Increased biomass harvesting for bioenergy:-effects on biodiversity, landscape amenities and ...

161 Pages·2009·1.22 MB·English

Increased biomass harvesting
for bioenergy
– effects on biodiversity, landscape amenities and cultural
heritage values

Erik Framstad (ed.)
Håkan Berglund, Vegard Gundersen, Raimo Heikkilä,
Noora Lankinen, Taru Peltola, Ole Risbøl, and Martin Weih

TemaNord 2009:591
Increased biomass harvesting for bioenergy
– effects on biodiversity, landscape amenities and cultural heritage values

TemaNord 2009:591
© Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen 2009
ISBN 978-92-893-1962-1
Copies: 0

This publication can be ordered on www.norden.org/order. Other Nordic publications are available
at www.norden.org/publications

Nordic Council of Ministers Nordic Council
Store Strandstræde 18 Store Strandstræde 18
DK-1255 Copenhagen K DK-1255 Copenhagen K
Phone [phone] Phone [phone]
Fax [phone] Fax [phone]

www.norden.org

Nordic co-operation
Nordic cooperation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving
Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and three autonomous areas: the Faroe Islands, Green-
land, and Åland.
Nordic cooperation has firm traditions in politics, the economy, and culture. It plays an important role
in European and international collaboration, and aims at creating a strong Nordic community in a
strong Europe.
Nordic cooperation seeks to safeguard Nordic and regional interests and principles in the global
community. Common Nordic values help the region solidify its position as one of the world’s most
innovative and competitive.
Content
Preface................................................................................................................................7
Summary............................................................................................................................9
1. Background and delimitation of the issues...................................................................13
2. Objectives and potential for bioenergy.........................................................................15
2.1 Objectives for climate, biodiversity and other environmental concerns...............15
2.2 Current energy supplies and potential for bioenergy in Fennoscandia.................21
3. Environmental consequences of biomass production and harvesting...........................31
3.1 Biodiversity..........................................................................................................31
3.2 Landscape and outdoor recreation........................................................................38
3.3 Cultural heritage values........................................................................................44
4. Forests..........................................................................................................................47
4.1 Increased harvesting of biomass from forests.......................................................47
4.2 Effects on biodiversity..........................................................................................59
4.3 Effects on landscape appeareance and outdoor recreation....................................82
4.4 Effects on cultural heritage values........................................................................95
5. Agricultural land.........................................................................................................103
5.1 Increased harvesting of biomass from agricultural land........................................105
5.2 Effects on biodiversity........................................................................................108
5.3 Effects on landscape appearance and outdoor recreation...................................113
5.4 Effects on cultural heritage values......................................................................116
6. Other land – mires and wetlands.................................................................................119
6.1 Effects on biodiversity........................................................................................119
6.2 Effects on landscape appeareance and outdoor recreation..................................121
6.3 Effects on cultural heritage values......................................................................121
7. Conclusions................................................................................................................123
7.1 Most likely biomass harvesting activities...........................................................123
7.2 Effects of biomass harvesting on environmental values.....................................125
7.3 Key gaps in knowledge......................................................................................131
References......................................................................................................................135
Yhteenveto.....................................................................................................................155
Sammendrag...................................................................................................................159

Preface
This project was initiated by the Terrestrial Ecosystem Group (TEG), a
working group under the Nordic Council of Ministers. The project’s
overall aim has been to describe and document possible effects of in-
creased harvesting of bioenergy on biodiversity, landscapes, outdoor
recreation, and the cultural heritage in Finland, Norway, and Sweden.
Erik Framstad of the Norwegian Institue for Nature Research (NINA) has
coordinated the project and edited the report. Håkan Berglund (Swedish
Agricultural University, SLU) and Raimo Heikkilä (Finnish Environment
Institute, SYKE) have been mainly responsible for effects on biodiversity
in forests, Martin Weih (SLU) has had main responsibility for effects on
biodiversity on agricultural land, Vegard Gundersen (NINA) has been
responsible for effects on landscapes and outdoor recreation, whereas
Ole Risbøl (Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research, NIKU)
has been responsible for effects on the cultural heritage. Other contribu-
tors have been Taru Peltola and Noora Lankinen of SYKE. In addition,
Nicholas Clarke (Norwegian Forest and Landscape Institute),
Göran Lundh (Swedish Forest Agency), Lars Nesheim (Bioforsk),
Svein M. Søgnen (Norwegian Forest Owners’ Association), and
Anne Sverdrup-Thygeson (NINA) have kindly provided information or
reviewed various sections of earlier drafts of the report. The main contact
for the project at TEG has been Gudrun Schneider (Norwegian Ministry
of Environment) up to 1 Sep. 2009, and Jannica Pitkänen-Brunnsberg
(Metsähallitus) thereafter. The project has been financed by contributions
from the Nordic Council of Ministers (over TEG’s budget), the
Norwegian Ministry of Environment, the Swedish Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, and the participating institutes.

