Search

EU environmental law increasingly adopts an impact-based regulatory strategy that places biophysical sciences in a significant role not only in designing regulation but also in interpreting and implementing the law. While crucial for the effectiveness of environmental law, such a regulatory strategy creates challenges for the legitimacy of EU environmental law. This article traces the shift from a behaviour-based to impact-based regulation in this context and analyses the latter in light of Lon L. Fuller's eight classic criteria for the rule of law to expose the legitimacy challenges. Focusing on the EU Water Framework Directive and the Land-use Change and Forestry Regulation, this study shows that EU environmental law suffers from serious shortcomings in securing legal legitimacy and concludes by highlighting how this may be improved going forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fossil‐based emissions can be avoided by using wood in place of non‐renewable raw materials as energy and materials. However, wood harvest influences forest carbon stocks. Increased harvest may reduce the overall climate benefit of wood use significantly, but is widely overlooked. We reviewed selected simulation studies and compared differences in forest carbon and amount of wood harvested between harvest scenarios of different intensities for three different time perspectives: short‐ (1–30 years), mid‐ (31–70 years), and long‐term (71–100 years). Out of more than 450 reviewed studies 45 provided adequate data. Our results show that increased harvest reduces carbon stocks over 100 years in temperate and boreal forests by about 1.6 (stdev 0.9) tC per tC harvested (referred to as carbon balance indicator (CBI)). CBI proved to be robust when outliers explicitly influenced by factors other than changes in the harvest rate, such as fertilization or increase in forest area, were removed. The carbon impacts tend to be greatest in the mid‐term, but no significant difference in was found for average values between short and long time‐horizons. CBI can be interpreted as carbon opportunity costs of wood harvest in forests. Our results indicate that even after 100 years, CBI is significant compared to the typical GHG credits expected in the technosphere by avoiding fossil emissions in substitution and increasing carbon stocks in harvested wood products. Our estimates provide typical values that can directly be included in GHG balances of products or assessments of mitigation policies and measures related to wood use. However, more systematic scenarios with transparent information on influencing factors for forest carbon stocks are required to provide better constrained estimates for specific forest types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Replacing non-renewable materials and energy with wood offers a potential strategy to mitigate climate change if the net emissions of ecosystem and technosystem are reduced in a considered time period. Displacement factors (DFs) describe an emission reduction for a wood-based product or fuel which is used in place of a non-wood alternative. The aims of this review were to map and assess DFs from scientific literature and to provide findings on how to harmonise practices behind them and to support coherent application. Results: Most of the reviewed DFs were positive, implying decreasing fossil GHG emissions in the technosystem. The vast majority of the reviewed DFs describe avoided fossil emissions either both in processing and use of wood or only in the latter when wood processing emissions were considered separately. Some of the reviewed DFs included emissions avoided in post-use of harvested wood products (HWPs). Changes in forest and product carbon stocks were not included in DFs except in a few single cases. However, in most of the reviewed studies they were considered separately in a consistent way along with DFs. DFs for wood energy, construction and material substitution were widely available, whereas DFs for packaging products, chemicals and textiles were scarce. More than half of DFs were calculated by the authors of the reviewed articles while the rest of them were adopted from other articles. Conclusions: Most of the reviewed DFs describe the avoided fossil GHG emissions. These DFs may provide insights on the wood-based products with a potential to replace emissions intensive alternatives but they do not reveal the actual climate change mitigation effects of wood use. The way DFs should be applied and interpreted depends on what has been included in them. If the aim of DFs is to describe the overall climate effects of wood use, DFs should include all the relevant GHG flows, including changes in forest and HWP carbon stock and post-use of HWPs, however, based on this literature review this is not a common practice. DFs including only fossil emissions should be applied together with a coherent assessment of changes in forest and HWP carbon stocks, as was the case in most of the reviewed studies. To increase robustness and transparency and to decrease misuse, we recommend that system boundaries and other assumptions behind DFs should be clearly documented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forest 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vauhkonen (2023) raised concerns regarding the applicability of the carbon balance indicator (CBI) applied in our paper (Soimakallio et al. 2022) to characterize the results in various contexts, the way the scenario pairs were compared, and the way the results were filtered. Here we respond to each of the above‐mentioned concerns Vauhkonen raised and finally to the conclusions that he drew. