Financial feasibility of increasing carbon sequestration in harvested wood products in Mississippi

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prakash Nepal ◽  
Robert K. Grala ◽  
Donald L. Grebner
2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunyi Ji ◽  
Hongqiang Yang ◽  
Ying Nie ◽  
Yinxing Hong

Author(s):  
Sampo Soimakallio ◽  
Tuomo Kalliokoski ◽  
Aleksi Lehtonen ◽  
Olli Salminen

AbstractForest biomass can be used in two different ways to limit the growth of the atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations: (1) to provide negative emissions through sequestration of carbon into forests and harvested wood products or (2) to avoid GHG emissions through substitution of non-renewable raw materials with wood. We study the trade-offs and synergies between these strategies using three different Finnish national-level forest scenarios between 2015 and 2044 as examples. We demonstrate how GHG emissions change when wood harvest rates are increased. We take into account CO2 and other greenhouse gas flows in the forest, the decay rate of harvested wood products and fossil-based CO2 emissions that can be avoided by substituting alternative materials with wood derived from increased harvests. We considered uncertainties of key parameters by using stochastic simulation. According to our results, an increase in harvest rates in Finland increased the total net GHG flow to the atmosphere virtually certainly or very likely, given the uncertainties and time frame considered. This was because the increased biomass-based CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere together with decreased carbon sequestration into the forest were very likely higher than the avoided fossil-based CO2 emissions. The reverse of this conclusion would require that compared to what was studied in this paper, the share of long-living wood products in the product mix would be higher, carbon dioxide from bioenergy production would be captured and stored, and reduction in forest carbon equivalent net sink due to wood harvesting would be minimized.


2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-86
Author(s):  
Akiko Suyari ◽  
Yushin Shinoda ◽  
Chihiro Kayo

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 3949-4023 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. P. Peters ◽  
S. J. Davis ◽  
R. M. Andrew

Abstract. In a globalised world, the transfer of carbon between regions, either physically or embodied in production, represents a substantial fraction of global carbon emissions. The resulting emission transfers are important for balancing regional carbon budgets and for understanding the drivers of regional emissions. In this paper we synthesise current understanding in two parts: (1) embodied CO2 emissions from the production of goods and services produced in one country but consumed in others, (2) physical carbon flows in fossil fuels, petroleum-derived products, harvested wood products, crops, and livestock. We describe the key differences between studies and provide a consistent set of estimates using the same definitions, modelling framework, and consistent data. We find the largest trade flows of carbon in international trade in 2004 were fossil fuels (2673 MtC, 37% of global emissions), CO2 embodied in traded goods and services (1661 MtC, 22% of global emissions), livestock (651 MtC, 20% of total livestock carbon), crops (522 MtC, 31% of total harvested crop carbon), petroleum-based products (183 MtC, 50% of their total production), and harvested wood products (149 MtC, 40% of total roundwood extraction). We find that for embodied CO2 emissions estimates from independent studies are robust. We found that differences between individual studies is not representative of the uncertainty in consumption-based estimates as different studies use different production-based emission estimates as input and different definitions of allocating emissions to international trade. After adjusting for these issues, results across independent studies converge to give less uncertainty than previously assumed. For physical carbon flows there are relatively few studies to be synthesised, but differences between existing studies are due to the method of allocating to international trade with some studies using "apparent consumption" as opposed to "final consumption" in more comprehensive approaches. While results across studies are robust to be used in further applications, more research is needed to understand the differences between methods and to harmonise definitions for particular applications.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document