# Cost Analysis of a Novel Method for Ecological Compensation—A Study of the Translocation of Dead Wood

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. Work Phases

#### 2.2. Area Description

^{3}per ha and year) with high conservation value, 113 hectares of productive forest with low conservation value but with no forest of very-high conservation value. The remaining areas were non-productive forest, mires or open water [25].

#### 2.3. Substrate Identification

#### 2.4. Tree Felling and Log Marking

#### 2.5. Extraction

#### 2.6. Road Transport

#### 2.7. Insertion

#### 2.8. Cost Assessment

#### 2.9. Time Studies

#### 2.10. Calculations

^{3}) per time unit, was calculated as the load size divided by the time consumption for the work element and/or load (round trips) of interest of the respective work element.

^{3}).

#### 2.11. Statistical Analysis

## 3. Results

#### 3.1. Costs

#### 3.2. Work Analysis

^{3}per hour.

^{2}-adj = 89.7). However, given the features of the loading work, the loading is dependent on the number of logs loaded, and the distance driven during loading is directly dependent on the logs’ dispersion. Indeed, the loading distance driven was strongly dependent on the load size (distance (km) = 0.0263 × load size (number of logs), n = 10, p < 0.001, R

^{2}-adj = 83.6). Following this logic, and due to the rather small sample size, load size was used for the models in Table 7.

^{2}-adj = 85.7). However, both models resulted in very similar time predictions.

#### 3.3. Modelling of Costs and Cost Sensitivity

_{1}+ 0.0612 + 0.00847b + 0.2770a

_{2}+0.8 × 0.02830b + 0.11 + 0.12

_{1}and a

_{2}are the distances (in km) expected to be driven when driving without and with load, respectively, and b is the number of logs expected in the load. Since 20% of the observed unloading time during Insertion was considered attributable to the work related to carrying out the scientific evaluation, the model for predicting the unloading time is multiplied by 0.8 (i.e., (100% − 20%)/100).

## 4. Discussion

^{3}for final felling, with average tree volumes of 0.23 m

^{3}under bark and with 44% of the costs being attributable to the extraction [30]. So, assuming the insertion corresponds to two extraction costs, conventional harvesting, extraction and insertion would be 137 SEK per m

^{3}. Conventional Swedish road transport costs are approximately 86 SEK per m

^{3}in Northern Sweden [30]. So, in total, conventional felling, extraction, road transport and insertion could be estimated to cost 223 SEK per m

^{3}. With a mean log volume of 0.24 m

^{3}over bark as in this study, this corresponds to approximately 54 SEK/log, whereas it was observed to be almost seven times higher (363 SEK/log) for the corresponding work phases of actual translocation work (i.e., with the costs of the scientific evaluation excluded). There are substantial shortcomings in the comparison, but it, nevertheless, clearly highlights the considerably higher costs related to translocation of ecologically valuable, and sensitive, logs compared to fresh logs for industrial uses.

