Tag: forests

Changing forest structure in Virginia and North Carolina

Photos: Roanoke Rapids area near the North Carolina, Virginia border, courtesy of Enviva.

Forest owners have responded to the recovery in pine saw-timber markets, since the global financial crisis of 2008, by planting more forest and investing more in the management of their land. The same period has witnessed increased demand from the biomass sector which has replaced declining need for wood from pulp and paper markets.

The area of timberland (actively managed productive forest) has increase by around 89,000 hectares (ha) since 2010. This change is due to three important factors: new planting on agricultural land; the planting of low-grade self-seeded areas with more productive improved pine; and the re-classification by the US Forest Service (USFS) of some areas of naturally regenerated pine from woodland to timberland.

The 2018 data shows that pine forest makes up 46% of the timberland area, of which 61% is planted and the remainder naturally regenerated. Hardwoods cover 43% of the timberland area, with 93% of this naturally regenerated. The remaining area is mixed stands.

Composition of timberland area

Since 2000 there have been some significant changes in the composition of the timberland area with a transition from hardwood to softwood. Pine has increased from 39% of the total area in 2000 to 46% in 2018 and hardwood has decreased from 50% to 43% over the same period.

All pine areas have increased since 2000 with naturally regenerated pine increasing by 13,000 ha and planted pine by 340,000 ha since 2000. Mixed stands have declined by 6,500 ha as some of these sites have been replanted with improved pine to increase growth and saw-timber production.

The biggest change has been in the hardwood areas where there has been a decline of around 314,000 ha, despite the total area of timberland increasing by 31,000 ha.

Change in forest type

This change has been driven by private forest owners (representing 91% of the total timberland area), seeking to gain a better return on investment from their forest land.

Hardwood markets have declined since the 2008 recession and demand for hardwood saw-timber has not recovered. Demand for pine saw-timber has rebounded and is now as strong as pre-crisis.

Pine also offers much faster growth rates and higher total volumes in a much shorter time frame (typically 25-35 years compared to 75-80 years for hardwoods).

The decision to change species is similar to a farmer changing their agricultural crops based on market demand and prices for each product. Where forests are managed for revenue generation then it is reasonable to optimise the land and crop for this objective. This can be a significant positive, from a carbon perspective more carbon is sequestered in a shorter time frame and more carbon is stored in long term wood products, if the quantity if saw-timber is increased.

Increased revenue generation also helps to maintain the forest area (rather than conversion to urban development, agriculture or other uses).

A potential negative is the change in habitat from a pure hardwood stand to a pure pine stand, each providing a different ecosystem and supporting a different range of flora and fauna. There is no conclusive evidence that one forest type is better or worse than the other; there is a great deal of variety of each type.

Some hardwood forests are rich in species and biodiversity, others can be unremarkable. The key is not to endanger or risk losing any species or sensitive habitat and to ensure that any conversion only occurs where there is no loss of biodiversity and no negative impact to the ecosystem.

It is not clear whether all of the lost hardwood stands have been directly converted to pine forests, some hardwood stands may have been lost to other land uses (urban and other land has increased by 400,000 ha). Some may have been directly converted to pine by forest owners encouraged by the increase in pine saw-timber demand and prices.

Whatever the primary driver of this change it is clearly not being driven by the biomass sector.

Change in forest type – timing

The chart above demonstrates that the biggest change, loss of hardwood and increase in planted pine, occurred between 2000 and 2012, prior to the operation of the pellet mills. Since 2012, there has been no significant loss of natural hardwood and only a small decline in planted hardwood.

Read the full report: Catchment Area Analysis of Forest Management and Market Trends: Enviva Pellets Ahoskie, Enviva Pellets Northampton, Enviva Pellets Southampton (UK metric version). Explore Enviva’s supply chain via Track & Trace. This is part of a series of catchment area analyses around the forest biomass pellet plants supplying Drax Power Station with renewable fuel. The series includes: Estonia, Morehouse Bioenergy, Amite Bioenergy, and the Drax forestry team’s review of the Chesapeake report on Enviva’s area of operations.

Estonia catchment area analysis

View from Suur Munamagi over forest landscape in South Estonia.

