|
This paper originally appeared in the Journal of Forestry 98(10):8-13, October 2000, published by the
Society of American Foresters.
It is based on a paper
published in the Journal of Industrial Ecology 1(3):125-145 (1997),
"Searching for the Leverage to Conserve
Forests: The Industrial Ecology of Wood Products in the United States.".
URL: http://phe.rockefeller.edu/Foresters_Lever/
The Forester's Lever
Industrial Ecology and Wood Products
by Iddo K. Wernick, Paul E. Waggoner, and Jesse H. Ausubel
Abstract:
Despite increases in the nation’s
population, affluence, and timber removals, US forest area has remained constant
and timber inventory has risen 30 percent since 1952. Industrial ecology, which
analyses the flow of timber through systems of production and consumption, seeks
to explain how that happened; it also shows the leverage that consumers,
millers, and foresters have to reduce harvested area and continue the rebirth of
the American forest. Changes in demand by consumers, wood utilization by
millers, and management by foresters can help conserve forests for uses other
than timber. Of the three actors, however, foresters can exert the most
leverage—by increasing the growth rate of trees.
America
has more trees today than 100 years ago," reads an International Paper
advertisement in the March 1998 issue of the Journal of Forestry. In a nation
that has tripled its population, multiplied its gross domestic product (GDP) 16
times, and uses more timber than any material but sand and gravel, the ad asks,
"How did that happen?" We use industrial ecology, the analysis of the flow of
material through systems of production and consumption, to answer the question
and locate the point of greatest leverage for conserving forests and their
benefits (Wernick et al 1998).
This study looks strictly at the number of
hectares harvested to satisfy society's need for timber. Timber harvesting
affects the wildlife and recreational services provided by the forest and the
integrity of the forest as ecosystem. Harvesting timber from less area leaves
more for the other benefits that forests provide. Though it is an imperfect
measure, we agree with Hyde (1997) that, on the whole, the area harvested
provides the best single proxy for environmental impact.
A range of human activities--from
consumption and disposal back to processing and forestry--all contribute to the
area of the forest harvested. In their decisions about construction, packaging,
communication, recycling, and energy, consumers decide how much wood must be
delivered to them. Through efficient timber utilization for forest products,
millers can reduce the need to fell trees for processing. Finally, by growing
the trees and supervising their harvest, foresters determine how much forest
must be harvested to deliver the timber that the mills need.
To understand how the three actors affect
the flow of forest products and measure their leverage for reducing the area
harvested, we use an identity to isolate each actor's role for individual
products (i.e., solid wood, paper, fuel). For paper, for example, equation
1 illustrates how the forest area disturbed is determined by the number of
consumers x their share of GDP x the sheets of paper per GDP x the amount of
wood a miller uses to make a sheet of paper x the forest area harvested for that
wood.
Consumers
The past century. In the United
States, absolute timber consumption for products and fuel grew 70 percent
between 1900 and 1993 (US Bureau of the Census 1975, 1996). Including the use of
residues, consumption of wood for pulp exceeded that for lumber, which stayed
nearly level. Fuelwood consumption nearly disappeared only to reemerge during
the Depression and the oil shocks of the 1970s. Plywood and veneer consumption
began to account for a little under 10 percent of the processed harvest in the
early 1990s.
The annual percentage change of the
national consumption of each of these products is approximately the sum of the
small percentage changes in the first three components of equation 1. In
the equation, consumers' leverage the flow of forest products with their numbers
(population), wealth (GDP per capita), and the amount of product consumed per
dollar of GDP. Industrial ecologists call the amount of product consumed per
dollar of GDP "intensity of use" (IOU). The difference between changes in
population plus wealth on the one hand, and the national consumption on the
other is the IOU. This factor gauges how large a part forest products played in
national economic activity as represented by the GDP.
From 1900 to 1993, American population
tripled, rising an average 1.3 percent per year. The annual growth of the GDP
per person fluctuated, from -4 percent entering the Depression to more than +8
percent in the following decade; the annual average for the century was 1.7
percent. Combined, growing population and personal wealth raised GDP 16 times,
an average of 3 percent per year. But the 70 percent rise in timber consumption
from 1900 to 1993 corresponds to an annual increase of only 0.5 percent. The
IOU, which represents the difference, thus fell an average of 2.5 percent per
year.
What changes timber IOU? Constant IOU means
that consumption rises in tandem with the rise of population and personal
wealth. For example, 2 percent more people and 2 percent more GDP per person
would raise consumption 2 + 2 + 0, or 4 percent. If paper use grows faster than
the economy, however, and the IOU for paper goes up by 2 percent each year, then
consumption rises 2 + 2 + 2, or 6 percent. If paper use slows relative to the
economy and the IOU falls 2 percent per year, then consumption rises only 2 + 2
- 2, or 2 percent.
