Read more

BENCHMARK REPORT
Improvement of CARBON sequestration practices in agricultural and forestry
sectors towards low-CArbon REgional energy patterns
CARBON.CARE
Foreword
There is a considerable confusion as to what the term
they are not exactly the same. Performance
‘benchmarking’ actually means. Often, benchmarking
measurement or assessment could be defined as the
is understood as a process of simply comparing
initial work done to specify and gather data on the
numerical
different
criteria that account for the performance of a
organisations. However, if benchmarking is understood
programme or service. Knowing the factors that are
as a tool for improvement, it is more than just
important in effectively performing a particular service
comparing and ranking. It goes beyond the
or function is the foundation of benchmarking practice.
establishment of benchmarks, standards and norms,
A benchmark is simply a standard of performance. The
and investigates the practices that support the
standard may be established by the organisation as a
benchmarks. The philosophy of benchmarking is very
goal or expected level of performance or for various
well expressed as the practice of being
humble
other reasons. Benchmarks may also be established
enough to admit that someone else is better at
by looking outside the organisation. An important
something, and being wise enough to learn how to
element of the definition of benchmarking is best
match and even surpass them at it.
practice. Best practice, in the more traditional uses of
Benchmarking is about finding out why there are
benchmarking, is defined by Robert Camp as ‘those
differences in performance and about learning from
practices that please the customer most’. Thus it is
others’ best practice. The concept of benchmarking
argued that the goals of a benchmarking study should
was pioneered by the Xerox Corporation to meet the
be based on customer, needs, where the definition of
Japanese competitive challenge of the 1970s.. For the
customers is to be intended in general sense, internal
purpose of this report, the first definition (by the
(departments
within
an
American Productivity and Quality Center) seems to be
management
levels,
employees)
the most appropriate one. Almost any process or
(consumers, citizens, regulators, legislators, local and
activity of an organisation is a candidate for
national environmental groups, investors). In practice,
benchmarking, such as:
conducting a benchmarking study is immaterial if it is
• work processes;
not designed to meet a specific customer requirement.
• products and services;
The goal of benchmarking is basically to learn from
• support functions;
others’ best practice. It is an improvement tool. If used
• organisational performance;
properly, it leads to true, fundamental process
• strategies.
improvement, which, in turn, leads to bottom-line
Often, the terms benchmarking and performance
performance improvement.
performance
levels
across
assessment are used interchangeably, even though
organisation,
or
higher
external
According to Robert Camp, often called the initiator of
benchmarking exercise, it might not be possible (or not
the ‘benchmarking wave’, the payback experienced in
appropriate) to express all the benefits in financial
benchmarking activities is generally 5 to 25 times the
terms. Also, benefits like the creation of networks and
investment. It has to be noted that, especially
partnerships are difficult to quantify. These qualitative
concerning environmental issue , costs and benefits
aspects have to be taken into consideration when
cannot always be expressed in quantitative terms. If
assessing the usefulness of a benchmarking study in
there are improvements in air quality as a result of a
the environmental field.
Index
1. INTRODUCTION TO CARBON EMISSION REDUCTION/REMOVAL ACTUAL STRATEGIES IN
PRIMARY SECTOR
2. REGIONAL STRATEGIES
2.1.1
Province of Ferrara (Italy)
2.1.2
Province of Asturias (Spain)
2.1.3
Province of Goreniska (Slovenia)
3. THE CONCEPT OF BEST PRACTICE
3.1 A general approach
3.2 Criteria of selection
3.3 Fields of application
4. THE STAKEHOLDERS
5. POTENTIAL OR EXPECTED FEEDBACK
6. BEST PRACTICES FOR CCS&CS IN PRIMARY SECTOR: THE GOLD 6
7. CONCLUSIONS
1. INTRODUCTION TO CARBON EMISSION REDUCTION/REMOVAL ACTUAL STRATEGIES IN
PRIMARY SECTOR
From Kyoto to Copenhagen, the countries on our planet have systematically expressed the desire to reduce
greenhouse gases emissions in order to mitigate the effects of climate change. In 1997, many states signed and
adhered to a binding commitment in Kyoto, fully aware of some rather remarkable absences (United States,
China and Australia) which threatened its real effectiveness. Since then, during various phases, European
countries have cultivated the aspiration of becoming leaders on the world’s horizon to the point of deciding
unilaterally in 2008 to develop and tackle a commitment to the ambitious 20-20-20 project by the year 2020: a
20% reduction in greenhouse gases emissions (in comparison with those in 1990), a 20% increase in energy
efficiency and the attainment of the target of 20% renewable energy sources.
There are many problematic aspects to this approach. Mitigation is mentioned, that is to say the control of
emissions, and not adapting to climate changes. There is also the discussion of emissions interpreted as a direct
result of combustion, ignoring the fact that energy is needed to produce goods and it really doesn’t matter much
to global warming if these goods are produced on another part of the planet: it would be worthwhile adopting a
more integrated vision, that is the Life Cycle Assessment. As far as the 20% mark is concerned, it will surely be
insufficient to stop climate change, unless this measurement includes the great emitters themselves (today USA
and China) and would be followed by other even more ambitious goals in years to come. Some heads of state
have already declared that a 20% reduction cannot be attained without paying the price of a serious economical
penalty: like a nemesis, the recession came along anyway, and certainly not due to 20-20-20 and the EU’s
emissions have dropped 17.3% in comparison with 1990. The decrease registered in 2009 was remarkable as
well: -6.9% in comparison with the previous year. The following map has been recently published by US EIA
(Energy Information Administration), as a way for measuring a country’s economic growth based on CO2
production from energy consumption:
Most scientists likely claim that if the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other so-called
greenhouse gases continue to rise, the earth’s climate will become warmer. While relatively little is known about
the likely costs and benefits of such warming, it seems clear that both depend critically on the rate at which
warming occurs. The rate of future warming depends, in turn, on a number of poorly understood natural
processes and on future emissions of greenhouse gases. Key climate processes (in particular, warming the deep
ocean) involve long lags, and important greenhouse gases (in particular, CO2) remain in the atmosphere for many
years after they are emitted. Accordingly, climate change analyses necessarily involve emissions forecasts
spanning several decades and often a century or more.
Projected impacts from climate change in different EU regions (Source: European Commission Agriculture and
Rural Development, 2010)
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 to inform international
negotiations on climate change. Among the most visible of the IPCC’s activities there has been the generation of
scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions extending to the year 2100. Emissions of CO2 caused by human
activity are generally considered the most important single source of potential future warming.
It has been estimated that roughly a third of the total emissions of carbon into the atmosphere since 1850 has
resulted from land use change (and the remainder from fossil-fuel emissions). For example, in the 1990s, 6.4
billion tonnes of carbon alone per year was emitted to the atmosphere from industrial activities and approximately
2.2 billion per year was emitted from tropical deforestation. Because of this potentially important role in the
climate change debate, the policymaking community is assessing how agriculture and forestry may enter into
future climate policies. These come into play, either as domestic actions (e.g., emission offsets within a cap-
and-trade system), or via mechanisms for achieving international commitments for emissions reductions (e.g., the
Clean Development Mechanism).
The total global contribution to greenhouse gases (GHG) emission by primary sector (agriculture and forestry
combined) considering all direct and indirect emissions (including fossil fuel use in farm operations, the
production of agrochemicals and the conversion of land to agriculture), is between 8.5 – 16.5 Pg CO2-eq, which
represents between 17 and 32% of all global human-induced GHG emissions, including land use changes.
Agriculture directly contributes between 5.1 and 6.1 Pg CO2-eq/yr (10–12%) to global emissions. These
emissions are mainly in the form of methane (3.3 Pg CO2-eq/yr) and nitrous oxide (2.8 Pg CO2-eq/yr) whereas
the direct net flux of carbon dioxide is quite small (0.04 Pg CO2-eq/yr).
Sources of agricultural GHG
On the other hand, as it is widely recognized, primary sector has also a significant climate change mitigation
potential, which could change its position from the second largest emitter to a much smaller emitter or even a net
sink. There are a wide range of mitigation options in the primary sector with an overall potential of 6-8 Pg CO2eq/yr. By far the greatest mitigation contribution originates from soil carbon sequestration (4-5 Pg CO2-eq/ yr) and
from afforestation and reforestation activities (2-3 Pg CO2-eq/yr). The low carbon concentration in croplands
means that there is a great potential to increase carbon content through beneficial management practices.
The main three mitigation strategies are reforesting degraded lands, implementing sustainable agricultural
practices on existing lands, and slowing tropical deforestation. These three strategies will be more effective
when done in concert., in fact, improved agriculture practices will help to enable forest restoration, as improved
practices and corresponding increases in agricultural yields will stabilize land-use change and reduce competition
for use of lands more suited for forest cover. Similarly, improved agriculture practices will reduce pressure on the
need to clear more land, usually at the expense of forests. Sustainably managed new forests will also reduce
timber and fuelwood pressures on existing natural forest, possibly avoiding deforestation.
Emission reductions to meet Kyoto Protocol requirements in Tg C eq/yr by 2010 are estimated at 634 for the
United States, 176 for Western Europe, 137 for Japan, 72 for Canada and 34 for Australia. By 2020, the required
reductions in Tg C eq/yr are estimated at 805 for the United States, 314 for western Europe, 150 for Japan, and
86 for Canada. Whereas these mandatory reductions apply only to countries listed under the Kyoto Protocol,
there is an urgency for all the countries to identify strategies of reducing/offsetting CO2 emissions.
Many land-based opportunities to increase carbon stocks or avoid carbon emissions exist. Where land uses have
changed to become predominantly agricultural, restoration of the carbon content in cultivated organic soils
has a high per area potential and represents the area of greatest mitigation potential in agriculture. The most
prominent options for mitigation in agriculture emissions are:
〉
Cropland management (mitigation potential up to ~1.45 Pg CO2-eq/yr such as:
-
Avoiding leaving land bare: bare soil is prone to erosion and nutrient leaching and contains less carbon
than the same field with vegetation. Important solutions are “catch” and “cover” crops, which cover the
soil in between the actual crop or in fallow periods, respectively.
-
Using an appropriate amount of nitrogen fertiliser by avoiding applications in excess of immediate plant
requirements, by applying it at the right time, and by placing it more precisely in the soil. Reducing the
reliance on fertilisers by adopting cropping systems such as use of rotations with legume crops has a
high mitigation potential. No burning of crop residues in the field.
-
Reducing tillage: No-till agriculture can increase carbon in the soil, but in industrial farming settings this
maybe offset by increasing reliance on herbicides and machinery. However, for organic systems some
preliminary study results showed that reduced tillage without the use of herbicides has positive benefits
for carbon sequestration in the soil.
〉
Grazing land management (mitigation potential up to ~1.35 Pg CO2-eq/yr such as reducing razing
intensity or reducing the frequency and intensity of fires (by active fire management). These measures
typically lead to increased tree and shrub cover, resulting in a CO2 sink in both soil and biomass.
〉
Restoration of organic soils that are drained for crop production and restoration of degraded lands to
increase carbon sinks (combined mitigation potential ~2.0 Pg CO2-eq/yr): avoid drainage of wetlands,
carry out erosion control, add organic and nutrient amendments.
〉
Improved water management (~0.3 Pg CO2-eq/yr).
〉
Lower but still significant mitigation is possible with set-asides, land use change (e.g., conversion of
cropland to grassland) and agro-forestry (~0.05 Pg CO2-eq/yr); as well as improved livestock and
manure management (~0.25 Pg CO2-eq/yr).
〉
Increasing efficiency in the manufacturing of fertilisers can contribute significantly with a reduction of up
to about ~0.2 Pg CO2-eq/yr. Improvements would be related to greater energy efficiency in ammonia
production plants (29%), introduction of new nitrous oxide reduction technology (32%) and other general
energy-saving measures in manufacturing (39%).
Recent estimate (2007) gives a maximum global realistic mitigation potential from agriculture of 4.3 Pg CO2eq/yr:
Global technical mitigation potential by 2030 of each agricultural management practice showing the
impacts of each practice on each GHG
For forests, carbon stocks can be increased and carbon emissions avoided by:
(1) protecting secondary and other degraded forests to allow them to regenerate naturally;
(2) restoring native forests through assisted and natural regeneration;
(3) maintaining existing forest-carbon stocks and sink processes by avoiding deforestation;
(4) establishing plantations on non-forested lands; and
(5) managing forests sustainably to provide biomass energy.
The total amount of carbon that could be sequestered by reforestation to create native forests over the ten-year
period is 316 million tonnes on 3.5 million hectares of land. The greatest potential exists in countries of Latin
America (56% of the total), followed by Asia (30% of the total) and Africa (14% of the total). Tropical
deforestation causes an estimated 20% of worldwide anthropogenic carbon emissions.
Forests and trees are important carbon sinks. Forests are an important component of the global carbon cycle
because of the large amount of carbon stored in live and dead woody biomass as well as soil organic matter.
Around 13 million hectares of forest were converted to other uses or lost through natural causes each year
between 2000 and 2010 (FAO 2010). The world has an estimated 850 million hectares of degraded forests, which
could potentially be restored and rehabilitated to bring back lost biodiversity and ecosystem services, and, at the
same time, contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Forests contribute to mitigating climate change in two possible ways: by increasing or maintaining the carbon
stock in forest biomass (afforestation/reforestation, avoided deforestation, or improving forest management
practices) and in timber products (“stock effect”); and by replacing fuelwood with fossil-fuel and non-timber with
timber products, the production of which is less energy and emissions intensive ("substitution effect"). Thus, the
storage of carbon in forests and forest products has been proposed as an appropriate strategy for mitigating the
effect of climate change. The carbon is also ultimately stored in the forest products. Forests and their carbon
sequestration potential are affected by management practices, climate and the rise in atmospheric CO2.
The growing evidence of the environmental, social and economic implications is making governments incorporate
actions into their policies and programs. The first international commitment was the Kyoto Protocol to reduce
emissions, further regulated a market for carbon credits. Unfortunately, it is not viable alternative to one of the
way to mitigate climate change, such as sustainable forest management project, because forest products were
excluded for Kyoto protocol. Trying to fill this gap new markets are emerging, the voluntary markets.
