An evaluation of the UK's use of SFM standards to procure solid woody biomass for electricity generation using sustainable bioenergy criteria

被引:8
作者
Barnett, Brad [1 ]
机构
[1] Michigan Technol Univ, Dept Social Sci, 1400 Townsend Dr, Houghton, MI 49931 USA
来源
BIOFUELS-UK | 2016年 / 7卷 / 01期
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
certification standards; energy return on investment; EROI; Renewables Obligation; sustainable forest management; FOREST MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION; IMPACTS; ENERGY; OPPORTUNITIES; PERCEPTIONS; GOVERNANCE; BIOFUELS; LESSONS;
D O I
10.1080/17597269.2015.1118775
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
The threat of climate change and depletion of its fossil fuels has pushed the UK to aggressively pursue renewable energy sources for power production. According to its National Renewable Energy Action Plan, the UK hopes to generate 30% of its electricity demand by 2020 from renewable sources, with energy from biogenic sources accounting for approximately 22.3% of renewable generation. The UK requires that all woody biomass imported to help meet these renewable electricity goals provide evidence of legal and sustainable sourcing and, at a minimum, save 60% in GHG emissions compared to fossil fuels. Under its Timber Standard for Heat & Electricity, the UK recognizes woodfuel imported from US forests certified by Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) as meeting this requirement. This study evaluates SFI and FSC sustainable forest management certification programs using criteria found in the scholarly literature for sustainable bioenergy feedstock production. The author argues that the sustainability of UK woody biomass imports for electricity would be improved by coupling sustainable forest management programs with a bioenergy sustainability scheme as designed by the Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 11
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2011, RSB PRINC CRIT SUST
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2015, Requirements for the SFI 2015-2019 program: Standards, rules for label use, procedures and guidance, P1
  • [3] [Anonymous], SUSTAIN DEV BIOFUELS
  • [4] Certification Schemes and the Impacts on Forests and Forestry
    Auld, Graeme
    Gulbrandsen, Lars H.
    McDermott, Constance L.
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES, 2008, 33 (187-211) : 187 - 211
  • [5] Ecological Impacts of Energy-Wood Harvests: Lessons from Whole-Tree Harvesting and Natural Disturbance
    Berger, Alaina L.
    Palik, Brian
    D'Amato, Anthony W.
    Fraver, Shawn
    Bradford, John B.
    Nislow, Keith
    King, David
    Brooks, Robert T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FORESTRY, 2013, 111 (02) : 139 - 153
  • [6] Perceptions of Virginia's Primary Forest Products Manufacturers regarding Forest Certification
    Bond, Brian
    Lyon, Scott
    Munsell, John
    Barrett, Scott
    Gagnon, Jennifer
    [J]. FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL, 2014, 64 (7-8) : 242 - 249
  • [7] Sustainability criteria for bioenergy systems: results from an expert survey
    Buchholz, Thomas
    Luzadis, Valerie A.
    Volk, Timothy A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2009, 17 : S86 - S98
  • [8] Assessment and optimization of forest biomass supply chains from economic, social and environmental perspectives - A review of literature
    Carnbero, Claudia
    Sowlati, Taraneh
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2014, 36 : 62 - 73
  • [9] Revising theories of nonstate market-driven (NSMD) governance: Lessons from the Finnish Forest Certification experience
    Cashore, Benjamin
    Egan, Elizabeth
    Auld, Graeme
    Newsom, Deanna
    [J]. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS, 2007, 7 (01) : 1 - +
  • [10] Clark MR, 2011, ECOL SOC, V16