Abstract
An analysis by Sterman et al (2018 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 015007) suggests that use of wood for bioenergy production results in a worse climate outcome than from using coal. However, many of the assumptions on which their primary wood bioenergy scenario is based are not realistic and therefore are not informative. Assumptions of uncharacteristically long rotations for southern pine plantations, no utilization of wood for longer-duration products, and a single harvest over 100 years understate the carbon performance of current forest management practices. We provide references that support realistic modeling of forest carbon dynamics that are reflective of current practice and therefore more informative.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 128002 |
| Journal | Environmental Research Letters |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - 2018 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
Keywords
- Biomass energy
- CO emissions
- Forest management
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Comment on 'Does replacing coal with wood lower CO2 emissions? Dynamic lifecycle analysis of wood bioenergy''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver