IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i7p6322-d1117688.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modelling Carbon Storage Dynamics of Wood Products with the HWP-RIAL Model—Projection of Particleboard End-of-Life Emissions under Different Climate Mitigation Measures

Author

Listed:
  • Éva Király

    (Forest Research Institute, University of Sopron, Várkerület 30/A, H-9600 Sárvár, Hungary)

  • Gábor Kis-Kovács

    (Hungarian Meteorological Service, Kitaibel Pál Street 1, H-1024 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Zoltán Börcsök

    (Faculty of Wood Engineering and Creative Industries, University of Sopron, Bajcsy-Zsilinszky E. Street 4, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary)

  • Zoltán Kocsis

    (Faculty of Wood Engineering and Creative Industries, University of Sopron, Bajcsy-Zsilinszky E. Street 4, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary)

  • Gábor Németh

    (Faculty of Wood Engineering and Creative Industries, University of Sopron, Bajcsy-Zsilinszky E. Street 4, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary)

  • András Polgár

    (Faculty of Forestry, University of Sopron, Bajcsy-Zsilinszky E. Street 4, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary)

  • Attila Borovics

    (Forest Research Institute, University of Sopron, Várkerület 30/A, H-9600 Sárvár, Hungary)

Abstract

Harvested wood products (HWPs) store a significant amount of carbon, and their lifetime extension and appropriate waste management, recycling, and reuse can contribute remarkably to the achievement of climate goals. In this study, we examined the carbon storage and CO 2 and CH 4 emissions under different scenarios of 200,000 m 3 particleboard manufactured in 2020 by a hypothetical manufacturer. The scope of our investigation was to model the effects of a changing product lifetime, recycling rates and waste management practices on the duration of the carbon storage in wood panels and on their emission patterns. The aim of the investigation was to identify the most climate-friendly practices and find the combination of measures related to HWP production and waste management with the highest climate mitigation effect. We used the newly developed HWP-RIAL (recycling, incineration and landfill) model for the projections, which is a combination of two IPCC models parametrized for Hungarian circumstances and supplemented with a self-developed recycling and waste-route-selection submodule. The model runs covered the period 2020–2130. According to the results, the combined scenario with bundled mitigation activities had the largest mitigation potential in the modelled period, resulting in 32% emission reduction by 2050 as compared to the business-as-usual scenario. Amongst individual mitigation activities, increased recycling rates had the largest mitigation effect. The lifetime extension of particleboard can be a complementary measure to support climate mitigation efforts, along with the concept of cascade use and that of circular bioeconomy. Results showed that landfilled wood waste is a significant source of CH 4 emissions on the long term; thus, incineration of wood waste is preferable to landfilling.

Suggested Citation

  • Éva Király & Gábor Kis-Kovács & Zoltán Börcsök & Zoltán Kocsis & Gábor Németh & András Polgár & Attila Borovics, 2023. "Modelling Carbon Storage Dynamics of Wood Products with the HWP-RIAL Model—Projection of Particleboard End-of-Life Emissions under Different Climate Mitigation Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:6322-:d:1117688
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/6322/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/6322/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ratajczak, Ewa & Bidzińska, Gabriela & Szostak, Aleksandra & Herbeć, Magdalena, 2015. "Resources of post-consumer wood waste originating from the construction sector in Poland," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 93-99.
    2. Li, N. & Toppinen, A., 2011. "Corporate responsibility and sustainable competitive advantage in forest-based industry: Complementary or conflicting goals?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 113-123.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lehtonen, Olli & Tykkyläinen, Markku, 2014. "Delphi path simulator for unveiling development opportunities in the forest industries by contrasting forest management practices — The case of North Karelia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 171-185.
    2. D’Amato, D. & Li, N. & Rekola, M. & Toppinen, A. & Lu, F-F., 2015. "Linking forest ecosystem services to corporate sustainability disclosure: A conceptual analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 170-178.
    3. Muhammad Haseeb & Hafezali Iqbal Hussain & Sebastian Kot & Armenia Androniceanu & Kittisak Jermsittiparsert, 2019. "Role of Social and Technological Challenges in Achieving a Sustainable Competitive Advantage and Sustainable Business Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-23, July.
    4. Tarmo Räty & Anne Toppinen & Anders Roos & Maria Riala & Anders Q. Nyrud, 2016. "Environmental Policy in the Nordic Wood Product Industry: Insights Into Firms’ Strategies and Communication," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 10-27, January.
    5. Pätäri, S. & Arminen, H. & Albareda, L. & Puumalainen, K. & Toppinen, A., 2017. "Student values and perceptions of corporate social responsibility in the forest industry on the road to a bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 201-215.
    6. Colaço, Rui & Simão, João, 2018. "Disclosure of corporate social responsibility in the forestry sector of the Congo Basin," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 136-147.
    7. Fangyu Gu & Yu Xie, 2022. "The differential impacts of coercive pressure from environmental law and proactive environmental strategy on corporate environmental performance: The case study of a pulp and paper company," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1909-1925, September.
    8. Xinfei Li & Baodong Cheng & Heng Xu, 2021. "Time-Based Corporate-Social-Responsibility Evaluation Model Taking Chinese Listed Forestry Companies as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-14, July.
    9. Verena Hermelingmeier & Timo von Wirth, 2021. "The nexus of business sustainability and organizational learning: A systematic literature review to identify key learning principles for business transformation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1839-1851, May.
    10. Carlos M. Jardon & Xavier Martínez-Cobas, 2019. "Leadership and Organizational Culture in the Sustainability of Subsistence Small Businesses: An Intellectual Capital Based View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, June.
    11. Anni Tuppura & Anne Toppinen & Kaisu Puumalainen, 2016. "Forest Certification and ISO 14001: Current State and Motivation in Forest Companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 355-368, July.
    12. Yanli Li & Lan Gao, 2019. "Corporate Social Responsibility of Forestry Companies in China: An Analysis of Contents, Levels, Strategies, and Determinants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-17, August.
    13. DeBoer, Jennifer & Panwar, Rajat & Kozak, Robert & Cashore, Benjamin, 2020. "Squaring the circle: Refining the competitiveness logic for the circular bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    14. Wan, Minli & Toppinen, Anne, 2016. "Effects of perceived product quality and Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (LOHAS) on consumer price preferences for children's furniture in China," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 52-67.
    15. Liubachyna, Anna & Secco, Laura & Pettenella, Davide, 2017. "Reporting practices of State Forest Enterprises in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 162-172.
    16. D. D’Amato & M. Wan & N. Li & M. Rekola & A. Toppinen, 2018. "Managerial Views of Corporate Impacts and Dependencies on Ecosystem Services: A Case of International and Domestic Forestry Companies in China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 1011-1028, July.
    17. Merriam Haffar & Cory Searcy, 2017. "Classification of Trade-offs Encountered in the Practice of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 495-522, February.
    18. Pätäri, Satu & Tuppura, Anni & Toppinen, Anne & Korhonen, Jaana, 2016. "Global sustainability megaforces in shaping the future of the European pulp and paper industry towards a bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 38-46.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:6322-:d:1117688. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.