The accumulation of biomass and carbon in forest stands may be increased through different management
options. As examples, fire protection, pest control, increasing the length of time of rotation (harvest), regulation of
tree densities, improvement of the nutrient state, selection of species and genotypes and use of biotechnology.
The majority of these activities are expected to increases the carbon accumulation rate 0.3 to 0.7 Mg of C per
hectares per year.
Management practices that alter species composition, rotation lengths, the thinning regimes or that result in forest
conservation increase in forest land and soil conservation can be used to increase carbon sequestration in
forests. The connections between climate change concerns and the product value chain are perhaps more
complex in the forest industry than in any other industry. The forests that supply the industry’s raw material
remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and store the carbon not only in trees, but also below ground
in soil and root systems.
Better forest management has key role to play in dealing with climate change. On the one hand, changes in
global climate are already stressing forests through higher mean annual temperatures, altered precipitation
patterns and more frequent and extreme weather events.
FAO and other experts have estimated that global carbon retention resulting from reduced deforestation,
increased forest regrowth and more agro-forestry and plantations could make up for about 15 percent of carbon
emissions from fossil fuels over the next 50 years. But, ond on the flip side of the coin, when destroyed or overharvested and burned, forests can become sources of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. Destruction of forests
adds almost six billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, and preventing this stored carbon
from escaping is important for the carbon balance and vital in conserving the environment.
Experts and policies stress a need to use more wood in long-lasting products to keep trapped carbon out of the
atmosphere for longer periods of time. Harvested wood is a carbon sink also as wood used in construction or for
furniture effectively stores carbon for centuries. Construction sector, based on energy wasteful materials (steel,
concrete, brick, plastic, aluminium) is according to some statistics largest consumer of energy and therefore
contributes also the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions.
Wooden house captures during its life-cycle 10 to 25 tonnes of carbon, together with wooden equipment &
furniture, or 60 tones CO2. If Europe would increase share of newly constructed houses for 10%, it would
decrease annual quantity of CO2 defined by Kyoto Agreement for 25%. Moreover, when wooden products wear
out and can be no longer re-used recycled, it can be used in modern heating-energy plants for energy production.
It is, however, more rational if we use remaining of wood processing and worn out wooden products for
composites or for liquefying. Liquefied and modified wood can be of use as a raw material for all products which
we now produce by fossil row materials.
It is nowadays debated if the use of wood fuel instead of oil, coal and natural gas, can actually mitigate climate
change. Although burning wood and biomass does release carbon dioxide into the air, if those fuels come from a
sustainably-managed forest, those carbon releases can be offset by replanting. Indeed, if managed properly,
forests can supply bioenergy virtually without contributing any greenhouse gas to the atmosphere.
2. REGIONAL STRATEGIES
2.1.1.
Province of Ferrara (Italy)
The Province of Ferrara, located in the north east of th Emilia Romagna Region, close to Veneto and Lombardia,
has a territory of 2.632 Km2 for 351.452 inhabitants (ref. 2005).
Enterprises are principally devoted to services and agriculture, with more than 8.000 of farms for 180.000 ha of
UAA (Source: ISTAT 5°Censimento Generale Agricoltura).
The local agricultural production is principally concentrated on cereals (around 65%) and orchard and vegetables
(around 20%),
The Province of Ferrara has recently subscribed the European Covenant of Mayors, assuming the responsibility
to draw up and approve a Local Plan of Actions for Sustainability. The initiative, launched by Eu Commission in
2008, provided the commitment to reduce the GHG emissions through specific measures at local level, in terms
of investments in renewable energies, improvements in energy efficiency, application of best practices for a
functional use of energy resources.
It is coherent with the fact that the Province of Ferrara has ever been particularly interested to assume a real own
responsibility in reaching the general goal to guide the local growing awareness for climate protection. Starting
from the base, the idea is to obtain the goal through a list of actions, in accordance with other local actors, in
order to try to give room to the ambitious vision of creating a real partnership between public and private sector.
In fact, the Province has been recently involved in another EU project on similar topics (as LACRe, Local Alliance
for Climate Responsibility - LIFE07ENV/IT/000357, now concluded; or ITACA, Innovative Transport Approach in
Cities and metropolitan Areas - Programme Interreg IVC Inter-Power).
As a strategy, the private entrepreneurs (farmers, in our case) should become more aware of the fact that there
are a thousand ways to save energy, to use it more efficiently and thus in a more advantageous way,
economically speaking, through such measures as management improvements or resources optimization.
From its side, the local public administration could become a dependable partner for farmers that are socially
responsible or wish to become so, as it can provide decisive support to the realization of excellent actions. Viceversa, farmers could become partners of the local administration and contribute to the creation of joint projects
and the attainment of common goals.
From a sort of such a social responsibility agreement viewpoint, local administrations have taken the role of a
promoter of:
→ a new developmental model for the territory inspired by the principles of sustainability and therefore of the
adoption of innovative policies as well as a unifier of various social players
→ opportunities for the territorial actors to come together face to face and discuss issues on a local level.
One final essential element in the creation of a new local roundtable between farmers and the territory – through
a multi-stakeholder approach – is the existence of shared values to take action to mitigate climate change.
In this way, such a local low carbon economy based could go beyond the traditional relationships between public
administrations and local economy, searching for new, innovative routes that could facilitate an active
collaboration between public organizations and farmers, generating an experience of the “virtuous circle” in order
to attain complex goals, such as those related to climate protection.
Departing from a provincial territorial level, the final aim of this strategy will be to join to the general regional effort
of creating a “waterfall effect” in the diffusion of a culture of social responsibility, through the promotion of an
environmental context that is more safeguarded and liveable, therefore more sustainable.
2.1.2.
Province of Asturias (Spain)
The Principality of Asturias is located in the North-West of the Iberian Peninsula, it has a surface of 10.604 km2,
and is bordered to the North by 334 km of coastline, bathed by the Cantabrian Sea (Figure 1). Asturias
possesses 1,085,289 inhabitants, with an average population density of 102.3 inhabitants per km2. The region is
divided in 78 municipalities, and the central metropolitan area accounts for 80 % of the population with the largest
cities and towns.
The main characteristic of the economic structure of Asturias is the importance of the industrial sector that
represents 21.67 % of the activity: agro-food, metal, chemical and mining are the main sectors with
Figure 1: Map of Asturias location.
presence in Asturias. Services represent 62.6 % and have shown a very strong upward trend in the past decade.
Construction accounts 13.87 % and the primary sector 1.87 %.
According to the National Forest Inventory III, about 72% of the one million hectares that has the Principality of
Asturias is declared as forest land use (Figure 2) and nearly 64% belong to private owners. However, in recent
decades the rural areas have been abandoned, and the Asturian forest sector has suffered a negative and
positive impacts. On one hand, a negative impact has happened because the forestland abandonment. And on
the other hand, a positive effect due to the increment of forest biomass in the forests.
Forest land
72%
Others land use
9%
Agriculture
19 %
Figure 2: Relative distribution of land use in Asturias.
In Asturias, the most important forest income comes mainly from Eucalyptus, pine and chestnut wood (Figure 3).
From the first two species there is almost 500.000 m3 of timber per year. However, there are challenges to
incorporating into the traditional silviculture practices new concepts, such as Sustainable Forest Management and
Forest Certification. These new action improve the quality of forest production chain, from preparation land to
wood selling to the final consumers.
Forests
Grassland
Crops
Industrial areas
Figure 3: Forests distribution in Asturias.
2.1.3.
Province of Goreniska (Slovenia)
Gorenjska region is located in the North-West of Slovenia with 2137 km2 of territory and around 200,000
inhabitants. This predominantly mountainous region in the Slovene Alps, with only some of flat and fertile land in
the central part and in river valleys in the north and west, has a large proportion of less favoured areas for
agriculture. The climate is transitional alpine-continental with cold snowy winters, and mild and not very dry
summers. Almost 60% of the territory is covered by quality forest, while grassland and pastures prevail in the
arable land. Due to a great diversity of well-preserved nature, around 45% of the region is within the Natura 2000
nature conservation network (of which major share are forsts).
In economic aspect, Gorenjska was once known as the strongest industrial region in Slovenia, but after since
1990 service sector has prevailed. Industry (35% of all employees) includes a high number of SMEs, and some
medium-sized and highly technological companies of steel, metal and wooden products, electronic machinery
and appliances. Agriculture, important also for the preservation of the typical landscape, is dominated by dairy
cattle breeding, forestry and small-scale production of honey, potatoes, meat and fruits. Due to the attractive
nature of the Alpine mountains and lakes, tourism is one of the key economic sectors with high share of foreign
visitors.
It is important to notice, that Gorenjska as such is not a ‘’real’’ region as Slovenia has not yet established a
regional administrative level inbetween local communities and state administration. Therefor there are no regional
policies, regional legislation and regional strategies/programs for Gorenjska region alone, at least legaly binded
ones. So far, as one of 8 Slovene historical regions, Gorenjska exists only as a developmental and statistical
region. One of the consequences of this is that most of data concerning energy, both consumption and
production, are compiled only at national or local community level, and not also at regional level.
There are, however, a joint regional development plan and 2 sub-regional rural development plans which
comprise all of Gorenjska rural areas. All of these documents were designed for a period of 2007-2013 by special
regional or local development councils with a participation of all concerned local communitues and other relevant
public/private regional actors.
Gorenjska has also number of semi-independent regional branches of important national organizations like
Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry, Chamber for Craft and Small Entreprenourship and Slovene Forestry
Service. Established within IEE program at the initiative of Municipality of Kranj, Gorenjska has from 2009 on also
a Local Energy Agency for Gorenjska.
For all above listed reasons, national policies, programs and instruments are those who have the most important
role and impact, while regional and community developmental plans are so far just (volunteer) operational plans
aimed to achive EU/national requirements on regional level.
Map 1: Location of Gorenjska region in Europe and within Slovenia
Map 2: Topography of Gorenjska region
Wood as an important natural resource has in Gorenjska always contibuted signicitantly to the development of
industry and economy as whole, particularly in rural areas. As wood is the most energy saving row material,
forests and permanently incorporated CO2 are important factor contributing to carbon sink and therefor
contribution to effective use of energy and cleaner environment.
Due to increased energy consumption, both in industry, households and transport, as well as CO2 emissions
from only partly sustainable agriculture, emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases has been increasing
rapidly on Gorenjska regional level. Partial shift to renewables (biomass and hydropower energy) and well as
affords for more efficient use of energy has been so far ‘’defeated’’ by rapid growth of energy consumption.
There are in general 3 major sectors interlinking regional energy, forests&forestry&wood and carbon C&C:
•
Forests contribute significantly to CO2 sink and capture, but the capacity of this contribution depends on
the forest management, t.i. on the quality and quantity of level of forest works in regional private&public
forests;
•
Potential and actual use of local wooden biomass from forest and wood processing industry/craft for
public/private local consumers which partly contribute to decrease of regional CO2 emission, and also to
local economy;
•
Use of local wood in construction industry and for other products, which contribute to minimizing regional
CO2 emissions by capturing CO2 in wooden products, by lower energy needs for wood products
production processes, and by (potential) final use of such products when worned-out for energy
production. As such production and use of local wooden products greatly contribute to local economy,
less impact to the environment and indirectly to more intensive forest management.
General overview shows that Gorenjska region has rich forest resources, appropratie skills (along with
educational institutions), (partly) infrastructure and long tradition of sustainable forest management, wooden
products production/consumption and (mainly domestic) heating by wooden biomass. In spite of that, most of the
energy is not CO2 sustainable and is imported from other regions. The fragmentation of private forests has
resulted in a lower intensity of works in these forests, while the decline of the wood processing industry has
followed a reduction in the overall use of regional wooden products. All this has resulted in a lack of wood waste
for biomass heating, too. More of these problems and challenges will be presented in sections A to C on the
following pages.
A. Sustainable forest management in Gorenjska and forest carbon sink
Gorenjska region forests are today managed trough the guidance of two regional branches of Slovene Forestry
service (OE Bled and OE Kranj) which cover more then 143 000 ha are forests (almost 68,5% of total territory).
Wood stock on this territory varies from 284 to almost 330 m3/ha. Annual growth rate is 6,5 m3/ha of which
around 4m3 or even 4,8m3 would be possible to exploit. The total annual potential cut in Gorenjska forests is
570.000 m3, but much less is in fact realized.
Among many vital functions of these forests for economy, society and nature/environment (wooden and nonwooden products, ecological stability, habitats for plants/animals, water/soil protection, social/recreation/touristic
function, protection against radical natural events), production of important share of oxygen as an outcome of
proccesses based on equally important storage of CO2 is probably the most important.
All these functions, including production of O2 and storage of CO2, can be fulfilled to the optimum
extent only by forests which are healthy, preserved (sound) and biodiversely rich.
In comparison to forest in the majority of other European countries, forest in Slovenia are generaly better
preserved and have higher diversity of natural structures. Such a situation is a result of planned and attentive, t.i.
sustainable or co-natural management of forests in the past (especially after 1945). Forest management in
Slovenia has been based on natural reviving and small-scale moderate interventions, and such actions have
contributed to a significant reinforcement and revitalization of Slovene forest in last 60 years. It was mainly thanks
to good work of public Forestry Service, based on domestically developed approches, that management of
foresty is multifunctional and sounded with principles of environment and nature protection. Success was a
combination of delaration and actualy management of wood and wood processing industry as a strategic national
sector, and organizational and bussiness integrity of entire cycle between forest management and wood
processing industry. Additional favorable factor was also a total absence of foreign business competition, smaller
number of other competitive materials, and state strategic support (also by subsidies).
One of the consequence of such forest policy was also significant afforestization of Slovene territory after 1945,
which became even faster after 1991. As a result of that, forests today cover some 60% of Slovenia (the share
which was only at 43% a century ago), and this trend has been slowing down only in recent years. Slovenia is
now at the third place in Europe by the share of foresty of the total territory, just after Sweden and Finland. Main
types of forests are beech, fir-beech and spruce-beech, and beech-oak forests.