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Butchart, S.H.M.; Walpole, M.; Collen, B.; van Strien, A.; Scharlemann, J.P.W.; Almond, R.E.A.; Baillie, J.E.M.; Bomhard, B.; Brown, C.; Bruno, J.; et al. Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines. Science
**2010**, 328, 1164–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2010; pp. 1–378. [Google Scholar]
- Ceballos, G.; Ehrlich, P.; Barnosky, A.; García, A.; Pringle, R.; Palmer, T. Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Sci. Adv.
**2015**, 1, e1400253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Lubchenco, J. Entering the century of the environment: A new social contract for science. Science
**1998**, 279, 491–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Verrier, B.; Rose, B.; Caillaud, E.; Remita, H. Combining organizational performance with sustainable development issues: The Lean and Green project benchmarking repository. J. Clean. Prod.
**2014**, 85, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - BBOP. Biodiversity Offset Design Handbook-Updated; Forest Trends: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Bell, D.; Hjältén, J.; Nilsson, C.; Jorgensen, D.; Johansson, T. Forest restoration to attract a putative umbrella species, the white-backed woodpecker, benefited saproxylic beetles. Ecosphere
**2015**, 6, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hjältén, J.; Hägglund, R.; Johansson, T.; Roberge, J.-M.; Dynesius, M.; Olsson, J. Forest restoration by burning and gap cutting yield distinct immediate effects on saproxylic beetles. Biodiver. Conserv.
**2017**, 26, 1623–1640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Hyvärinen, E.; Kouki, J.; Martikainen, P. Prescribed fires and retention trees help to conserve beetle diversity in managed boreal forests despite their transient negative effects on some beetle groups. Insect Conserv. Divers.
**2009**, 2, 93–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Versluijs, M.; Eggers, S.; Hjältén, J.; Löfroth, T.; Roberge, J.-M. Ecological restoration in boreal forest modifies the structure of bird assemblages. For. Ecol. Manag.
**2017**, 401, 75–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Palmer, M.A.; Ambrose, R.F.; Poff, N.L. Ecological theory and community restoration ecology. Restor. Ecol.
**1997**, 5, 291–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Bull, J.W.; Suttle, K.B.; Gordon, A.; Singh, N.J.; Milner-Gulland, E.J. Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice. Oryx
**2013**, 47, 369–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Bidaud, C.; Schreckenberg, K.; Jones, J.P. The local costs of biodiversity offsets: Comparing standards, policy and practice. Land Use Policy
**2018**, 77, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cuperus, R.; Bakermans, M.M.; De Haes, H.A.U.; Canters, K.J. Ecological compensation in Dutch highway planning. Environ. Manag.
**2001**, 27, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Ackerman, P.; Belbo, H.; Eliasson, L.; de Jong, A.; Lazdins, A.; Lyons, J. The COST model for calculation of forest operations costs. Int. J. For. Eng.
**2014**, 25, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Magagnotti, N.; Spinelli, R.; Acuna, M.; Bigot, M.; Guerra, S.; Hartsough, B.; Kanzian, C.; Kärhä, K.; Lindroos, O.; Roux, S.; et al. Good Practice Guidelines for Biomass Production Studies; COST Action FP-0902, WG 2 Operations Research and Measurement Methodologies; CNR IVALSA: Sesto Fiorentino, Italy, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Eriksson, M.; Lindroos, O. Productivity of harvesters and forwarders in CTL operations in Northern Sweden based on large follow-up datasets. Int. J. For. Eng.
**2014**, 25, 179–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Manner, J.; Nordfjell, T.; Lindroos, O. Automatic load level follow-up of forwarders’ fuel and time consumption. Int. J. For. Eng.
**2016**, 27, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cabral, O.M.D.J.V.; Lopes, E.D.S.; Rodrigues, C.K. Impact of distance between strip roads on productivity and costs of a forwarder in commercial thinning of Pinus Taeda Stands. Croat. J. For. Eng.
**2020**, 41, 243–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Santos, D.W.F.D.N.; Magalhães Valente, D.S.; Fernandes, H.C.; Souza, A.P.D.; Cecon, P.R. Modeling technical, economic and environmental parameters of a forwarder in a Eucalyptus forest. Int. J. For. Eng.
**2020**, 31, 197–204. [Google Scholar] - Gagliardi, K.; Ackerman, S.; Ackerman, P. Multi-product forwarder-based timber extraction: Time consumption and productivity analysis of two forwarder models over multiple products and extraction distances. Croat. J. For. Eng.
**2020**, 41, 231–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Eliasson, L.; Grönlund, Ö.; Lundström, H.; Sonesson, J. Harvester and forwarder productivity and net revenues in patch cutting. Int. J. For. Eng.
**2021**, 32, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ahti, T.; Hämet-Ahti, L.; Jalas, J. Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe. In Annales Botanici Fennici; Societas Zoologica Botanica Fennica Vanamo: Helsinki, Finland, 1968; pp. 169–211. [Google Scholar]
- Swedish Standards Institute. Geographic Information—Data on Forest and Forest Management; SS 637009; Swedish Standards Institute: Stockholm, Sweden, 2016. (In Swedish) [Google Scholar]
- Forsgren, A.; Forsberg, A.; Lindmark Burck, S.; Granér, A.; Josefsson, T.; Nordin, J.; Nordlund, E.; Nordlund, M. Kompensationsplan: Utökning sandmagasin Aitik. [Compensation plan: Increased sand magazine Aitik]; Boliden Mineral AB: Gällivare, Sweden, 2016. (In Swedish) [Google Scholar]
- Tranberg, O.; Hekkala, A.-M.; Löfroth, T.; Jönsson, M.; Sjögren, J.; Lindroos, O.; Hjältén, J. Translocation of deadwood in biodiversity offsetting, a novel way to compensate for habitat loss due to land exploitation. (Manuscript).
- Manner, J.; Palmroth, L.; Nordfjell, T.; Lindroos, O. Load level forwarding work element analysis based on automatic follow-up data. Silva Fenn.
**2016**, 50, 1546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Nurminen, T.; Heinonen, J. Characteristics and Time Consumption of Timber Trucking in Finland. Silva Fenn.
**2007**, 41, 471–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Svenson, G.; Fjeld, D. The impact of road geometry, surface roughness and truck weight on operating speed of logging trucks. Scand. J. For. Res.
**2017**, 32, 515–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Eliasson, L. Skogsbrukets kostnader och intäkter 2018. (Costs and Revenues in Forestry); Webresultat Nr 35; Skogforsk: Uppsala, Sweden, 2019; p. 2. (In Swedish) [Google Scholar]
- Manner, J.; Nordfjell, T.; Lindroos, O. Effects of the number of assortments and log concentration on time consumption for forwarding. Silva Fenn.
**2013**, 47, 1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Stokland, J.N.; Siitonen, J.; Jonsson, B.G. Biodiversity in Dead Wood; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Junninen, K.; Komonen, A. Conservation ecology of boreal polypores: A review. Biol. Conserv.
**2011**, 144, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Söderlind, M. Cost Analysis of Ecological Compensation—A Study of the Relocation of Dead Wood at the Aitik Mine; Rapport 12, Dept. of Forest Biomaterials and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Umeå, Sweden, 2018. [Google Scholar]

