A. Frühwald Federal Research Centre for Forestry and Forest Products University of Hamburg Centre...

A. Frühwald

Federal Research Centre for Forestry and Forest Products

University of Hamburg

Centre for Wood Sience and Technology

Comparision of wood Comparision of wood products and major products and major

substitutes with respect to substitutes with respect to environmental and energy environmental and energy

balancesbalances

Prof. Dr. Arno Frühwald



A. Frühwald




BFHBFH

A. Frühwald




Organisation of R&DOrganisation of R&D and teaching in Hamburg and teaching in Hamburg

University of HamburgUniversity of Hamburg Federal Research Centre Federal Research Centre for Foresty and Forest for Foresty and Forest

ProductsProducts

World Forestry

Wood Biology

Wood Technology

Nat

iona

l and

inte

rnat

iona

l in

stitu

tion

of R

&D

FB

- B

iolo

gy

World Forestry

Forest Genetics and Forest Tree Breding

Forest Ecology and Forest Assessment

Economics

Wood Biology and Wood Protection

Wood Physics and Mechanical Technology of Wood

Wood Chemistry and chemical Technology of Wood

A. Frühwald




Basic studies- natural sience- technical- economical basics

Advanced studies- Wood as raw material- Wood - Wood trade and market

Special subjects:- Wood Biology- Wood Technology- Wood Chemestry- Economics- int. Forestry and Politics

Intermediate diploma

Final diploma

Diploma thesis

Sem.

3

5

1,5

faculty

Institutes

Institutes

Institutes

chair

chair

faculty

chair

ca. 120 canditates

(2/3 1/3 )

20 Students/ semester

Study of wood sience, business and technologyStudy of wood sience, business and technology

University degree:

Diplom-Holzwirt/in

A. Frühwald




New environmental challenges for Forestry New environmental challenges for Forestry and Forest Products Sectorand Forest Products Sector

• sustainable management of resources

- Rio conference, world climate conferences

• reduced energy consumption

• reduced Global Warming Potential

• reduced emissions to air, water, soil

• recycling of materials

• biodiversity

Driving forces:

Kyoto-Protocol, Agenda 21

A. Frühwald




solar radiation

infrared-radiation

reflecion

absorption

CO2

FCKWCH4

trace gases into the atmosphere

emittance of

Greenhouse EffectGreenhouse Effect

A. Frühwald




Green House GasesGreen House Gases

chemical compound CO2-Äquivalent

(100 years)

CO2 1

CH4 24,5

NO2 320

O3 2000

H1201 Halon 5600

FCKW 1500

calculated as Carbon (C)

A. Frühwald




Emissions in t COEmissions in t CO22 per capita per capita

Germany: 11 t CO2

Luxembourg: 27 t CO2

USA: 20 t CO2

Finland: 12 t CO2

Canada: 16 t CO2

Great Britain: 10 t CO2

Sweden: 7 t CO2

A. Frühwald




Kyoto-Protocol obligationsKyoto-Protocol obligations

(Basis 1990 emissions, target year 2008/2012)(Basis 1990 emissions, target year 2008/2012)

Europe: - 8 %

Germany: - 21 %

Austria: - 13 %

USA: no interest

Sweden: + 4 %

Japan: - 6 %

New Zealand: +- 0 %

A. Frühwald



Centre for Wood Sience and Technology LCA is a method to describeLCA is a method to describe

the ecological importance of athe ecological importance of a

product or service along it´sproduct or service along it´s

life cycle from graddle to grave.life cycle from graddle to grave.