Oslo, November 2009

Erik Framstad
Project leader

Summary
As part of a strategy to combat climate change, the Nordic countries in-
tend to greatly increase the production and use of renewable energy. Bio-
energy is one important form of renewable energy where Finland, Nor-
way and Sweden in particular have considerable potential. Greatly in-
creased use of biomass for energy may, however, have wide-reaching
consequences for our land management and for associated environmental
values. The aim of this review is to present an overview of current
knowledge on the effects of biomass harvesting for the purpose of bio-
energy on biodiversity, landscape amenities (especially outdoor recrea-
tion), and cultural heritage values in Fennoscandia. The review is based
on existing studies and general knowledge of the production and harvest-
ing systems and their effects.
The current supply of renewable bioenergy in Finland, Norway, and
Sweden is equivalent to 83 TWh, 15 TWh, and 104 TWh, respectively, of
which more than 90% comes from the forest sector. Assessments for total
supplies of bioenergy by 2020 vary but are in the order of 126 TWh,
34 TWh, and 151 TWh for Finland, Norway and Sweden, respectively.
Many biomass harvesting options exist but they are not all equally likely
in the Nordic countries. Based on various public recommendations and
the current debate on the use of biomass, the following options need to be
considered from forests, farmland and mires and wetlands.

 Increased harvesting of logging residues, stumps, trees from tending
and thinning of young forest, and non-standard wood from current
logging areas, especially from forestry districts near roads and facilities
for effective use of the biomass resources (e.g., heating plants, industrial
facilities).
 Increased intensity of forest cultivation activities, such as building of
forest roads, soil preparation, nitrogen fertilization, planting, various
thinning regimes, use of high-yield varieties or species, and shorter
rotation time, on current logging areas.
 Increased harvesting of woody residues from clearing of power line
corridors and along roads where effective transportation to facilities
for use of the biomass is possible.
 Increased harvesting from currently non-commercial forest as well as
increased afforestation may be relevant under suitable economical
constraints, especially in Norway.
 Increased cultivation of energy crops on arable land, such as grains,
oilseed crops, and grasses, primarily in Finland and Sweden.
10 Increased biomass harvesting for bioenergy
 Increased short rotation forestry with willows and poplars on farmland,
primarily in Finland and Sweden.
 Increased harvesting of wood resources from marginal agricultural
land, field edges etc, to a limited extent where the biomass can be
exploited locally.
 Biomass harvesting from mires and wetlands may primarily be in the
form of harvesting of Sphagnum and canary reed grass on former peat
mining areas and harvesting reed in shallow water bodies, mainly in
Finland.

The following biomass harvesting measures will in most cases be accept-
able or have only minor negative effects:

 Harvesting of logging residues, including trees from tending of young
forest and thinning, seems to be among the more acceptable forms of
biomass harvesting. It will probably have only marginally negative or
no effects on biodiversity and cultural heritage values and a positive
effect for landscape appreciation and outdoor recreation. This requires,
however, that the general environmental concerns in forestry are
strengthened and that appropriate measures are taken to avoid damage
to important resources for biodiversity (e.g., coarse dead wood, old
deciduous trees) and cultural heritage remains.
 Harvesting of biomass from power line corridors and along roads will
have similar limited effects for biodiversity and cultural heritage
values and positive effects for landscape appreciation as removal of
logging residues.
 Harvesting of bushes and trees from marginal farmland is likely to
have mainly positive effects for biodiversity, landscape appreciation
and cultural heritage values as it will reduce the negative effects of
succession to woody vegetation. However, particular measures are
needed to avoid damage to cultural heritage values and to preserve
valuable resources for biodiversity, especially old/large deciduous
trees.

The following biomass harvesting measures will have mainly or even
serious negative environmental effects:

 Harvesting of stumps will have a negative effect particularly on land-
scape appreciation and cultural heritage values. The effects on bio-
diversity are inadequately known.
 Intensification of silviculture will magnify the various negative effects
of current forestry activities for biodiversity, landscape appreciation
and cultural heritage values through a more schematic and less diverse
forest landscape, less un-exploited forest area, shorter rotation time,