[MCN] Contrary to earlier claims, unlogged forests better at carbon capture

[Lance Olsen]

Rethinking forest carbon assessments to account for policy institutions
Andrew Macintosh, Heather Keith and David Lindenmayer

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE | ADVANCE ONLINE 
PUBLICATION | June 29, 2015 
www.nature.com/natureclimatechange

Abstract
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2695.html
There has been extensive debate about whether the 
sustainable use of forests (forest management 
aimed at producing a sustainable yield of timber 
or other products) results in superior climate 
outcomes to conservation (maintenance or 
enhancement of conservation values without 
commercial harvesting) (1-8). Most of the 
relevant research has relied on consequential 
life-cycle assessment (LCA), with the results 
tending to show that sustainable use has lower 
net greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions than 
conservation in the long term (1-5). However, the 
literature cautions that results are sensitive to 
forest- and market-related contextual factors: 
the carbon density of the forests, silvicultural 
and wood processing practices, and the extent to 
which wood products and forest bioenergy displace 
carbon-intensive alternatives. Depending on these 
issues, conservation can be better for the 
climate than sustainable use (1,6-8). Policy 
institutions are another key contextual factor 
but, so far, they have largely been ignored 
(1-6). Using a case study on the Southern 
Forestry Region (SFR) of New South Wales (NSW), 
Australia, we show how policy institutions can 
affect the assessed outcomes from alternative 
forest management strategies. Our results 
highlight the need for greater attention to be 
paid to policy institutions in forest carbon 
research.


----------------------------------------------------
The press release:

"Contrary to the findings of many previous 
life-cycle analyses, the study found that, when 
policy effects are accounted for, conserving the 
native forests of southeast New South Wales 
resulted in better climate outcomes than if they 
continued to be sustainably harvested."
--------------------------
New study re-writes the rules of carbon analysis
A new study has found analyses of carbon 
emissions may be misleading as they failed to 
include the impacts of policies such as trading 
schemes, emission caps or quotas

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY - PUBLIC RELEASE: 30-JUN-2015

A new study published today in Nature Climate 
Change 
<<http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2695.html>>has 
found analyses of carbon emissions may be 
misleading as they failed to include the impacts 
of policies such as trading schemes, emission 
caps or quotas.

"The inclusion of policy mechanisms can radically 
alter the outcomes from life-cycle analyses and 
result in counter-intuitive outcomes," said 
Associate Professor Andrew Macintosh from The 
Australian National University (ANU) College of 
Law, lead author of the study.

"Traditional life-cycle analysis would find a 
person who regularly eats beef and builds their 
house with bricks and mortar has a greater impact 
on the climate than a vegan with a wooden house.

"But when the impacts of policy mechanisms are 
accounted for, the simple dichotomies that so 
often characterise climate debates like 'lentils 
good, beef bad' and 'wood good, cement bad' 
become impossible to maintain."

The paper develops a new framework for evaluating 
the impacts of policy mechanisms in life-cycle 
analysis and applies it to the issue of whether 
it is better for the climate to conserve native 
forests or to harvest them sustainably to produce 
wood products.

Contrary to the findings of many previous 
life-cycle analyses, the study found that, when 
policy effects are accounted for, conserving the 
native forests of southeast New South Wales 
resulted in better climate outcomes than if they 
continued to be sustainably harvested.

"The results showed that conserving the native 
forests resulted in significant reductions in 
domestic emissions over the 100-year projection 
period; 79 to 85 million tonnes of carbon dioxide 
equivalent, or almost 15 per cent of Australia's 
current annual emissions," said co-author 
Professor David Lindenmayer, from ANU Fenner 
School of Environment and Society.

"The simplest explanations for why conserving 
native forests reduces emissions is that, when 
these forests are harvested, only a small 
proportion of the biomass finds its way into 
long-lived wood products and burning wood does 
not generate much energy.

"The applicable policy mechanisms magnify these 
factors by shielding Australia from the emissions 
embodied in substitute imported wood products and 
ensuring that, when native forests are burnt for 
electricity, it displaces other types of 
renewable energy generation like wind and solar 
rather than fossil fuels," he said.
###


-- 
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The resulting flood calendar spans the last ca 
270 years (AD 1740-AD 2007). Š.. Our record thus 
suggests climate warming is favouring the 
occurrence of high magnitude torrential flood 
events in high-altitude catchments."

B. Wilhelm et al. Does global warming favour the 
occurrence of extreme floods in European Alps? 
First evidences from a NW Alps proglacial lake 
sediment record. Climatic Change, online 10 
December 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0376-2
Received: 21 September 2009 / Accepted: 14 November 2011
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bigskynet.org/pipermail/missoula-community-news_bigskynet.org/attachments/20150630/e0b7f335/attachment-0002.html>