Estonia is a heavily forested country with a mature forest resource that has been neglected over many years due to political and ownership changes. Management of state and corporate owned forests is now good, but some small privately-owned areas of forest are still poorly managed.

Despite this, both the forest area and the growing stock have been increasing, largely due to new planting and the maturing age class of existing forest.

Forest area has increased from 49% to 52% of the total land, increasing by more than 118 thousand hectares since 2010.

Land use in Estonia

Land use in Estonia [click to view/download]

Over the same period the growing stock increased by 52 million m3, with 60% of this growth in softwood and 40% in hardwood species. The data shows a slight decline in 2018 but this is due to a sampling error and the growing stock is thought to have been maintained at 2017 levels (this should be rectified in the 2019 data when available).

Change in forest growing stock – Estonia

Change in forest growing stock – Estonia [click to view/download]

The forests of Estonia have been going through a period of restitution since the 1990s. Land that had been taken into state ownership during Soviet rule has been given back to private owners. This process was complex and lengthy and limited active management in the forest during this time.

Since 2008, harvesting and management has increased. Private and corporate forest owners have been harvesting forest that had been mature and ready for clear felling. The longer-term harvesting trend has been considerably lower than annual growth (increment) and the maximum sustainable harvesting level, as shown on the chart below.

Annual increment and harvesting levels

Annual increment and harvesting levels [click to view/download]

In 2018 harvesting reached an all time high at just over 14 million m3 and just under the maximum threshold. It is expected to remain at this level as more forest matures and enters the cycle of harvest and regeneration.

Clear cutting (regeneration felling) is the largest operation by volume but thinning (maintenance felling) is the largest by area.

This indicates a forest landscape in balance, with widespread thinning to produce more sawlog trees and a large volume of clear cuts in the mature stands to make way for the next generation of forests.

Reforestation in Estonia. * Note: Since 2014 it has not been compulsory for private and other forest owners to submit reforestation data. [Click to view/download]

Reforestation in Estonia. * Note: Since 2014 it has not been compulsory for private and other forest owners to submit reforestation data. [Click to view/download]

Planting of seedlings is the most common form of regeneration. However, some native hardwood species are strong pioneers and naturally regenerate among the spruce and pine stands. This has led to a change in the species composition of some forests with an increase in hardwoods, although this is relatively small scale and only prevalent among some small private owners that do not invest in clearing unwanted regeneration.

Species mix in Estonian forests [Click to view/download]

Species mix in Estonian forests [Click to view/download]

Markets and prices for forest products

Sunrise and fog over forest landscape in Estonia

Sunrise and fog over forest landscape in Estonia

Pulpwood markets are limited in Estonia and this material has been historically exported to neighbouring Finland and Sweden. Export demand has had a significant impact on prices as can be seen in a spike in 2018 when demand was at its strongest.

The forest industry has been dominated by sawmills and panel board mills. Demand and production in this sector has been increasing and this has kept prices high. There is a substantial differential between sawlog and pulpwood pricing.

Comparison of sawlog and pulpwood prices [click to view/download]

Comparison of sawlog and pulpwood prices [click to view/download]

The pellet industry developed due to the abundance of low-grade fibre available domestically. This included sawmill and forest residues, as well as low grade roundwood from thinnings and clear cuts. Drax’s suppliers use a combination of these feedstock sources as shown below.

Drax feedstocks from Estonia 2018 [click to view download]

Sunrise through forest in Estonia

Sunrise through forest in Estonia

Summary of key questions addressed in the analysis:

Impacts of wood-based bioenergy demand to forest resources:

Forest area / forest cover

No negative impact. Regardless of increasing domestic biomass utilisation for energy and exports, forest area has increased due to afforestation programmes. Forest cover is not as high as forest area, due to temporarily un-stocked area after clear-cut. Despite this, forest cover has continuously increased from 2010–2018.

Growing stock

No negative impact. The total forest growing stock has been increasing for the last two decades. In 2018 the growth slowed or halted (official statistics show a decrease, but this is due to sampling error). In 2018 there was record-high wood demand from Finland, which was driven by high global pulp prices motivating maximal pulp production. This increased harvests to a previously unseen level.