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wood harvesting in boreal forests typically consists of sequential harvesting operations within a rotation: a few thinnings and a final felling. The aim of this paper is to model differentiated relative global warming potential ( GWP) coefficients for stemwood use from different thinnings and final fellings, and correction factors for long-lived wood products, potentially applicable in life cycle assessment studies. All thinnings and final fellings influence the development of forest carbon stocks. The climate impact of a single harvesting operation is generated in comparison with no harvesting, thus encountering a methodological problem on how to handle the subsequent operations. The dynamic forest stand simulator MOTTI was applied in the modelling of evolution of forest carbon stocks at landscape level in Southern Finland. The landscape-level approach for climate impact assessment gave results similar to some stand-level approaches presented in previous literature that included the same forest C pools and also studied the impacts relative to the no-harvest situation. The climate impacts of stemwood use decreased over time. For energy use, the impacts were higher or similar in the short term and 0-50% lower in the midterm in comparison with an identical amount of fossil CO2. The impacts were to some extent (approximately 20-40%) lower for wood from intermediate thinnings than for wood from final fellings or first thinnings. However, the study reveals that product lifetime has higher relative influence on the climate impacts of wood-based value chains than whether the stemwood originates from thinnings or final fellings. Although the evolution of future C stocks in unmanaged boreal forests is uncertain, a sensitivity analysis suggests that landscape-level model results for climate impacts would not be sensitive to the assumptions made on the future evolution of C stocks in unmanaged forest. Energy use of boreal stemwood seems to be far from climate neutral. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A carbon (C) balance indicator is presented for the evaluation of forest bioenergy scenarios as a means to reduce greenhouse gas ( GHG) emissions. A bioenergy-intensive scenario with a greater harvest is compared to a baseline scenario. The relative carbon indicator ( RC) is defined as the ratio between the difference in terrestrial C stocks - that is the C debt - and the difference in cumulative bioenergy harvest between the scenarios, over a selected time frame T. A value of zero indicates no C debt from additional biomass harvests, while a value of one indicates a C debt equal to the amount of additionally harvested biomass C. Multiplying the RC indicator by the smokestack emission factor of biomass (approximately 110 t CO2/ TJ) provides the net cumulative CO2 emission factor of the biomass combustion as a function of T, allowing a direct comparison with the emission factors of comparable fossil fuels. The indicator is applied to bioenergy cases in Finland, where typically the rotation length of managed forests is long and the decay rate of harvest residues is slow. The country-level examples illustrate that although Finnish forests remain as a C sink in each of the considered scenarios, the efforts of increasing forest bioenergy may still increase the atmospheric CO2 concentrations in comparison with the baseline scenario and use of fossil fuels. The results also show that the net emission factor depends - besides on forest-growth or residue-decay dynamics - on the timing and evolution of harvests as well. Unlike for the constant fossil C emission factor, the temporal profile of bioenergy use is of great importance for the net emission factor of biomass. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: As proposed by United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)-Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Life Cycle Initiative (Milà i Canals et al., Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1265-1277, and Koellner et al., Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1188-1202, ), the impacts of land occupation should be studied in comparison to a baseline. Regardless of these guidelines, a land use baseline is often ignored in agro-bioenergy life cycle assessment (LCA) studies. This paper tests the appropriateness and significance of applying natural regeneration as a land use baseline for assessing the greenhouse gas (GHG) balances of agro-bioenergy in Finland. Methods: In the land use baseline applied, the land is assumed to be left to regenerate toward its natural state, which, in Finland, would most probably be some sort of forest. The foregone carbon stock of the natural regeneration baseline was estimated based on the literature. The GHG balances were studied by comparing the cumulative warming impacts of the dynamic biomass carbon cycle of the agro-bioenergy production system and the defined baseline over a given time horizon varying from 0 to 100 years. The significance of the results is illustrated by comparing them to other GHG emissions related to bioenergy. Results and discussion: The results depend significantly on the agro-bioenergy yields and the carbon sequestration rate assumed in the natural regeneration baseline scenario. The GHG balances may be of the same magnitude as GHG emissions due to indirect land use changes resulting from market-mediated impacts, life cycle emissions of