Over the last decades, the natural disturbance is increasingly putting pressure on European forests. Shifts in disturbance regimes may compromise forest functioning and the continuous provisioning of ...ecosystem services to society, including their climate change mitigation potential. Although forests are central to many European policies, we lack the long‐term empirical data needed for thoroughly understanding disturbance dynamics, modeling them, and developing adaptive management strategies. Here, we present a unique database of >170,000 records of ground‐based natural disturbance observations in European forests from 1950 to 2019. Reported data confirm a significant increase in forest disturbance in 34 European countries, causing on an average of 43.8 million m3 of disturbed timber volume per year over the 70‐year study period. This value is likely a conservative estimate due to under‐reporting, especially of small‐scale disturbances. We used machine learning techniques for assessing the magnitude of unreported disturbances, which are estimated to be between 8.6 and 18.3 million m3/year. In the last 20 years, disturbances on average accounted for 16% of the mean annual harvest in Europe. Wind was the most important disturbance agent over the study period (46% of total damage), followed by fire (24%) and bark beetles (17%). Bark beetle disturbance doubled its share of the total damage in the last 20 years. Forest disturbances can profoundly impact ecosystem services (e.g., climate change mitigation), affect regional forest resource provisioning and consequently disrupt long‐term management planning objectives and timber markets. We conclude that adaptation to changing disturbance regimes must be placed at the core of the European forest management and policy debate. Furthermore, a coherent and homogeneous monitoring system of natural disturbances is urgently needed in Europe, to better observe and respond to the ongoing changes in forest disturbance regimes.
Shifts in forest disturbance regimes may compromise the continuous provisioning of ecosystem services to society. Although forests in Europe are central to many policies, empirical data for understanding disturbance dynamics are lacking. We present a unique database of >170,000 ground‐based natural disturbance records in European forests from 1950 to 2019. Disturbances significantly increase over the study period, damaging on average 43.8 million m3 of timber volume per year. This is likely a conservative estimate due to under‐reporting. We estimated the magnitude of unreported damages to be between 8.6 and 18.3 million m3/year.
Summary
Increasing the amount of carbon stored in harvested wood products (HWPs) is an internationally recognized measure to mitigate climate change. Several approaches and tiers of methods may be ...used to analyze the contribution of HWP in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and removals at a regional and national level. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides guidelines on three tiers of methods for estimating annual carbon stock changes in the carbon pool of HWPs. These tiers mostly differ by the availability of input data and the level of HWP aggregation. In this case study for the Czech Republic, we have applied the production approach and alternative tiers of accounting methods, which are described in the IPCC guidelines, including the default method (tier 2) and the most advanced method (tier 3). We used country‐specific data and material flow analysis to trace the carbon flow over the entire forest‐based sector, including only the domestic harvest and the primary and secondary wood products manufactured within the country. The results of this study show that the carbon stored in the HWP pool could be underestimated if simpler methods and default values nonspecific to the country are applied. At the national level, applying the tier 3 method resulted in a 15.8% higher annual carbon inflow in the pool of HWPs compared to the tier 2 IPCC default method. This means that the advanced method reveals an apparently higher carbon sink in HWPs. A documented increase of carbon storage might bring additional credits to reporting countries, and, more important, it could promote the use of long‐life HWPs to mitigate climate change.
The aim of this study was to analyse the sustainability impacts of allocating material from energy use to material use by adding cascaded wood into production of wood products. A case study is ...presented, where we analyse sustainability impacts of cascade use alternatives compared to the non-cascade use practice in particleboard production within the province of North Karelia, Finland. Direct impacts are captured using sustainability indicators representing environmental, economic and social aspects of sustainability. Results show that introducing cascaded wood can increase carbon storage in wood products, employment and production costs. Energy use and GHG emissions increase as well, when the total industrial activity during the lifetime of wood increases. We conclude that cascade use can improve resource efficiency as it enables the use of wood multiple times before combustion; however, the amount of waste wood for energy generation decreases locally, and alternative sources of energy need to be identified.
