LandscapeLandscape--Scale Scale Carbon Emissions Carbon Emissions

from Historically Harvested from Historically Harvested Forest ProductsForest Products

Sean Healey, PhDSean Healey, PhDInterior West Forest Inventory and AnalysisInterior West Forest Inventory and Analysis

Todd A. Morgan, CFTodd A. Morgan, CFBureau of Business & Economic ResearchBureau of Business & Economic Research

October 19, 2009October 19, 2009

Forest Industry Censuses

• Mill type, capacity, equipment, employment

• Timber harvest volume, use, species, county, & ownership

• Product volume, sales, & geographic distribution

• Mill residue & wood fiber use

CaliforniaCalifornia’’s Forest s Forest Products IndustryProducts Industry

CaliforniaCalifornia’’s Timbers Timber-- Processing Capacity & Use Processing Capacity & Use

(excluding pulpwood)(excluding pulpwood)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Bill

ion

Boa

rd F

eet S

crib

ner

2006

2004

2002

2000

1998

1996

1994

1992

1990

1988

Timber Processing Capacity Capacity Utilized

Percent of harvest processed inPercent of harvest processed in--areaarea

Coastal 94%4% to Northern Interior

Northern Interior 79% 16% to Oregon

Sacramento 77% 17% to Northern Interior

San Joaquin 89% 11% to Sacramento

Southern California no harvest, no mills

California Timber HarvestCalifornia Timber Harvest

0

1

2

3

4

5

619

68

1972

1976

1982

1985

1988

1992

1994

2000

2006

Bill

ion

boar

d fe

et

IndustryNIPFOther PubUSFS

43% 45% 45%

32% 28% 15% 13%

40% 40%

37%

California Annual Timber HarvestCalifornia Annual Timber Harvest 19521952--20082008

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1952

1957

1962

1967

1972

1977

1982

1987

1992

1997

2002

2007

Billi

on B

oard

Fee

t Scr

ibne

r

Private & Tribal State Federal Total

Sawlogs

Wood forenergyVeneer & otherproducts

California Timber Harvest, California Timber Harvest, 20062006

Total = 375 MMCFTotal = 375 MMCF

76%76%

8%8%

16%16%

Disposition of Wood Fiber, Disposition of Wood Fiber, 20062006

36%

38%17%

5%

4%

LumberVeneer/plywoodEnergyPaper/boardOther productsUnutilized

Total = 375 MMCFTotal = 375 MMCF

Logging Logging UtilizationUtilization

What BBER can readily What BBER can readily provideprovide

InIn--state timber harvest info.state timber harvest info.

InIn--state timberstate timber--processing info.processing info.

Historic timber harvest & wood industry info.Historic timber harvest & wood industry info.

Logging residue info.Logging residue info.

What BBER What BBER cannotcannot readily readily provide, provide, but may be able to help withbut may be able to help with

Total inTotal in--state consumption of wood productsstate consumption of wood productsDetailed Detailed internationalinternational log or product import/export info.log or product import/export info.Energy consumption associated with wood products Energy consumption associated with wood products manufacturing, transportation, sales, etc. manufacturing, transportation, sales, etc. Quantities, types, and fate of nonQuantities, types, and fate of non--wood bywood by--productsproductsInIn--state state secondarysecondary wood products manufacturingwood products manufacturing–– Volumes and sources of wood inputsVolumes and sources of wood inputs–– Volume and disposition of wood residuesVolume and disposition of wood residues

Fate of wood products consumed inFate of wood products consumed in--statestate

Carbon ProjectCarbon Project

Determining Landscape‐Scale  Carbon Emissions from Historically 

Harvested Forest Products

Sean HealeyForest Service – Rocky Mountain 

Research StationOgden, UT

Todd MorganBureau of Business and Economic 

ResearchUniversity of Montana

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Har

vest

Car

bon

(tonn

es)

Mass of carbon comes from administrative harvest volume records, transformed from board feet to cubic feet using TPO survey data and further translated to carbon using conversion factors in Skog and Nicholson (2000).

Carbon in Wood Products Harvested from Ravalli County, MT, 1945-2007

Disposal, decay, and energy recapture dynamics drawn from the carbon 

offset literature can be implemented in a spreadsheet‐based tracking 

system for harvested wood carbon

From: Smith, Health, Skog, 

and Birdsey, 2006. See: 

www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/22954

Year Sent to the Dump

Year Produced

Metric Tonnes

C 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978-------------------------------- Tonnes of carbon not initially burned and now decomposing on a 96-year cycle ---------------