Thanks to such improvements in past years, forest represent for Slovenia a very important factor for carbon sink
which is taken into account Kioto Agreement requirements. Slovene forests bind annualy up to 5 Mt of CO2, of
which some 1,32 Mt CO2 are counted in for Kioto goals for CO2 emission reduction. As such sink allow Slovenia
to avoid in buying emission coupons in aborad or to take expencive meaures in other sectors within Slovenia, it
brings an ''income'' of 15 to 20 million EUR. Apart of that, accumulation of another 3,68 Mt CO2 remains
»unrecognized«.
Situation in forest management in Slovenia and Gorenjska region has been, however, deterioriating since 1991.
After a wide-scale denationalization of agriculture and forest land after 1991, private owners now own some ¾ of
all forests, while state and local communities own the rest of forests. In 1990, just before the return of nationalized
forest begun, Slovenia had 62,4% of private and 37,6% of public forests. It is expected that after finalization of
denationalization some 80% of forests will be privatelly owned, around 15% in the state ownership, while other
will be be owned by local communities, Catholic church and rural cooperatives. It is also expected, and has partly
already happened, that number of non-active and ‘’foreign’’ rural owners has and will further increase, while some
bigger and large private forest estate has been created. Such a ownership structure will place Slovenia (and also
Gorenjska) in the same group with Norway and Austria, which have together with Portugal smallest share of
public forests in Europe. All of already listed countries, together with France, have more than 3/4 of private
forests. On the other side the share of privately owned forests is less then 1/4 in following countries: Bulgaria,
Czech, Romania, Poland, Sweden and Switzerland. Most of other conteries have balanced shares of private and
public (state) forest.
One of main charateristics of privately owned forest in Slovenia and Gorenjska is land fragmentation, mainly due
the specific system of land inheritance. As a consequence average size of private forest estate is currently 2,5 ha,
which in further divided in even smaller and unconnected lots. Slovenia has enormous high number of 314.000
(!!) forest owners, and even 470.000 if co-owners are included. That is charateristic also for Gorenjska, along with
the fact that small individual properties are often further fragmented in more of distanted (sometimes not even in
the same community). Small and fragmented forest estates make optimal use of forests potentials in these
forests, as well as development planning and expert work, much more difficult and demanding.
Based on the date from 2010, the main charateristic for private forests is low explotation level of their production
potential althought it has been slightly increasing in most recent years. Total annual cut in all forests
(public+private) reached 3,37 milion m3 (60 % of them coniferous) which represented around 64 % of maximum
possible cut defined by forest management plans. Maximum possible cut defined by National Forestry Program
could be 75% of annual growth or around 5 500 000 m3. Quality of Slovene forests is most endangered by
natural weather disasters (wind, snow, sleet) and especially in last years bark beetles and other pests. If
demaged trees after such events are not restored, mainly due to lack of forest works by private owners, this can
damage quality of large forest areas for years, even decades.
It is likely to go on like this in years to come, due to National Forestry Program goal to acummulate 25% of annual
growth and due to international climate change obligations of Slovenia. But even in this case the curve of the
forest work intensity will have to turn up, otherwise substential share of economical and environmental potentials
of forests will be lost.
Furher increase of wood stock in forests is not so sustainable as the problem of forest overaging can appair,
which can couse decrease in forest growth and deteriorate immunity of forst. This can increase possibilities for
catastrophic events (fires, pests), which release substantial emissions of acummulated CO2 in a very short time.
Due to acummulation of the annual growth instead of cut, the stock growth is continuing.
To cope with all these problems, Slovene forest and rural development policies has a set of financial and nonfinancial measures which support and promote sustainable forest management of private owners; these include:
• financing and cofinancing (subsidies) of forest works planned by distric FM plans (renewal, maintainance
and protection of forests),
• coofinancing of investments dedicated to forest management (forest roads, forest machinery) included
in 4 measures of Slovene Rural Development Plan 2007-2013 and
• expert advisory and consultation services of public Forest Service to owners.
Advisory and motivation services are especially important to activate small, often demotivated forest estate
owners, but implementation of works in these forests is part of wide public interest to maintain and develop their
functions.
Negative balance between annual growth in forest&potential annual cut, and eventual cut shows relatively weakly
exploited potentials of Sloveven forest which has two main reasons and consequences, respectively. First of all,
forest owners finf it better to have unrealized production in a form of uncutted trees then bed explotation level
measured in a added value units, and (2) bed performance of potential annual cut means also less opportunities
to direct developmen of forest in a direction that would allow optimum explotation of of production potentials of
certain growing sites (e.g. problem of delayed thinning and too much of thick trees). All of these factors effect
vitallity of forest and capacity to capture CO2.
It is obvious that such small properties with little economical potential and a large number of new, urban
land inactive owners is a strong negative factor for appropriate, sufficient and multifunctional sustainable
management of forests. Just financial subsidies proved to be insufficient measure to cope with all of
problems linked to forest management.
One of the main problems of forest management in Slovenia and Gorenjska region has been also weakening of
the expert support to private forest owners. Gorenjska region forests are today managed trough the guidance of
two regional branches of Slovene Forestry service (OE Bled and OE Kranj) which are further divided into 23 and
29 forest districts, respectively. Each of this districts has his own district forest expert which acts as a most
important expert support, motivator and guidance for forest owners, especially small private ones.
After the 1993 reform of public forest, all Forestry Service branches lost ''gozdna gospodarstva'' (forest
management units) as their direct operational unit for implementation of forest works mainly in public, but also in
private forests. These most profitable units were privatized and often bought by private entreprenours. The
consultation units have remaind public (and in public interest) but are weak regarding the number of stuff (eg.
district foresters), due to lack of finances and additional burdens of new ''paper'' taks (preparing different
elaborates, permits, application for subsides for private owners, …). All these factors significantly infringed their
direct services for private forest owners who needed after 1991 even more of expert support due to new
economical, social, political and environmental situation (market economy, new demans by nature protection,
multifunctional rural economy…). Othe the other side work with new group of forest owners, mainly as a ''product''
of denationalization after 1991, remainded big and almost untouched challenge. It is charateristic for owners from
this group total loss of motivation for management of forests; many of them don't even know location, size and
situation in their forests.
Changes in the ownership structures after 2nd World War coused that Slovene populations is less and less
dependent on forest, and also during denationalization forests were in large share returned to non-farming
landowners. Forest properties are not owned by state or owners living on the work with forest resources.
Such ownership is, however not problematic by itself. Non-farming forest property is in average smaller then the
one owned by farmers, and non-farming owners are as well not much dependend on the economical expolotation
of this forest. On the other side potentials in the non-faming cathegory of forest owners are relatively big as most
of fragmented properties are located in lowland areas where production condition for wood are more favorable as
well as terraing for forest management, comparing to larger estates located in less accesable areas.
As previouslly described such ownership structure is one of main reasons for low explotation level of
Slovene/Gorenjska forests. It is therefore no surprise that forestry has represented in the period 2001-2009 only
0,3% of national GDP, with added value per employed person rising only slightly.
But changing of the ownership structure is a long-term process, and real challenge for forest experts, especially
district foresters, is to activate those forest owners which have less favorable conditions to carry on active forest
management, but can by appropriate approaches and measures for increasing social capital achieve significant
positive progress. Active or activated forest owners are also coolaborators of district forsters in promoting expert
basis for forest management works. Foresters threfore need to take more active approach towards traditional and
especially ''new'' forest owners (see the problem of Forest Service on the page 12). Solution can be also in
networking within forst owners assocciations, joint marketing/selling of wood and woode certification.
B. Wooden biomass in Gorenjska regiona as a local renewable energy resource
Energy consumption in Gorenjska region largely depends on climate conditions. According to statistics of Slovene
Agency for Environment heating days vary from 225 days in central lowland of Gorenjska up to 294 days in
Alpine valleys.
As previously stated, Gorenjska region has no sufficient regional energy resources, both renewable and nonrenewable, except partly exploited potential of hydropower on Alpine river (mainly Sava river) and streams, and
wooden biomass coming directly or indirectly from 60% of territory covered by forests.
Biomass heating is certanly big and important potential for Gorenjska region; according to statistics of Slovene
Foretsry Service share of forest in Gorenjska vary from 50% to even 80% of territory. According to methodlogy of
the same service for suitability of certan communitues for explotation of wooden biomass, some are listed among
unsuitable (communities in region’s lowlands along Sava river – communities of Jesenice, Lesce, Radovljica,
Kranj, Šenčur, Cerklje) while other are partly or very suitable (communities of Bohinjska Bistrica, Bled, Železniki,
Gorenja vas - Poljane,Tržič, Kranjska gora). Low potential for further explotation of wooden biomass in low-lands
is further minimized by well developed natural gas network. In general it is possible to say that Gorenjska region
has large and unexploited potential for wooden biomass energy, but mostly limited to the hilly areas of the region,
due to high share of forests areas with high potential for explotation of wooden biomass.
Current suppy of heating energy is therefore based on three major energy resources: heating oil, wood and
natural gas. Share of renewables in overall energy consumption was 10,8 % in 2009, among which wooden
biomass prevails with 53% and hydropower with some 38%. Almost 2/3 of energ produced from RE is spent for
heating and the rest for electricity production. For wooden biomass this share is even much bigger as some 95 %
of energy of wooden biomass is used for heating, but current technology is largely obsolete with low level of
efficency. As prices of extra light heating oil has been increased in last decade, number of individual wooden
biomass installations have been steadily growning.
It is expected, however, that need and consumption for non-renewable energy to further rise in next decade, and
to happened the same with emissions of CO2 unless a major shift will be introduced. Important aspect of such
scenario is also a drain of financial resources out of the region for imported energy resources, as energy
represent third largest cost in any product or service. For that reason, and due to pressure of EU legislation on
energy and CO2 emissions, some changes are required. It is questionable, however, if all regional plans and
especially operational activities go in the right/most effective directions
Slovenia set up by the Resolution on National energy program (2004) a range of goals aimed to increase share of
renewable energies RE)( in energy consumption. As a member of EU, country has to follow new goals agreed
within Climate-energy pact of EU for promoting REs. Goal of Slovene in this aspect is to reach 25% share of RE
by 2020. In year 2007 an Operative program for use of wooden biomass as energy resource (2007 – 2013) was
adopted, focusing on the use of wooden waste. To fully implement program, some 201 millions EUR would be
needed, from which 67 millions should be non-reimbursable funds (grants).
Ministry for Environment and Space prepared already in 2002 a Program for energy use of wooden biomass for
2002-2004. Program planned to build in next 10 years 50 municipality remote control systems for biomass
heating, 100 industrial heating systems and 5000 small individual private heating installations. Total subventions
to support these investments are estimated to 53 millions EUR. In order to eliminate legislation, institutional and
procedural obstacles for wider use of wooden biomass, Slovene Public Agency for Ef prepared and implemented
(by funds of Global Fund for Environment) in 2002-2005 a wide and comprehensive project ‘’Eliminating
obstacles for increased use of wooden biomass as energy resource’’.
Action plan for Renewable energies in Slovenia (2010) has a very important part of content dedicated to wooden
biomass, especially among:
1. Programs for promoting use of renewables for heating and cooling (out of 6 programs 3 are dedicated to
support investments in heating by wooden biomass, while 2 are dedicated to support it by awareness-rising,
promotion and expert consulting)
2. Special measures within the Plan – these plans were created exclusively and only for supporting use of
wooden biomass energy (also to support increase quantities of available biomass and it’s supply)
Operational Program for energy use of wooden biomass in Slovenia for 2007-2013 (wooden biomass is the only
renewable source of energy to have such special operational program !!)
Slovene Environmental Public Fund as a main provider of public financial support for public/private investments in
renewables has 2 of it’s measures targeted on installing municipal and individual private heating system (trough
favourable credits or non-refundable money)
Slovene Rural development program 2007-2013 provides non-refundable subventions both for use of wooden
biomass on farms for own consumption, as well to produce heath as a profitable commercial activity on farms to
support sustainable development of rural areas. Share of non-refundable funds is up to 70% of investment.
Development documents at the regional level partly followed national directions. Regional development plan for
Gorenjska 2007-2013 has underlined in the section INFRASTRUCTURE, ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION IN
SPACE SETTLEMENT (and in the sub-section Investment demanding construction of municipal environmental
and electro-energetic infrastructure according to the EU requirements) that significantly increased consumption of
electrical energy will require very high investments to strengthen electro distribution network, eg. to ensure
sufficient energy supply of the Jože Pučnik Airport area which is planned to grow into vast logistic-business area
by 2020.
Another sub-measure of the same section, Improvement of energy efficiency, states that energy efficient use of
energy will be a must due to growing prices of energy and environmental burdens of fossil fuels.
According to the program it is therefore very important for Gorenjska to be included into affords for efficient use of
energy in industry, public buildings and in households as well. In the sector of industry main measure for
increased energy efficiency is and will be co-generation of electricity and heating energy. Energy efficiency can
be improved also by decreasing energy consumption, both by improved heating protection-insulation of buildings
which would contribute to minimizing consumption of energy for heating or by replacement of energy inefficient
technologies by more modern and efficient ones.
On the production side, section AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT plans within the
sub-measure ‘’Forest – Source of income and energy’’ a better use of forests and wood, respectively, as one of
rare regional natural resources.
It recognizes fact, that wood in the rural areas of Gorenjska is traditionally an important row material for wood
processing industry, as well as one of key sources of renewable energies. Facts as preservation of tradition,
sustainable forest management, socio-economic importance and energy self-sufficiency prove it’s importance.
Gaining, processing and usage of wood for energy purposes offer also new opportunities for income on farms
and new jobs in rural areas.
Gorenjska has already seen an increased interest for modern use of wood in energy purposes with some forestagriculture cooperatives, individual enterprise and owners of bigger forest estates more and more orienting into
this sector. When in the period 2002 – 2006 Ministry of Space and Environment, project GEF (Global
Environment Fund) and ECO fund jointly financed 8 big remote control systems for biomass heating, none of
them in Gorenjska region. As it was said, the whole region has so far only two bigger remote control
systems for biomass heating, DOLB Predvor and DOLB Železniki. Some other, as those presented in Best
practice section, are much smaller in size, but very interesting from the aspect of business model and contribution
to the local economy. As one fo reasons for low number of systems of remote heating is also undeveloped
biomass logistic.
