期刊论文详细信息
Forests
Legal Harvesting, Sustainable Sourcing and Cascaded Use of Wood for Bioenergy: Their Coverage through Existing Certification Frameworks for Sustainable Forest Management
Richard Sikkema1  Martin Junginger1  Jinke van Dam2  Gerben Stegeman4  David Durrant3 
[1] Copernicus institute (Utrecht University), Heidelberglaan 2, Utrecht NL-3584 CS, The Netherlands; E-Mail:;Jinke van Dam Consultancy, van Beesdelaan 25, Bunnik NL-3981 EC, The Netherlands; E-Mail:;UK Forestry Commission, Forest Research, Alice Holt Lodge, Wrecclesham, Farnham Surrey GU10 4LH, UK; E-Mail:;Control Union Certifications, Meeuwenlaan 4-6, Zwolle NL-8011 BZ, The Netherlands; E-Mail:
关键词: sustainable forest management (SFM);    certification;    chain-of-custody (COC);    solid biomass;    bio-energy;    North America;    Europe;    Renewable Energy Directive (RED);    EU Timber Regulation (EUTR);    Waste Directive;   
DOI  :  10.3390/f5092163
来源: mdpi
PDF
【 摘 要 】

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.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202003190021890ZK.pdf 564KB PDF download
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:12次 浏览次数:28次