in the South-eastern United States. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 6, 371-389.
29. JRC-IES (2010) International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) handbook. Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and Sustainability. JRC-IES, Ispra.
30. Kallio AMI, Salminen O, Sievänen R (2013) Sequester or substitute-Consequences of increased production of wood based energy on the carbon balance in Finland. Journal of Forest Economics, 19, 402-415.
31. Kneeshaw D, Gauthier S (2003) Old growth in the boreal forest: a dynamic perspective at the stand and landscape level. Environmental Reviews, 11, S99-S114.
32. Koellner T, de Baan BL, Beck T et al. (2013) UNEP-SETAC guideline on global land use impact assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services in LCA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18, 1188-1202.
33. Lamers P, Junginger M (2013) The 'debt' is in the detail: a synthesis of recent temporal forest carbon analyses on woody biomass for energy. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 7, 373-385.
34. Leslie AJ (1966) A review of the concept of the normal forest. Australian Forestry, 30, 139-147.
35. Lindner M, Maroschek M, Netherer S et al. (2010) Climate change impacts, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability of European forest ecosystems. Forest Ecology and Management, 259, 698-709.
36. Lippke B, Oneil E, Harrison R, Skog K, Gustavsson L, Sahre R (2011) Life cycle impacts of forest management and wood utilization on carbon mitigation: knowns and unknowns. Carbon Management, 2, 303-333.
37. Liu Y, Yu G, Wang Q, Zhang Y (2014) How temperature, precipitation and stand age control the biomass carbon density of global mature forests. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 23, 323-333.
38. Luyssaert S, Schulze ED, Börner A et al. (2008) Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature, 455, 213-215.
39. Mainville N (2011) Fuelling a BioMess. Why burning trees for energy will harm people, the climate and forests. Greenpeace Canada. Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/Global/canada/report/2011/10/ForestBiomess_Eng.pdf (accessed 20 September 2013).
40. Mäkinen H, Hynynen J, Isomäki A (2005) Intensive management of Scots pine stands in southern Finland: first empirical results and simulated further development. Forest Ecology and Management, 215, 37-50.
41. Mäkinen H, Hynynen J, Siitonen J, Sievänen R (2006) Predicting the decomposition of Scots pine, Norway spruce, and birch stems in Finland. Ecological Applications, 16, 1865-1879.
42. Matala J, Hynynen J, Miina J et al. (2003) Comparison of a physiological model and a statistical model for prediction of growth and yield in boreal forests. Ecological Modelling, 161, 95-116.
43. Matthews R, Sokka L, Soimakallio S et al. (2014) Review of literature on biogenic carbon and life cycle assessment of forest bioenergy. Final Task 1 report, EU DG ENER project ENER/C1/427. Forest Research, Farnham.
44. Melin Y, Petersson H, Nordfjell T (2009) Decomposition of stump and root systems of Norway spruce in Sweden-A modelling approach. Forest Ecology and Management, 257, 1445-1451.
45. Milà i Canals L, Bauer C, Depestele J et al. (2007) Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment within LCA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12, 5-15.
46. Miner R (2010) Biomass Carbon Neutrality. NCASI Discussion paper. Available at: http://nafoalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/NCASI-Biomass-carbon-neutrality.pdf (accessed 20 September 2013).
47. Mitchell SR, Harmon ME, O'Connell KEB (2012) Carbon debt and carbon sequestration parity in forest bioenergy production. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 4, 818-827.
48. Ness B, Urbel-Piirsalu E, Anderberg S, Olsson L (2007) Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics, 60, 498-508.
49. Palviainen M, Finér L, Laiho R, Shorohova E, Kapitsa E, Vanha-Majamaa I (2010) Carbon and nitrogen release from decomposing Scots pine, Norway spruce and silver birch stumps. Forest Ecology and Management, 259, 390-398.
50. Pingoud K, Ekholm T, Savolainen I (2012) Global warming potential (GWP) factors and warming payback time as climate indicators of forest biomass use. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 17, 369-383.
51. Plevin RJ, Delucchi MA, Creutzig F (2014) Using attributional life cycle assessment to estimate climate-change mitigation benefits misleads policy makers. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 18, 73-83.
52. Rantala S (ed.) (2011) Finnish Forestry Practice and Management. Metsäkustannus, Helsinki.
53. Repo A, Känkänen R, Tuovinen J-P, Antikainen R, Tuomi M, Vanhala P, Liski J (2012) Forest bioenergy climate impact can be improved by allocating forest residue removal. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 4, 202-212.
54. Routa J, Kellomäki S, Kilpeläinen A, Peltola H, Strandman H (2011) Effects of forest management on the carbon dioxide emissions of wood energy in integrated production of timber and energy biomass. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 3, 483-497.
55. Salminen H, Lehtonen M, Hynynen J (2005) Reusing legacy FORTRAN in the MOTTI growth and yield simulator. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 49, 103-113.
56. Schulze E-D, Körner C, Law BE, Haberl H, Luyssaert S (2012) Large-scale bioenergy from additional harvest of forest biomass is neither sustainable nor greenhouse gas neutral. Global Change Biology Bioenergy, 4, 611-616.
57. Sedjo RA (2011) Carbon Neutrality and Bioenergy. A Zero-Sum Game? RFF DP 11-15. Resources for the Future, Washington DC. 9 p + Appx.
58. Shorohova E, Kapitsa E, Vanha-Majamaa I (2008) Decomposition of stumps 10 years after partial and complete harvesting in a southern boreal forest in Finland. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 38, 2414-2421.
59. Siipilehto J, Ojansuu R, Miina J, Hynynen J, Valkonen S, Saksa T (2014) Metsikön varhaiskehityksen kuvaus MOTTI-ohjelmistossa [In Finnish]. Metlan Työraportti / Metla Working Paper 286, 1-43.
60. Soimakallio S (2014) Toward a more comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions assessment of biofuels: the case of forest-based Fischer-Tropsch diesel production in Finland. Environmental Science and Technology, 48, 3031-3038.
61. Suh S, Yang Y (2014) On the uncanny capabilities of consequential LCA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 19, 1179-1184.
62. Ter-Mikaelian MT, Colombo SJ, Chen J (2013) Effects of harvesting on spatial and temporal diversity of carbon stocks in a boreal forest landscape. Ecology and Evolution, 3, 3738-3750.