Sustaining the sequestration efficiency of the European forest sector

Valade, Aude; Bellassen, Valentin; Magand, Claire; Luyssaert, Sebastiaan

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2017.09.009

Cited by 55 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 97 publications

(123 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of forestry carbon sequestration is less economical than the enterprise's ability to reduce emissions through technology, which has greater potential to alleviate climate warming and promote sustainable human development [3,4]. Expanding forest area and promoting forest growth through artificial activities, such as afforestation and management, have significant potential for emission reduction [5][6][7][8][9]. In the United States, for example, forest resources in its territory can offset one-eighth annual carbon dioxide emissions in the country [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies of Forestry Carbon Sink under Forest Insurance and Subsidies

Song

Peng

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We take the forest insurance supply chain, composed of a forestry enterprise and an insurance company, as the research object. The forestry carbon sink, operated by the forestry enterprise, is the subject matter of insurance. The Stackelberg game model is constructed to study the optimal strategies of the forestry enterprise and insurance company under the forest insurance mechanism, as well as the impact of government subsidies, probability of deforestation, and carbon limit level on the decision-making and profit of the forestry enterprise and insurance company. The results show that the larger the carbon limit, the looser carbon restraint policy, which causes the forestry enterprise to reduce the scale of carbon sink forest, and the insurance company lowers the premium level. As the probability of deforestation increases, both the scale of the carbon sink forest and the premium level will decrease. Direct subsidies for the premiums of the forestry enterprise are conducive to expanding the scale of carbon sink forest, but will lead to the insurance company improving the premium level. Providing indirect subsidies to the insurance company’s operating costs will not only expand the scale of the carbon sink forest, but also lower the premium level. In the case of the same number of premium subsidies, indirect subsidies are more effective than direct subsidies in increasing the forestry enterprise’s income and promoting it to expand the forest scale.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies of Forestry Carbon Sink under Forest Insurance and Subsidies

Song

Peng

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous studies have highlighted energy substitution and material substitution as forest levers for climate change mitigation [e.g. 19,[46][47][48][49][50]. Most authors consider that substitutable wood products may truly replace homologous non-wood products and apply averaged displacement factors to more or less extensive sets of wood products.…”

Section: Applicability Of the Concept Of Substitutionmentioning

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

“…Kui raieintensiivsuse suurenedes süsiniku sidumise kasv ei kompenseeri süsinikuvarude vähenemist, siis metsamajanduse intensiivistumine viib negatiivsete kliimamõjudeni. Näitena võib tuua Euroopa metsasektori (nii puistud kui ka puidutooted), mis on hetkel süsiniku siduja (Luyssaert et al, 2010;Valade et al, 2017), kuid raie intensiivsuse kasvades metsasektori süsinikuemissioon suureneb (Valade et al, 2017). Veel enam, 250 aastat tagasi jahutasid Euroopa metsad kliimat rohkem kui tänapäeval, seda valdavalt tänu suure süsinikuvaruga majandamata metsadele, mis on nüüdseks asendunud majandatud metsadega (Naudts et al, 2016).…”

Section: Metsade Majandamise Mõju Süsinikuringele Ja -Varudeleunclassified

“…Metsamajandusvõtetega saab metsade süsinikusidumist ja -hoidmist suurendada (Valade et al, 2017). Maastiku tasemel süsinikuvaru suurendamiseks on soovitav metsastada lagedad alad ja jäätmaad, samuti taasmetsastada endine metsamaa, vältida raadamist ning rajada metsakaitsealasid ja taastada märgalasid (Usi & Lal, 2017).…”

Section: Metsade Majandamise Mõju Süsinikuringele Ja -Varudeleunclassified

“…Metsasektoril on oluline potentsiaal vähendada atmosfääri CO 2 kontsentratsiooni tõusu. Kuna aga Pariisi kliimakokkulepe jätab riikidele palju otsustamisõigust oma süsinikuheidete vähenemise tegevusteks ja kirjeldamiseks, on riikide metsasektoril võimalus tegeleda "rohepesuga" -järgida küll kliimakokkuleppe reegleid, kuid mitte selle sügavamat sisu, s.o püüda aktiivselt vähendada kliimamuutusi (Valade et al, 2017). Metsasektori potentsiaali rakendamisest on rohkem kasu, kui vähendada kogu tarbimist ja suurendada taaskasutust.…”

Section: Puitu Seotud Süsiniku Vabanemine Sõltuvalt Selle Kasutamisviunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

The influence of forest management and timber use options on carbon sequestration and the consequences on biodiversity

Rosenvald

2017

Forestry Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of scientific studies dealing with the influence of forest management on carbon dynamics are often controversial. Substituting fossil fuels with wood is not always a climate-friendly solution, and besides, it has often a negative impact on biodiversity. The current paper reviews the literature about the influence of different forest management and timber use options on climate change and brings out the accompanying consequences on biodiversity in temperate and boreal climate zones. The forest’s ability to sequestrate and store carbon can be enlarged by appropriate forest management planning and practices. Generally, for mitigation of climate change, the moderate (not intensive) forest management is most favourable, but intensification of management enhances global warming, since forest carbon storage in tree biomass and soil decreases. The mitigation of climate change is just one of the many roles of forest, and climate policy actions cannot come at the expense of species diversity. The complex studies dealing with several forest goals conclude that high carbon store and biodiversity protection do not contradict each other, but the achievement of maximum economic profit at the same time is not possible. The mitigation of climate change and wildlife protection is most effective when it is first of all the forests with a high biodiversity that are managed less intensively. Concerning climate change, the most negative forest biomass use is wood combustion. It is reasonable to burn only such biomass (cut and industrial residues) which cannot be used for producing goods holding carbon for a long time.

show abstract

Sustaining the sequestration efficiency of the European forest sector

Cited by 55 publications

References 97 publications

Strategies of Forestry Carbon Sink under Forest Insurance and Subsidies

Strategies of Forestry Carbon Sink under Forest Insurance and Subsidies

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

The influence of forest management and timber use options on carbon sequestration and the consequences on biodiversity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About