Impacts of Increasing Bioenergy Production on Timber Harvest and Carbon Emissions

A special issue of Forests (ISSN 1999-4907). This special issue belongs to the section "Wood Science and Forest Products".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (25 October 2020) | Viewed by 5089

Special Issue Editor

Institute of BioEconomy (IBE), National Research Council (CNR), Via Madonna del Piano, 10 - 50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Florence, Italy
Interests: timber and wood biomass harvesting systems; wood biomass quality and employment; remote sensing; ergonomics; forest certification schemes; environmental impacts; economics

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Demand for wood biomass has consistently increased in recent years worldwide as a response to the new and ambitious renewable energy strategy at global level. Nevertheless, a number of aspects call for a careful evaluation in the supply process. The use of wood for energy should take into account all the possible impacts related both to harvesting and processing operations. Cost effectiveness of wood biomass harvesting is important and can be achieved by integrating it with timber production—but the possible effects on the soil medium (machine traffic, depletion of nutrients, etc.), timber competition. and forest health in the long term should also be considered. How can innovations in the forestry sector help to limit the emissions released by the whole supply chain in every step? How can they improve efficiency in the biomass use? To what extent can the type of forest, harvesting, and storage systems implemented along the chain affect the energetic yield? How does wood biomass quality affect energy performance? What are all the possible sources of wood energy? All these questions are awaiting an answer from the forestry community.

Contributions should cover (but are not restricted to) the following topics:

  • Efficiency, costs, and emissions of woody biomass harvest, transformation, and transport;
  • Environmental impact of biomass removal from forests;
  • Integration of timber and biomass production for increasing overall process efficiency;
  • Carbon emissions of bioenergy supply chain (may include the whole process, forest to energy production, or just a specific part, such as harvest or energy conversion);
  • Carbon and energy balances of wood-energy systems;
  • Biomass quality (e.g., as consequence of work system, transformation means, type of forest);
  • Relation between biomass quality and process efficiency, including emissions;
  • Biomass sources from forests, agricultural areas (e.g., agroforestry systems), energy crops (e.g., short rotation coppice), and riparian vegetation management.

Dr. Carla Nati
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Forests is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • wood energy
  • energy balance
  • emissions
  • timber harvesting
  • forest sustainability
  • impacts
  • biomass sources
  • wood biomass quality

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

16 pages, 2197 KiB  
Article
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Bioenergy Production from Different Wood Pellet Supply Chains
by Andrea Sgarbossa, Martina Boschiero, Francesca Pierobon, Raffaele Cavalli and Michela Zanetti
Forests 2020, 11(11), 1127; https://doi.org/10.3390/f11111127 - 23 Oct 2020
Cited by 30 | Viewed by 4724
Abstract
The EU is one of the largest producers and consumers of wood pellets in the world, covering around 36% of the global wood pellet production and around 50% of the global consumption in 2018. The EU wood pellet consumption is expected to further [...] Read more.
The EU is one of the largest producers and consumers of wood pellets in the world, covering around 36% of the global wood pellet production and around 50% of the global consumption in 2018. The EU wood pellet consumption is expected to further increase in response to the ambitious energy and climate goals for 2030. Currently, wood pellets are mainly produced from sawdust and other sawmill residues; however, other types of forest feedstock are being investigated in order to meet the increasing wood pellet demand and move toward greater energy independence. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the environmental impact of different wood pellet supply chains. A comparative cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment is performed considering the following wood feedstock systems: (i) sawdust from sawmill (S1), (ii) roundwood logs (S2), (iii) whole trees from forest thinning operation (S3), and (iv) logging residues produced during forest tree harvesting (S4). The study focuses on Global Warming Potential (GWP), Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP), Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP), and Human Toxicity Potential (HTP). Results show that S3 displays the lowest figures on all the environmental impact categories considered in this study. Compared to the reference case S1, S3 shows a GWP reduction of 46%, an ODP reduction of 6.6%, a POCP reduction of 14.8%, and HTP reduction of 13.2%. S3 and S4 have lower GWP than S1 and S2, even when the biogenic CO2 emissions are considered. Overall, the life cycle phases that have the highest GWP, POCP, and HTP are the burning phase and the preparation of the material to be pelletized, particularly the drying process. Nevertheless, the main phases that contribute to the ODP are the forest operations and the pellet preparation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop