Characterization factors
development at a land
management practice level
Learnings from a forestry case
study for land use impact
assessment on climate change
Claire CORNILLIER
(1)
,
Anthony BENOIST
(2,3)
(1)
FCBA, Environment & Health Department,
Bordeaux, France
(2)
CIRAD, BioWooEB, Montpellier, France
Montpellier
21
stSeptember 2016
Introduction
o
Context: Methodological recommendations
•
Scope: LCA studies of energy generation from wood
o
Scope of this presentation
•
Focus on carbon sequestration & climate change
Materials & Methods (1/3)
o
Carbon stock description in forestry systems
Stand-level approach
Landscape-level approach
Materials & Methods (1/3)
o
Carbon stock description in forestry systems
Stand-level approach
Landscape-level approach
C stock
Time
C stock
Time
Stand-level approach:
→
Most suitable approach for
the land use framework
→
Most suitable approach for
distinguishing practices
Materials & Methods (2/3)
Carbon Sequestration potential → Climate Change
1
st
model considered: Müller-Wenk & Brandão (2010)
“Average stay” in air of fossil CO
2: 157 years
Transformation CF
ref→use
44
12
.
Red area
157 yrs
Occupation CF
44
12
.
Green area
t
occ. 157 yrs
Materials & Methods (3/3)
Carbon Sequestration potential → Climate Change
2
nd
model considered: Dynamic approach
Transformation CF
ref→use
Occupation CF
Materials & Methods (3/3)
Carbon Sequestration potential → Climate Change
2
nd
model considered: Dynamic approach
Transformation CF
Deriving these direct and avoided
ref→use
Occupation CF
Materials & Methods (3/3)
Carbon Sequestration potential → Climate Change
2
nd
model considered: Dynamic approach
Transformation CF
ref→use
Occupation CF
Obtaining CF by applying Time-Adjusted
GWP to the resulting emission profiles
Data sources
o
Species considered
o
Carbon dynamics
Species
Management description
Eucalyptus
Short Rotation Coppice, with or
without residue harvesting
Birch then oak
Natural relaxation
Not presented
here:
• Douglas-fir
• Chestnut
Compartment
Eucalyptus
Natural relaxation
Stemwood
Dendrometric model
Description from
CNPF expert
statements
Standing biomass & roots
Expansion factors
Dead biomass
Exponential decay
Real C dynamics & land use framework
Eucalyptus,
transformation
without
to
with residue harvesting
Previous
land use
Land use
under study
Further
land uses
Average carbon stocks (without soil & litter)
73 tC / ha
64 tC / ha
Carbon loss
Real C dynamics & land use framework
Eucalyptus,
transformation
without
to
with residue harvesting
153 tC / ha
200 yrs
Transformation
impact
Occupation
impact
Developing CF (1/4)
+ 0.2-0.3 tCO
2-eq
/ ha / yr
Developing CF (2/4)
o
Everything at hand to calculate CF…
o
But some questions raised
•
Matching real dynamics and framework modelling
o
Linear
vs. real dynamic modelling
o
Temporal boundaries: historical vs.
causal
modelling
o
“No transformation time” assumption
Developing CF (3/4)
o
Real
vs.
linear
dynamic modelling
Eucalyptus,
occupation
,
without residue harvesting
x 3.7
Real modelling
Linear modelling
Time (years)
Ca
rbo
n
s
toc
k
(tC
/
h
a)
Developing CF (4/4)
o
Historical
vs.
causal
modelling
Eucalyptus,
occupation
,
without residue harvesting
Historical “macro-level” modelling
Causal “stand-level” modelling
x 5.0
Time (years)
Ca
rbo
n
s
toc
k
(tC
/
h
a)
Take-home messages
o
Land use framework suitable at a land
management practice level
o
A classical trade-off in LCA
•
Müller-Wenk & Brandão (2010) proposal
o
Simple and easy to use method
•
Dynamic approach
o
More scientifically valid(?) but more challenging to apply
o
Perspectives
•
Consequential modelling and land use framework
-l
ca
.or
g