With rare exceptions, during the 20th
century the IOU for solid wood products fell (fig. 1, p. 10). Steel,
concrete, and plastic became substitutes for wood in certain structures,
furniture, barrels, and cross ties. New preservatives for wood prevented fire
and decay. Such changes helped lower the IOU for solid wood.
Early in the century US paper use grew
dramatically, raising the IOU of pulp even during the Depression. Beginning in
the late 1930s, the IOU for pulp fell sharply as the wartime economy lifted GDP
faster than paper consumption. Following a burst after the war, the IOU for pulp
fell and has been falling since. Because we calculated the IOU only from the
industrial roundwood that millers used for solid wood products and paper, more
efficient utilization by millers deserves some of the credit for lowering the
IOU we calculated (see note in figure 1). By the early 1990s, the falling
IOU of pulp actually overcame the growing population numbers and affluence to
reduce pulpwood consumption.
Figure 1. Relative annual percentage
changes in intensity of use (IOU) of roundwood used for solid wood, pulp, and
fuel. IOU is amount of product divided by GDP. Sources: US Bureau of the
Census 1975, 1996; USDA 1993. Note: The data represent the industrial
roundwood used for the product itself. Intensity of use goes up with consumer
demand but is moderated by increases in efficient utilization; the graph
incorporates both effects.
Use of fuelwood fluctuated dramatically
over the century. Early in the 1900s, the growing use of coal and oil lowered
fuelwood IOU. Then, during the Depression fuelwood IOU soared, only to fall
steadily until the mid 1970s, when oil shocks again encouraged the burning of
fuelwood.
This next century. Population
projections for the next 5 0 to 100 years in the United States range from 0.3 to
0.7 percent per year (US Bureau of the Census 1996). From 1985 to 1995 annual
per capita GDP grew an average of 1.3 percent per year-a bit slower than the 1.7
percent average since 1900. The combined growth of population and GDP per person
can reasonably be projected to be about 2 percent per year.
After considering trends in industrial
production and consumer demand, the USDA Forest Service projects national timber
consumption for products to grow about 0.6 percent per year from 2000 to 2040
(Haynes 1990). Assuming the 2 percent rise in population and GDP, the 0.6
percent projection implies a 1.4 percent annual decline in timber IOU. This
compares with the average annual drop of 1.8 percent in IOU from 1985 to 1995
and the 20th-century average of -2.5 percent. If consumers continue the
long-term 2.5 percent drop in IOU, they could counter the 2 percent rise in
population and wealth and reduce timber consumption 0.5 percent
annually.
Millers
The past century. In equation
1, millers exert their leverage by changing wood per product in the flow
volumes depicted in figure 2 (p. 11). In 1993, 646 million cubic meters
of wood and fiber entered the US forest product sector. Trees furnished 78
percent, recycling 10 percent, and imports 12 percent. Other removals (i.e.,
timber from thinnings or land-clearing operations) and logging residues never
entered the commercial flow. Mills consumed 26 percent for solid wood products,
26 percent for paper, and 36 percent for fuel 10 percent was exported. The
dotted lines in the center column show the flow of residues in mills, primarily
for paper and fuel. To transform logs into lumber efficiently, Millers took
advantage of sophisticated new scanning and cutting technologies and sharper,
more stable blades (Haynes 1990). They raised the ratio of lumber to roundwood
from 33 percent in 1970 to 42 percent in 1993. The volume of unused residue has
fallen about 30 million cubic meters since the 1950s. Since 1970, the residues
lost in making lumber fell from over 25 percent to 2 percent. Stretching the
value of each log and each hectare, Millers also developed composite products
like oriented strand board that use irregular wood shapes as well as previously
unused tree species.
Figure 2. Flow of forest products,
in millions of cubic meters, in the United States in 1993. We use volume instead
of mass to eliminate variables like changing moisture content, mineral fillers,
and synthetics in products; I cubic meter of wood is considered equivalent to
0.5 metric ton of paper. The dotted rules show the flow of residues in mills.
Notes: Timber removals are based on the ratio of logging residues (15.1
percent) and other removals (6.6 percent) to all removals for 1991. Dashed
lines represent recycled paper. Construction includes millwork, such as
cabinetry and moldings. Other paper and board includes industrial uses,
such as materials handling, furniture, and transport. Fuel: The ratio of
end uses relies on Btu data from the Energy Information Administration; fuel
includes 100 million cubic meters burned by paper mills for energy.
Residential and commercial fuel includes electric utilities.
Sources: Ince 1994; Energy Information Administration 1994; USDA 1993; US
Bureau of the Census 1996; American Forest & Paper Association 1995; Smith
et al. 1994; and data from the Engineered Wood Products Association, Tacoma,
Washington; and the Western Wood Products Association, Portland,
Oregon.