Harvesting levels

Slight increasing impact. During 2004–2011, harvesting levels in Estonia were less than half of the estimated maximum sustainable level. This resulted in an increase in the maximum sustainable harvesting level for the 2011–2020 period. In 2018, the harvesting volumes were at the maximum sustainable level. The main drivers increasing the harvesting volumes have been increased sawmill capacity and production, high demand for pulpwood in Finland and Sweden and improved demand for energy wood. This was a temporary peak and demand has already slowed. Softwood lumber prices have decreased significantly in Europe due to an abundance of wood supply from Central Europe, which has been created by widespread bark beetle and other forest damages. Global pulp prices have also decreased to below 2017 prices.

Forest growth / carbon sequestration potential

Ambivalent impact. The annual increment has grown throughout the 2000–2018 period. Increased fuelwood price has enabled forest management in some of the alder forests that were completely unutilised in the past. Thinnings, both commercial and pre-commercial, accelerate long-term volume growth in forests, leading to increased carbon sequestration. Removal of harvesting residues decreases carbon sequestration since the residues are input to the soil carbon pool. However, the majority of the harvesting residues’ carbon is released to the atmosphere when the biomass decays, so the ultimate impact of harvesting residue collection is minimal if the collection is done on a sustainable level. The sustainability of the collection is determined by how the soil nutrient balance is impacted by collection. This is not accounting for the substitution effect that the harvesting residues may have, by e.g. reducing the need to burn fossil fuels. Utilisation of sawmill by-products does not directly impact forests’ carbon sequestration potential, but it can increase harvesting through improved sawmill overall profitability.

Impacts of wood-based bioenergy demand to forest management practices:

Rotation lengths

Neutral. Forest law regulates minimum forest age for clear-cuts. According to interviews, Riigimetsa Majandamise Keskus (RMK – the Estonian state forest company), often conducts the final felling at the minimum age. Due to the regulation, an increase of wood-based bioenergy demand has not shortened rotations at least in state-managed forests. In forests that are older than the minimum final felling age, sawlog price is a more important driver for final-felling decisions than wood-based bioenergy demand.

Thinning

Increasing impact. The increase of bioenergy demand has increased the demand for small-diameter hardwood, which in turn has increased thinnings in previously unmanaged forest stands. This will increase the availability of good quality sawlogs and will also accelerate the carbon sequestration (tonnes/ha/year) of the forests. However, the total forest carbon stock (tonnes/ha) will be reduced; in unmanaged (e.g. no thinnings) mature stands, the carbon stock is larger than in managed stands of similar age. The carbon stock of a thinned stand will remain below that of an unthinned stand regardless of post-thinning accelerated growth.

Conversion from hardwood to softwood

Neutral. No indication of hardwood conversion to softwood was found.

Impacts of wood-based bioenergy demand to solid wood product (SWP) markets:

Diversion from other wood product markets

Neutral. Production of sawnwood, wood-based panels, pulp and paper products have increased or remained steady, i.e. no evidence of diversion.

Wood prices

Slight increasing impact. During 2017–2018, the price of all roundwood assortments increased notably. The increase was strongest in pulpwood assortments, especially those that are not further processed domestically but are exported to mainly Finland and Sweden. Finnish demand for pulpwood was at a very high level in 2018. This was a temporary trend, however, and prices and demand have since decreased. The price increase for fuelwood was less dramatic, no sharp increases are observed. According to interviews, pellet production was the most important driver of fuelwood prices.

Read the full report: Catchment Area Analysis in Estonia. A 2017 interview with Raul Kirjanen, CEO of Graanul Invest, a wood pellet supplier of Drax operating in Estonia, can be read here. Read how Drax and Graanul work with NGOs when concerns are raised within our supply chain here.

Read more about how bioenergy has no negative impact on Estonia’s forest resources here.

This is part of a series of catchment area analyses around the forest biomass pellet plants supplying Drax Power Station with renewable fuel. Others in the series include: Georgia Mill, Latvia, Chesapeake and Drax’s own, other three mills LaSalle BionergyMorehouse Bioenergy and Amite Bioenergy.

