Abstract
Wood biomass has been viewed as “carbon neutral”—its uses as energy have a zero carbon footprint. Some observers argue that the use of wood biofuels will result in a decrease of the forest stock and a net reduction of the carbon captured in the forest. Such assessments take a static, accounting view of forest systems and do not consider the effects of management in renewing the forest and increasing its extent or ability to sequester carbon. This paper addresses the carbon neutrality debate using a dynamic optimization forest management model to examine the effect on the existing and future forests of a changing demand for wood biomass. The results show that under market optimizing conditions, when future demand is anticipated to increase for significant periods, the response of managers will be to increase the intensity of forest production thereby offsetting much of the carbon released in bioenergy production.
Highlights
Until recently, the conventional wisdom was that the use of wood energy as a substitute for fossil fuels would reduce net carbon emissions, since the wood biomass would substitute for fossil fuels and wood, being a renewable resource, would recapture the emitted carbon as the forest regrows
A new argument is that the use of wood biofuels will decrease the forest stock and reduce the net carbon captured in the forest
Our results suggest that the forest stock for a commercial regulated forest system will generally expand in the face of increasing demand as the forest expanding effects of the additional market derived investments in the forest stock exceed the forest contracting effects of the increased harvests
Summary
The conventional wisdom was that the use of wood energy as a substitute for fossil fuels would reduce net carbon emissions, since the wood biomass would substitute for fossil fuels and wood, being a renewable resource, would recapture the emitted carbon as the forest regrows. A new argument is that the use of wood biofuels will decrease the forest stock and reduce the net carbon captured in the forest. This would offset some or all of the gains from the decrease in fossil fuel use [2,3,4,5]. The long-term net change in the amount of carbon captured in the forest may be zero, the new argument runs, in the shorter term the initial large emissions will not be fully offset by regrowth, and so using wood biomass energy will generate substantial near-term increases in atmospheric carbon. High grain prices may cause forestland clearing for cropping, thereby reducing the overall forest and the total carbon stock in that forest
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
