Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 4/2014

01-04-2014 | LAND USE IN LCA

Is land use impact assessment in LCA applicable for forest biomass value chains? Findings from comparison of use of Scandinavian wood, agro-biomass and peat for energy

Authors: Tuomas Helin, Anne Holma, Sampo Soimakallio

Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Issue 4/2014

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

A framework for the inclusion of land use impact assessment and a set of land use impact indicators has been recently proposed for life cycle assessment (LCA) and no case studies are available for forest biomass. The proposed methodology is tested for Scandinavian managed forestry; a comparative case study is made for energy from wood, agro-biomass and peat; and sensitivity to forest management options is analysed.

Methods

The functional unit of this comparative case study is 1 GJ of energy in solid fuels. The land use impact assessment framework of the United Nations Environment Programme and the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP-SETAC) is followed and its application for wood biomass is critically analysed. Applied midpoint indicators include ecological footprint and human appropriation of net primary production, global warming potential indicator for biomass (GWPbio-100) and impact indicators proposed by UNEP-SETAC on ecosystem services and biodiversity. Options for forest biomass land inventory modelling are discussed. The system boundary covers only the biomass acquisition phase. Management scenarios are formulated for forest and barley biomass, and a sensitivity analysis focuses on impacts of land transformations for agro-biomass.

Results and discussion

Meaningful differences were found in between solid biofuels from distinct land use classes. The impact indicator results were sensitive to land occupation and transformation and differed significantly from inventory results. Current impact assessment method is not sensitive to land management scenarios because the published characterisation factors are still too coarse and indicate differences only between land use types. All indicators on ecosystem services and biodiversity were sensitive to the assumptions related with land transformation. The land occupation (m2a) approach in inventory was found challenging for Scandinavian wood, due to long rotation periods and variable intensities of harvests. Some suggestions of UNEP-SETAC were challenged for the sake of practicality and relevance for decision support.

Conclusions

Land use impact assessment framework for LCA and life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) indicators could be applied in a comparison of solid bioenergy sources. Although forest bioenergy has higher land occupation than agro-bioenergy, LCIA indicator results are of similar magnitude or even lower for forest bioenergy. Previous literature indicates that environmental impacts of land use are significant, but it remains questionable if these are captured with satisfactory reliability with the applied LCA methodology, especially for forest biomass. Short and long time perspectives of land use impacts should be studied in LCA with characterisation factors for all relevant timeframes, not only 500 years, with a forward-looking perspective. Characterisation factors need to be modelled further for different (forest) land management intensities and for peat excavation.
previous article A spatially explicit data-driven approach to assess the effect of agricultural land occupation on species groups
next article An institutional analysis of EPD programs and a global PCR registry

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
Data on future forest management scenarios have been produced in Finnish Forest Cluster project EffFibre and were provided as written notification from Jari Hynynen from the Finnish Forest Research Institute METLA.
 
2
LCA is a tool to support decision-making. A decision-maker may be e.g. a policy maker, corporate manager or a consumer, and the relevant decision-making context should be clear for the LCA practitioner in defining the goal and scope of the study.
 
