Search

Recent concepts of environmental sustainability have focused on narrative economic and societal aspects rather than quantitative ones. Many key sustainability indicators also lack a consistent definition of sustainability, have perspectives that are too short-term, and are unable to model the dynamics of complex environmental utilization which can then result in inappropriate projection of long-term sustainability and/or sustainability indication. Here I propose a generalized quantitative framework of environmental sustainability requiring that (1) environmental capacities and utilization rates are identified, (2) their complex temporal dynamics are quantitatively modeled or estimated (3) while also adjusting for uncertainties, and finally, (4) using one of three options, determining which cumulative utilization pathways can be sustained for a (usually well-defined) period of time. Using the example of wood volume and its growth as capacities and harvest as utilization, and the example of global greenhouse gas emissions as the utilization component and the capacity of the air to absorb these emissions, I demonstrate how the proposed framework can be applied in practice, how sustainability indicators could be developed, and also how they can inform policies and measures to ensure sustainability.

Selenium soil chemistry is complex. It is dominated by selenates, selenites and selenides. Selenate seems to be more toxic for soil animals than selenite. However, bioavailability of different selenium forms as selenate and selenite on soil animals is poorly known. In order to investigate whether higher toxicity of selenate over selenite is a stable phenomenon to the potworm Enchytraeus albidus , standard laboratory tests were conducted on a chernozem brown forest soil and on a meadow chernozem. Toxicity was expressed in terms of adult mortality (LC 50 ) and juvenile production (EC 50 ). Selenate toxicity, expressed on adult mortality and juvenile production, was more substantial than that of selenite if total (conc. HNO 3 + conc. H 2 O 2 soluble) concentrations were considered. No such difference was observed in the case of available (NH 4 -acetate + EDTA soluble) concentrations. E. albidus proved to be more sensitive to selenate and selenite status of the soil than any other animal species tested before. Soil pH between 5.8 and 7.6 did not influence toxicity. The toxicity of selenate and selenite is reverse in aquatic and soil environment in most cases. The reason for this needs further investigations.

Parties to the Kyoto Protocol and/or the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are required to account for their direct human-induced carbon emissions and removals including those from forestry and other land use related activities. In most European countries, the forestry related greenhouse gas inventories are largely or exclusively based on converting tree volume data from national forest inventories to biomass using biomass conversion and expansion factors (BCEFs). However, country specific data for many species are often lacking, which considerably increases the uncertainties of the greenhouse gas inventories. The focus of this research was to develop, using internationally published datasets that cover a large geographical area, an extended set of generalized curves of such biomass expansion factors for several species or species groups by age, growing stock and site index.

This paper presents a framework that encompasses a full range of options for including land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) within future agreements under the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The intent is to provide options that can address the broad range of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals as well as to bring the broadest possible range of nations into undertaking mitigation efforts. We suggest that the approach taken for the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period is only one within a much larger universe of possible approaches. This larger universe includes partially or completely “de-linking” LULUCF commitments from those in other sectors, and allowing commitments specified in terms other than tonnes of greenhouse gases. Such approaches may provide clarity and transparency concerning the role of the various sectors in the agreements and encourage participation in agreements by a more inclusive, diverse set of countries, resulting in a more effective use of LULUCF in addressing climate change.