An evaluation of the UK's use of SFM standards to procure solid woody biomass for electricity generation using sustainable bioenergy criteria

Forestlands have been identified as a valuable resource to mitigate climate change due to the biome’s capacity to both sequester greenhouse gases and substitute for fossil fuels. Woody biomass has been proposed as a substitutable input for coalgenerated electricity as economies attempt to transition to renewable power while addressing economic development goals. However, increasing the intensity of forest management for energy production has the potential to result in significant ecological, economic and social consequences at local, regional and global scales. In this context, my dissertation explores the capacity of existing policy frameworks to stimulate and support sustainable power production from forest biomaterials. In Chapter Two, I explore the interactions between shifting goals, actors and institutions in influencing incentives that shape today’s policy mix for woody biopower production in Wisconsin. The study’s results reveal that the state’s shifting focus away from using renewable energy as a means to pursue climate change mitigation and energy security goals combined with an absence of supportive coalitions has resulted in the dismantling of support for the woody biopower policy framework. In Chapter Three, I use data from a household survey of Tomahawk, Wisconsin residents to evaluate support for woody biomass production for power generation. Results show that respondents in biomass producing communities are more supportive of biomass sources such as forestry residues and forestry thinnings than dedicated harvesting operations. In addition, the results indicate that using an xiii ecosystem services approach can help explain differences in support between these respondents and provide insights into socially acceptable forms of biomass harvesting operations. Chapter Four evaluates the use of sustainable forest management certification programs as a policy instrument to source sustainable woody biomass. The study evaluated the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) certification programs using bioenergy sustainability criteria found in the academic literature. The analysis shows a deficiency in these programs to address key criteria pertaining to climate change mitigation and would be improved by coupling sustainable forest management programs with bioenergy sustainability schemes such as designed by the Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials.

To solve problems caused by conventional forest management, forest certification has emerged as a driver of sustainable forest management. Several sustainable forest management certification systems exist, including the Forest Stewardship Council and those endorsed by the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification, such as the Canadian Standards Association – Sustainable Forestry Management Standard CAN/CSA Z809 and Sustainable Forestry Initiative. For consumers to use certified products to meet their own sustainability goals, they must have an understanding of the effectiveness of different certification systems. To understand the relative performance of three systems, we determined: (1) the criteria used to compare the Forest Stewardship Council, Canadian Standards Association – Sustainable Forestry Management, and Sustainable Forestry Initiative, (2) if consensus exists regarding their ability to achieve sustainability goals, and (3) what research gaps must be filled to improve our understanding of how forest certification systems affect sustainable forest management. We conducted a qualitative meta-analysis of 26 grey literature references (books, industry and nongovernmental organization publications) and 9 primary literature references (articles in peer-reviewed academic journals) that compared at least two of the aforementioned certification systems. The Forest Stewardship Council was the highest performer for ecological health and social sustainable forest management criteria. The Canadian Standards Association – Sustainable Forestry Management and Sustainable Forestry Initiative performed best under sustainable forest management criteria of forest productivity and economic longevity of a firm. Sixty-two percent of analyses were comparisons of the wording of certification system principles or criteria; 34% were surveys of foresters or consumers. An important caveat to these results is that only one comparison was based on empirically collected field data. We recommend that future studies collect ecological and socioeconomic data from forests so purchasers can select certified forest products based on empirical evidence.

Mapping convergence of sustainable forest management systems: Comparing three protocols and two certification schemes for ascertaining the trends in global forest governance

Competition among environmental certification systems has created considerable demand for transparent comparison. Drawing on the case of forest certification, this article presents an analytical framework for comparing certification standards and government policies according to their policy approach and environmental threshold requirements. A detailed analysis of existing policies is applied to one key indicator, i.e. riparian buffer zones, where it reveals clear differences among the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) regional standards and among the FSC, the Canadian Standards Association (CSA), and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) certification systems. The FSC regional standards of British Columbia and the Pacific Coast contain quantitative riparian buffer zone thresholds, with the FSC British Columbia standards being the most restrictive. The FSC Southeast standards are comparable with the SFI standards in deferring to state buffer zone guidelines but making those guidelines mandatory. The systems-based CSA standards contain no substantive prescriptions. Most certification standards appear to closely mimic government policy approaches. Standards that cover multiple jurisdictions resemble an averaging of the prescriptiveness and performance thresholds of government policies, resulting in an increase in some state requirements and no additional requirements in others. These findings lay the groundwork for further explanatory research on the interaction of state and non-state policies as well as the systematic comparison of policy effectiveness.

We conducted e-mail surveys of organizations that had received forest management certification under the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) in the United States and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) in the United States and Canada to determine if forest certification has changed forest management practices and if the changes are practically and statistically different between systems. The results indicate that forest certification prompted substantial changes in practices. On average, firms implemented 13‐14 changes in forestry, environmental, social, and economic/system practices to obtain or maintain forest certification. Although there was no statistical difference between systems in the total number of changes, there were many differences in the implementation of specific forest practices, with FSC firms required to make more environmental/forest management changes and SFI firms required to make more economic/system changes. Forest managers believed that the benefits of forest certification were greater than the disadvantages. SFI managers rated the benefits of forest certification higher than FSC managers, but also rated the disadvantages higher. Most organizations felt certification accomplished their objectives and were likely to recertify, thus indicating their endorsement of the process.

RES Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable energy sources sets an overall binding target of supplying 20% of European Union (EU)’s final energy consumption from renewable energy sources by 2020 with binding national targets for each Member State. Details of how these targets will be achieved in each Member State are described in National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAPs). High RES scenario presented in Energy Roadmap 2050 by European Commission (EC) foresees that 75% of the gross final energy can be supplied from renewable energy sources by 2050. This challenging target calls for a major effort to increase the number of qualified workers in the market able to cover the demand for high quality RES installations in the upcoming years. The substantial need for training and qualification is acknowledged in the RES Directive, Article 14(3), which includes an obligation on the Member States to make provision for the training and certification of installers of RES. This effort is also supported by actions such as the EC initiative Build Up Skills, launched by the Commission in 2011, which aims to unite forces to increase the number of qualified workforce by promoting training and qualification in the field of energy efficiency and renewable energy in the building sector in Europe. The Install+RES training courses are fully in line with this line of action and aim at providing a pool of highly qualified trainers and installers (electricians, plumbers, roofers and technicians for heating systems) of small-scale renewable energy systems (biomass, solar, photovoltaic systems and heat pumps) for buildings in several European countries, namely Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Poland and Slovenia, by establishing training courses. 33 courses have been implemented, 78 trainers and 516 installers have been qualified during the Install+RES project in the field of renewable energy systems installations. The Install+RES project started in May 2010 and ended in April 2013. The Install+RES project was co-financed by the European Commission in the framework of the Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) Program. The Install+RES training courses material was developed in line with the requirements mentioned in Directive 2009/28/EC (Article 14, Annex IV). The Install+RES training courses were completed with an exam leading to a certification or qualification according to the requirements of the Directive 2009/28/EC. The high quality of the courses offered within the Install+RES project was ensured by the “train the trainers” courses. During the “train the trainers” courses, the trainers, who will implement the training courses for installers, acquired practical and theoretical knowledge to properly implement the training courses for installers of small-scale renewable energy systems in their countries. During the “train the trainer” courses, the trainers obtained the pedagogical and technical skills to implement the “Install+RES” courses for installers in their respective countries (Italy, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Greece and Poland). The innovative aspects of the Install+RES “train the trainer” courses such as the “hand on learning” concept, “tandem teaching” approach and the “multiplier effect” are highlighted in the following explanatory pages. The Install+RES “train the trainer” courses was established in Munich, Germany, in German and English languages. The participants of the training courses were the Install+RES training providers and also third party organisations interested in establishing training courses in their own countries. The content and the methodology of the training courses have been adapted to each target country (Poland, Italy, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Greece) according to the potential installers’ and markets’ needs resulting from the NREAPs in line with the RES Directive. The adapted material has been translated into the National languages of each target country. One pilot course and two training courses for installers have been offered in Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Poland and Slovenia in the National languages. The Install+RES training courses are meant to be an investment for sustainability by evolutionary processes, which will lead to the establishment of a high quality of skills and as consequence to the maximization of Renewable Energy Systems (RES) s efficiency, reliability, lifetime and safety. The training material and training concept developed during the Install+RES project has given a strong contribution to ensure the achievement of the targets stated in the National Renewable Energy Action Plans and in the High RES scenario of the Energy Roadmap 2050 as well as to the roadmaps to 2020 developed within the BUILD UP SKILLS Initiative.

Forest owner motivations and attitudes towards supplying biomass for energy in Europe