Ownership structure marked by property fragmentation, lack of ambitious and systematic policy which would
support and promote use of wooden ‘’waste’’ from forests, closing down of big wood processing plants (except 2,
Jelovica and Lip Bled) as a source for energy waste for energy purposes and current dominance of heating by
fossily energy, couse big potentials of wooden biomass to be unexploited. Economic efficency of wooden
biomass is relatively low due to complicated logistic coused by forest property fragmentation and partly
inadequate infrastructure for forest works (forest roads, forest cableway). In 2007 a regional partnership
‘’Regional biologistic’’ with 15 major regional forestry actors implemented a study which showed economic
efficency of wooden chips use depending on 3 different types of biomass collecting. With a price situation in
2008, study outlined that only harvesting by using forest cableways and with wooden chips partly prepared
already trough regular forest proccessing works give biomass competitive to fossil fuels. Price of wooden chips
half prepared already as a result of regular forest ‘’cleaning’’, was calculated to be on the edge of cost efficency,
while the third way (chips from wood cutted for purpose of wood-processing, but in reality not used for such
purpose) proved not to be economic at the current fossil fuel level (in 2008). Positive perspectives for wooden
biomass energy are driven by growing prices of fossile fuels, which has grown for some 30% since the study was
done. Analysis of the stat of art and potentials to develop renewables in Gorenjska region has shown that 2/3 of
housing buildings in communities with already prepared Local Energy Concept (LEC) are heated by extra light
heating oil. Share of housing buildings heated by wooden biomass is around 25%, but the fact is that most of
these boilers are 15 and more years old and will need to be replaced.
Rural development Program, within the Regional development program for Gorenjska (2007-2013), underlines
importance of forests and wooden biomass for economy of rural, especially hilly areas. Among joint regional
topics, which are defined by 4 regional measures, is also measure: Forest, woode and energy: Biomass collection
centres and boilers/remote systems. As wood as an energy resource has a large importance for promoting
sustainable forest management, Regiona development plan directs it’s support to the support of plants/boilers,
remote control system and logistics for use of wood and biomass, respectively, for energy purposes. These
projects should attract some 5,56 million EUR of national and EU funds, while the total value of these projects
(together with private funfs) is expected to be 14,07 million EUR
Program of infrastructural, environmental and spatial development of Gorenjska within the above mentioned
Program plans projects for renewable energy use and energy efficiency with anticipated co-financing by 13,75
million EUR from national and EU fund, while the total value of these projects (together with private funfs) is
expected to be 128,46 million EUR. It anticipates construction of number of bigger systems, namely in Jesenice,
Železniki (Češnjica-Log), gradual development of such system in Jezersko and support to numerous smaller
private and public systems for biomass heating.
Main problem of Slovenia – and of Gorenjska region – is operationalization of all the listed programs and policies
adopted. It has adopted sufficient legislation concerning sustainable energy which follows binding EU legislation
on this matter. Analyses noticed that unfortunately renewable energies play rather marginal role in the main
regional development document – Regional development program for Gorenjska 2007 – 2013, and in
development documents of individual local communities in the region, eg. (a.) Strategic development document of
Kranjska gora community, b.) Rural development program for communities of Gorenja vas – Poljane, Škofja
Loka, Železniki and Žiri in the 2007 - 2013. Local Energy Concept (LEC) are in the communities which have
already adopted such document, only strategic document addressing energy efficiency and use of renewables. It
is possible to say, based on a analyse of local and regional development documents, that decision-making actors
at regional and local leve in practice don’t take in account renewables as one of key factors of development
strategies.
For above mentioned reasons, in spite of subventions for co-generation by using biomass and with exception of
some bigger towns, remote control systems for biomass heating has not been fully used and recognized as
important energy solution, while exisiting systems use only limited quantaties of energy wood.
Main obstacles for faster introduction of remote control systems for biomass heating has been, according to
the draft of Program for sustainable development of of wood added value chain (prepared by Government Office
for Climate Changes) following:
•
Complicated business and administrative procedures for implementation of remote control system for
biomass heating and purchasing of such heating,
•
Lack of investors and capital,
•
Uncertatnty about biomass supply (both quality and quantity).
It was suggested in the same draft that solutions could be enabling of those providers, which are strong in terms
of capital and professional competencess, for implementation of remote control systems of biomass heating and
energy wood supply. Such actors could be existing public energy companies (eg. Petrol, Energetika Ljubljana) or
existing public (municipal) utilitity companies. State and public institutions could support development of such
providers by:
•
Recognizing remote control systems using wooden biomass for heating as priority in legislation and
policies concerning public companies, energy sector and climate changes,
•
Adopting legislation concerning public service companies in such manner that would foster investments
in this sector (public-private partnerships, transfer of infrastructure into capital stock of municipal
companies),
•
Actively cooperating with communities in the preparation and implementation of projects for remote
control systems for heating by offering them guidance, training and expert assistance.
It is worth noticing and taking into account certain environmental and social weaknesses of wooden biomass. It’s
burning produce very fine and solid particles (soot) which pollutes air, as well some other harmful substances.
Energy plants also employee less people if compard with number of employees in wood-processing industry. In
the light of that, burning of wooden biomass might be an alternative to unsustainable energy resources but only if
we burn wooden waste and remainings which cannot be anymore processed in some other product.
C. Local wood as a CO2 and regional development positive construction material
Construction sector, based on energy wasteful materials (steel, concrete, brick, plastic, aluminium) is as
everywhere in developed countries, also in Slovenia one of the largest consumer of energy and therefore
contributes also the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions (See the Introductionary chapter). Solution is a
use of wooden products which, troughout it’s life-cycle, store around 2 tonnes of CO2 per m3. Wood is of all
materials also the least energy consumptive and it is renewable. Wooden house, together with all interior
equipment, captures during its life-cycle around 60 tones CO2. We can find many examples in the world where
appropriately constructed wooden buildings reached age of even 700 years. Wood and wooden
constructions/products are, if appropriately treated trough processing, also the healthiest or healthier material for
human health and well-being then majority of other materials. As the only natural material it provides the most
developed and most pleasant living environment, especially because of living climate.
Slovenia and Gorenjska has with 60% of territory covered by forest and some 4m3 of annual wooden stock
growth/person a vast potential to develop production based on the use of domestic material and leaving added
value and jobs for domestic actors.
Out of annual growth in forests (4m3/person), only 0,2m3 for products as priority is still given to other
unsustainable and imported materials.
Increased use of local wood would bring following benefits for Gorenjska region sustainable economy:
•
Renewable, natural and domestic material would be used instead of unsustainable ones;
•
Wood processing industry is a labour intensive and brings therefor number of new jobs. In comparison to
existing 15.000 jobs there are estimations that this numbers could be for another 30.000 person.
•
Production of products based on domestic wood can contribute to the self-sufficiency of Gorenjska
region and Slovenia on these products;
•
Increased wood processing would help to increase demand for wood and consequently for more
intensive forest management (in private forests);
•
Increased quantaties of wood waste as a side product would be available at better price for energy
purposes;
For all above mentioned reasons experts urged that wood-proccessing companies should be focused on
production of wooden products with high added value and not just timber export. To support such development
state should stimualte increase purchase of domestrically produced wooden products. In view of many burning
wood for energy purposes also couse more damage then benefits, so processing wood into wooden products
which contribute ten-fold and more both to the reduction of green-house gas emissions and to the added value of
wood, is much better option.
Slovene and Gorenjska wood-processing industry,respectively, has been, in spite of rich resources, long tradition
of both use and produce wooden products, and a high number of skilled people in all processing phases, facing
huge problems and decline after 1991. Many succesfull wood-processing companies (Liko Vrhnika, Kli Logatec,
Javor Pivka, saw in Trzič-Gorenjska) went bankrupt due to bad business management, coruptive managers and
uneffective or bed instruments of forestry/economy policies.
Most severe problems which this wood-processing sector has been facing, are:
•
Unfavorable general economical climate;
•
Poor development in the sector;
•
Divided, fragmented and insufficently connected production chain;
•
Low market reputation (image);
•
Sources of wood;
•
Problems with skilled staff and relations between institutions of knowledge and companies;
•
Partly poor technological equipment;
•
Unsuitable positioning of sector withing state policies in the past.
In spite of all the listed wood processing and carpentry, respectively, is still the only Slovene industry with
(potentially) rich resources of local row material, favorable geographical dispersion, technologically relatively well
equiped processing plants and well branched market for it’s products.
As an illustration of misssed opportunities is the fact that in Austria 10 times more people lives on wood
processing as in Slovenia. State there offers significant stimulations and support for wood processing and
recommends that at least 20 % of all houses should be built of (local) wood.
Measures listed in the Table 1 have been identified in order to improve situation in the sector and fully use it’s
potential for development, and consequently for CO2 capture:
Table 1: Measure for improvement of situation in Slovene wood processing industry
N.
1
2
Group of measures
Improvement of general economical environment
New marketing approaches&new selling channels
3
Optimizing and capital netwroking of production
chains
4
Introduction of new technologies, new products
and services, and marketing paradigms
considering sustainable development and use of
topmost design
5
Active state policy on all levels of wood usage
6
Promotion of use of wood on all levels of society
7
Strenghtening links between companies and
institutions of knowledge
Goal(s)
• Improvement of general economical environment
• To increase sell of products with high added value
• Creation of innovative and market interesting trade
brands
● To network the entire sector, increase collaboration
and reach optimal added value in each part and entire
forest-wood production chain
• To increase sell of products and services based on
wood in all of it’s manifestation forms
• To increase volume of wood processed in Slovenia
• To increase share of timber processed in moder
processing plants
• To start introducing substance and energy
biorafineries based on lignocellulose materials
• To accept wood as a row material of national
importance and wood-processing industry as a
strategic sector
• To proclaim and accept wood as an strategic and
prestigous row material
• Increase investments in research and development
Dr. Pohleve as one of leading experts for wooden constructions and promotor of the use of Slovene wood has
estimated that if potential would be better used, Slovenia could even sell CO2 coupons. The first step should be
done by the state promotion of wooden products trough with state’s public procurement policy and by building
most prominent state/public building in wood If state would regulate use of wooden products, eg. wooden frames
for kindergartens, schools and all ministries, domestic producers could with increased work ensure additional
employments, wooden products would capture CO2, and use of domestic raw material would keep money in the
country.
It was also urged by many experts and institutions that Centres for wood-processing should be established on
forest-rich areas (among suggestes areas also Mežaklja and Pokljuka platous in Gorenjska region). An example
of such policy is Steymark region in Austria where some 30 of such centres were established, while first such
Centre was created in Trnovska platou area near Nova Gorica (western Slovenia) in 2011.
Ecological indiference is obvious especially with big investments in the construction sector in housing where the
leding goal of investors is to makismize profit no matter of burdens for environment and of quality of living in such
buildings. Such situation is a consequence of no interventions from state institutions as environmental burdens
are not sanctioned by additional ecological taxeswhich would restore a balanca between use of energy wasteful
and environmental unfriendky construction materials on once, and use of natural, ecological and for living
friendly materials as wood (Dujič, 2011).
There have been many exampels of unecological construction projects in past years, where entire
neighbourhoods and all types of housing units were constructed by pretressed concrete. Such constructions are
aside of harmful environmental often also unhealthy living environment for their residents.
Investments in energy efficient technologies and renewable materials as it is also wood should be given absolute
priority, if not even directed by the law. The target of Slovenia for next few years should be to increase use of
wooden product at the level of at least 1m3/person; In Austria as a country with much smaller annual growth in
forests the target is to reach a consumption of 1,2m3 of wood/person by 2020. Shift to bigger use of wood for
products and constructions would save much more energy as we can get by burning wood. (Pohleven, 2009).
State council and Slovene forest-wood technological platoform assambled following concrete tasks to reduce
problems of forestry, wood-processing and paper industry sector and full use potentials of forests and wood of
Slovenia (it was addressed to the state and relevant ministries):
1. Wood should be declared as national strategic good/row material for production of wooden products with high
added value.
2. Forestry and wood-processing industry should be from the point of view of national economy development
and benefits defined as one of most important sectors for which strategic management should be established,
taking into account interdisciplinarity (similar as it was done for touristic sector). Strategic management on the
government level would ensure optimal use of wood and simultaniously respecting principles of sustainable
development;
3. Strenghtening use and sell of wooden products with added value in Slovenia and abroad (all types of
processed wood and wooden products) and limit sell of unprocessed wood and excessive use of qualitative
wood for heating energy. Main source for energy has to be wooden waste feom wood processing and less
value types of wood and bushes.
4. To elaborate strategy for setting up interconnected process-chain of processing (from forest to products),
which would take in account geographical dispersion of forests, central location for primary processing
(paring, sawing, drying…) with capacity of around 500.000 m3 and regional centres for secundary processing
(windows, furniture, doors, building face systems, houses, public buildings, sculptures…);.
5. Centres for wood processing should be established on forest-rich areas which would, connected with a central
plant for primary processing, link production, processing and selling of products and energy use of wooden
waste from processing and of worn out wooden products. Within above mentioned centres expert support
should be organized for introduction of new technologoes of wood processing.
6. Develop appropriate education systems on all levels which would enure skilled personnel for entire forestwood processing sector. Communication of the knowledge from this sector should start already within
kindergarten education and then continue trough entire education cycle.
7. In rural areas promotional expert service should be organized in order to support and direct forest production
and wood processing; For work of such service education program should be formed with know-how from
forestry and carpentry for training experts for both sector and for production of celluloses.
8. Support activities of centres for creative industries (design) trough which research-developmnet project for
production of products with added value has been implemented. This would enable industry to reach higher
competitivness on domestic and especialy on foreign markets;
9. Establishment of National institute for carpentry (NIC), which would enable higher development of new
technologies taking into account protection of environment and products, and faster transfer of know-how into
practical production. This would represent expert support to a wood-processing industry and helps financing
researches;
10. To build first energy self-sufficient ecological centre in Europe, t.i. wood-processing centre which would be
supplied exclusively from renewable energy resources and use excessive energy for supplying neighbouring
settlements;
11. Systematic certification of intermediate and final products and services according to their impact on greenhouse gas emissions and on environment in general in their entire life-cycle as wooden products use less of
energy comparing to other materials. Introduction of green ecological (with environmental, green-house effect)
labels could help that wooden products would count as a Slovene contribution to the deminishing emissions of
green-house gases (Kyoto Agreement);
12. Supporting use of wood in construction, processing industry, agriculture and energy sector according of the
principle of ''gradual use'': good wood for products, bad wood for processing adn celluloses, wooden ''waste''
for energy;
13. Promoting use of wood in construction of road and railway infrastructure (eg. obligatory wooden anti-noise
fence), which would help, except anti-noise protection, additionaly increase environmental effect of CO2
storage in wood;
14. Introduce obligatory use of natural materials (min. 25%) in construction sector, and introduction of additional
ecological taxes if such obligatory share is not fulfilled;
15. State and public institutions should be constructed and equiped by Slovene wooden products which would
ensure consumption and pomotion of (Slovene) wooden products;
16. Introduce ecological taxes for environmentally unacceptable products and subvention when natural materials
are used, respectively. The same principle should be used in the case of energy wastefull and energy efficent
products, respectively. Here assesment should take in account both grey energy (which is need for
manufactoring of product) as well as operational energy (energy need for the use of energy );
17. Introduction of taxes based on environmental requests for diminishing emissions of greenhouse gases where
products with higher share of wood would enjoy lower environmental taxes. Further measure could be
exemption from taxes for employees in existing wood-processing companies which would free finances for
technological investments;
18. Slovene strategy for economy crisis exit 2010-2013 should be supplemented by measures to support woodprocessing industry which brings multiple benefits.
As one of first measures aimed at fostering development of wood-processing industry, a Decree on green public
procurements was adopted by Slovene Government in December 2011. Estimated value of public procurements
has been around 13% (in 2007), what gives to the public sector a potential to be one of major actors in
diminishing impact of development activities on environment, decrease energy, water and other row materials
consumption, ensure preservation of natural resources and biodiversity and combating od climate changes.
By purchasing environmentally friendly products and services public administration directly influence development
of new priducts, technologies and innovations, creating of ‘’green’’ market and rising of competitiveness.
EU Commission suggested in its reports a political goal that after 2010 in average 50% of all public procurements
in member states should be ‘’green’’. EU Commission issued in 2009 a guide-book to help member countries to
introduce criteria for green procurement into practice. Among 10 mentioned group of products/sectors are also:
•
Construction sector and buildings (which take info account integrity of constructions and reconstructions in
the phases of planning, construction/reconstruction and demolition of buildings and use of material and
energy during all of these phases. Aspects of material and energy effectivnes applies also for the period of
building operating and therefor include also all energy conumptive systems and devices, and also for
purchased or rented buildings);
•
Electric energy; Slovenia adopted an Action plan for green procurements whose declared principle aim is,
by fostering implementation of green public procurement, to:
•
diminish negative impact on environment
•
improve the effectivness of the the public money use
•
support the development and innovations of environmentally friendly products
•
support devising new environmentaly friendly products
•
promote new environmental technologies and CO2 free economy
•
offer a good example to other business actors and consumers
Among important principles which shouldbe taken into account during implementation of green public
procurement is a principle of cost estimation of entire life-cyxle of a product/service (Life Cycle Costing - LCC). At
the achieving above mentioned goals, so called rolling approach will be used, taking into account awareness of
public sector and development of Slovene market for environmentally less burdering products and services.
Common goal for selected products/services is, that by 2012 50% of all public procuremennts should be
environmentally acceptable.
Slovene decree on green public procurements requires that projecting public buildings should include at least
30% of volume share of wood and wooden substances. Slovene target is to reach (by 2012) in construction
sector and building a 30 % share of all green procurements, while for electricity and furniture shares should be
100% and 50%, respectively. Suggested criteria for above listed groups of products and service include following
environmental aspects:
• use of energy and energy efficiency rabo energije in energetsko učinkovitost;
• use of natural resources (renewable and non-renewable, biodegradable products);
• use of hazardous substances (chemicals);
• emissions of substances in environmental medias (air, water, soil);
• quantity of waste produces, recycling and reuse of renewable resources .
To fully and correctly implement this decree and take benefits of it’s potential advantages, following tasks need to
be fulfilled:
•
To educate and train implemetors of public procurement,
•
Set up a dialog between public clients and companies as providers to inform them about plans on green public
procurement, so they could respond to the business opportunities that such policy offers them
Slovene Forestry&Wood technological platform is planning to organize in 2012 a set of education events for all
actors involved, mainly from public administration and communities, as well as for arhitects, planners,
constructors, carpenters and general/specialized medias.
3. THE CONCEPT OF BEST PRACTICE
3.1. A general approach
There is no universal definition of a best practice, but there are common characteristics which make a practice
the best. Best practices are often exemplary behaviors modeled into processes. Conceptually, best practices are
ethical, legal, fair, replicable, and applicable to anyone within an organization; therefore, they are “Good
Practices“. However, they are not only “Good Practices”. They are “Best Practices” because their implementation
aims
at
improving
an
organization’s
performance
through
additional accountability, compliance,
transparency and risk control.
When defined, a best practice is known as a technique, method, process, activity or incentive which has proven
to be most effective in providing a certain outcome.
In order to survive the volatile market conditions and the tough competition dominating it, organizations from all
industries have started adopting the best practices of their respective fields.
Basically, any best practice is implemented in order to improve the quality of the services an organization offers.
A best practice can focus on different aspects of the production or the development process. Once implemented,
it will improve organizations’ customer satisfaction rates, therefore adding to companies’ popularity and public
appeal.
The concept of best practices is a method that has consistently shown results superior to those achieved with
other means, and that is used as a benchmark.
3.2. Criteria of selection
Agricultural and forestlands can play a key role as part of a comprehensive strategy to slow the accumulation of
greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere. Much of the public discussion about using these lands as part of
an overall strategy to address climate change results from the beliefs that forest and agriculture land-use and
management options will be relatively low cost, and that biomass can play an important role in reducing the use
of fossil fuels. In the near term, these lands can be managed to increase the quantity of carbon stored in soils and
plant matter, thereby reducing net emissions of the primary greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. In many cases the
changes in land-use management that increase carbon storage provide multiple benefits—such as erosion
control, water quality protection, and improved wildlife habitat—that by themselves justify the new practices.
Over longer time horizons, agricultural and forestlands can produce biomass-based substitutes for fossil fuels,
thereby further reducing emissions.
This report derives from the examination of a wide array of ways in which forest and agricultural lands can be
managed to store or “sequester” carbon and reduce net emissions. A range of policies and programs that would
promote this objective have been analyzed. The results of this analysis suggest that, by carefully designing and
implementing a large-scale forest and agricultural carbon sequestration strategy, it could be substantially
possible reduce its net carbon dioxide emissions. A successful strategy is likely to encompass a variety of
initiatives at the national, state, and local levels, and to involve both government and private parties. No single
approach will suffice.
Much of the infrastructure needed to increase carbon sequestration on agricultural and forestlands is already in
place. To capitalize on sequestration opportunities, we will need to address the full range of practices available
for conserving existing carbon stocks and for promoting additional carbon uptake and storage on forest, crop, and
grazing lands. A successful strategy will also need to be responsive to the different types of land and landowners
involved, to draw on the existing network of organizations, and include a variety of policy tools. On public lands,
for example, government agencies, personnel, and resources can be directly deployed to pursue sequestration
goals.
According to IPCC best practices guidelines for A.F.O.L.U. (Agriculture, Forest and Other Land Use) of 2003 and
2006, a best practice should observe the subsequent criteria:
•
Transparent: data source, definitions, methodologies and assumptions should be clearly described.
•
Complete: all land areas within a country should be included with increases in some areas balanced by
decreases in others where this occurs in reality, and should recognise subsets of land used for estimation
and reporting according to definitions agreed in the Marrakesh Accords for Parties to the Kyoto Protocol.
•
Internally consistent: capable of representing management and land-use change consistently over time,
without being unduly affected either by artificial discontinuities in time series data or by effects due to
interference of sampling data with rotational or cyclical patterns of land use.
•
Accurate: capable of representing carbon stock changes and greenhouse gas emissions and removals and
the relations between these and land use and land-use changes.
•
Comparable between countries
3.3. Fields of application
The accumulation of CO2 and other GHG in the atmosphere due to deforestation, fossil fuel combustion and other
human activities may have begun to change the global climate. The response and feedback of to projected global
change are expected to be profound.
Forest and agriculture systems play a prominent role in the global C cycle. Forest contain an estimanted 66% of
the terrestrial above-ground C and approximately 45% of the terrestrial soil C. In addition global forest account for
approximately 90% of the annual C flux between the atmosphere and terrestrial ecosystems. Application of forest
management practices on only 500-800 Mha in 12-15 key nations could potentially sequester or conserve 1-2 Pg
C annually. Agricultural systems also play a significant role in the global C cycle. Agroecosystems contain about
12% of the world's terrestrial soil C, and conservation of this pool is essential to sustained crop productivity and
decreasing CO2 emissions. Some agricultural practices have been shown to increase soil C content
by
increasing C sequestration and/or reducing the loss of C to the atmosphere. Practices such as reduced tillage,
crop residue incorporation, field application of manure and sludge, and rotations using cover
crops or
leguminous crop store more C in soil systems than conventional agronomic technology. For example, slowing
soil degradation by impeding desertification could conserve 0.5 to 1.5 Pg terrestrial C annually using current
infrastructure and technology.
As it is already described in other parts of the present report, this is the general context of the climate protection
actions for primary sector. Even if of general inspiration to the worldwide above mentioned approach, t he field of
application of the CARBON.CARE identified best practices cannot obviously be declined otherwise that at local
level, as to assure to be effective for the stakeholders.
4. THE STAKEHOLDERS
There are many different actors who can develop the creation of a roundtable for climate protection and low
carbon economy and there are just as many different methods of organization and financing that govern it. Aside
from the specifics of the single experiences, partners involved could be split up into 3 categories:
‣ Promoters
‣ Facilitators
‣ Members
Promoters are the actors in the socio-economic-political and cultural system that conceive the process and act as
engines for the start-up of the partnership. They can be a group of Institutions, University and/or Research
Centres together with Public Adminitration, depending upon strength and resources available. In any case, their
task is to start up the process, aggregate other actors that can offer the maximum added value and define the
roundtable’s general goals. Facilitators are all those who can contribute directly to the success of the roundtable
by providing technical support, know-how or resources. Possible facilitators are: Chambers of Commerce,
Banking and Credit Institutes and local farmer associations. An important role is played by organizations that aid
and bring businesses and economic operators together, such as business and professional associations,
professional rosters and Chambers of Commerce.
It is also opportune that there be members among the facilitators capable of verifying and guaranteeing the
transparency and honesty of the process, such as exponents from the academic and research world, experts of
environmental and energy issues. More specifically, the presence of third parties is important in the approval
phase of the plan of action, monitoring and assessment of results. The members are the actors who are more
directly involved in the process. They are the true protagonists of the partnership and with their commitment; they
contribute concretely to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and the promotion of eco-efficiency of local
economy. Members could be single companies or farmers or even an individual person that feel the responsibility
for proposing a new participated model towards a sustainable low carbon economy.
The implementation of measures in Asturian forest for mitigating the effect of climate change must involve variety
of actors, it means forest-dependent people, such as civil society, forestry owners trough the local forestry
associations, research institutions, regional government, policy-makers and private sector (first, second and third
transformation companies). Best forest management practices and forest buffer strips are potential tools that
forestry owners can use to reach this goal. It is important to note that the group of silviculturists, an essential part
of the timber business, is a group of twenty companies in the region that work forests to ensure the raw material
for the other subsectors.
5. POTENTIAL OR EXPECTED FEEDBACK
Generally, survey results show that carbon dioxide capture and storage and carbon sequestration are largely
unknown to the general public, and there is significant confusion over which environmental issue the technology
is intended to address. The environment is not a top priority for the public, and global warming is not the top
environmental concern, even for those concerned about the environment.
Public opinion and public acceptance of climate change-mitigation technologies is important because global
climate change is an extraordinarily complex problem without a clear scientific or political solution. Proposed
solutions to global climate change involve costs to society and sacrifices by the public. Ways to address climate
change usually include technological leaps in energy production, more expensive energy sources, energy
efficiency measures, and lifestyle changes to consume less energy. The costs and uncertainties of global climate
change make it difficult to garner political support. Policymakers not only have to decide how to address the
scientific and technical uncertainties of global climate change but they also have to decide how to respond to
public uncertainty and skepticism about the need for action. Frequently, policymakers in the government and the
energy industry are able to make decisions about research allocation and facility placement without much public
attention. Farmers usually have been characterized as having a deep economic orientation toward farming
because they are strictly dependent on the land for their livelihood However, they are in close contact with the
land on a daily basis, so they could enhance their perception as environmentally concerned and responsible.
The expected results of our actions will be a general improvement of awareness and concern for environmental
problems associated with primary sector, agriculture and forestry, starting from local level towards wider
scenarios.
In general, society has a limited knowledge of climate change, and this issue is not considering a priority. People
also recognize their limited understanding of the issue. However, the participation of Provinces in
CARBON.CARE project will give the region and its municipalities the opportunity of identify good practices in
agricultural and forestry sector, with secondary effects probably also in others sectors like energy or public
procurement in order to reduce emissions and design awareness raising campaigns to address and involve
people in the active climate protection.
Sustainable and low carbon development has to become a key question in the regional strategies. The expected
results of our project will provide knowledge and awareness for climate change problems related to primary
sector.
6. BEST PRACTICES FOR CCS&CS IN PRIMARY SECTOR: THE GOLD 6
According to the discussion during the kick-off meeting of CARBON.CARE project (May 2011, Ferrara), a group
of potentially interesting best practices were identified in the field of agriculture and forestry sectors respectively.
A general shared form to describe a best practice and the related activities has been used. As a summary, the
gold 6 are reported below, and declined on the basis of the Region of development:
1- Cropland precision practices and techniques. Includes crop
rotation, soil management, efficient fertilizer/nutrient use, including
manure, and chemical application
2- Bioenergy/biofuel substitution. Includes on-farm use; replacing
Province of Ferrara (Italy)
fossil fuels or deriving bioenergy from land-use feedstocks (renewable
energy, as biogas), and on-farm energy efficiency/conservation.