Including fuelwood, residues, and pulping
liquors, 47 percent of the US timber harvest in 1993 became useful energy. In
fact, US lumber and plywood mills generated over 72 percent of their energy
internally-by 1991 (Energy Information Administration 1994). Outright harvest
for fuel has remained a relatively steady percentage of harvest since rising to
about 15 percent in the early 1970s. Currently, about three-quarters of fuelwood
harvest comes from non-growing stock.
In the forest products sector overall, had
the log-to-lumber efficiency remained at -1970 levels, meeting 1993 market
demand would have required 48 million cubic meters more timber. Without
composites displacing lumber, an additional 32 million cubic meters of roundwood
input would have been required. Finally, improved efficiency in papermaking
spared 34 million cubic meters of material input in satisfying 1993 demand.
Their virtual elimination of waste since 1970 leaves millers with the challenge
of transforming the near half of wood that is burned into more valuable
products.
This next century. On top of raising
their efficiency, millers can use substitutes for pulp, such as wastepaper and
crops. The recovery and use of wastepaper have increased, and the first
facilities are now becoming operational to make newsprint from such crops as
kenaf (Kafus Industries 1999). Furthermore, by incorporating organic .and
mineral fillers into products, millers can also lower the input of timber. Other
substitutions offered by manufacturers and accepted by consumers include
polyethylene for paper bags, concrete for rail ties, and steel beams for wooden
rafters.
Foresters
The past century. The foresters'
parameter in equation I is the hectares of forest disturbed per cubic
meter of wood harvested. A forester can maximize timber yields and minimize area
disturbed in three ways: (1) harvesting more of each tree, (2) harvesting more
trees on each hectare, and (3) increasing annual tree growth.
1. The roughly two-thirds of the dry matter
above the stump in sterns generally sets the limit on how much of each tree is
harvested. From 1952 to 1991 logging residues as a percentage of timber removals
from growing stock fell from 10 percent to 7.5 percent for softwoods and from 22
percent to 12 percent for hardwoods (Haynes et al. 1995). Because removing
vegetation also removes nutrients and because stems are poor in nutrients,
harvesting more than stems can deplete a site. Considering the already high
harvest index and the nutrient depletion from x raising the index further,
foresters have little opportunity to get more wood by harvesting more of each
tree.
2. Harvesting more trees on each hectare
means less partial cutting, more clearcutting. In the 1980s, partial cutting
accounted for three-fifths and clearcutting for two-fifths of the 4 million
hectares affected by harvest nationally (W. Brad Smith 1997, pers. commun.).
Because 1991 roundwood removals were about 500 million cubic meters, loggers
obtained an average of roughly 125 cubic meters of timber for roundwood products
for every hectare of timberland harvested. Compared with clearcutting, partial
cutting affects appearance less, but harvesting the same volume of timber
requires more roads to reach a wider area and counters the objective of
disturbing less area.
Concentrating harvest on fewer hectares by
cutting more per hectare shrinks the area disturbed nationally. The result is
tree plantations, and such concentrations of single species can encourage pests.
The attack by fungi and insects in Connecticut plantations of red pine brought
from Europe is an example. But the epidemics that removed native chestnut, elm,
and hemlock from heterogeneous forests in the same state show that heterogeneity
is no guarantee against disaster. The values of homogeneous plantations for
wildlife habitat and aesthetic experiences are another concern, but in
northeastern Minnesota 53 conifer plantations that were 30 years old, the
overstory produced the intended timber, and the understory resembled that
beneath naturally regenerated and mature forests (Ohmann 1984).
Plantations allow concentrated harvests. In
the South, which contains more than half of the nation's industrial forestdand,
one-eighth of all timberland is now plantations, and that proportion is expected
to double by 2030 (Environmental Defense Fund et al. 1995). This expansion of
plantations and clearcutting should increase the harvest per hectare and I
shrink the area annually disturbed by harvesting. Changing social preferences in
recent decades, however, have made the lever of harvesting more trees per
hectare more difficult to apply.
3. Increasing the annual tree growth is
forestry’s third way to shrink the area disturbed by harvest. At the
present average growth rate for growing stock of 3 cubic meters per hectare per
year, almost the entire 200 million hectares of American timberland is required
to supply the 500 million cubic meters harvested. If foresters achieved annual
productivity of 5.9 cubic meters per hectare on appropriately productive sites,
they could provide the needed 500 million cubic meters on just 23 percent of US
timberland.
Yields can be raised. On industry-owned
forests, yields exceed by half those on national forests and private
nonindustrial land (Haynes 1990 Powell et al. 1993). Nationally, although the
forest industry owns only about one-seventh of timberland, it produces a fifth
of national timber growth, a quarter of softwood growth, and about a third of
the annual harvest. Here are two other statistics that indicate industry's
disproportionate contribution: Industrial foresters did more than 40 percent of
the planting and 70 percent of the stand improvement in 1995 (Moulton et al.