UE policies have played a leading role in protecting the environment by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases, and minimizing environmental impacts of energy use. Romanian National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP) has promoted the use of energy from renewable sources in accordance with the Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament. In this regard, renewable energy resources appear to be the one of the most efficient and effective solutions for clean and sustainable energy development in Romania. Despite the current economic downturn, electricity consumption in Romania for 2014–2020 is expected to have a growth of 2–3% per year, estimating a 4.6% gross domestic production (GDP). Romania’s potentials for electricity generation from renewable resources is represented by: hydro energy with a theoretical potential estimated to 40 TWh in hydro power plant with more than 10 MW and 6 TWh in the small ones; wind energy with a theoretical potential estimated to 23 TWh and photovoltaic energy estimated to 1.2 TWh (source Romanian NREAP). From estimations and theoretical figures to reality regarding renewable energy in Romania the evolution is spectacular because in 2007 the hydro electric energy production was representative with 15.7% and renewables were no longer mentioned, and in 2013 (04.03.3013), the figures were 30.0% in hydro power and 6.5% wind (www.transelectrica.ro). According to NREAP, the expectations in the wind energy installed capacity were 1,850 MW in 2012 and the real installed capacity was 1,905 MW, with 3% growth. This paper deals with present and future prospect situation of renewable energy and the role of hydropower in Romania. This study shows that there is an important potential for Energy and Sustainability IV 3 www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line) WIT Transactions on Ecology and The Environment, Vol 176, © 2013 WIT Press doi:10.2495/ESUS130011 renewable energy in Romania, especially concerning hydropower, and wind energy. We analyze the renewable energy sources in Romania considering the most important criteria for sustainable development.

Forest certifications gradually cover more and more forest areas around the world. Two leading forest certification systems (FSC - Forest Stewardship Council and PEFC - Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes) are constantly expanding their areas of operation. In addition to the leading organizations mentioned above, many local forest certification systems have been established since the 1990s (e.g. SFI – The Sustainable Forestry Initiative, CSA – The Canadian Standards Association’s Sustainable Forest Management Standard, LEI – Lembaga Ecolabel Indonesia). Although the details of forest certification programs differ, the common assumption is the broadly understood protection of the natural environment. This article discusses the impact of world-leading and local forest certification systems on the protection of biodiversity and valuable natural areas.

Developing a certification system for urban forests in the United States

It is essential to investigate alternative energy solutions, especially those derived from renewable energy sources due to the growing global fossil fuel crisis. Renewable and sustainable energy sources have gained significant technological, economical, and environmental attention from researchers globally over the past decade. It has become a viable and sustainable alternative solution compared to conventional fossil fuels, providing cleaner, derived from naturally replenishing sources, with low gas emissions, and more environmentally friendly method for power production. Renewable sources include geothermal, solar, wind, hydropower, and biomass energy. These sources have various environmental impacts; however, these effects are significantly less compared to fossil fuel sources. As an example, fossil fuel-power plants require 35 times more land compared to geothermal power plants. Additionally, geothermal power plants emit approximately one-sixth of the carbon dioxide (CO2) produced by natural gas power plants. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the environmental impacts, specifically addressing water and air pollution (i.e., greenhouse gas emissions) associated with utilizing renewable energy sources for power production, which can serve as a crucial tool for policy, developers, and decision makers when planning the usage of renewable energy sources.

The first objective of this paper was to provide an inventory of developments of certification schemes for sustainable biomass production, following recent EU legislation (both formalized and under development). One main pillar is the EU Timber Regulation for legal harvesting; a second one is the EU’s 2010 recommendations for sustainable woody biomass sourcing for energy; the third one is the EU Waste Directive. The second objective was to benchmark the coverage of this (draft) legislation, when wood product certificates for sustainable forest management (SFM) are used as proof of the related legislative requirements. We studied North America, as it is a major biomass supplier to the EU-28. Together with existing forest legislation in the US and Canada, SFM certificates are actively used to cover the EU’s (draft) legislation. However, North American forests are only partially certified with fibers coming from certified forests; these are referred to as forest management (FM) fibers. Other certified fibers should come from complementary risk assessments downstream in the supply chain (risk based fibers). Our benchmark concludes that: (a) FM fiber certification by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) international standards show the highest level of coverage with EU’s (draft) legislation; (b) There is insufficient coverage for risk based fibers by FSC Controlled Wood (FSC-CW), PEFC Due Diligence (PEFC-DD), or SFI-fiber sourcing (SFI-FS). Other weaknesses identified for elaboration are: (c) Alignment in definitions are needed, such as for primary forest, high carbon stock, and wood waste (cascading); (d) Imperfect mass balance (fiber check downstream) needs to be solved, as non-certified fiber flows are inadequately monitored; (e) Add-on of a GHG calculation tool is needed, as GHG life cycle reporting is not covered by any of the SFM frameworks.

In this study, we developed and tested a geographic information system methodology to measure the width and slope of streamside management zones (SMZs). We also assessed the compliance of SMZs on the Cumberland Plateau of Tennessee with the quantitative portions of state best management practices and the sustainable forestry standards used by the Sustainable Forestry Initiative and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). We found that using different standards greatly affected overall SMZ compliance and that FSC-level compliance varied as a function of type and resident status of forest owner.

Chapter 17 - Chesapeake Forest Lands, Maryland, United States of America

Applying resource efficiency principles to the analysis of EU-27 bioenergy options by 2020 – Findings from a recent study for the European Environment Agency