Biofore Magazine 2022

By Payal Bhattar Photography Getty Images

FEATURE

37

“This product study, and other studies undertaken over the years, are all expanding our knowledge and contributing to the development of UPM’s climate approach.” Forests and forest products contribute to climate change mitigation by sequestering carbon into forests, storing part of the carbon in harvested wood products (HWPs) and by avoiding fossil-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in substitutions for alternativematerials and energy. But this study reveals that the handling of carbon storage inwood and its substitution effects are intrinsically connected to wood har vested from forests. It also tells us why we need to coherently con sider changes in fossil carbon emissions when assessing the climate effects of wood, as well as in carbon stocks in the forests and HWPs such as furniture, plywood, paper and paper-like products. Most importantly, the study provides practical guidelines to conduct annual GHG balance assessments of the temporary car bon storage of wood products, the cascading use of wood and the substitution of wood for alternatives at a company-wide, multi- product and product lifecycle level. “It's difficult to say in detail that this is the figure that should be used for a certain single product. It’s much more practical to define typical ranges and average values for different types of product groups,” explains Soimakallio. He elaborates that it's important to understand where the hotspots are, such as why certain products are good or bad: “We can see what the important and least important factors are, as well as what should be improved to change the picture.” A giant leap This climate study complements UPM’s ongoing scientific efforts in promoting sustainability practices throughout its value chain. For instance, there have been cooperation projects with the Finn ish Meteorological Institute and the Natural Resources Institute focusing on climate effects, as well as ongoing research conducted in Uruguay on methods for measuring soil carbon content. “Over the years we have cooperatedwith scientific partners who are credible and transparent,” says Lundgren. “This product study, and other studies undertaken over the years, are all expanding our knowledge and contributing to the development of UPM’s climate approach.” “As society looks to achieve net-zero, science is going to play a crucial role by providing uswith facts so that we can contribute ina credible manner. Scientists have estimated the need to limit warm ing to 1.5C and, as companies and societies, we must listen to their warnings. It could change later for the better and we will need to adjust our ways accordingly. But if we don't develop something, then who will?”

T wo years ago, UPM commissioned a one-of-a-kind climate study on fossil carbon emission substitution and carbon storage effects in its wood-based products. Led by the Finn ish Environment Institute (SYKE) in collaboration with Germany’s Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg (IFEU), it marked another step in UPM’s commitment to the UN Business Ambition for 1.5°C tomitigate climate change. “It's really part of the bigger picture of what is UPM’s overall im pact for the climate,” says Sami Lundgren , Vice President, Respon sibility, UPM. “We know that forest management has a positive im pact and we can measure that. We know that when we are reducing emissions from the mills, it makes a positive impact. But we don't have a global view of how replacing fossil-based products impacts the big picture and howwe can combine these three.” It may sound like a simple task. But it wasn’t and still isn’t. The duration of the six-month study eventually stretched to two years because scientists needed to first find the connection between forest carbonbalances and thecarbonbalancesof harvestedwoodproducts. Infinite possibilities The challenge was that there were several wood products with var ying lifecycles that were generating many different possibilities. Many assumptions would have a strong impact on the results of the study and scientists had the tough job of narrowing them down in number and arriving at credible robust conclusions. Sampo Soimakallio , Head of Unit for SYKE, recalls the enormity of the task. “We don’t know for how long the products exist, what dif ferent purposes they are used for and what happens to them at the end of life – whether carbon is released or not. We also don't know what wood-based products really substitute in themarket,” he lists. “Even if we know all these, then there are still assumptions re quired about the carbon balance of harvested wood products and products that are substituted by them. That is difficult to define.” Once that was defined, scientists began comparing two different systems - onewith thewood use under study and a reference system without wood use. The focus of the research was narrowed down to assessing carbon stock changes inproductsmade of wood, and fossil emission substitution due to using wood-based products and fuels instead of non-woodmaterials and fuels. Light at the end of the tunnel By April this year, scientists were able to conclude that it is possible to roughly assess the substitution and carbon storage effects of harvested wood products and wood-based energy caused by production stages at product and company levels.