3- Forest management. Includes harvest for long-term wood products;
reduced impact logging; certified sustainable forestry; thinning/release;
fertilization and pruning
4- Structural characterization of local wood (Castanea sativa Mill.) for
its use in construction
Principality of Asturias (Spain)
5- Energy effective buildings from Gorenjska regional wood
6- Local public-private cooperation for heating by local wooden
Gorenijska Region (Slovenia)
biomass
Best practice n°1
Title of the best practice
Cropland precision practices and techniques. Includes crop
rotation, soil management, efficient fertilizer/nutrient use, including
manure, and chemical application
Location where the BP was developed
Province of Ferrara
Field of application the best practice
Please thick the relevant box
Description of the best practice activities
Please provide also links to the relevant internet
websites
local bodies
public utilities
industry & SMEs sector
agriculture
forestry
The main activities are briefly outlined in the title of this best practice,
and they are addressed on the following areas:
-crop rotation. For enhanced crop production and efficient resource
use, a cropping system can be a mixture of cash crops and nitrogenfixing legumes (the so-called companion cover crops). In such
integrated cropping systems, cash and cover crops are rotated so that
the following crops take up nutrients left by the the previous crops, and
both contribute to plant residue-based soil nutrients.
-soil management. It is referred to techniques to maintain soil structure
and conditions that contribute to high yields and good returns on inputs
while having minimal adverse environmental impacts. Soil
management techniques vary from conventional tillage to minimum
tillage to no-tillage systems. Water and irrigation management is
another aspect of the general soil management, and refers to practices
for planning, developing, distributing and optimally utilizing water
resources. Water is a precious and basic component of agriculture and
protecting water supplies guarantees profitable farm operations. It
means right time application of the right amount of irrigation water to
the crops. Irrigation scheduling can be based on water budget
calculation, observation of plant water stress, or measurement of soil
water status to answer two essential questions: when to irrigate and
how much to irrigate.
-efficient fertilizer/nutrient use, including manure. Nutrient management
and planning means the application of precise amounts of nutrients to
the soil according to the crop nutrients requirements to prevent the
contamination of surface and ground water bodies. This also involves
the use various organic source of nutrients, e.g. organic manure
amendments, the wise use of which is considered environmentally
friendly, while improves physical and hydrological soil properties.
-chemical application. Pesticides are an important input for many
cropping systems. If mishandles and misused they can be toxic to
people and animals that come in contact with them, at risk. Because a
Description of the best practice innovative and
demonstrative approach – added value
Coherence of the best practice with the local
policy framework and with the national /
regional legislation
Description of the best practice background
Actors involved in the best practice
development
Principal stakeholders that could benefit from
the CCS&CS application
Source of potential financing of the best
practice
Transferability of the best practice
safe and effective ecosystem is important for environment protection
and our safety, pesticides should be bought in small quantities, stored
in a secured area, and disposed in accordance with state and local
regulations. Farmers should avoid unnecessary application, overspray
and drift, and maintain application equipment in working condition, and
calibrate the equipment frequently to ensure recommended quantity
are applied without waste.
All the above mentioned activities go towards the achievement of a
balance between crop production and environmental protection,
through the application of an holistic management approach, where all
the aspects of crop production should be revised from the perspective
of environmental sustainability.
Agriculture cannot be considered in isolation of other resources uses.
Rather it needs to be considered from a long-term system perspective
and, importantly, within a broader resource use context. Such an
integrates approach is perfectly aligned with the measures introduced
by national/regional/local bodies in order to protect the environment
and manage the natural resources more sustainably.
Successful crop production requires an understanding of the basics of
agriculture including management principles for soils, water, nutrients,
crop residues, pests, and tillage systems. But requires also a growing
concern about the consequences of intensive agricultural production on
natural resources (soil, air, water), as to develop effective and practical
solutions to minimize or prevent the environmental impacts.
Development holistic management practices and implementing
sustainable best practices in agricultural areas require the concerted
intentions of concerned growers, with a wide support from local bodies
and regulatory agencies.
Reaching a sustainable model for agriculture could be a value added
approach firstly for local farmers, but also for all the people who live in
rural areas or use agricultural products.
EU funding (explain which)
national / government funding
regional funding
venture funds
private investment
other (explain which)
The effect of change in resource use and management practices in
agriculture is frequently incremental and cumulative, taking a long time
to be apparent. While community and institutional attitudes and
understanding on natural resource management are constantly
evolving, there remains considerable lack of access to information and
inadequate understanding of the long term effect of agricultural
activities on the environment. Starting the use of a best practices
approach at the beginning by few farmers could then generate a wider
and wider diffusion to the other, up to become a “normal” behaviour. Of
course, a driving force to obtain this ambitious result could be some
forms of incentives or supporting actions by the regional/local bodies.
Best practice n° 2
Title of the best practice
Bioenergy/biofuel substitution. Includes on-farm use; replacing fossil
fuels or deriving bioenergy from land-use feedstocks (renewable
energy, as biogas), and on-farm energy efficiency/conservation.
Location where the BP was developed
Province of Ferrara
Field of application the best practice
Description of the best practice activities
local bodies
public utilities
industry & SMEs sector
agriculture
forestry
Possible activities to be evaluated to assess the potential of the
application of this BP in agricultural local context, may be:
-restoring formerly marginal land
Certain crops, such as switchgrass, may even restore productivity of
marginal land. While production may be less profitable, examples of
small-scale biofuel projects, demonstrate the potential for local energy
provision. Nevertheless, crop and location specific challenges and
concerns exist, especially regarding possible yields, required inputs
and side-effects on water and biodiversity. While large potential areas
have been suggested for both degraded and abandoned land, more
research seems necessary to clarify the realistic production potentials,
and to provide guidance for land management, in particular to balance
the environmental costs and benefits of any land conversion against
natural regeneration.
-use of waste and production residues
Energy recovery from waste and residues can save significant GHG
emissions without requiring additional land. Specifically, besides
municipal organic waste, also residues from agriculture (both crop
production and animal husbandry) provide a significant energy
potential which is still largely unused. Further research is necessary to
determine the proper balance of residues that should remain on the
field or in the forest to maintain soil fertility and soil carbon content, and
the amount that can be removed for energy, as well as with regard to
nutrient recycling after energy recovery.
Increase energy and material productivity in transport, industry and
households
Global resources do not allow simply shifting from fossil resources to
biomass while maintaining the current patterns of consumption.
Instead, the level of consumption needs to be significantly reduced for
biofuels to be able to substitute for relevant portions of fossil fuel use.
For that to occur, resource efficiency in terms of services provided per
unit of primary material, energy and land will need to be drastically
increased.
Description of the best practice innovative and
demonstrative approach – added value
Coherence of the best practice with the local
policy framework and with the national /
regional legislation
Description of the best practice background
Actors involved in the best practice
development
Principal stakeholders that could benefit from
the CCS&CS application
Source of potential financing of the best
practice
Transferability of the best practice
Significant options for future progress go beyond the optimisation of
biofuel production. An integrated view of supplying both materials and
energy for enhanced service provision for households and industry will
lead to wider potentials and allow better choices to increase
sustainability of resource use. Improved systems technologies will
enhance overall resource efficiency, while more effective management
instruments can adjust the demand for biofuels to sustainable levels.
Future development of global agricultural yields will determine the
degree to which demand for food and non-food biomass can be
supplied from existing cultivated land. Life-cycle-assessments (LCA) of
biofuels show a wide range of net greenhouse gas savings compared
to fossil fuels. This mainly depends on the feedstock and conversion
technology, but also on other factors, including methodological
assumptions.
Climate change, together with an increasing demand for energy,
volatile oil prices, and energy poverty have led to a search for
alternative sources of energy that would be economically efficient,
socially equitable, and environmentally sound. Biofuels is one of the
option that has raised the most public and private interest. Encouraged
by research indicating that biofuels could provide substantial energy
while mitigating climate change, our national governments have
supported production aimed at increasing biofuel use. However,
concern has been growing about negative implications of growing
biomass for biofuel production. Current biofuels are often made from
feedstock crops that also serve as food. Hence, there is a potential risk
for competition between food and fuel, and consequences on food
prices as a result. The best alternative seems to be biofuels obtained
by waste biomass, from industry and agriculture.
This BP development requires the concerted intentions of concerned
growers, with a wide support from local bodies and regulatory
agencies. To deal with these issues, several initiatives have to be
started also by governments, industry players and civil society to
develop criteria for sustainable production of biofuels and to change
negative concerns about this topic.
Reaching a sustainable model for agriculture could be a value added
approach firstly for local farmers, but also for all the people who live in
rural areas or use agricultural products.
EU funding (explain which)
national / government funding
regional funding
venture funds
private investment
other (explain which)
The recent increase of oil prices has affected various production
facilities. Policies have stimulated biofuel demand by setting targets
and blending quotas, and have aided development by establishing
support mechanisms (such as subsidies and tax exemptions). The
future potential of biofuels to contribute to energy supply is largely
contingent on the ability to increase yields on existing farmlands or to
add values to agricultural waste to be proficiently used as raw material
for biofuels.
Best practice n°3
Title of the best practice
Forest management. Includes harvest for long-term wood products;
reduced impact logging; certified sustainable forestry; thinning/release;
fertilization and pruning
Location where the BP was developed
Asturias (Spain)
Field of application the best practice
Please thick the relevant box
local bodies
public utilities
industry & SMEs sector
agriculture
X forestry
Harvest for long-term wood products: forest management practices that
maintain and increase forest area, reduce natural disturbances in the
forest, improve forest conditions, and ensure the appropriate and timely
transfer of carbon into wood products lead to increasing overall carbon
storage, thereby reducing carbon in the atmosphere. With the new
silvicuture assesment the
Description of the best practice activities
Reduced impact logging: these techniques are design to minimize the
environmental impact of timber extraction on forest, and their
implementation will bring benefits for the forest ecosystem. Damage to
the surrounding forest and the forest ecosystem can be tremendously
reduced by adopting certain reduced-impact logging practices
including: 1) directional tree felling to inflict the smallest impact on the
surrounding forest; 2) establishing stream buffer zones and watershed
protection areas; 3) using improved technologies to reduce damage to
the soil caused by log extraction; 4) careful planning to prevent excess
roads; 5) reducing wood waste for cut areas (anywhere from 25-50
percent of the wood from a given cleared patch is wasted); 6) limiting
the gradient of roads to prevent excess erosion.
Certified sustainable forestry: Certification has emerged as a market
mechanism for monitoring and promoting sustainable management
practices in various resource-based industries, including agriculture
and forestry. Forest certification is a process that involves an
independent third-party certifying that a particular forest is managed in
accordance with agreed standards on a sustainable basis, and that any
timber from it has been produced in accordance with best practice
forest management and environmental standards. There are two forest
certification schemes operating in Asturias - the Forest Stewardship
Council (FSC) scheme and Programme for the Endorsement of Forest
Certification (PECF). To date around 17,600 hectares of forests in
Asturias are certified under PECF.
Thinning/release: Commercial thinning is the most widely used method
of concentrating site resources onto plantation trees. Thinning stands
to extract pulpwood or other products can pay many benefits. Thinning
brings immediate monetary returns, allows each remaining tree to grow
faster, and saves site resources that would have been lost through tree
mortality, improves crop tree survival and reduces some types of pest
risks to the stand.
Fertilization and pruning: the application of precise amounts of
nutrients is used at the beginning of the plantations according to the
seedling nutrients requirements to prevent contamination. Pruning is a
technique used to improve growth trees and wood quality and it is
apply during the rotation period of the stand.
Description of the best practice innovative and
demonstrative approach – added value
Coherence of the best practice with the local
policy framework and with the national /
regional legislation
Description of the best practice background
Actors involved in the best practice
development
Principal stakeholders that could benefit from
the CCS&CS application
Source of potential financing of the best
practice
Transferability of the best practice
All these activities contribute to improve forest management and
consequently can increase the carbon stocks in forests and wood
products. Also, they go towards the achievement of a balance between
forest production and environmental protection, through sustainable
forestry management.
The concept of best practices was first introduced in response to the
Spain low “Ley de Montes (Ley 43/2003) and the regional low “Ley de
Montes y Ordenación Forestal del Principado de Asturias (3/2004). The
activities related to best practices in forest management are included in
the national and regional lows.
The increase in demand for wood requires an understanding of forests
and their products and ecosystem services. In recent years, much
attention has been focused on enviromental impact on forests but
carbon accounting for harvested wood products in national greenhouse
gas inventories is a new option.
Forestry companies and regional goverment.
Forestry owners, local people who live in the region and forestry
companies that could have new products to offer in the forest market.
EU funding (explain which)
x national / government funding
x regional funding
venture funds
x private investment
other (explain which)
Assistance is available to forestry owners through the local forestry
associations for enhancing the overall environmental quality of their
properties. Best forest management practices and forest buffer strips
are potential tools that forestry owners can use to reach this goal.
The biggest drawback to the new harvesting methods is the great
management expense, because more supervision, planning, and
training are required and fewer trees can be removed, reducing output
and income. Nonetheless, it seems clear that it will have to made to
establish new forest management for long-term benefits. The big
question is whether it is in the economic interest of timber operators to
adopt these methods without prodding from government agencies or
specific market demand for "greener" products.
Best practice n°4
Title of the best practice
Structural characterization of local wood (Castanea sativa Mill.) for its
use in construction
Location where the BP was developed
Asturias (Spain)
Field of application the best practice
Please thick the relevant box
local bodies
public utilities
X industry & SMEs sector
agriculture
X forestry
Timber has been used in construction for centuries, but steel and
concrete are the most usual materials currently used. Nowadays,
timber is taking importance because of its known structural aptitude
and sustainable exploitation, without the energetically expensive
process for the fabrication of steel and concrete. In addition, the
employment of local timber enhances the market and the possibilities
for local industries.
Description of the best practice activities
However, the employment of timber in construction needs a normative
support, and only a few wood species are regulated for this purpose.