-----------1961 37741 1149 343 317 277 251 238 198 198 172 172 159 114 114 114 114 114 79 791962 72195 2198 657 606 531 480 455 379 379 328 328 303 217 217 217 217 217 1521963 81156 2471 739 682 596 540 511 426 426 369 369 341 244 244 244 244 2441964 39841 1213 363 335 293 265 251 209 209 181 181 167 120 120 120 1201965 74749 2276 680 628 549 497 471 392 392 340 340 314 225 225 2251966 86896 2646 791 730 639 578 547 456 456 395 395 365 262 2621967 77920 2373 709 655 573 518 491 409 409 355 355 327 2351968 91235 2778 830 766 671 607 575 479 479 415 415 3831969 93162 2837 848 783 685 620 587 489 489 424 4241970 67067 2042 610 563 493 446 423 352 352 3051971 60752 1850 553 510 447 404 383 319 3191972 61128 1861 556 513 449 407 385 3211973 54447 1658 495 457 400 362 3431974 55255 1683 503 464 406 3671975 34621 1054 315 291 2541976 44144 1344 402 3711977 42090 1282 3831978 63412 1931

Harvested forest carbon is “tracked” first to disposal (below) and ultimately to emission either via decay or through energy

recapture using dynamics in the offset literature.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

Emis

sion

(ton

nes

C)

Cut 1945-1979, Dump

Cut 1945-1979, Landfill

Cut 1980-2007, Landfill

Annual product carbon emissions may be derived that realistically include historically harvested

forest products

More on this method: http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/33355

We can also combine the TPO mill data with  satellite‐derived maps of harvest to estimate timber 

haul distances and fossil carbon emissions.

Not harvested

1985‐86

1986‐88

1988‐91

1991‐93

1993‐95

1995‐97

We can use Landsat satellite time series to  determine the spatial and temporal distribution of 

most harvests.

Within a GIS, we can estimate the road distance  between each harvest and each mill.  Then, we run a 

lot of simulations that “send”

timber from particular  harvests to particular mill to derive…

Polygons represent 

mapped harvest units, 

and numbers indicate 

locations of processing 

facilities.

…haul distances and transport‐related fossil carbon  emissions

Fossil Carbon Emissions from Logging Trucks Hauling  Ravalli County Timber

Carbon

 Emitted

 (ton

nes)

See: Healey, Morgan, and others, In Press, Carbon Balance 

and Management

The Product Carbon Dynamics Module is part of a larger system

Landscape Map of Starting 

Condition (Forest Type and 

Volume)

Landscape Map of Disturbance 

Timing and Magnitude

Harvested Wood 

Products

Atmosphere

Mechanistic, Spatially 

Explicit Process Model

•1605b‐compliant, FIA‐

derived carbon accumulation 

dynamics•FVS‐derived combustion and 

post‐fire dynamics•Regional average rates of 

wood utilization and energy 

recapture

Energy Re‐capture

The system is mechanistic in that regional mean  carbon accumulation rates are applied to 

undisturbed forest across the landscape from a  remotely sensed starting condition.

-30,000,000

-25,000,000

-20,000,000

-15,000,000

-10,000,000

-5,000,000

085-86 88-91 93-95 97-98 99-01 03to05

Gro

win

g St

ock

Rem

oved

(cf)

harvest fire

Mechanistic carbon accumulation is stopped and carbon 

stocks are reset only when disturbance is detectedAnn

ual G

rowing Stock Re

moval (cf/year)

Image‐based estimates of the 

magnitude of harvest and fire in 

Ravalli County, 1985‐2005

‐130,000,000

Sequestration

Emission

Net Forest 

Growth

Fire EffectsHarvest 

Product 

Decay

Harvest Product 

Energy Re‐capture

The result of the landscape carbon tracking system is that one can 

derive the relative impact of all of the processes being considered

‡Each of these terms has a 

magnitude and standard error for 

each year

Fossil Carbon Related to 

Management

Example

Time

Land

scap

e Ca

rbon

 Excha

nge 

(ton

nes C)

Sequestration

EmissionBecause each individual term has it’s 

own estimate of uncertainty, Monte 

Carlo simulation can be used to 

determine overall uncertainty of the 

net exchange at each date

When all of the net losses and gains are added  together, we get a net landscape flux

Landscape Map of Starting 

Condition (Forest Type and 

Volume)

Landscape Map of Disturbance 

Timing and Magnitude

Harvested Wood 

Products

Atmosphere

Mechanistic, Spatially 

Explicit Process Model

•1605b‐compliant, FIA‐

derived carbon accumulation 

dynamics•FVS‐derived combustion and 

post‐fire dynamics•Regional average rates of 

wood utilization and energy 

recapture

Energy Re‐capture

Landscape Map of Starting 

Condition (Forest Type and 

Volume)

Landscape Map of Disturbance 

Timing and Magnitude

Harvested Wood 

Products

Atmosphere

Mechanistic, Spatially 

Explicit Process Model

•1605b‐compliant, FIA‐

derived carbon accumulation 

dynamics•FVS‐derived combustion and 

post‐fire dynamics•Regional average rates of 

wood utilization and energy 

recapture

Energy Re‐capture

Remotely sensed records of 

actual disturbance history 

can be replaced with 

hypothetical fire and 

harvest layers to establish 

baseline scenarios and to 

“game”

the results of 

alternative management 

strategies and climate 

effects

seanhealey@fs.fed.ustodd.morgan@business.umt.edu