The method is described in the standards ISO/EN

•14.040 Principles of LCA

•14.041 Inventory Analysis (LCI)

•14.042 Impact Assessment (LCIA)

•14.043 Interpretation

Life Cycle AssessmentLife Cycle Assessment

A. Frühwald




An inventory analysisAn inventory analysis

Raw

material

Product

manufacture

Product

useIncineration

energy capital

equipment

waterair soil

emissions (incl. energy) to system boundary

system under study

Raw

materials

auxiliary

materials

products

by-products

A. Frühwald




Impact CategoriesImpact Categories

GWP: Global Warming Potential

AP: Actification Potential

EP: Eutrophication

HTP: Human Toxicity Potential

AETP: Aquatic Toxicity Potential

POCP: Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential

TETP: Terrestric Toxicity Potential

A. Frühwald




Material and energy for glue lam and Material and energy for glue lam and construction solid wood for structural useconstruction solid wood for structural use

glue lam constructionsolid wood

materials

kg / m3

lumberwater

oil + greasevarnishplasticsmetalsglue

total:

592467

0,20,70,22214

1.096

lumberwater

oil + greaseglueplastics

total:

529423

0,30,40,2

953

energy

kWh/m3

primary

electricitydieselwoodfuel oil

total:

391273518

36

1.218

electricitydieselwoodfuel oil

total:

241216220

11

688

A. Frühwald




0

50

100

150

fore

stry

sawm

illing

dryin

g

plann

ing

over

all

kg C

O2-

equ

ival

ents

per

m³ 142

54

70

117

Greenhouse gas emission of Greenhouse gas emission of

construction solid timber (GWP)construction solid timber (GWP)

Fixed CO2/m³: 925,5 kg

A. Frühwald




Acidification Potential (AP) ofAcidification Potential (AP) of

construction solid timberconstruction solid timber

0

0,5

1,0

1,5kg

SO

2-eq

uiv

alen

ts p

er m

³

1,15

0,50,55

0,030,075

fore

stry

sawm

illing

dryin

g

plann

ing

over

all

A. Frühwald




Glue Lam

300

100

CSL/Parallam

360

80

65

13

LVL/OSB

360

80

55

13

moment of inertia 22.500 cm4 20.000 cm4 17.500 cm4

wood volume per 10m beam 0,70 m3 0,22 m3 0,26 m3

type of logs large diam. thinningslarge d. 75%thinn. 25%

Ecological aspects of beam structuresEcological aspects of beam structures

A. Frühwald




Glue Lam

300

100

CSL/Parallam

360

80

65

13

LVL/OSB

360

80

55

13

moment of inertia 22.500 cm4 20.000 cm4 17.500 cm4

wood volume per 10m beam 0,70 m3 0,22 m3 0,26 m3

type of logs large diam. thinningslarge d. 75%thinn. 25%

energy input 1.400 MJ 900 MJ 1.300 MJfossil 57 % 37 % 50 %non-fossil 43 % 63 % 50 %

CO2-Equiv. 33 kg 17 kg 27 kg

Ecological aspects of beam structuresEcological aspects of beam structures

A. Frühwald




Comparison of timber and non timber products Comparison of timber and non timber products

wooden house brick type house

weight [kg] 71 273

energy [MJ] 271 876

CO2-emissions [kg] - 50 58

acidification [kg] 128 196

1 m² wall elements

Source: Waltjen, R. et al. 1999

A. Frühwald




Example: single family houses Example: single family houses

House type Impactpotential

Production Construction

Framework house GWP100 70100.00 24752.00

AP 156.37 55.21

EP 13.32 4.70POCP 4.03 1.42

Blockhouse GWP100 71546.00 24752.00

AP 159.59 55.21EP 13.59 4.70

POCP 4.12 1.42Brick house GWP100 85277.00 29702.00

AP 190.22 66.26

EP 16.20 5.64POCP 4.91 1.71

A. Frühwald





House type Impactpotential

Total Case A Total Case B

Framework house GWP100 94852.00 79248.00

AP 211.58 176.78

EP 18.02 15.05

POCP 5.46 4.56

Blockhouse GWP100 96298.00 52957.00

AP 214.81 118.13

EP 18.30 10.06

POCP 5.54 3.05

Brick house GWP100 114980.00 108400.00

AP 256.48 241.81

EP 21.844 20.60

POCP 6.616 6.24

No thermal utilisation of waste wood

Thermal utilisation of waste wood

A. Frühwald





Case A

Case B

GWP 100

Framework construction

Blockhouse

Brick house

95.000

80.000

115.000

53.000

96.000

108.000

A. Frühwald





Case A

Case B

AP


Blockhouse

Brick house

211

176

256

118

214

241

A. Frühwald





Case A

Case B

EP


Blockhouse

Brick house

18

15

22

10

18

20

A. Frühwald





Case A

Case B

POCP


Blockhouse

Brick house

5,4

4,5

6,6

3,0

5,5

6,2

A. Frühwald




Example: Simple (three-storey) buildings Example: Simple (three-storey) buildings

