Estimating net climate impacts of timber production and utilization in fossil fuel intensive material and energy substitution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We utilized an ecosystem model and life cycle assessment tool for studying carbon flows between the ecosystem, technosystem, and atmosphere for scenarios utilizing forest biomass (biosystem) against fossil fuel intensive materials (fossil system). The net climate impacts were studied for a Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stand over two consecutive rotation periods (2 × 80 years) in the boreal conditions in central Finland (62°N, 29°E). The effects of alternative forest management on the carbon dynamics in the biosystem were studied in comparison with the fossil system by using an unmanaged and baseline thinning regime. The results showed that the biosystem produced carbon benefits compared with the similar system with the use of fossil fuel intensive materials and energy. The unmanaged stand stored the highest amount of carbon and retained carbon the longest when solely the ecosystem was considered. Studying the ecosystem and the technosystem together, the biosystem was found effective in storing and increasing the residence of carbon with or without changing the life span of biomass-based products. We found that the increase of the life span of biomass-based products could reduce emissions up to 0.28 t CO 2 ·ha −1 ·year −1 depending on the management regimes over the study period. The increased stocking regimes could increase negative net climate impact by 47% over the study period compared with the use of baseline thinning in the biosystem. The proper climate mitigation strategies should consider the benefits from forest management and forest biomass in storing carbon into both the ecosystem and technosystem.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".