Literature
Alakangas E (2000) Suomessa käytettävien polttoaineiden ominaisuuksia [Properties of fuels used in Finland]. Espoo 2000. Valtion teknillinen tutkimuskeskus, VTT Research Notes 2045
Alvarenga RAF, Dewulf J, Van Langenhove H, Huijbregts MAJ (2013) Exergy-based accounting for land as a natural resource in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(5):939–947CrossRef
Baitz M, Albrecht S, Brauner E (2013) LCA’s theory and practice: like ebony and ivory living in perfect harmony? Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:5–13CrossRef
Barona E, Ramankutty N, Hyman G, Coomes OT (2010) The role of pasture and soybean in deforestation of the Brazilian Amazon. Environ Res Lett 5:024002CrossRef
Brandão M, Milà i Canals L (2013) Global characterisation factors to assess land use impacts on biotic production. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1243–1252CrossRef
Brandão M, Milà i Canals L, Clift R (2010) Soil organic carbon changes in the cultivation of energy crops: implications for GHG balances and soil quality for use in LCA. Biomass Bioenerg 35:2323–2336CrossRef
Cespi D, Passarini F, Ciacci L, Vassura I, Castellani V, Collina E, Piazzalunga A, Morselli L (2013) Heating systems LCA: comparison of biomass-based appliances. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.​1007/​s11367-013-0611-3
Cherubini F, Strømman AH (2011) Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: state of the art and future challenges. Bioresource Technol 102(2):437–451CrossRef
Cherubini F, Peters GP, Berntsen T, Strømman AH, Hertwich E (2011) CO2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming. Glob Change Biol Bioenerg 3:413–426CrossRef
Coelho CRV, Michelsen O (2013) Land use impacts on biodiversity from kiwifruit production in New Zealand assessed with global and national datasets. Int J Life Cycle Assess. doi:10.​1007/​s11367-013-0628-7
de Baan L, Alkemade R, Koellner T (2013a) Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1216–1230CrossRef
de Baan L, Mutel CL, Curran M, Hellweg S, Koellner T (2013b) Land use in life cycle assessment: global characterization factors based on regional and global potential species extinction. Environ Sci Technol 47:9281–9290CrossRef
De Jong J, Humphrey JW, Smith M, Ravn HP (2011) The impact of forest management on biodiversity. Paper 1 in Raulund-Rasmussen K, De Jong J, Humphrey JW et al. Papers on impacts of forest management on environmental services. EFI Technical Report 57, 2011
Ewing B, Goldfinger S, Wackernagel M, Stechbart M, Rizk SM, Reed A, Kitzes J (2010) Ecological footprint atlas 2010. Global Footprint Network, Oakland
Finnish Forest Research Institute METLA (2011) Finnish statistical yearbook of forestry. Metsäntutkimuslaitos METLA, Vantaa. ISBN 978-951-40-2330-9
Finnveden G, Hauschild MZ, Ekvall T, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S, Koehler A, Pennington D, Suh S (2009) Recent developments in life cycle assessment. J Environ Manag 91:1–21CrossRef
Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, De Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R (2008) ReCiPe 2008. A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. The Hague, The Netherlands: VROM, 2009
Gundersen P, Raulund-Rasmussen K, Ring E (2011) The impact of forest management on water quality in Europe. Paper 4 in Raulund-Rasmussen K, De Jong J, Humphrey JW et al. Papers on impacts of forest management on environmental services. EFI Technical Report 57, 2011
Haberl H, Erb KH, Krausmann F, Gaube V, Bondeau A, Plutzar C, Gingrich S, Lucht W, Fischer-Kowalski M (2007) Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth’s terrestrial ecosystems. PNAS 104:12942–12947CrossRef
Hansen K, Rosenqvist L, Vsterdal L, Gundersen P (2007) Nitrate leaching from three afforestation chronosequences on former arable land in Denmark. Glob Change Biol 13:1250–1264CrossRef
Hansen K, Stupak I, Ring E, Raulund-Rasmussen K (2011) The impact of forest management on soil quality. Paper 3 in Raulund-Rasmussen K, De Jong J, Humphrey JW et al. Papers on impacts of forest management on environmental services. EFI Technical Report 57, 2011
Hanski I, Ovaskainen O (2002) Extinction debt at extinction threshold. Conserv Biol 16:666–673CrossRef
Helin T, Sokka L, Soimakallio S, Pingoud K, Pajula T (2013) Approaches for inclusion of forest carbon cycle in life cycle assessment—a review. Glob Change Biol Bioenerg 5(5):475–486CrossRef
Helmisaari H-S, Hanssen KH, Jacobson S et al (2011) Logging residue removal after thinning in Nordic boreal forests: long-term impact on tree growth. Forest Ecol Manag 261:1919–1927CrossRef
Hertel T, Golub WA, Jones AD, O'Hare M, Plevin RJ, Kammen DM (2010) Effects of US maize ethanol on global land use and greenhouse gas emissions: estimating market-mediated responses. Bioscience 60(3):223–231CrossRef
Hobbs RJ, Arico S, Aronson J et al (2006) Novel ecosystems: theoretical and management aspects of the new ecological world order. Global Ecol Biogeogr 15:1–7CrossRef
Huijbregts MAJ, Hellweg S, Frischknecht R, Hungerbühlerd K, Hendriks AJ (2008) Ecological footprint accounting in the life cycle assessment of products. Ecol Econ 64:798–807CrossRef
JRC-IES Joint Research Centre – Institute for Environment & Sustainability (2010) International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) handbook. JRC-IES, Ispra, Italy
Jyske T, Mäkinen H, Saranpää P (2008) Wood density within Norway spruce stems. Silva Fennica 42(3):439–455CrossRef
Katzensteiner K, Kilmo E, Szukics U, Delaney CM (2011) Impact of forest management alternatives on water budgets and runoff processes. Paper 2 in Raulund-Rasmussen K, De Jong J, Humphrey JW et al. Papers on impacts of forest management on environmental services. EFI Technical Report 57, 2011
Kirkinen J, Minkkinen K, Penttilä T, Kojola S, Sievänen R, Alm J, Saarnio S, Silvan N, Laine J, Savolainen I (2007) Greenhouse gas impact due to different peat fuel utilisation chains in Finland—a life cycle approach. Boreal Environ Res 12(2):211–223
Kirkinen J, Palosuo T, Holmgren K, Savolainen I (2008) Greenhouse impact due to the use of combustible fuels: life cycle viewpoint and relative radiative forcing commitment. Environ Manag 42:458–469CrossRef
Kløverpris J, Wenzel H, Nielsen PH (2008) Life cycle inventory modelling of land use induced by crop consumption. Part 1: conceptual analysis and methodological proposal. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(1):13–21
Koellner T, Geyer R (eds) (2013) Global land use impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(6):1185–1187
Koellner T, de Baan L, Beck T, Brandão M, Civit B, Margni M, Milà i Canals L, Saad R, de Souza DM, Müller-Wenk R (2013a) UNEP-SETAC guideline on global land use impact assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services in LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1188–1202CrossRef
Koellner T, de Baan L, Beck T, Brandão M, Civit B, Goedkoop M, Margni M, Milà i Canals L, Müller-Wenk K, Weidema B, Wittstock B (2013b) Principles for life cycle inventories of land use on a global scale. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1203–1215CrossRef
Köhl M, Bastup-Birk A, Marchetti M et al (2011) Criterion 3: maintenance and encouragement of productive functions of forests (wood and non-wood). In: State of Europe’s forests 2011. Status and trends in sustainable forest management in Europe (eds FOREST EUROPE, UNECE and FAO). pp. 51–64, Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Oslo
Koponen K, Soimakallio S (2013) Reconsideration of the land use baseline may have a significant impact on the GHG balances of agro-bioenergy. Bioenergy Australia Conference 2013. 25-27. November 2013, Hunter Valley, NSW, Australia
Luyssaert S, Schulze ED, Börner A, Knohl A, Hessenmöller D, Law BE, Ciais P, Grace J (2008) Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455:213–215CrossRef
Mäkinen T, Soimakallio S, Paappanen T, Pahkala K, Mikkola H (2006) Liikenteen biopolttoaineiden ja peltoenergian kasvihuonekaasutaseet ja uudet liiketoimintakonseptit [Greenhouse gas balances and new business opportunities for biomass-based transportation fuels and agro-biomass in Finland]. Appendices E & K. Espoo 2006. VTT Research Notes 2357
Mattila T, Seppälä J, Nissinen A, Mäenpää I (2011) Land use impacts of industries and products in the Finnish economy: a comparison of three indicators. Biomass Bioenerg 35:4781–4787CrossRef
Mattila T, Helin T, Antikainen R (2012) Land use indicators in life cycle assessment—a case study on beer production. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:277–286CrossRef
Michelsen O (2008) Assessment of land use impact on biodiversity. Proposal of a new methodology exemplified with forestry operations in Norway. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(1):22–31
Michelsen O, Cherubini F, Strømman AH (2012) Impact assessment of biodiversity and carbon pools from land use and land use changes in life cycle assessment, exemplified with forestry operations in Norway. J Ind Ecol 16:231–242CrossRef
Milà i Canals L, Bauer C, Depestele J, Dubreuil A, Freiermuth Knuchel R, Gaillard G, Michelsen O, Müller-Wenk R, Rydgren B (2007a) Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment within LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(1):5–15CrossRef
Milà i Canals L, Romanyà J, Cowell SJ (2007b) Method for assessing impacts on life support functions (LSF) related to the use of ‘fertile land’ in life cycle assessment (LCA). J Clean Prod 15:1426–1440CrossRef