The European normative indicates characterization methodologies and
requirements for this regulation. Chestnut timber is not yet included as
construction material, although the great economic and historical
importance in our region of this species. This practice can be resumed
in the characterization of chestnut timber from Asturias, promoting the
employment of this wood.
http://www.cetemas.es/?lng=2
Description of the best practice innovative and
demonstrative approach – added value
In Spain, especially in the North of the country, chestnut tree has a
great cultural and social importance, but its wood is not included as
construction material in the Spanish or European normative. The
knowledge of chestnut timber physical and mechanical properties and
their inclusion in the current regulations represent an important
progress in the enhancement of this species.
The multifunctional of chestnut, especially the timber exploitation,
needs to be potentiated in order to maximize the environmental and
economic benefits with a sustainable development. Development of
local species reduces the economic and environmental transport costs.
Coherence of the best practice with the local
policy framework and with the national /
regional legislation
The increasing claim for sustainable materials, such as timber, is a
corroborated fact in actual market. In Asturias, chestnut timber is
required for the industry. Now, an important local company trades with
correctly classified chestnut timber due to the characterization
performed in this region.
Despite its importance in this region, the Spanish and European
normative about structural timber do not include the chestnut timber.
For this normative inclusion, the local characterization needs to be
expanded to a national scope, with different provenances. Spanish
standard inclusion will be started in 2011 and the process for the
inclusion in European normative will be made in 2012.
This best practice development is needed because of the nonpresence of chestnut timber in the national and European regulations
and the market claim for this material.
Description of the best practice background
The impact of chestnut timber characterization on first transformation
market implies better economic possibilities for the industries involved.
The chestnut market enhancement results in a development of forest
management, with consequently economic and environmental effects.
In addition, the excellent mechanical chestnut timber properties and its
natural durability make an optimal construction material with a minimal
application of chemistry treatments.
•
Actors involved in the best practice
development
•
•
•
Principal stakeholders that could benefit from
the CCS&CS application
•
•
CETEMAS, Forest and Wood Technology Research Centre,
founded in 2009, that invests in research and development
projects that are vital to the expansion and innovation of
forest and wood product-based industries.
Public Administration (Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación.
Consejería de Educación y Ciencia del Principado de
Asturias)
Design companies in timber structures, engineers and
architects.
First, second and third transformation industries, with market
improvement because of the enhancement of important and
local species.
Research organisms, with the development of methodologies
and new research objectives about chestnut timber.
Forestry owners and public administration, with the
increasing importance of good silviculture and forest
management practices derived from the enhancement of the
chestnut products market.
Source of potential financing of the best
practice
Transferability of the best practice
EU funding (explain which)
X national / government funding
regional funding
venture funds
private investment
other (explain which)
In Spain, only four conifer species (pines) and one deciduous species
(Eucalyptus) are contained in the current normative. Similar
characterization projects can be carried out in other regions with the
same methodology, using other potential timber species not regulated.
And also, this kind of project could be develop in other European
region.
Enhancement of the timber as a structural material concerns all the
production value chain, from the tree up to the final product, with an
improvement in the environmental effect derived from sustainable and
optimized forest management.
Best practice form nº 5
Title of the best practice
Energy effective buildings from Gorenjska regional wood
Location where the BP was developed
Gorenjska region
Field of application the best practice
Please thick the relevant box
Description of the best practice activities
X local bodies
X public utilities
X industry & SMEs sector
agriculture
X forestry
Wooden buildings with low energy consumption are combination
of traditional forms of constructing/arhitecture in Gorenjska region
with a modern technological achivements and innovative design.
Such a construction patterns are important for Gorenjska as a
region with large stocks of high quality forests and no or little
other energy resources. These types of constructions contribute
twice to a low carbon economy. Furthermore they (potentially)
respect cultural identity of the region and, if using local wood,
keep financial resources within the region.
There are around 8-10 companies of different sizes which are in
Gorenjska region occupied with own production and construction
of very diverse types of wooden buildings (prefab houses, houses
of massive wood, skeletal houses). They all offer low energy
option, and most of them also buildings in energy passive
construction and by using regional wood.
Description of the best practice innovative and
demonstrative approach – added value
Example of such company is Jelovica House, a division within
Jelovica Company. Following it’s bussines vision, it is now a
leading company in constructing wooden, energy-efficient
buildings such as kindergartens, tourist villas, family and school
buildings for various target groups and of different sizes. Another
possibilty is a ‘’wooden’’ energy restoration of already existing
buildings. Innovations and environmentally friendly products of
Jelovica have been awarded with several Slovene and EU prizes
for energy efficiency.
Community of Preddvor decided in 2011 to investment is such a
wooden, low-energy kindergarten by Jelovica House. That was no
surprise as Preddvor in general has been for more than a decade
aimed to become an energy sustainable community. Achieving
this goal included the installation of a remote control system for
biomass heating (in 2002) for all inhabitants of the community,
using wood from the region.
The kindergarten of Preddvor will consist of 7 playing rooms, a
sports room, a multi-purpose room, administration rooms and a
utility. The total surface of the kindergarten amounts to 1,400m2.
The exterior appearance of the building is a combination of a
façade plaster and larch wood, with 3-layer larch windows.
The kindergarten will be built with Jelovica Termo Plus
construction system which ensures low-energy construction within
B2 energy class, i.e. annual energy consumption of 25–35
kWh/m2 of useful surface. It will be heated with biomass from the
existing boiler house in Preddvor. The timber for construction
comes from the Gorenjska region and from elswhere in Slovenia.
http://montazne-hise-on.net/lesene-hise.html
http://montazne-hise-on.net/skeletne-hise.html
http://montazne-hise-on.net/montazne-hise.html
http://www.jelovica-hise.si/en/
Solutions developed for wooden energy houses offer a large set
of various advantages which partly vary depending on the type of
construction (skeletal, massive, prefab). Basic advantages are
high quality of both construction and living environment
(‘’breathing’’ house), and low energy consumption. Low energy
consumption/CO2 emissions in the production and decomposition
phases for components of such house, and the same in it’s
operating phase of the house, make it as one of most succesful
CCS&CS product. All these advantages are due to charateristics
of such building: diffusion-openess, structural strenght, fire
resistence, thermal conductivity, ''breathing'' of materials and finally
degradabilty of materials used at the end of life-cycle.
Savings in costs for heating applies to the fact that pleasent
feeling of living in wooden building is achived already at the
temperature of 18 - 20⁰C, while in brick-built house only at the
temperature at 22 - 24⁰C. 1 ⁰C lower room temperature brings 56% savings of the costs for heating. CO2 balance of wood is equal
to zero and posititve, respectively, as wood can emit only the quantity
of CO2 which was presviously absorbed, save from the air and used to
produce oxygen.
Primary energy needed for production of wooden construction
materials, eg. fiber board made of soft wood is 12 x smaller as the
energy for polystyrene (fibers from soft wood 70kWh/m3, polystyrene
870kWh/m3). Products as polystyrene, steel, aluminium,… produce
CO2 already in the production phase. Wood is furthermore a material
which is very easy for re-us or recycling.
With all these charateristics, kindergarten in Preddvor will not only
complite affords of Preddvor to become energy sustainable community;
as a public education institution with high number of people
experiencing it's advantages ''from first hand'', knowledge, recognition
of advantages and awarness rising for energy/CO2 minimizing will be
effectivelly diffused and promoted among large number of people of all
generations.
Coherence of the best practice with the local
policy framework and with the national /
regional legislation
Gorenjska region is officially not a ‘’true’’ region due to the fact, that
Slovenia has not been yet divided into administrative regions; these
exist only as statistical and developmental regions. For that reason,
main policy framework with all relevant legislation is not regional, but
national on.
Energy efficient in constructing, renovating in interior equipment are
one of main goals of all Slovene legislation linked to sustainable energy
policy and climate policy, especially after 1995: a.) In the National
Energy Program (2004) energy efficency both in production and
operating of different products and services was defined as one of
main areas of interventions. b.) Slovene Operational Program for
decreasing of Green-house emissions in 2003 declared, by
coordinating key instruments with National Energy Law and in order to
reach Kioto Agreement, support to increase energy efficency in
industry, buildings and in living environment goals, as one of it's main
meaures. c.) National action program for Energy Efficency for period
2008-2016 includes number of financial support masures within the
cathegory “Energy efficent renovation and sustainable building
construction” for households and terciar sector (public sector, craft,
service sector).
These law and programs has reflected in Operational program for
development of environmental and transport infrastructure 2007–2013
(OPROPI), financed substantialy by Cohesion Fund. It is a
implementation document of National Energy Program.
Program contains among several priority tasks also ''Sustainable
Energy'' as one of principle one. Goal of this task is to remove
numerous obstacles which limit more substantial investments into
energy efficency and renewables. This task has 3 major investment
areas, among which one is »Energy renovation and sustainable
constructing in public sector«.
Based on all of above mentioned documents and on upgraded EU
legislation (Directive on Energy efficency of building - Directive
2010/31/EU)), new supplemented National Energy Law was passed in
2011. One of biggest novelty is a request for preparation and
implementation od action plan for increasing number of buildings with
zelo or very low consumption of primary energy and emissions of CO2
(eg. passive houses), with special focus on public sector. Energy
identity card regulations were upgraded, and this card is now
requested also for all building bigger then 250 m2, if they are used by
public institutions. Law brings in new regulation defining energy
efficency and use of renewable resources in public sector, eg. stricter
request for energy efficeny and renewable in public sector and
obligatory energy assesment.
None of these documents have, however, included explicitly indication
to the wooden constructed buildings as best combination of energy
Description of the best practice background
Actors involved in the best practice
development
efficency and using of sustainable local materials.
This will be done by Decree on Green public procurement which is
expected to be introduced in December 2011. Decree will regulate
mandatory 30 % share of wood to be used in constructing or
renovating public buildings and their interior equipment (furniture).
Wood used by constructors will must be produced legally and certified
(as well as wood for paper).
Gorenjska region, as Slovenia in general, faces problems with growing
pressure on environment (mainly focused on increase of CO2
emissions and amounts of of low-degradable waste), increasing costs
for consumption of imported materials, deterioration or stagnation in
economy in rural areas, and loss of cultural identity due to ‘’imported’’
patterns and materials used for buildings in rural areas. All this was
mainly caused by the growth in constructing sector, especially until
2008.
On the other side high wooden stock in forests, especially privately
owned ones, is continuing to grow due to good quality of forests and
work of public Forest service advisors. Big share of this wood is of high
quality. Slovenia has also a very long tradition of high-quality products
of wood-processing industry&craft as wooden houses, furniture, small
items for private use…which is due to centuries of use also a part of
Gorenjska cultural identity. But after 1990 especially big woodprocessing companies largely decreased or even bankrupted due to
bad business management and insufficient adjustments to new global
trends in construction &interior equipment and furniture.
Some most ambitious regional companies (eg. Jelovica House),
however, have remained and increased their business, achieving
recognition and success on most competitive global markets.
High amounts of regional wood, environmental pressures of CO2
and waste, and general economic problems have now again
increased interest of private and public actors to work together
for increase of low energy constructions from local/regional
wood. All these policy and business commitments aim at minimizing
CO2 impact and waste production, supporting sustainable (rural)
development, and preserving cultural identity. Wooden products, such
as furniture, houses or other infrastructure store large amounts of CO2,
and help to avoid harmful impacts of manufacturing based on
unsustainable materials. Such building are energy effective (do
decrease costs and CO2footprint), offers healthy environment (trend of
‘’nature for health’’) and support cultural identity and economy by using
local natural resources (wood).
- Regional SMEs (Jelovica, Plevel, Gaj Les, Lumnar…) with their
business interest to offer to private and public clients energy
efficient and environmental friendly buildings. Such constructions
are now even requested by EU/Slovene legislation, supported by
subsidies and partly motivated by stronger ‘’green’’ awareness
and trends.
- Local communities and public institutions (schools…) as
owners/managers/investors in constructing and managing of
public buildings. Such example is Community of Preddvor. Such
constructions are now even requested by EU/Slovene legislation,
supported by subsidies and partly motivated by stronger ‘’green’’
awareness and trends.
- Private house owners/investors with their housing plans and
interest to maximize quality of living and minimize energy costs
-
-
Principal stakeholders that could benefit from
the CCS&CS application
-
Source of potential financing of the best
practice
Transferability of the best practice
Forest owners and local wood processing industry – new
trends, legal requests and financial supports for wooden low
energy building increased opportunities for both groups, but their
power and functioning is not yet well balanced and coordinated.
While already high quality of regional wood is getting even better,
and after a big drop in harvesting in private forests also quantity is
increasing, link between forest owners and wood processing
industry is still week. All of bigger units of wood processing into
intermediate products, which existed before 1990, are now closed
down due to economical, technological and political reason. At
the moment there are no big saws for intermediate wood products
in the whole region. Large share or even majority of raw wood is
exported to big saws out of region or even out of Slovenia (Italy,
Austria), and then back as intermediate wood products which
decrease financial and environmental benefits. That is the
situation also with a wood for above mentioned wooden houses.
Architects and interior designers – Typical architecture in
Gorenjska regiona has traditionally used high share of wood in
constructing and in interior equipment/furniture. Unfortunately
trends after 1945 were note very favourable for these patterns as
they were often perceived as backwarded, ‘’peasant’’ in socialistic
(industrial) society. All these started slowly to change after 1990,
and now many involved companies have their own architects who
respect wood as constructing material. Many of these and other
‘’external’’ architects are now highly motived and active in develop
and promote wide range of advantages of wood as natural
material (good insulation, healthy living spaces, aesthetic…).
In long-term, such motivation and know-how has to be more
widely included in the curriculum of relevant education institutions
and programs at all levels (university, trainings of architect
associations or craft chamber…
Local communities and public institutions (schools, kindergartens,
homes for seniors, hospitals…)
State&regional and other public actors responsible for buildings in
public interest, eg. Hospitals, schools,…. (responsible also to
cover costs for their construction, renovation and operating)
Local and regional SMEs in the wood-processing industry
Local and regional SMEs involved in designing, building and
managing buildings
Forest owners
Private house owners
X EU funding (explain which)
X national / government funding
regional funding
X venture funds
X private investment
other (explain which)
Both good, as well as some weak points of above described best
practice are useful and can be transferred to any other Slovene or
European region rich in wood. Low-energy constructions made of local
wood can bring a range of positive CCS&CS impacts on environment,
economy and a quality of living, but following conditions need to be
fulfilled: 1. Sufficient &sustainable management of local forests 2.