Morehouse catchment area analysis

Working forest in southern Arkansas within the Morehouse catchment area

The forest area around the Drax Morehouse BioEnergy plant has a long history of active management for timber production. 96% of the forest owners are private and around half of these are corporate investors seeking a financial return from forest management. The pulp and paper (p&p) sector dominates the market for low grade roundwood with over 75% of the total demand. The wood pellet markets use only 6% of the roundwood, of which 4% is used by Morehouse.

Given the small scale of demand in the pellet sector, the extent of influence is limited. However, the new pellet markets have had a positive impact, replacing some of the declining demand in the p&p sector and providing a market for thinnings for some forest owners and a new off-take for sawmill residues.

Pine forest is dominant in this area with an increasing inventory (growing stock) despite a stable forest area. Active management of pine forests has increased the amount of timber stored in the standing trees by 68 million tonnes from 2006 to 2018.  Over the same period the hardwood inventory remained static.

Chart showing historic inventory and timberland area in Morehouse catchment

Historic inventory and timberland area in Morehouse catchment; click to view/download.

US Forest Service FIA data shows that the pine resource in this catchment area has been maturing, the volume of timber has been increasing in each size class year on year. This means that the volume available for harvesting is increasing and that more markets will be required to utilise this surplus volume and ensure that the long-term future of the forest area can be maintained.

Chart showing historic pine inventory by DBH Class

Historic pine inventory by DBH Class in Morehouse catchment; click to view/download.

This is reflected in the growth drain ratio – the comparison of annual growth versus harvesting. A ratio of one shows a forest area in balance, less than one shows that harvesting is greater than growth. This can be the case when the forest area is predominantly mature and at the age when clear cutting is necessary.

A growth drain ratio of more than one shows that growth exceeds harvesting, this is typically the case in younger forests that are not yet ready for harvesting and are in the peak growing phase, but it can also occur when insufficient market demand exists and owners are forced to retain stands for longer in the absence of a viable market.

Drax Morehouse plant

Drax’s Morehouse BioEnergy compressed wood pellet plant in northern Louisiana

This can have a negative impact on the future growth of the forest; limiting the financial return to forest owners and reducing the cumulative sequestration of carbon by enforcing sub-optimal rotation lengths.

The current growth drain ratio of pine around Morehouse is 1.67 with an average annual surplus of around 7 million metric tonnes. This surplus of growth is partly due to a decline in saw-timber demand due to the global financial crisis but also due to the maturing age class of the forest resource and the increasing quantity of timber available for harvesting.

Historic growth and removals of pine in Morehouse catchment (million metric tonnes)

YearGrowthRemovalsNet GrowthGrowth-to-Drain
200914.112960762411.1860124622.92694830041.26166145535
201014.580331100610.91819493463.662136166021.33541589869
201115.129903273610.72162297824.408280295451.41115792865
201215.357258404710.30755904395.049699360811.48990254039
201315.63898206189.701617808065.93736425371.61199733603
201415.91041518229.376564771556.533850410651.69682773701
201515.94235364499.669133266476.273220378431.64878828387
201616.43527840789.579357241816.855921165961.71569740985
201716.838075354610.1594737396.678601615681.65737672908
201817.770968348910.65938820047.111580148561.66716588371

The chart below shows the decline in pine saw-timber demand in the catchment area following the financial crisis in 2008. It also shows the recent increase in pulpwood demand driven by the new pellet mill markets that have supplemented the declining p&p mills.

Sawmills are a vital component of the forest industry around Morehouse, with most private owners seeking to maximise revenue through saw-timber production from pine forests.

As detailed in the table below, there are 70 markets for higher value timber products around this catchment area. These mills also need an off-taker for their residues and the pellet mills can provide a valuable market for this material, increasing the viability of the saw-timber market.

Operating grade-using facilities near Morehouse timber market

TypeNumber of MillsCapacityCapacity UnitsHardwood Roundwood At Mill From MarketSoftwood Roundwood At Mill From Market
Consumption, million green metric tonnes
Lumber6810538.8235294M m³1.737194320550.88604623042613.06745552335.69986977638
Plywood/Veneer2904M m³000.9617438725360.506109617373
Total701.737194320550.88604623042614.02919939586.20597939376

Pulp and paper mills dominate the low grade roundwood market for both hardwood and softwood. The pellet mill market is small with just 3 mills and therefore does not influence forest management decisions or macro trends in the catchment area. However, demand for wood pellet feedstock exceeds 1.5 million tonnes p.a. and this can provide a valuable market for thinnings and sawmill residues. A healthy forest landscape requires a combination of diverse markets co-existing to utilise the full range of forest products.

