Carbon Storage in Forests and Wood Buildings: Myths ...

Carbon Storage in Forests and Wood Buildings: Myths, Misconceptions or Reality?

DR. INDRONEIL GANGULYA S S O C I AT E P R O F E S S O R , U N I V E R S I T Y O F WA S H I N G TO N

B U I L D I N G S U S TA I N A B LY: F R O M F O R E S T L A N D M A N A G E M E N T TO C A R B O N - P O S I T I V E , H EA LT H Y B U I L D I N G S

ORG AN IZ ED BY: WOODWORKS DATE: OC TOBER 20 , 2020

Center for International Trade in Forest Products

Disclaimer: This presentation was developed by Dr. Ganguly and is not funded by WoodWorks or the Softwood Lumber Board.


The tale of Two Carbons:Fossil Carbon and Biogenic Carbon

Anthropogenic Emission

Anthropogenic Climate Change


The carbon neutrality assumption of biogenic carbon is greenwashingas fossil carbon is exactly same as biogenic carbon

Answer: Oversimplified and/or wrong --Misconception.

(Mor

R1)

:Myt

hs/M

isco

ncep

tion

s or

Rea

lity:

Bio

geni

c C

arbo

nN

eutr

alit

y


MoR1: Biogenic Carbon NeutralityDefinition of Biogenic Carbon Neutrality:

1. Carbon neutrality as a property of wood or other biomass harvested from forests where new growth completely offsets losses of carbon caused by harvesting.

2. As carbon is released from harvested wood back into the atmosphere, usually as biogenic CO2, growing trees are removing CO2 from the atmosphere at a rate that completely offsets these emissions of biogenic CO2, resulting in net biogenic CO2 emissions of zero or less.

3. A forest producing carbon neutral wood will have stable or increasing stocks of forest carbon.

4. Forestland should continue to be forestland, either through plantation or natural regeneration (ensure no land use change).

Definition by the Forest Solutions Group (FSG)


System Boundary and the LCA concept of neutrality

900 kWh per month

900 kWh per month

MoR1: Biogenic Carbon Neutrality


MoR1: System Boundary and the LCA concept of neutrality

CO2CO2 CO2 CO2 CO2

Biogenic CO2

CO2CO2 CO2 CO2

Syst

em B

ou

nd

ary

CO2

Annual Net Sequestration 21.0 mil ton CO2e

Annual removal 19.1 mil ton CO2e

Net Annual Seq 1.9 mil ton CO2e Implying stable or increasing forest stock


4 CO2 units

4 CO2 units


MoR1: Biogenic Carbon Neutrality and Biogenic Carbon Storage

CO2CO2 CO2 CO2

20

15

WA

Sta

te P

riva

te F

ore

sts

Merchantable Biomass

Residue, Hog Fuel, Waste

Panel and Misc. Prods

Lumber

CO2CO2CO2 CO2

6.2 MT CO2e

3.0 MT CO2e

12.9 MT CO2e

CO

2e

in p

rod

ucts: 9

.9 M

T CO

2e

Annual Net Sequestration 21.0 MT CO2e

An

nu

al r

em

ova

l 19

.1 M

T C

O2

e

Pulp and Paper

50%

35%

15%



Why do we hear conflicting information?


Biomass carbon pool aspects: Windows of our perception

Carbon pool in ForestsHarvest and

production emissionCarbon pool in the Economy


Alternate explanation of carbon neutrality: We harvest today, then replant seedlings and wait for 40 years (anything between 20 to 80) to recoup the loss in forest biomass.

Answer: This is a widely circulated misunderstanding/myth.

(Mor

R2)

:Myt

hs/M

isco

ncep

tion

s or

Rea

lity:

Wai

t fo

r Fo

rest

toG

row


Tree vs Plot vs LandscapeSustainable Forest Management: Forests managed for timber production are considered sustainable if the harvests are planned to not remove more wood than is grown (i.e., the forest inventory is not declining over time). In other words, on an average the yearly harvest from an administrative landscape unit is lower than the annual growth

A section in the Grays Harbor county (intensively managed forests)

Simplified Representation

Assuming a 45-year harvest cycle,

2.2% of the plots are harvested every

year

9-11% of the total aboveground

biomass is harvested every year

Plots different age classes distributed

across the landscape

MorR 2: Wait for Forest to Grow


Story of Single Plot Vs Landscape

-50,000

-25,000

0

25,000

50,000

75,000

100,000

125,000

150,000

175,000

1 8

15

22

29

36

43

50

57

64

71

78

85

92

99

10

6

11

3

12

0

12

7

13

4

14

1

14

8

15

5

16

2

16

9

17

6

18

3

19

0

19

7

20

4

21

1

21

8

22

5

23

2

23

9

24

6

25

3

26

0

26

7

27

4

28

1

28

8

29

5

30

2

30

9

31

6

KgC

O2e

pe

r ac

re

YearsAll production emissions

absorbed 9 years after new cycle begins



Story of Single Plot Vs Landscape

-50,000

-25,000

0

25,000

50,000

75,000

100,000

125,000

150,000

175,000

1 8

15

22

29

36

43

50

57

64

71

78

85

92

99

10

6

11

3

12

0

12

7

13

4

14

1

14

8

15

5

16

2

16

9

17

6

18

3

19

0

19

7

20

4

21

1

21

8

22

5

23

2

23

9

24

6

25

3

26

0

26

7

27

4

28

1

28

8

29

5

30

2

30

9

31

6

KgC

O2e

pe

r ac

re

Years

Average Global Warming benefit = 46,935 KG CO2e



We will be better-off environmentally, if we don’t harvest and let the trees grow.