fossil fuels, and relative reduction in carbon stocks due to forest harvesting for bioenergy. Conclusions: Ignoring a dynamic land use baseline results in misleading conclusions on the GHG balances of land occupation, including agro-bioenergy, due to ignorance of foregone carbon sequestration. Thus, the interpretation of the results and conclusions provided in the vast number of agro-bioenergy LCA studies relying on biomass carbon neutrality should be reassessed. Besides bioenergy, the issue of land use baseline is relevant for any provision service function of land occupation. The foregone carbon sequestration is, however, highly uncertain and thus speculative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to clarify the application of a land-use baseline in attributional life cycle assessment (ALCA) for product systems involving land use, through consideration of the fundamental purpose of ALCA. Currently, there is no clear view in the literature whether a baseline should be used when accounting for environmentally relevant physical flows related to land use. Methods: An extensive search of literature was carried out using the key terms 'attributional life cycle assessment' and 'attributional LCA' in the Google Scholar web search engine. Approximately 700 publications were reviewed and summarised according to their type and scope, relevance of land use, key statements and references given for ALCA, and arguments for and against using a baseline in ALCA. Based on the literature review and supplementary literature references, a critical discussion on the use of a baseline and determination of the most appropriate land-use baseline in ALCA is provided. Results and discussion: A few studies clearly argued that only absolute (observable) flows without a baseline are to be inventoried in ALCA, while the majority of the studies did not make any clear statement for or against. On the other hand, a land-use baseline was explicitly applied or proposed in a minority of the studies only, despite the fact that we classified land use as highly relevant for the majority of the studies reviewed. Furthermore, the LCA guidelines reviewed give contradictory recommendations. The most cited studies for the definition of ALCA provide general rules for selecting processes based on observable flows but do not argue that observable flows necessarily describe the environmentally relevant physical flows. Conclusions: We conclude that a baseline is required to separate the studied parts of the technosphere from natural processes and to describe the impact of land use on ecosystem quality, such as carbon sequestration and biodiversity. The most coherent baseline for human-induced land-use in ALCA is natural regeneration. As the natural-regeneration baseline has typically been excluded, may vary bio-geographically and temporally, and is subject to uncertainties, case studies applying it should be performed so that implications can be studied and evaluated. This is particularly important for agricultural and forestry systems, such as food, feed, fibre, timber and biofuels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: A framework for the inclusion of land use impact assessment and a set of land use impact indicators has been recently proposed for life cycle assessment (LCA) and no case studies are available for forest biomass. The proposed methodology is tested for Scandinavian managed forestry; a comparative case study is made for energy from wood, agro-biomass and peat; and sensitivity to forest management options is analysed. Methods: The functional unit of this comparative case study is 1 GJ of energy in solid fuels. The land use impact assessment framework of the United Nations Environment Programme and the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP-SETAC) is followed and its application for wood biomass is critically analysed. Applied midpoint indicators include ecological footprint and human appropriation of net primary production, global warming potential indicator for biomass (GWP-100) and impact indicators proposed by UNEP-SETAC on ecosystem services and biodiversity. Options for forest biomass land inventory modelling are discussed. The system boundary covers only the biomass acquisition phase. Management scenarios are formulated for forest and barley biomass, and a sensitivity analysis focuses on impacts of land transformations for agro-biomass. Results and discussion: Meaningful differences were found in between solid biofuels from distinct land use classes. The impact indicator results were sensitive to land occupation and transformation and differed significantly from inventory results. Current impact assessment method is not sensitive to land management scenarios because the published characterisation factors are still too coarse and indicate differences only between land use types. All indicators on ecosystem services and biodiversity were sensitive to the assumptions related with land transformation. The land occupation (ma) approach in inventory was found challenging for Scandinavian wood, due to long rotation periods and variable intensities of harvests. Some suggestions of UNEP-SETAC were challenged for the sake of practicality and relevance for decision support. Conclusions: Land use impact assessment framework for LCA and life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators could be applied in a comparison of solid bioenergy sources. Although forest bioenergy has higher land occupation than agro-bioenergy, LCIA indicator results are of similar magnitude or even lower for forest