**Figure 2.**Examples of different classes of translocated logs. Downed intermediate decomposition logs of pine(

**A**) and spruce (

**B**), fresh standing pine (

**C**) and standing pine of kelo type (

**D**). Photo: Nordlund Konsult AB.

**Figure 3.**Predicted time consumption (

**A**) per load and (

**B**) per log, and (

**C**) predicted cost per log for the actual translocation work as a function of expected driving distance, when assuming that the distances driven with and without load are identical. Hence, 1 km in the figure gives a total distance of 2 km for driving with and without load. Load sizes are assumed to 18, 105 and 10 logs for the Extraction, Road Transport and Insertion, respectively. Correspondingly, the hourly costs are assumed to be 900, 900 and 750 SEK, respectively.

**Figure 4.**Predicted time consumption (

**A**) per load and (

**B**) per log, and (

**C**) predicted cost per log as a function of expected load size. To mirror approximately the maximal load capacity of the study’s vehicles, load sizes have been limited to 40 and 20 logs for Extraction and Insertion, respectively. Driving distances are assumed to be 0.3, 24 and 0.9 km for driving with and without load, respectively, for the Extraction, Road Transport and Insertion, respectively. Correspondingly, the hourly costs are assumed to be 900, 900 and 750 SEK, respectively.

**Table 1.**Log assortments that were translocated, and the mean log volume in each assortment, from sampling carried out for this study.

Species | Posture of Tree | Decomposition Stage | Translocated Logs | Sampled Logs | Log Volume (m ^{3}) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

N | n | (%) | Mean | SD | |||

Spruce | Downed | Early decomposition | 80 | 16 | 20 | 0.13 | 0.05 |

Intermediate decomposition | 80 | 27 | 34 | 0.15 | 0.05 | ||

Standing | Kelo type (intermediate decomp.) | 80 | 26 | 33 | 0.18 | 0.08 | |

Fresh | 80 | 17 | 21 | 0.33 | 0.12 | ||

Pine | Downed | Early decomposition | 20 | 11 | 55 | 0.15 | 0.07 |

Intermediate decomposition | 66 | 15 | 23 | 0.23 | 0.12 | ||

Standing | Kelo type (intermediate decomp.) | 94 | 23 | 24 | 0.27 | 0.13 | |

Fresh | 140 | 20 | 14 | 0.47 | 0.16 | ||

All pooled | 640 | 155 | 24 | 0.24 | 0.15 |

**Table 2.**Specifications for the machines used for the work phases Extraction, Road Transport and Insertion.

Feature | Extraction | Road Transport | Insertion |
---|---|---|---|

Machine type | Forwarder | Self-loading timber truck | Forwarder |

Make and model | Komatsu 865 | Scania R440 | Terri ATD |

Manufacturing year | 2013 | 2012 | 2001 |

Work time (hours) | 10,800 | - | 4000 |

Driven distance (km) | - | 850,000 | - |

Laden mass (tonnes ^{a}) | 18 | 19.6 | 3 |

Width (m) | 3.2 | 2.6 | 1.8 |

Length (m) | 10 | 22 | 6.5–7.1 |

Load capacity (m^{3}sob) | 15 | 50 | 4 |

Propulsion | Wheels with bogie band | Wheels | Tracks |

Crane model | CRF 11c | FTG V13 | Mowi 2046 |

Crane reach (m) | 12 | 8 | 4.6 |

^{a}metric tonnes (1 tonne = 1000 kg).