Answer: False/based on faulty assumptions/myth.

(Mor

R3)

:Myt

hs/M

isco

ncep

tion

s or

Rea

lity:

Ant

iHar

vest


Rate of carbon sequestration in mature forests vs younger forests

Source: Braakhekke 2019. https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-617-2019

Some Definitions:

Carbon pool: A reservoir of carbon.

Carbon stock: The absolute quantity of carbon held within a pool at a specified time.

Sequestration (uptake):The process of increasing the carbon content of a carbon pool. (IPCC, 2000).

Carbon sink: A given pool (reservoir) can be a sink for atmospheric carbon if, during a given time interval, more carbon is flowing into it than is flowing out.

Carbon flux: Transfer of carbon from one carbon pool to another.

MorR 3: Anti Harvest

https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-617-2019

Forest carbon pool by ownership for the 2016 WA inventory period

Carbon pool in Forests

Source: 2007- 2016 FIA WA State inventory report (WA DNR 2020)


Annual change per acre in live tree carbon from growth, removals and mortality

Carbon pool in Forests

Source: 2007- 2016 FIA WA State inventory report (WA DNR 2020)


Pool for the 2016 inventory period, including the wood products pool



Global warming mitigating impacts (or, benefits) of carbon stored in wood products

This section is based on a paper published in ‘Forests’: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/11/2/194

https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/11/2/194

Center for International Trade in Forest ProductsHow is radiative forcing used to measure impact of carbon stored in wood products?

Sequestered Carbon in Products: To quantify the benefits of carbon storage in a forest product, we applied the Bern Carbon cycle model over the lifetime of the product and then calculated a negative GWP.

The longevity of the product: To analyze the data of products in use over the life-span of the product, we applied the CO2 decay curve at each time interval, taking into account the proportion of product still in use.

Production Emissions: The LCA based Global Warming Potential (GWP) associated with production emissions were subtracted from GWP benefits of storing carbon in the product.

Methodology for factoring-in impacts of wood products

Environmental Impact


Aspects of environmental assessment of wood products

C stock in the wood products


Global warming mitigating potential Washington state’s wood products from private lands

The overall benefit on global warming of storing carbon in wood products from private land in Washington state is:

• Without production emissions: ~ 4.3 million tCO2e

• With production emissions: ~ 1.8 million tCO2e

-1,761,511

-449,329

-755,785

-418,075

37,391

-175,713

-4,324,244

-836,283

-2,214,665

-700,993

-109,688

-462,616

-5,000,000

-4,000,000

-3,000,000

-2,000,000

-1,000,000

0

Total Washington Puget Sound Olympic Peninsula Lower Columbia Central Washington Inland Empire

t C

O2

e

With emissions Without emissions

Avo

idin

g g

ree

nh

ou

se g

as e

mis

sio

ns

to t

he

atm

Ganguly et al., 2019, https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/11/2/194


Center for International Trade in Forest ProductsWA State Law: State’s forests and forest products sector as part of the state’s global climate response

From WFPA website: On average, the private forest industry, including growing, harvesting, transportation and milling wood is Below Net Zero as it sequesters 12% of WA state’s carbon emissions (Source: University of Washington Forest Carbon Study, 2020).

“On March 25, 2020, Governor Jay Inslee signed HB 2528 into law which recognizes the contributions of the state’s forests and forest products sector as part of the state’s global climate response.” (National Law Review, Oct 14th, 2020)

“The enactment of this law provides an opportunity for the forestry and forest products sector to expand its services and contribute to the state’s climate goals.” (National Law Review, Oct 14th, 2020)

National Law Review (https://www.natlawreview.com/article/forests-recognized-contributors-to-washington-state-s-response-to-climate-change)

Discussion on the bill: https://opportunitywa.org/reducing-washingtons-carbon-emissions-by-promoting-washingtons-forest-product-industry/


https://www.natlawreview.com/article/forests-recognized-contributors-to-washington-state-s-response-to-climate-change

https://opportunitywa.org/reducing-washingtons-carbon-emissions-by-promoting-washingtons-forest-product-industry/


‘Fossil Carbon’ is different from ‘Biogenic Carbon’ with respect of global warming and climate change

Courtesy: AFPA

MoR: Concluding Remarks

Bottomline:

1. Awareness about sourcing of wood. Softwood lumber sourced in the North America should be okay.

2. Sustainable forestry doesn’t have to be eco-certified (FSC, SFI etc.). However, most of the softwood lumber (90% plus in WA) produced in North America is certified by one of the third-party agencies.

3. Yes, biogenic carbon and fossil carbon are identical in their elemental form, but one of them does not increase the abundance of GHGs in the atmosphere, if our terrestrial ecosystem is managed sustainably.

4. Acknowledging, the passionate concerns of individuals and groups, however, some of the misunderstanding may stem from an incomplete view of the biogenic carbon flow.

• Its important to differentiate between valid concerns

and economically vested propaganda.


Thank you for your attention!

Indroneil Ganguly

Associate Professor and Associate Director


University of Washington

Box 352100

Seattle, WA 98195

Office: (206) 685-8311

E-mail: [email protected]

Carbon Storage in Forests and Wood Buildings: Myths ...

Documents

Transcript of Carbon Storage in Forests and Wood Buildings: Myths ...