bioenergy. Previous literature indicates that environmental impacts of land use are significant, but it remains questionable if these are captured with satisfactory reliability with the applied LCA methodology, especially for forest biomass. Short and long time perspectives of land use impacts should be studied in LCA with characterisation factors for all relevant timeframes, not only 500 years, with a forward-looking perspective. Characterisation factors need to be modelled further for different (forest) land management intensities and for peat excavation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forests are a significant pool of terrestrial carbon. A key feature related to forest biomass harvesting and use is the typical time difference between carbon release into and sequestration from the atmosphere. Traditionally, the use of sustainably grown biomass has been considered as carbon neutral in life cycle assessment ( LCA) studies. However, various approaches to account for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sinks of forest biomass acquisition and use have also been developed and applied, resulting in different conclusions on climate impacts of forest products. The aim of this study is to summarize, clarify, and assess the suitability of these approaches for LCA. A literature review is carried out, and the results are analyzed through an assessment framework. The different approaches are reviewed through their approach to the definition of reference land-use situation, consideration of time frame and timing of carbon emissions and sequestration, substitution credits, and indicators applied to measure climate impacts. On the basis of the review, it is concluded that, to account for GHG emissions and the related climate impacts objectively, biomass carbon stored in the products and the timing of sinks and emissions should be taken into account in LCA. The reference situation for forest land use has to be defined appropriately, describing the development in the absence of the studied system. We suggest the use of some climate impact indicator that takes the timing of the emissions and sinks into consideration and enables the use of different time frames. If substitution credits are considered, they need to be transparently presented in the results. Instead of carbon stock values taken from the literature, the use of dynamic forest models is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Life cycle assessment (LCA) is being used increasingly in decision support situations. In actual cases, the sources of uncertainty are easily hidden in the complexity. Methods for taking uncertainty into account are recommended by LCA guidelines, but actual application remains rare. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the sources of uncertainty in a practical simple selection case wherein a customer makes a decision between beer and wine in a restaurant, considering the selected criteria and the given information. The uncertainty in LCA results is connected to the broader scope of decision analysis. Methods: Life cycle inventories were collected for beer and wine production from existing literature. The functional unit was chosen to be one serving of alcohol: beer or wine. For illustrative purposes, only the global warming potential indicator was included in the LCA through carbon footprint (CF). Probabilistic uncertainty analysis was applied to the CF system using Monte Carlo simulation. Water footprint was also roughly considered. In addition, three non-environmental indicators were included in the decision: weight control, price, and taste. The comparison between the two products was constructed as a multiple-criteria decision analytical problem. Results and discussion: The results indicated that beer had, on average, a higher CF value than wine did. However, the difference was not significant, and within the uncertainty range, also the opposite conclusion was possible. The ratio of wine to beer CF was dominated by the uncertainty in the NO emissions of wine production. When all of the decision criteria were included, the level of uncertainty prevented robust overall conclusions about preference for beer or wine. However, depending on the utility differences assigned to subjective indicators, there existed also cases wherein decisions could be made at a 10 % risk level regardless of high overall uncertainty. Conclusions: In many cases, the uncertainties of LCA are dwarfed by the overall uncertainty of the decision situation. However, as shown by our example, in many cases, reasonable decisions can be made in spite of high uncertainties. The uncertainties of single LCA indicators should be considered in relation to the decision-making problem, which depends on the uncertainty of LCA indicators but also significantly on the weighting of the indicators and the related uncertainty. Successful decision making depends on both the magnitude of uncertainty and the differences in expected utility value between alternatives. More attention should be paid to uncertainty analysis considering the weighting factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the authors' reply to Matthew Brander's response to their paper on the necessity of a land-use baseline in attributional LCA where he raised concerns on the appropriateness of attributable LCA (ALCA) to support decision-making. They point out that postponement of natural regeneration can be attributed to any land use regardless of the length occupation and whether the temporal scope includes the initial land transformation.