Operating pulpwood-using facilities near Morehouse timber market

TypeNumber of MillsCapacityCapacity UnitsHardwood Roundwood At Mill From MarketSoftwood Roundwood At Mill From Market
Consumption, million green metric tons
Pulp/Paper117634.86896M metric tons3.489826926741.192570970097.557287050371.66598821268
OSB/Panel62412.55M m³002.567325398621.19890681942
Chips178395.08999M metric tons2.938909722111.46484421365.287607151192.18745126814
Pellets31573.965975M metric tons002.078219858451.01128896402
Total346.428736648862.6574151836917.49043945866.06363526426

In its analysis, Forisk Consulting considered the impact that the new pellet mills including Morehouse BioEnergy have had on the significant trends in the local forest industry. The tables below summarise the Forisk view on the key issues. In its opinion, the Morehouse plant has had no negative impact.

Bioenergy impacts on markets and forest supplies in the Morehouse market

ActivityIs there evidence that bioenergy demand has caused the following?Explanation
DeforestationNo
Change in forest management practiceNo
Diversion from other marketsPossiblyBioenergy plants compete with pulp/paper and OSB mills for pulpwood and residual feedstocks. There is no evidence that these facilities reduced production as a result of bioenergy markets, however.
Increase in wood priceNoThere is no evidence that bioenergy demand increased stumpage prices in the market.
Reduction in growing stocking timberNo
Reduction in sequestration of carbon / growth rateNo
Increasing harvesting above the sustainable yieldNo

Bioenergy impacts on forests markets in the Morehouse market

Forest metric Bioenergy impact
Growing Stock Neutral
Growth Rates Neutral
Forest Area Neutral
Wood Prices Neutral
Markets for Solid Wood Neutral to Positive*
*Access to viable residual markets benefits users of solid wood (i.e. lumber producers).

Read the full report: Morehouse, Louisiana Catchment Area Analysis. An interview with the co-author, Amanda Hamsley Lang, COO and partner at Forisk Consulting, can be read here. Explore every delivery of wood to Morehouse BioEnergy using our ForestScope data transparency tool.

This is part of a series of catchment area analyses around the forest biomass pellet plants supplying Drax Power Station with renewable fuel. Others in the series include: ,

Others in the series include: Georgia MillEstonia, Latvia, Chesapeake and Drax’s own, other three mills LaSalle BionergyMorehouse Bioenergy and Amite Bioenergy.

Findings and Recommendations from the First Meeting of Drax’s Independent Advisory Board on Sustainable Biomass (IAB)

Sir John Beddington

Dear Will,

Findings and Recommendations from the First Meeting of Drax’s Independent Advisory Board on Sustainable Biomass (IAB)

The Independent Advisory Board on Sustainable Biomass provides this statement following its first meeting on Friday 15th November 2019.

Attendees: John Beddington (Chair), John Krebs (Deputy Chair), Virginia Dale, Sam Fankhauser, Elena Schmidt, Robert Matthews (Ex-Officio Member).

During the meeting, IAB members:

The IAB shares this summary of its findings and recommendations.