State or forest owners and companies motivated and equipped to cut
down in nature sensitive way 3. Well situated and operating wood
processing industry for 1st phase of wood processing (intermediate
wood products) 4. Well operating and sustainability oriented
regional/national industry for second phase of wood processing
(production of houses, furniture…) 5. Motivated and stimulated market
and consumers to decide for/use more of wooden products 6. Public
institutions and instruments that supports development of wooden
construction sector (eg. by support to technology development or to
business development of companies) and their use both with
supporting instruments and by direct consumption
Best practice form nº 6
Title of the best practice
Local public-private cooperation for heating by local wooden
biomass
Location where the BP was developed
Gorenjska region
Field of application the best practice
X local bodies
X public utilities
X industry & SMEs sector
agriculture
X forestry
Rapid development of techologies of installations for wooden
biomass heating in last decade enables bigger consumption units
to be heated by one centralized installation in a very efficent (up
to 98%), easy and environmentaly friendly way. Such biomass
heating systems are most effective if consumers are close to
each other, t.i. distribution network is as concentrated as possible
in order to minimize energy losses. Optimal option for minimizing
CO2 emissions is that also wood and processed wooden
biomass, respectively, originate as close to it’s final consumers
as possible. Three examples of this best practice presents all the
elements that such best practice should have:
Description of the best practice activities
1. Community of Preddvor - Installation of big municipality
remote control systems for biomass heating in Gorenjska region
has started in Community of Preddvor (in 2002); more than a
decade this community has aimed to become an energy
sustainable community. In spite of many technological and
organizational problems, this system is now used for all
inhabitants of villages Preddvor, Hrib and Potoče. System
provides heating for private houses with some 1200 residents, as
well as for number of public and private business buildings, using
wood from local forests and wood-processing plants.
2. Lom Primary School - In 2008, a modern biomass heating
installation was completed in the Lom Primary School (the Municipality
of Tržič). It replaced an obsolete oil based heating installation which
consumed annually around 11,000 litres of heating oil and released 30
tons of CO2. However, the new installation is not only environmentally
friendly; thanks to wood biomass coming from the nearby forests, it
also contributes to local rural economy. Wooden biomass is provided
by Gaj Les Co., situated in Potarje village just few kilometres away; this
biomass originates partly from forest management of local forests,
while the other part is a wooden ‘’waste’’ from wood processing (Gaj
Les Co. is specialized for production of wooden houses and cottages,
pellets and other costume-made wooden products). As the previous oil
storage tank was no longer needed, a dressing-room for pupils was
arranged on its previous location. Community saves now some 6% of
cost for heating compering to previous expenditures.
70% of co-financing for biomass mill used to produce ‘’fuel’ for Lom
School by Gaj Les Co was ensured by Slovene Program for Rural
development 2007-2013. Potentially weaker point of this practice is
management of all phases in school heating. After a decision to
change oil for wood, concession agreement was signed between
Community of Tržič and Electro Gorenjska Co., which has been for
decades main regional company for electricity distribution. A decade
ago, in order to use new business opportunities, company started to
invest in renewable energy (particularly for solar power-plants). Focus
on certain types of renewables depends largely on priorities of actual
company management, and by change of head management also
interest for certain renewable can shift or even disappear. Such
uncertainty weakens control and motivation towards Lom heating
installation which can negatively affect continuously efficiency and
improvements in operating of the system.
3. Biomasa Trstenik Co. was established in 2007 after Jože Uranič
from Hribar Farm decided to quit traditional cattle breeding and to
orient completely to forestry and biomass heating production. Farm and
now the biomass heating company is located in a village of Trstenik
(502 m; Municipality of Kranj) on the slopes of Kamnisko-Savinjske
Alps which are completely covered by forest up to altitude of 15001700.
Hrib Farm and Biomasa Trstenik, respectively, installed biomass
heating installation on the location of previous cattle barn, storage tank
for warm water, all automatic devices and silo for wooden biomass.
Gradually they set up hot water system with three branches with total
length of 550 metres. For implementation of all investment they also
candidate and successfully obtained 30% of costs from Slovene Rural
Development Program 2007-2013. This system now provides heating
for 9 private houses, local church, parson’s house and Home of
Salesians (there were also talks with local community for heating
kindergarten and civil parish).With all consumers they agreed on 15
years contract for heating during the winter season. Annual
consumption is around 400 m3 of wooden biomass of lower quality.
Almost all wood originates from forests belonging to Hribar Farm, while
part is obtained from neighbouring farmers-forest owners trough annual
forest cleaning. So far farmers gave this wood for free as they were
satisfied that someone else took care that forest are properly and
regularly maintained and managed. Satisfaction is also on the side of
consumers as heating costs for them are now considerably lower as
with heating oil.
Description of the best practice innovative and
demonstrative approach – added value
Coherence of the best practice with the local
policy framework and with the national /
regional legislation
All individual cases of this good practice show that local forests and
wood processing plants of Gorenjska region can provide important
quantities of wooden biomass to produce renewable energy with
positive effects for environment (lower CO2 emissions) and local
economy. However, elements of technology, motivation and
management are of crucial importance for their success and long-term
positive impact.
All of described examples of best practice not only use renewable
energy resources, but also a local one to avoid transport CO2 and
keep money for ‘’fuel’’ in the local area/region.
What is more, they also use the most cost effective and environmental
ethic forms of biomass, t.i. less valuable wooden waste, while highquality wood is used for constructing, furniture…
Important impact of such approach in ensuring wooden biomass used
is increase of motivation to implement sustainable forest management
(cleaning, selective woodcutting…) and better use all parts of wood
brought into wood processing plants. With additional income it provides
not only economy and environmental benefits trough business of
heating, but also financial motivation for forest management and
development of wood processing industry.
Wooden biomass used in schools is also a strong demonstration and
promotional tool for renewable energies, and affords to introduce them
in public institutions proves dedication of state authorities and public
sector for CCS&CS and sustainable rural development. Public funds
available for renewable energy from wooden biomass also enhance
motivation of private investors.
Gorenjska region is officially not a ‘’real’’ region due to the fact, that
Slovenia has not been yet divided into administrative regions; these
exist only as statistical and developmental regions. For that reason,
main policy framework with all relevant legislation is not regional, but
national on.
Use of renawable energies has been one of main goals of all Slovene
legislation linked to sustainable energy policy and climate policy,
especially after 1995. Among these sources wooden biomass has
special position due to 60% of Slovene territory covered by forests.
Ministry for Environment and Space prepared already in 2002 a
Program for energy use of wooden biomass for 2002-2004. Program
planned to build in next 10 years 50 municipality remote control
systems for biomass heating, 100 industrial heating systems and
5000 small individual private heating installations. Total subventions to
support these investments are estimated to 53 millions EUR. In order
to eliminate legislation, institutional and procedural obstacles for wider
use of wooden biomass, Slovene Public Agency for Ef prepared and
implemented (by funds of Global Fund for Environment) in 2002-2005 a
wide and comprehensive project ‘’Eliminating obstacles for increased
use of wooden biomass as energy resource’’.
Most important laws regulating, guiding and promoting use of wooden
biomass in Slovenia are:
a.) The National Energy Program (2004);
b.) Slovene Operational Program for decreasing of Green-house
emissions adopted in 2003, coordinated by key instruments of National
Energy Law in order to reach Kioto Agreement;
c.) These law and programs has reflected in Operational program for
development of environmental and transport infrastructure 2007–2013
(OPROPI), financed substantialy by Cohesion Fund. It is a
Description of the best practice background
implementation document of National Energy Program.
Program contains among several priority tasks also ''Sustainable
Energy'' as one of principle one. Goal of this task is to remove
numerous obstacles which limit more substantial investments into
energy efficency and renewables. This task has 3 major investment
areas, among which one is »Innovative measures for local energy
supply«.
d.) Action plan for Renewable energies in Slovenia (2010); Goals of
Slovene energy policy, for achieving of which this plan is setting up
instruments and supporting, are to ensure 25% share of renewable
energies by 2020, t.i. to double their share from 2010 by 2020.
Renewable are also to become one of priorities of economic
development, and their share should further increase also after 2020
(at least until 2020). Very important part of Plan’s content is dedicated
to wooden biomass, especially among:
1. Programs for promoting use of renewables for heating and cooling
(out of 6 programs 3 are dedicated to support investments in heating
by wooden biomass, while 2 are dedicated to support it by awarenessrising, promotion and expert consulting)
2. Special measures within the Plan – these plans were created
exclusively and only for supporting use of wooden biomass energy
(also to support increase quantities of available biomass and it’s
supply)
e.) Operational Program for energy use of wooden biomass in Slovenia
for 2007-2013 (wooden biomass is the only renewable source of
energy to have such special operational program !!)
f.) Slovene Environmental Public Fund as a main provider of public
financial support for public/private investments in renewables has 2 of
it’s measures targeted on installing municipal and individual private
heating system (trough favourable credits or non-refundable money)
g.) Slovene Rural development program 2007-2013 provides nonrefundable subventions both for use of wooden biomass on farms for
own consumption, as well to produce heath as a profitable commercial
activity on farms to support sustainable development of rural areas.
Share of non-refundable funds is up to 70% of investment.
Use of wood as energy source is mentioned in National Law on Forests
(1993) and National program for Forests in 2007.
As already mentioned, Gorenjska has no regional legislation, but
energy from wooden biomass is frequently mentioned in regional
development documents: Regional development plan for Gorenjska
2007-2013 (as a guide-book for big regional projects and investments)
and Rural action plan 2007-13 (as a base for LEADER projects)
Use of wooden biomass in heating has been tradionally important
in Gorenjska region, especially for private home owners. The
pressure of environmenatl impacts and increasing costs of nonrenewable (fossils) fuels, and search for new development
opportunities for stagnating rural areas has increased motivation
to . Strong factors are also improved biomass heating
technologies which ensures high efficency, and obligations of
Slovenia within EU to increasing share of renewable energies
with lower CO2 emissions.
Slovenia has no other important (renewable) energy resources
except wood which could be substatially increased in the future.
Rivers, where numerous hydro-power plants were constructed in
the past, have limited potential for the future due to natural
condistions and nature protection regulations.
It is therefor no surprise, that Slovenia has prepared many
projects and programs to support use of wooden biomass, and
substantial financial respurces are available for it’s promotion and
implementation.
Actors involved in the best practice
development
-
Local and regional SMEs involved in planning, installing,
supplying and managing heating installations (Elektro Gorenjska,
Gaj Les, Roblek Farm, Preddvor Energetika..)
-
Local communities and public institutions responsible for
operating and financing of heating systems (Community of
Preddvor, Community of Trzic, Primary school of Trzic-Lom)
-
Private residents and owners of commercial/business premises in
Preddvor and Trstenik villages which are heated by joint heating
installation, mostly with lower cots
-
Private forest owners around Preddvor, Lom and Trstenik villages
who obtained additional income by providing heating or at least
ensured themselves free forest management;
-
Slovene Program for Rural development 2007-2013 which
ensured co-financing for biomass mill used to produce ‘’fuel’ for
Lom School by Gaj Les Co., and biomass heating installations in
Trstenik village (Biomasa Trstenik Co.)
Regional SMEs involved in planning, installing, supplying and
managing heating installations
-
Local communities, state authorities/organizations and public
institutions responsible for operating and financing of heating
systems ( communities, ministries, schools, hospitals)
-
Private residents and owners of commercial/business/craft
premises in which could be heated by joint heating installation
-
Private (small and big) forest owners in Gorenjska region
Principal stakeholders that could benefit from
the CCS&CS application
Source of potential financing of the best
practice
Transferability of the best practice
X EU funding (explain which)
X national / government funding
regional funding
X venture funds
X private investment
other (explain which)
Although described best practice in one or another form is already in
practice in many regions of EU, especially Scandinavia, Austria and
Germany, Slovene examples are still very interesting and useful to
transfer them into partner region and elsewhere in Europe.
Main preconditions which need to be fulfilled for such transferability
are:
a.) Legislation and policy documents which requires from public
actors that share of renewables has to be increased,
b.) Legislation and policy documents which allow installing&operating
of such heating installations&systems;
c.) private and public financial support instruments (special funds,
non-refundable public money, …) to support heating systems and
all ‘’supporting’’ activities (forest management, wooden biomass
production…), especially for financially weaker private investors;
d.) Organizational models, political will and cooperation culture for
installing,
operating
and
supplying
of
heating
installations&systems
e.) Sufficient territory covered by quality trees and sufficient quantity
of wood stock, sustainably managed and exploited (woodcutting).
For all this, also forestry supporting infrastructure is needed
(forests roads, forest service advisors, trainings for forest owners,
financial help for forest equipment…)
f.)
Existing and successful wood processing industry/craft providing
wooden biomass as a side product
7. CONCLUSIONS
This report addressed the use of benchmarking as a management tool in the context of municipal and local
community actions towards sustainability management. It is motivated by the growing interest at the European
policy-making level to stimulate the use of sustainability management tools and exchange of best practices
among local authorities. This is seen to be important because local authority actions play a vital role in
responding to the challenges of enhancing the state of the environment not only in policy-making, but also in the
provision of services and in the planning process. Local communities therefore need to be aware of their own
sustainability performance levels and should be able to engage in exchange of best practices to respond to these
challenges. This has been promoted through a number of actions at the policy level. The increased use of
sustainability management tools and the exchange of information between communities are stressed in several
documents issued by the European Commission or city networks. Tools such as quality and environmental
management, performance measurement, or activity-based costing are increasingly used by local authorities to
increase their efficiency concerning environmental services. Furthermore, cooperation between communities
through networks is increasing. These actions can be seen in the context of sharing experience and learning from
each other. Benchmarking could be considered in this context as the ‘magic tool’ to foster healthy competition
between communities and lead to improvements.
Sustainable management of resources offer multiple opportunities to reduce GHGs, counteract global warming
and mitigate climate change. In order to reduce trade-offs among food security, climate change and ecosystem
degradation, productive and sustainable assessment of primary sector is crucial. The system-oriented and
participative concept of agriculture and forestry, combined with new sustainable technologies, could offer greatly
needed solutions in the face of climate change.