Climate change and transition towards a bioeconomy are seen as both challenges and opportunities for the forest-based sector in Europe. Transition towards a bioeconomy will in most cases rely on ...intensified use of renewable resources and/or advancement in technology. However, how can the intensified use of renewable resources be combined with climate change mitigation measures to increase carbon sinks in the forest-based sector? Additionally, what are the possible socio-economic and environmental impacts of intensified wood use? In this study, we examined the impacts of increased wood utilisation in Lithuania. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of increased domestic wood utilisation on: (i) employment; (ii) the economic performance of the sector; (iii) carbon in forest biomass and soil; and (iv) carbon in harvested wood products (HWP). The system boundaries were set in accordance with international greenhouse gas reporting to include only domestic wood flows. We assessed alternative wood utilisation scenarios using a forest resource model and a tool to assess sustainability impacts of (wood) value chains, using country specific data on wood (carbon) flows. Our results indicate that increased wood use could lead to trade-offs between six selected indicators. Opportunities for employment and the economic performance of the forest-based sector improved in all scenarios due to increased wood utilisation. However, when forest fellings increased, the carbon stored in forests decreased, the carbon stored in HWP increased, but overall the total carbon stored in forests and HWP decreased. When considering also additional substitution effects until the year 2100, the scenario with reduced wood exports generated larger total climate change mitigation effects than the baseline. Our results suggest that increased wood utilisation might support Lithuania’s bioeconomy through increased socio-economic benefits. National positive climate change mitigation effects could be gained only if additional actions to utilise more domestic wood for long-life HWP will be taken.
Forests and the forest-based sector play important roles in mitigating climate change through carbon sequestration and storage in living biomass and soil. In Europe, the forest sector is the only ...sector that positively affects atmospheric carbon balance. After the forest harvest, a large share of carbon is removed together with the wood. This wood carbon might be stored for centuries if in the form of long-lived wood products. In 2011, the United Nations decided that countries should account for and report carbon balance not only in forests but also in harvested wood products (HWP), followed by very general guidelines on methods for carbon accounting in HWP. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) proposed three methodological levels called tiers for estimating carbon stock and its changes in HWP. The first reporting period revealed that countries applied different carbon accounting methods (tiers), therefore comparing the carbon budgets of HWP and the effect of climate change mitigation among different countries is difficult. In order to test the differences between carbon accounting methods proposed by the IPCC guidelines, we applied two carbon accounting methods and used different data sources in the case of Lithuania. The methods applied were the IPCC Tier 2 method (data on HWP from statistics or the literature, default half-life values, and default HWP categories) and material flow analysis, which is compatible with the IPCC Tier 3 method (material flow data on HWP, country-specific half-life values, and country-specific HWP categories). Depending on the availability of historical data from different sources for the purpose of this study, three study periods were defined: 1992–2015 Food and Agriculture Organization Corporate Statistical Database (FAOSTAT) data, 1960–1991 data from the literature, and 1940–1991 data from national statistics. The study findings show that carbon stock in HWP significantly differed when different data sources and methods were applied. The highest carbon stock in HWP (19.5 Mt) at the end of the study period was observed when FAOSTAT data from 1992–2015 were used and the Tier 3 method was applied. The lowest carbon stock in HWP (11.2 Mt) at the end of the study period was observed when data from national statistics from 1940–1991 were used and the Tier 2 method was applied. The carbon inflow into the pool of HWP in all cases was estimated to be 40% higher when material flow analysis was applied compared to the IPCC default (Tier 2) method. These findings suggest that in general it is more reasonable to apply the Tier 3 method for carbon accounting of HWP in Lithuania.
EU Biomass Flows GURRIA ALBUSAC Patricia; GONZALEZ HERMOSO Hugo; CAZZANIGA Noemi ...
IDEAS Working Paper Series from RePEc,
01/2022
Paper
Odprti dostop
The EU Biomass Flows tool is a visualisation, in the form of Sankey diagrams, of the flows of biomass for each sector of the bioeconomy, from supply to uses including trade. It displays the ...harmonised data from the various Joint Research Centre (JRC) units contributing to the BIOMASS Assessment study of the JRC. The diagrams enable deeper analysis and comparison of the different countries and sectors across a defined time series.The first version of the tool was published in 2017 and has been used in multiple research activities and publications. A new version was released in 2020 on new software. This new version offers improved analysis capabilities and a better user experience, as well as increased granularity of data for some biomass types. It relies on the methodology to extract and integrate data developed for the first biomass visualisation tool.In the past years, we have continued to improve on the data and design of the EU Biomass Flows tool. The most important changes of this new release will be focused on four areas: migration to EU27 aggregation, redesign of the flows for woody biomass Update of the data with the latest available years and visualisation of food waste flows.
PDF