Climate change mitigation from increased paper recycling in Sweden: conserving forests or utilizing substitution?

IF 2.5 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Research Communications Pub Date : 2024-06-26 DOI:10.1088/2515-7620/ad5930
Maximilian Schulte, Ragnar Jonsson, Torun Hammar, Jeannette Eggers, Johan Stendahl and Per-Anders Hansson
{"title":"Climate change mitigation from increased paper recycling in Sweden: conserving forests or utilizing substitution?","authors":"Maximilian Schulte, Ragnar Jonsson, Torun Hammar, Jeannette Eggers, Johan Stendahl and Per-Anders Hansson","doi":"10.1088/2515-7620/ad5930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate change mitigation by increased paper recycling can alleviate the two-sided pressure on the Swedish forest sector: supplying growing demands for wood-based products and increasing the forest carbon sink. This study assesses two scenarios for making use of a reduced demand for primary pulp resulting from an increased paper recycling rate in Sweden, from the present 72% to 78%. A Conservation scenario uses the saved primary pulp to reduce pulplog harvests so as to increase the forest carbon sink concomitant with constant overall wood product supply. In contrast, a Substitution scenario uses the saved primary pulp to produce man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCF) from dissolving pulp replacing cotton fiber, implying increased overall wood product supply. Our results suggest that utilizing efficiency gains in paper recycling to reduce pulplog harvests is better from a climate change mitigation perspective than producing additional MMCF to substitute cotton fiber. This conclusion holds even when assuming the use of by-products from dissolving pulp making and an indirect increase in MMCF availability. Hence, unless joint improvements across the value chain materialize, the best climate change mitigation option from increased paper recycling in Sweden would seemingly be to reduce fellings rather than producing additional MMCF.","PeriodicalId":48496,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Research Communications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Research Communications","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ad5930","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Climate change mitigation by increased paper recycling can alleviate the two-sided pressure on the Swedish forest sector: supplying growing demands for wood-based products and increasing the forest carbon sink. This study assesses two scenarios for making use of a reduced demand for primary pulp resulting from an increased paper recycling rate in Sweden, from the present 72% to 78%. A Conservation scenario uses the saved primary pulp to reduce pulplog harvests so as to increase the forest carbon sink concomitant with constant overall wood product supply. In contrast, a Substitution scenario uses the saved primary pulp to produce man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCF) from dissolving pulp replacing cotton fiber, implying increased overall wood product supply. Our results suggest that utilizing efficiency gains in paper recycling to reduce pulplog harvests is better from a climate change mitigation perspective than producing additional MMCF to substitute cotton fiber. This conclusion holds even when assuming the use of by-products from dissolving pulp making and an indirect increase in MMCF availability. Hence, unless joint improvements across the value chain materialize, the best climate change mitigation option from increased paper recycling in Sweden would seemingly be to reduce fellings rather than producing additional MMCF.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
瑞典通过增加纸张回收缓解气候变化:保护森林还是利用替代品?
通过提高纸张回收利用率来减缓气候变化,可以减轻瑞典林业部门面临的双面压力:既要满足日益增长的木质产品需求,又要增加森林碳汇。本研究评估了两种方案,以利用瑞典纸张回收率从目前的 72% 提高到 78% 后对原生纸浆需求的减少。保护方案利用节省下来的原生纸浆减少纸浆木浆的采伐量,从而在保持总体木制品供应量不变的同时增加森林碳汇。与此相反,替代方案利用节省下来的原生纸浆生产人造纤维素纤维 (MMCF),用溶解纸浆替代棉纤维,这意味着总体木制品供应量增加。我们的研究结果表明,从减缓气候变化的角度来看,利用纸张回收效率的提高来减少原浆的收获量要比生产更多的人造纤维素纤维来替代棉纤维更好。即使假设使用溶解浆制造过程中产生的副产品并间接增加 MMCF 的供应量,这一结论也是成立的。因此,除非整个价值链的联合改进得以实现,否则瑞典增加纸张回收利用的最佳气候变化减缓方案似乎是减少伐木量,而不是生产更多的 MMCF。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Research Communications
Environmental Research Communications ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
136
期刊最新文献
Effect of atmospheric response induced by preceding typhoon on movement of subsequent typhoon over Northwestern Pacific From consumption to context: assessing poverty and inequality across diverse socio-ecological systems in Ghana Deciphering the degradation of sulfonamides by UV/chlorination in aqueous solution: kinetics, reaction pathways, and toxicological evolution Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances removal in water and wastewater treatment plants: overall efficiency and performance of adsorption The effect of uncertainty in humidity and model parameters on the prediction of contrail energy forcing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1