  • The IAB agreed that its role is to provide independent advice to Drax on its sustainable biomass policy and practice. IAB members will do this by scrutinising the science and evidence, informing Drax’s approach, and by providing independent feedback to Drax on how it can adopt best practices. In addition to holding two face to face meetings each year, the IAB agreed to hold two interim telephone meetings.
  • The IAB recommended Drax refer to “forest environment” not “natural environment” in its policy.
  • The IAB noted that the ten criteria Drax have outlined to reduce the carbon emissions of its biomass approach have been designed to reflect the findings of Forest Research’s Carbon Impacts of Biomass Consumed in the EU report (2018). The IAB found that the Drax criteria are an accurate interpretation of the report.
  • The IAB would like to explore how the science can further be developed with regard to the use of small, early thinnings and small roundwood, and consider how Drax’s policy might evolve.
  • The IAB and Drax discussed the possibility of developing some sub criteria for specific forest types.
  • The IAB suggested Drax could consider a “Restatement of the Evidence” academic review process to better understand, and draw alignment on, where there is scientific evidence on the sustainability of biomass.
  • The IAB suggested Drax should consider both a goal to continuously improve and consider the longer term implications of its policy commitments in light of potential climate changes.
  • The IAB emphasised that the way Drax operationalises its commitments will be critical. It stressed the importance of robustly exploring the counterfactuals to Drax’s biomass activities, highlighting the potential for trade-offs between climate and biodiversity outcomes as an area for more detailed review.
  • The IAB highlighted a number of considerations for Drax in its use of the Sustainable Biomass Program (SBP). It welcomed SBP’s adoption of a multi-stakeholder approach and suggested it will be important to scrutinise its evolution. It noted that, as Drax’s sustainability commitments go beyond SBP’s current criteria, Drax needs a strategy on how to evidence the compliance for these additional commitments.
  • The IAB expressed interest in learning about Drax’s long term vision. It noted that the ceasing of subsidies in 2027 will be a key milestone and highlighted its interest in exploring Drax’s strategy for managing this.

In future meetings with Drax, the IAB will further examine evidence of Drax’s approach, performance and impact against its commitments, to identify any changes that Drax may need to make. The IAB noted the following specific topics for further consideration:

  • Evidence relating to the impact of thinning a forest on carbon, pest control and fire risks;
  • How Drax operationalises its commitments, the counterfactuals of Drax’s biomass activities, and potential trade-offs between biodiversity and carbon outcomes;
  • Drax’s approach to biodiversity;
  • Drax’s long term vision including its plans for developing and scaling bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and its broader roadmap to net zero carbon emissions;
  • Drax’s evidencing for each of its climate related commitments;
  • Potential differences between the standards expected by stakeholders and local legal standards;
  • Water and soil management practices.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir John Beddington
Chair of the IAB

View/download the PDF version here

The Sustainable Biomass Program

In 2013, Drax co-founded the SBP together with six other energy companies.

SBP builds upon existing forest certification programmes, such as the Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). These evidence sustainable forest management practices but do not yet encompass regulatory requirements for reporting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This is a critical gap for biomass generators, who are obligated to report GHG emissions to European regulators.

There is also limited uptake of forest-level certification schemes in some key forest source areas. SBP is working to address these challenges.

SBP certification provides assurance that woody biomass is supplied from legal and sustainable sources and that all regulatory requirements for the users of biomass for energy production are met. The tool is a unique certification scheme designed for woody biomass, mostly in the form of wood pellets and wood chips, used in industrial, large-scale energy production.

SBP certification is achieved via a rigorous assessment of wood pellet and wood chip producers and biomass traders, carried out by independent, third party certification bodies and scrutinised by an independent technical committee.

5 more things you never knew about forests

Forests have long been places of mystery for people. It’s within a dark wood that Virgil and then Dante locate the gates to the underworld, while Shakespeare’s magical Midsummer Night’s Dream plays out in a mystical forest near Athens.

And while fairies and portals may be the stuff of fantasy, the forests that inspired them remain a source of mystery to this day.

Here are five more things you might not know about forests.

The forest sector employs more than 50 million people around the world

Employment is one of the major driving forces of global urbanisation as waves of people in both developed and less developed countries head to cities in search of better wages and living standards. But outside of cities, industries still thrive – particularly forestry, which officially employs 13.2 million people around the world.

The World Bank even suggests that by counting people in informal forestry employment and those who earn a living indirectly through forests, timber or fuel, the number of people professionally involved in forestry is closer to 54 million worldwide.

Forestry’s total contribution to global GDP is also sizeable. It currently adds an impressive $120 billion directly – a number expected to grow by as much as 50% over the next 10 to 15 years. Even more impressive is the contribution of the wider timber and wood product sector, which generates as much as $600 billion – 1% of global GDP, according to the World Bank.