Impact potentials

7613

648 196

-278-3264

-84

-4000

-2000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

1 2 3

Steel wood & steelAP [t SO2 eq.]

EP [kg phosphate eq.] POCP [kg ethene eq.]

A. Frühwald




Example: Simple (three-storey) buildings Example: Simple (three-storey) buildings

GWP 100t

CO

2 e

q.

4.000

- 2.000

0

Wood & Steel

Steel

3.410

- 1.463

A. Frühwald




Example: Window frames Example: Window frames

Energy Consumption

26648

20794 19757

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

1

[MJ

/win

do

w u

nit

]

Alu PVC Wood

515 MJ renewable

A. Frühwald





GWP

906997

1090

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Aluminium PVC Wood

kg

CO

2-e

q

A. Frühwald





GWP100

-200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Alu PVC Wood

maintenance

transport

dismantling

framematerial

surfacetreatement

lifetime 30years

production

sealingmaterial

mounting

1089 kg CO2-eq. 996 kg CO2-eq. 906 kg CO2-eq.

A. Frühwald




Example: Noise protection elementsExample: Noise protection elements

Energy consumption (PEI)Energy consumption (PEI)

Source: Richter, Künniger, 2001

Brick WoodCement

MJ

- 500

0

2.500

1.500

2.000

1.000

500

3.000

energy for production

energy for manufacture

energy for recycling

A. Frühwald




Example: noice protection elementsExample: noice protection elements

Energy consumption (PEI)Energy consumption (PEI)

Source: Richter, Künniger, 2001

Brick WoodCement

MJ

- 500

0

2.500

1.500

2.000

1.000

500

3.000

energy from waste

energy fossil

energy renewable

A. Frühwald




Energy consumption vs. Energy potential Energy consumption vs. Energy potential

Fossil fuel

[MJ/m³]

Wood fuel

[MJ/m³]

Electricity

[MJ/m³]

residues

[MJ/m³]

product

[MJ/m³]

Logs 70 0 0 4.500 8.800 < 1%

Green

lumber

100 5 85 4.000 8.300 1,5%

Planned dry

lumber

1.000 850 250 5.500 9.000 15%

Glue lam 1.000 2.800 470 8.000 9.200 20%

OSB 200 3.000 470 2.200 12.900 25%

Consumption Energy potential in

consump.

potent.

A. Frühwald




Thank you for listeningThank you for listening

Vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit Vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit

Tack för Uppmärksamheten Tack för Uppmärksamheten

Merci beaucoup pour votre attentionMerci beaucoup pour votre attention

Vi ringrazio per la cortese attenzioneVi ringrazio per la cortese attenzione

Muchas gracias por su atenciónMuchas gracias por su atención

A. Frühwald




Carbon aspectsCarbon aspects

Sequestration – forests + wood products

Substitution effects

- material substitution

- energy substitution

A. Frühwald




Photosynthesis Photosynthesis

6 CO2

solar energy6 O2

(biomass)

H2O

C6H12O6

Input Output

1,44 kg CO2 1 kg biomass

0,56 kg H2O 1 kg O2

18,5 MJ solar energy 18,5 MJ thermal use

Balance für 1 kg wood

A. Frühwald




fossile fuels

COCO22 equiv equiv.. 900 mill t carbon/year

EUROPE

Atmosphere

OCEANS

CO2-sinks130 mill t

carbon/year forests

harvest

C-sink

fuelwoodreplace

Closed carbon cycleClosed carbon cycle

A. Frühwald




C-sink data for wood species C-sink data for wood species

1 m³ softwood (pine, spruce, larch)

