Environmental impacts of eucalypt and maritime pine wood production in Portugal

This study evaluates the environmental impacts associated with the production of eucalypt (Eucalyptus globulus Labill.) and maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) wood in Portugal. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is used from cradle-to-gate. Three forest management scenarios, representative of different forest management intensities and logging equipment, were simulated for each species. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of adopting different values for the wood productivity. The results obtained for each impact category show a relatively wide range of variation when different management scenarios and wood productivities are taken into account. The impacts, except for those in the category photochemical oxidant formation, are much smaller in the less intensive scenario (40–88%). The impacts of using chainsaws and adapted farm tractors in logging operations instead of harvesters and forwarders do not significantly differ (less than 11%), except for the impact category photochemical oxidant formation for which there are significant differences. For the same type of management scenario, the impacts of eucalypt wood production are larger than those estimated for maritime pine wood. The logging stage, as well as fertilization, especially with nitrogen-containing fertilizers, plays a major role in all the impact categories. More accurate impacts could be quantified using the methodology adopted in this study when the provenance of the wood and, consequently, the forest operation type and frequency, and associated consumption of fuels, lubricants and fertilizers, are known.

[1]  D Athanassiadis,et al.  Energy consumption and exhaust emissions in mechanized timber harvesting operations in Sweden. , 2000, The Science of the total environment.

[2]  Sara González-García,et al.  Environmental impacts of forest production and supply of pulpwood: Spanish and Swedish case studies , 2009 .

[3]  Ottar Michelsen,et al.  Environmental Impact and Added Value in Forestry Operations in Norway , 2008 .

[4]  Luís Arroja,et al.  Carbon dioxide emissions from forest operations in Portuguese eucalypt and maritime pine stands , 2007 .

[5]  O. Jolliet,et al.  Harmonisation of Environmental Life Cycle Assessment for Agriculture , 1997 .

[6]  N. H. Ravindranath,et al.  2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories , 2006 .

[7]  Keryn I. Paul,et al.  Cradle-to-gate inventory of wood production from Australian softwood plantations and native hardwood forests: Embodied energy, water use and other inputs , 2012 .

[8]  C. Bauer,et al.  Key Elements in a Framework for Land Use Impact Assessment Within LCA (11 pp) , 2007 .

[9]  Bruce Lippke,et al.  Life-Cycle Impacts of Inland Northwest and Northeast/North Central Forest Resources , 2010 .

[10]  Tiago Domingos,et al.  Industrial hemp or eucalyptus paper? , 2010 .

[11]  João Santos Pereira,et al.  Changes in carbon stocks in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. plantations induced by different water and nutrient availability , 2002 .

[12]  Llorenç Milà i Canals,et al.  Global characterisation factors to assess land use impacts on biotic production , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[13]  Ana Cláudia Dias,et al.  Life cycle assessment of printing and writing paper produced in Portugal , 2007 .

[14]  Juan Ignacio Montero,et al.  Land use indicators in life cycle assessment. Case study: The environmental impact of Mediterranean greenhouses , 2007 .

[15]  Sara González-García,et al.  Evaluation of forest operations in Spanish eucalypt plantations under a life cycle assessment perspective , 2009 .

[16]  Shane Ward,et al.  Energy Audit of Wood Harvesting Systems , 2003 .

[17]  G. Etiope EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2009 , 2009 .

[18]  R. Antikainen,et al.  Land use indicators in life cycle assessment , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[19]  Margarida Tomé,et al.  Evolução do material lenhoso de pinheiro bravo e eucalipto , 2010 .

[20]  Carla Valente,et al.  Improvement program for Eucalyptus globulus at Portucel: technological component , 1992 .

[21]  Anna Lewandowska,et al.  Adaptation of ecoinvent database to Polish conditions , 2008 .

[22]  Ana Luisa Pires,et al.  Influence of vegetation management and fertilization on Pinus pinaster growth and on understory biomass and composition , 2010 .

[23]  Timo Karjalainen,et al.  Comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from forest operations in Finland and Sweden , 2003 .

[24]  Ana Cláudia Dias,et al.  Application of life cycle assessment to the Portuguese pulp and paper industry , 2003 .

[25]  Staffan Berg,et al.  Energy use and environmental impacts of forest operations in Sweden , 2005 .

[26]  Ana Cláudia Dias,et al.  Comparison of methodologies for estimating the carbon footprint – case study of office paper , 2012 .

[27]  Edie Sonne,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from forestry operations: a life cycle assessment. , 2006, Journal of environmental quality.

[28]  Bruce Lippke,et al.  Life-Cycle Impacts of Forest Resource Activities in the Pacific Northwest and Southeast United States , 2005 .

[29]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Life cycle assessment An operational guide to the ISO standards , 2001 .

[30]  Abel Rodrigues,et al.  Net ecosystem carbon exchange in three contrasting Mediterranean ecosystems ? the effect of drought , 2007 .

[31]  Dimitris Athanassiadis,et al.  Fuel, Hydraulic Oil and Lubricant Consumption in Swedish Mechanized Harvesting Operations, 1996 , 2013 .

[32]  Antti Asikainen,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from the use of primary energy in forest operations and long-distance transportation of timber in Finland , 1996 .

[33]  Staffan Berg,et al.  Some aspects of LCA in the analysis of forestry operations , 1997 .