We will soon be able weigh the world’s forests

 We know forests blanket about 30% of the land on earth, but what about calculating the mass and volume of all those trees? That’s a different task entirely, but one which could offer important insights for sustainable forestry.

In 2021 the European Space Agency (ESA) will launch Earth Explorer Biomass, the first satellite to carry a P-band radar, which is capable of penetrating the forest canopies and capturing data on the density of tree trunks and branches. Essentially, it will be able to weigh the world’s forests.

Over the course of its five-year mission, it will produce 3D maps every six months, giving scientists data on forest density across eight growth cycles. The result will be a much clearer image of the amount of biomass present around the earth’s different forested areas and how it is changing over time as a result of carbon dioxide (CO2) absorption.

Forests are an energy source that clean up after themselves

For all the IKEA furniture made from wood, 50% of the world’s total wood production is still used for energy with some 2.4 billion people globally using it for heating, cooking and electricity generation.

The world’s forests have an energy content about 10 times that of the annual primary energy consumption, making it a hugely useful resource in helping meet energy demand – if it is managed and used in a sustainable way.

As with other energy sources that are combusted, wood releases CO2, . However, if this fuel is drawn from a responsibly managed forest or a sustainable system of growing forests, its carbon emissions are offset by new tree plantings, which absorb carbon as they grow. This means the only emissions produced are those that come from transporting the wood itself.

The US Food and Agriculture Organization predicts that by 2030, forestry mitigation – with the help of carbon pricing – could contribute to CO2 reductions of 0.2 to 13.8 gigatonnes a year. 

 

Forests improve drinking water

Forests provide what’s known as natural infrastructure, which not only regulate water levels but also improve the quality of drinking water. Root systems and organic material like the leaves and twigs that make up the forest floor absorb water, reducing runoff and erosion. They also play a part in absorbing nutrients that are harmful to water quality.

The forest canopy further helps this process by releasing water vapour, helping regulate rainfall and providing protection against aerial drifts of pesticides, which can filter back into water systems.

Forests can suck up a third of CO2 emissions

While governments around the world look to shift to cleaner, renewable energy sources and cut emissions, forests have been silently tackling climate change for centuries. Over the past few decades, the world’s forests have absorbed as much as 30% of annual global human generated CO2 emissions. In fact, their ability to deal with fossil fuel-derived carbon emissions is even written into the Paris Climate Agreement.

While natural forests can contribute massively to sequestering (absorbing and storing) greenhouse gases, managed forests can play an even more powerful role.

Younger trees absorb more CO2 to fuel their rapid growth compared to older trees with stored carbon reserves. Managed forests, with regular thinning and replanting of trees, ensure there are plentiful numbers of these carbon-hungry young trees around the world.

Read the original 5 things you never knew about forests here.

Longleaf Pine: how wood product markets help to conserve a protected species

Longleaf pine forests were once a dominant ecosystem across the Southern US’ Gulf and Atlantic states, spanning from the east coast in Virginia as far west as Texas. However, centuries of overuse and conversion to agriculture and to faster growing pine species mean today less than 5% of the estimated 90 million acres remain.

Restoration of the longleaf pine savanna is now underway and the careful management of both public and private forests is key to preserving this ecosystem. Wood product and biomass markets play an important role in this, ensuring there is an economic incentive for landowners to plant high-value longleaf pines and manage them in a way that promotes conservation.

An ecosystem shaped by fire

The ancient abundance of longleaf pines across the southern US owes to their highly pyrophytic nature, meaning they are resistant to fire. This allowed the trees to survive both the naturally occurring forest fires from summer thunderstorms and those started as land management by native Americans. These regular fires help give the longleaf savanna its distinctive features, with a limited canopy providing ample sunlight and allowing grasses and herbs to grow in the nitrogen-rich soil.

As colonial settlements expanded across North America, the long straight timber offered by the pines, as well as the resin and turpentine, made these forests a valuable resource. Longleaf pine ecosystems reached a depleted state.

The restoration push

Today, America’s Longleaf Restoration Initiative (ALRI) is taking strides to restore the species. The collaborative effort between public and private sector partners has set a 15-year goal of increasing longleaf acreage from 3.4 million to 8.0 million acres by 2025. 

