Search

• Substitution factors for forest products for the Canadian context were developed. • Substitution factors ranging from 0.51 to 0.91 tC/tC were found. • They will lead to more accurate assessments of the forest GHG mitigation potential. • These factors will help governments to manage forest and fight climate change. Evaluating the climate change mitigation potential of the forest sector requires a holistic approach based on forest carbon (C) sequestration, C storage in harvested wood products (HWP) and substitution on markets. High uncertainty is associated with substitution factors, that express avoided fossil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the use of forest-based products in replacement of GHG-intensive materials and fossil fuels. Few studies have focused on the development of substitution factors in Canada, resulting in the use of unrepresentative generic data. Here, we provide a framework to reduce uncertainties related to substitution factors for primary wood products in a Canadian context. A life cycle assessment framework is used to quantify fossil GHG emissions for a baseline and a wood-intensive scenario. For solid product substitution, we focused on the construction sector and analyzed a range of innovative wood buildings with steel and reinforced concrete as alternative materials. We found non-weighted averages of 0.80 tC/tC for sawnwood and 0.81 tC/tC for panels. For energy substitution, we analyzed cases with different specifications on biomass product, facility type and alternative fossil fuel source in non-residential heat production and biofuel transportation sectors. We found a non-weighted average of 0.80 tC/tC for non-residential heat production and 0.51 tC/tC for biofuel transportation, that can be interpreted as 0.91 tC/tC for heavy fuel oil, 0.69 tC/tC for light fuel oil and 0.68 tC/tC for natural gas substitution. These results provide a benchmark for substitution factors in Canada, to help guide forest management strategies for climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global climate change is a key concern in today's world, especially with the growth of population and industrial activities. One of the biggest sources of climate change is anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. In Canada, buildings are the third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, contributing to 12% of the country's equivalent Carbon dioxide emissions. These emissions have various negative impacts on the planet, which impede the transition towards a cleaner environment and more sustainable communities. Attention has now shifted towards Carbon dioxide reduction in addition to the currently practiced energy efficiency improvements and source switching, which is also important in achieving Canada's 2030 climate action goals. The current study attempts to address the above gap by investigating the feasibility of installing carbon capturing unit at building level, based on the perceptions of building managers in both multi-unit residential buildings and non-residential buildings. A Modified Digital Logic approach was used to identify the key factors that determine the acceptability of the unit, based on experts' input. Six primary criteria were identified to design a questionnaire and structured interviews to evaluate the acceptability of building level carbon capturing unit to stakeholders. The findings indicated that around 50% of non-residential building managers were interested in installing the carbon capturing unit, whereas none of the multi-unit building managers were in favor of the unit installation. The lack of interest is attributed to different factors such as unit scalability, inability to accurately estimate the short and long-term economic benefits, and other alternate plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Specifically, when establishing relationship between cost and unit scalability, 82% of residential unit managers and 50% of non-residential managers opined that the unit should be capable of being upgraded to accommodate a larger area and capture more emissions in order to justify the proposed cost of the unit. The findings provide important insights for policy makers in understanding the acceptability of carbon capturing unit at building level and to further develop and promote this emerging technology in the market. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]