~ 400 - 550 kg dry matter

~ 200 - 275 kg carbon

1 m³ hardwood (beach, oak, ash, others)

~ 400 - 700 kg dry matter

~ 200 - 350 kg carbon

average in Europe

1 m³ 500 - 600 kg dry matter or 250 - 300 kg carbon

A. Frühwald




Carbon sink in ForestsCarbon sink in Forests

carbon stocks in trees and soils

of European Forestsof European Forests ~ 20.000 Mio t C~ 20.000 Mio t C

of which

carbon stock in tree biomass ~ 8.000 Mio t C

estimated net sequestration

- in trees ~ 100 Mio t C/y

- in soils ~ 30 Mio t C/y

- total ~ 130 Mio t C/y

total carbon emission Europe ~ 900 Mio t C/y(Source: Karjalainen et al. 2000)

A. Frühwald




(political) C-Sinks in forests (political) C-Sinks in forests

accepted by COP 6 / COP 7accepted by COP 6 / COP 7

Germany: 1,24 Mio t/y

Austria: 0,63 Mio t/y

Sweden: 0,58 Mio t/y

Japan: 13 Mio t/y

Canada: 12 Mio t/y

Finland: 0,16 Mio t/y

New Zealand: 0,2 Mio t/y

Russia: 20 Mio t/ycompared to physical sink acc to Karjalinen et al. 130 Mio t/y

A. Frühwald




Carbon sink - wood productsCarbon sink - wood products

carbon stocks in wood products

• wooden windows 25 kg C/unit

• wooden floor (parquet) 5 kg C/m²

• furniture per family 1.000 kg C/family

• roof brick type house 1.000 - 3.000 kg C/unit

• wooden house 10.000 - 25.000 kg C/unit

A. Frühwald




C-sink wood products - Germany C-sink wood products - Germany

Volume

[Mio t]

Carbon sink

[Mio t]

35 Mio. houses with 2.000 kg furniture and

wooden fitmens 70 35

17 Mio. wooden single- and double family

houses (25 m³ each) 255 128

2,75 Mio. residential buildings with more than

two appartments, used wood 40 m³ 85 43

Wood in exterior use 80 40

Wood in non-residential buildings 100 50

Wood as packaging material 10 5

Paper products 50 25

Semifinished products -

production and storage 15 8

together 665 334

per capita 8 4

A. Frühwald




Expansion of German values to European sinkExpansion of German values to European sink

Germany 80 Mio people - 334 Mio C-sink in wood/paper products

EU (15) 375 Mio people 1.565 Mio C-sinks in wood products

remarks:

- building sector is different within EU regarding wooden buildings (North - South)

- other wood utilization sectors differ much within the EU

Total carbon Emission Europe 900 Mio t/y

A. Frühwald




C-sink in wood products EU (15) C-sink in wood products EU (15)

Estimates based on German situation:

total C-sink 1.565 Mio t

net sequestration 13 - 16 Mio t/y

Total C-emissions ~ 900 Mio t/y

C-sink in wood products 3,5 - 4,5 % 40 - 50 %

C-sink in forests 14 % 130 %

reduction obligation

total emissions

in % of

A. Frühwald




Average life time of wood products - Germany Average life time of wood products - Germany

Results from inquires and field research:

newspaper 0,2 years

magazines 0,5 years

books 25 years

packaging 2 years

furniture

low price 10 years

high price 30 years

outdoor uses 15 years

buildings

decoration 30 years

structural use 75 yearsaverage 33 years (weighed by volume)

A. Frühwald




195 m² living space

C-Emissions [t]

manufacture 28,1

construction 0,6

maintenance of house 5,5

use (60 y) 43,7

recycling 3,3

transport 0,4

total 81,8 t C

C-sink during 60 years 25,5 t C

Source: Pohlmann 2002

C-emissions during life cycle and C-sink C-emissions during life cycle and C-sink