These ecosystems are currently home to an estimated 900 endemic plants and 29 federally listed species including the red-cockaded woodpecker, gopher tortoise and indigo snake.

Restoring the environment in which the flora and fauna can flourish is not as simple as planting large numbers of longleaf pine trees.

“Conservation efforts must focus on not only the planting of the pine, but also the restoration, development, and maintenance of the pine savanna ecosystem,” says Kyla Cheynet, a forest ecologist at Drax Biomass. “This system requires predictable disturbance to maintain the open canopy and rich herbaceous vegetation.”

The role of the wood product market

These disturbances include prescribed fires and the careful harvesting of trees to ensure the landscape maintains its open canopy that allows plenty of sunlight to reach the grasses and other vegetation along the forest floor.

The ALRI’s 2016 report highlighted the importance of thinning and prescribed fires in conserving longleaf savanna. It found that while new planting of longleaf pines declined slightly (8%) from 2015, the wildlife quality, plant diversity and overall health of forests improved by removing competing tree species and allowing more sunlight to enter the forest.

Harvesting or thinning longleaf pine forests provides a small percentage of the fibre used to manufacture compressed wood pellets used at Drax Power Station, but these markets help to incentivise responsible forest management and offer a source of profit for landowners. These revenue-generating practices are crucial to ensuring the continued survival of longleaf pine forests by preventing them from being converted to agricultural land or lost to development.

The biomass carbon story

There is an important difference between carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from coal (and other fossil fuels) and CO2 emitted from renewable sources. Both do emit CO2 when burnt, but in climate change terms the impact of that CO2 is very different.

To understand this difference, it helps to think small and scale up. It helps to think of your own back garden.

One tree, every year for 30 years

Imagine you are lucky enough to have a garden with space for 30 trees. Three decades ago you decided to plant one tree per year, every year. In this example, each tree grows to maturity over thirty years so today you find yourself with a thriving copse with 30 trees at different stages of growth, ranging from one year to 30 years old.

At 30 years of age, the oldest has now reached maturity and you cut it down – in the spring, of course, before the sap rises – and leave the logs to dry over the summer. You plant a new seedling in its place. Through the summer and autumn the 29 established trees and the new seedling you planted continue to grow, absorbing carbon from the atmosphere to do so.

Winter comes and when it turns cold and dark you burn the seasoned wood to keep warm. Burning it will indeed emit carbon to the atmosphere. However, by end of the winter, the other 29 trees, plus the sapling you planted, will be at exactly the same stage of growth as the previous spring; contain the same amount of wood and hence the same amount of carbon.

As long as you fell and replant one tree every year on a 30-year cycle the atmosphere will see no extra CO2 and you’ll have used the energy captured by their growth to warm your home. Harvesting only what is grown is the essence of sustainable forest management.

If you didn’t have your seasoned, self-supplied wood to burn you might have been forced to burn coal or use more gas to heat your home. Over the course of the same winter these fuels would have emitted carbon to the atmosphere which endlessly accumulates – causing climate change.

Not only does your tree husbandry provide you with an endlessly renewable supply of fuel but you also might enjoy other benefits such as the shelter your trees provide and the diversity of wildlife they attract.

Mushroom - Brown cap boletus in autumn

No added carbon

This is a simplified example, but the principles hold true whether your forest contains 30 trees or 300 million – the important point is that with these renewable carbon emissions, provided you take out less wood than is growing and you at least replace the trees you take out, you do not add new carbon to the atmosphere. That is not true with fossil fuels.

It is true that you could have chosen not to have trees. You could instead build a wind turbine or install solar panels on your land. That would be a perfectly reasonable choice but you’ll still need to use the coal at night when the sun doesn’t shine or when the wind isn’t blowing. Worst of all you don’t get all the other benefits of a thriving forest – its seasonal beauty and the habitat that’s maintained for wildlife.

Of course, the wood Drax needs doesn’t grow in our ‘garden’. We bring it many miles from areas where there are large sustainably managed forests and we carefully account for the carbon emissions in the harvesting, processing and transporting the fuel to Drax. That’s why we ‘only’ achieve more than 80% carbon savings compared to coal.