Milà i Canals L, Rigarlsford G, Sim S (2013) Land use impact assessment of margarine. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1265–1277CrossRef
Müller-Wenk R, Brandão M (2010) Climatic impact of land use in LCA—carbon transfers between vegetation/soil and air. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:172–182CrossRef
Núñez M, Antón A, Muñoz P, Rieradevall J (2013) Inclusion of soil erosion impacts in life cycle assessment on a global scale: application to energy crops in Spain. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:755–767CrossRef
Pingoud K, Ekholm T, Savolainen I (2012) Global warming potential (GWP) factors and warming payback time as climate indicators of forest biomass use. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 17:369–383CrossRef
Plevin RJ, O’Hare M, Jones AD, Torn MS, Gibbs HK (2010) Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels: indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. Environ Sci Technol 44(21):8015–8021CrossRef
Raulund-Rasmussen K, De Jong J, Humphrey JW et al (2011) Papers on impacts of forest management on environmental services. EFI Technical Report 57:2011
Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K et al (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475CrossRef
Saad R, Koellner T, Margni M (2013) Land use impacts on freshwater regulation, erosion regulation and water purification: a spatial approach for a global scale. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1253–1264CrossRef
Schmidt JH (2008) Development of LCIA characterisation factors for land use impacts on biodiversity. J Clean Prod 16:1929–1942CrossRef
Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Elobeid A, Fabiosa J, Tokgoz S, Hayes D, Yu TH (2008) Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land use change. Science 319(5867):1238–1240CrossRef
Soimakallio S, Mäkinen T, Ekholm T, Pahkala K, Mikkola H, Paappanen T (2009) Greenhouse gas balances of transportation biofuels, electricity and heat generation in Finland—dealing with the uncertainties. Energ Policy 37(1):80–90CrossRef
Stanners D, Bosch P, Dom A, Gabrielsen P, Gee D, Martin J, Rickard L, Weber JL (2007) Frameworks for environmental assessment and indicators at the EEA. In: Hàk T, Moldan B, Dahl AL (eds) Sustainability indicators: a scientific assessment. Island, Washington, pp 127–144
Statistics Finland (2011) Fuel classification 2011. Greenhouse gas emission intensities for greenhouse gas inventory. Statistics Finland
Steen-Olsen K, Weinzettel J, Cranston G, Ercin AE, Hertwich EG (2012) Carbon, land, and water footprint accounts for the European Union: consumption, production, and displacements through international trade. Environ Sci Technol 46:10883–10891CrossRef
Wackernagel M, Schulz NB, Deumling D, Linares AC, Jenkins M, Kapos V, Monfreda C, Loh J, Myers N (2002) Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy. PNAS 99:9266–9271CrossRef
Warner F, Althaus HJ, Künninger T, Richter K (2007) Life cycle inventories of wood as fuel and construction material. Ecoinvent report no. 9, data v2.0. Table 4.2. EMPA Dübendorf, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Duebendorf, Switzerland
Metadata
Title
Is land use impact assessment in LCA applicable for forest biomass value chains? Findings from comparison of use of Scandinavian wood, agro-biomass and peat for energy
Authors
Tuomas Helin
Anne Holma
Sampo Soimakallio
Publication date
01-04-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Issue 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0706-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2014

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 4/2014 Go to the issue

CARBON FOOTPRINTING

Life cycle carbon footprint measurement of Portland cement and ready mix concrete for a city with local scarcity of resources like Hong Kong

LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND FOOD PRODUCTS

Comparative analysis of electricity cogeneration scenarios in sugarcane production by LCA

LCI METHODOLOGY AND DATABASES

Well-to-wheel analysis on greenhouse gas emission and energy use with natural gas in Korea

LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND FOOD PRODUCTS

Climate change impacts on life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions savings of biomethanol from corn and soybean

LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (LCIA)

Uncertainty and spatial variability in characterization factors for aquatic acidification at the global scale

LCIA OF IMPACTS ON HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOSYSTEMS

Surplus cost as a life cycle impact indicator for fossil resource scarcity