A. Frühwald




COCO22-emission wood/stone house -emission wood/stone house

CO

2 em

issi

onst

ored

CO

2

prod

uctio

n

Use p

hase

(60

Years

)

tota

l CO 2

-em

issio

n

CO 2-b

alan

ce

HM

H: wooden house

M: stone haus

H

H

H M

MM

(Source: Pohlmann 2002)

A. Frühwald




C-Sink in wooden houses C-Sink in wooden houses

Per house compared to brick type reduces C-emissions by 10 t

If additional 10 % of all houses in Europe would be build with wood, the C-emissions are reduced by

1,8 Mio. t (~ 2% of all C-emissions)

(After enlargement of the EU an increase is to expept)

A. Frühwald




SUBSTITUTION EFFECTS SUBSTITUTION EFFECTS

IN GENERAL:

If wood products substitute non wood based products less fossil energy is required because of:

• wood based products require less energy for manufacture

• processing residues and products after use are a source for energy

Substitution effects reduce fossil fuel consumption and therefore have a direct influence on GHG emission reduction („100% Kyoto-Protocol“)

A. Frühwald




Substitution effectsSubstitution effects

carbon and energy pool

energy

timber products replacenon-timber products

energetic comparison(production energy)

Processing residues and wood products after use

replace fossil energy

Substitution of fossil fuelsSubstitution of fossil fuelsSubstitution of materialSubstitution of material

reduced carbon and energy pool

no wood utilisationC-sink remains

Processing residues

A. Frühwald




Energy aspects of wooden productsEnergy aspects of wooden products

1 m³ logs

energy input

3.000 MJ

processing

recycling or energy

7.200 MJ

1 m³ for energy

9.000 MJ

0,2 m³ for energy

1.800 MJ

Δ = 6.000 MJ/m³ energy surplus

0,8 m³ products

A. Frühwald




Energy aspects of non-wooden productsEnergy aspects of non-wooden products

Alternative building material (non-wood)

(equiv. to 1 m³ of logs) processing

recycling or landfill

no energy~ 6.000 MJ

Δ = 6.000 MJ/m³ energy consumption

A. Frühwald




Summary comparison wood - non wood Summary comparison wood - non wood systemsystema) from wood system 6.000 MJ/m³ logs surplus energy

(to replace fossil energy)

b) from non wood systems 6.000 MJ/m³ logs equivalent input

(fossil energy)

Wood system replaces 12.000 MJ/m³ logs fossil energy

=> equivalent to 1,10 t CO2 or 0,30 t C emitted into atmosphere

Compared to storage in the forest

1 m³ is equivalent to ~ 0,25 t C or 0,90 t CO2

The consequences: use more wood

• first to produce products

• second to produce energy

A. Frühwald




C-storage in products and in forests (above ground)

0,25 t C per m³ wood

C-substitution

0,30 t C per m³ wood

Reduction of emissions!

Timber cuttings in Europe (EU 15) 251 Mio m³/y

10 % increase 25 Mio m³/y

C-emission reduction 12,5 Mio t C/y

1,4 % of all emissions

A. Frühwald




ConclusionsConclusions

1. Forest and long life timber products are important carbon sinks.

2. European forests are sustainable managed.

3. Wood products require little energy for manufacture.

4. More than 75% of the required energy is produced from wood residues and recovered wood.

5. Wood and wood products after use are important energy sources.

6. Alternative non-wood based products require more energy for manufacture.

7. The total CO2 reduction potential by using wood sink and substitution effects is up to 300 Mill. tons of CO2 per year in Europe, 15-20% of all CO2-emissions in Europe.

8. 1 m³ of round wood used in building sector can reduce the CO2- emission from fossil fuels up to 1,1 tons or 0,3 t C.

9. Substitution effect is more important than sink effect.

10. For environmental reasons: use more wood!

Date post:	02-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ann-knight
View:	218 times
Download:	3 times

A. Frühwald Federal Research Centre for Forestry and Forest Products University of Hamburg Centre...

Documents