Work Element | Definition |
---|---|

Loading | From the first log being gripped to the last log being put in the loadspace |

Driving full | From the last log being put in the loadspace to the first log being gripped for unloading |

Unloading | From the first log being gripped for unloading to the last log being put on the ground |

Driving empty | From the last log being put on the ground to the first log being gripped for loading |

Miscellaneous | Work-related activities that fit into none of the above work elements |

Delay | Non-work-related disturbances (phone calls, machine breakdowns, etc.) |

**Table 4.**Time consumption, hourly cost, total cost, number of objects (logs/trees), cost per translocated log (n = 640) and the work phases’ proportion of the cost.

Work Phase | Work Time including Actions Driven by | Time Consumption (hours) | Hourly Cost (SEK/hour) | Total Cost (SEK) | Number of Objects | Cost per Translocated Log (SEK/log) | Proportion of Cost (%) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Compensation | Evaluation | |||||||

Area identification | Yes | Yes | 60 | 525 | 31,500 | - | 49.2 | 6 |

Substrate identification | Yes | No | 90 | 525 | 47,250 | 600 | 73.8 | 9 |

Felling | Yes | Yes | 240 | 400 | 96,000 | 671 | 150.0 | 19 |

Log marking | No | Yes | 240 | 525 | 126,000 | 671 | 196.9 | 24 |

Extraction | Yes | No | 47.5 | 900 | 42,750 | 671 | 66.8 | 8 |

Road transport | Yes | No | 27 | 900 | 24,300 | 640 | 38.0 | 5 |

Insertion total | 240 | 637.5 | 153,000 | 640 | 239.1 | 29 | ||

Insertion of logs | Yes | Yes | 120 | 750 | 90,000 | 640 | 140.6 | 17 |

Natural value consultant(s) at insertion | No | Yes | 120 | 525 | 63,000 | 640 | 98.4 | 12 |

Total | 884.5 | 520,800 | 640 | 813.8 | 100 |

**Table 5.**Load sizes and logs per crane cycle for the work phases Extraction, Road Transport and Insertion.

Feature | Extraction | Road Transport | Insertion | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

n | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | |

Load size (Number of logs) | 26 | 18.4 | 6.1 | 6 | 106.7 | 48.75 | 17 | 10.4 | 3.8 |

Load size (m^{3}) | 26 | 5.1 | 2.3 | 6 | 28.6 | 11.6 | 17 | 2.8 | 0.6 |

Utilized load capacity (%) | 26 | 34 | 15 | 6 | 57 | 23 | 17 | 69 | 16 |

Logs per crane cycle at loading (n) | 26 | 0.98 | 0.06 | 6 | 2.14 | 0.43 | 17 | 1.02 | 0.09 |

Logs per crane cycle at unloading (n) | 25 | 1.02 | 0.09 | 6 | 2.38 | 0.29 | 17 | 1.00 | 0.00 |

**Table 6.**Time consumption, transport distance and speed per load for the four work phases, distributed over work elements.

Work Phase | Work Element | Time Consumption per Load (h) | Transport Distance per Load (km) | Speed per Load (km/h) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

n | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | n | Mean | SD | ||

Extraction | Driving empty | 26 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 11 | 0.32 | 0.19 | 11 | 2.35 | 0.34 |

Loading | 26 | 0.38 | 0.20 | 10 | 0.39 | 0.27 | 10 | 1.20 | 0.35 | |

Driving full | 26 | 0.12 | 0.10 | 9 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 9 | 2.15 | 0.44 | |

Unloading | 26 | 0.14 | 0.06 | 10 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 10 | 0.49 | 0.30 | |

Miscellaneous | 26 | 0.03 | 0.04 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |

Delay | 26 | 0.05 | 0.10 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |

All pooled ^{1} | 26 | 0.87 | 0.45 | 24 | 1.57 | 0.94 | - | - | - | |

Road transport | Driving empty | 6 | 0.63 | 0.32 | 6 | 25.3 | 13.48 | 6 | 40.0 | 2.78 |

Loading | 6 | 0.83 | 0.40 | 6 | 0.71 | 0.83 | 6 | 0.77 | 0.69 | |

Driving full | 6 | 0.59 | 0.27 | 6 | 22.9 | 10.88 | 6 | 38.5 | 1.05 | |

Unloading | 6 | 0.60 | 0.35 | 6 | 0.22 | 0.10 | 6 | 0.52 | 0.52 | |

Miscellaneous | 6 | 0.23 | 0.17 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |

Delay | 6 | 0.28 | 0.26 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |

All pooled ^{1} | 6 | 3.17 | 1.03 | 6 | 49.08 | 24.62 | - | - | - | |

Insertion | Driving empty | 17 | 0.21 | 0.09 | 17 | 0.96 | 0.27 | 17 | 4.82 | 1.44 |

Loading | 17 | 0.15 | 0.05 | 17 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 17 | 0.44 | 0.41 | |

Driving full | 17 | 0.26 | 0.09 | 17 | 0.93 | 0.21 | 17 | 3.90 | 1.51 | |

Unloading | 17 | 0.29 | 0.12 | 17 | 0.30 | 0.24 | 17 | 0.98 | 0.56 | |

Miscellaneous | 17 | 0.11 | 0.10 | - | - | - | - | - | ||

Delay | 17 | 0.12 | 0.28 | - | - | - | - | - | ||

All pooled ^{1} | 17 | 1.14 | 0.33 | 17 | 2.25 | 0.46 | - | - | - |

^{1}For most studied loads, total values were recorded but not always at a work element level.

**Table 7.**Models to predict time consumption per load as a function of transport distance or load size, based on regression analysis of observations in Table 6. In the case where no significant models could be found for a work element, the time consumption was predicted using the mean value from the observations.

Work Phase | Work Element | Time Consumption per Load ^{(a)} | p-Value | R^{2}-adj (%) | n |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

Extraction | Driving empty | 0.4431 a * | <0.001 | 98.8 | 11 |

Loading | 0.02057 b | <0.001 | 86.6 | 26 | |

Driving full | 0.4399 a | <0.001 | 98.4 | 9 | |

Unloading | 0.007667 b | <0.001 | 93.7 | 25 | |

Miscellaneous | 0.03 | - | - | 26 | |

Delay | 0.05 | - | - | 26 | |

Road transport | Driving empty | 0.02462 a | <0.001 | 99.5 | 6 |

Loading | 0.007812 b | <0.001 | 98.4 | 6 | |

Driving full | 0.02574 a | <0.001 | 99.9 | 6 | |

Unloading | 0.005843 b | <0.001 | 97.1 | 6 | |

Miscellaneous | 0.23 | - | - | 6 | |

Delay | 0.28 | - | - | 6 | |

Insertion | Driving empty | 0.2262 a | <0.001 | 93.6 | 17 |

Loading | 0.0612 + 0.00847 b | 0.004 | 40.38 | 17 | |

Driving full | 0.2770 a | <0.001 | 92.3 | 17 | |

Unloading | 0.02830 b | <0.001 | 97.7 | 17 | |

Miscellaneous | 0.11 | - | - | 17 | |

Delay | 0.12 | - | - | 17 |

^{(a)}a = Transport distance in km, b = load size in number of logs. When no significant relationships with a or b were found, the mean values from Table 6 were used. * The coefficient value for a corresponds to a speed, which can be calculated by dividing 1 by the coefficient (e.g., the model’s speed for driving empty during extraction = 1/0.4431 = 2.3 km/h).

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |

© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Lindroos, O.; Söderlind, M.; Jensen, J.; Hjältén, J.
Cost Analysis of a Novel Method for Ecological Compensation—A Study of the Translocation of Dead Wood. *Sustainability* **2021**, *13*, 6075.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116075

**AMA Style**

Lindroos O, Söderlind M, Jensen J, Hjältén J.
Cost Analysis of a Novel Method for Ecological Compensation—A Study of the Translocation of Dead Wood. *Sustainability*. 2021; 13(11):6075.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116075

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Lindroos, Ola, Malin Söderlind, Joel Jensen, and Joakim Hjältén.
2021. "Cost Analysis of a Novel Method for Ecological Compensation—A Study of the Translocation of Dead Wood" *Sustainability* 13, no. 11: 6075.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116075