1996).
This next century. Although the
forest industry actively manages its own lands, private owners, who control more
than half of all American timber land, may lack incentives to do so. Millions of
acres await even rudimentary management measures. In the late 1970s, Burwell
(1978) argued that millions of acres of forest were
underutilized:
In this context the term "underutilized"
refers to the practice of minimum management of privately owned forest for many
millions of acres. Some significant fraction of this area is never harvested,
and mature trees, both merchantable and cull, topple and decay. For a larger
fraction of the acreage, merchantable stemwood is periodically harvested but not
replanted, the woody residues and dead stemwood arc not removed, and growing
cull trees are left to expand their area of coverage.
Burwell’s observation remains apropos
today and can also apply to acres released from crops by rising agricultural
yields since the 1970s. Given sufficient resources, conventional management of
neglected stands offers foresters a great opportunity to raise average
yields.
Foresters already possess the means to
increase yields. Improving drainage of Southern pines at planting time increased
their height after 25 years. About one-tenth of the additional height was due to
bedding and weed control, a third to water control, and half to phosphate
fertilization (Allen et al. 1990). Foresters can plant species that grow faster
than the average annual 3 cubic meters. To illustrate the potential for higher
yields, we note that red alder grows biomass as fast as 26 tons per hectare per
year, yellow poplar 24, and Western hemlock 38 (Grier et al. 1989). A national
consensus would encourage corporations and state and federal agencies to improve
average yields with best management methods. The first step toward reaching that
consensus is for diverse stakeholders to recognize the unique leverage that
higher yields offer to reduce overall forest disturbance.
The forester's parameter in the flow of
forest products is wood per hectare of forest and thus the area disturbed per
cubic meter of wood harvested. Among the three levers-harvesting more of each
tree, cutting more trees on each hectare, and increasing the annual growth of
trees-the best opportunity for reducing the area harvested lies in growing more
wood per hectare.
Conclusion
By the end of the 19th century, population
growth, increasing wealth, the Industrial Revolution, and expanding agriculture
had shrunk the expanse of US forests about 30 percent from the pre-European
settlement condition. Although population and wealth continued to multiply, the
conservation movement and technological developments beginning early in the 20th
century combined to halt the clearing of forests and allowed forest
regeneration. Former pastures in New England and the upper Great Lakes states
are now mature forests. Expanding exurbs, contracting agriculture, and new
logging will all affect future forest clearing (Waggoner et al. 1996). Will
consumers, millers, and foresters use their leverage to lessen such disturbances
and continue the rebirth of the American forest?
Consumers spare forests by recycling fiber
to paper mills, and more importantly, lowering national intensity of use.
Millers already use about 120 million fewer cubic meters of roundwood a year
than they did three decades ago; further innovations may allow millers to profit
more from each unit of timber and spare still more hectares by channeling
residues burned as fuel to producing composites and paper. Foresters have the
most dramatic opportunity to reduce the hectares harvested-not by harvesting
more of a tree or even more trees per hectare, but by increasing the growth rate
of trees per hectare. They can narrow the gap between the potential of American
timberland and the current low growth rate through improved management of
neglected stands and intensive silviculture to raise yields.
American history hints that reducing wood
demand as the economy grows, utilizing wood more efficiently, and raising yields
can decouple the need for land from timber demand. A plausible 2.5 percent per
year drop in intensity of use coupled with an annual I percent rise in yield
would shrink the forest area disturbed by logging by 1.5 percent annually.
Compounded, that 1.5 percent would reduce the spatial extent of logging by half
in 50 years. The benefits of such sustained diligence include preserving a
national treasure, sparing land for undisturbed nature, and sequestering carbon
from the atmosphere.
Literature Cited
ALLEN, H.L., P.M. DOUGHERTY, and R.G.
CAMPBELL. 1990. Manipulation of water and nutrients: Practice and opportunity in
southern US pine forests. Forest Ecology and Management
30:437-53.
AMERICAN FOREST & PAPER ASSOCIATION.
1995. 1995 statistics: Paper paperboard, & woodpulp. Washington,
DC.
BURWELL, C.C. 1978. Solar biomass energy.
An overview of US potential. Science 199:1041-48.
ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, 1994.
Manufacturing consumption of energy. US Department of Energy Report
DOE/EIA-0512(91). Washington, DC: US Government Printing
Office.
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND ET AL. 1995.
Economic considerations in forest management. White Paper No. 11.
Washington, DC: Environmental Defense Fund.
GRIER, C.C., K.M. LEE, N.M. NADAKARNI, G.O.
KLOCK, and P.J. EDGERTON. 1989. Productivity of forests of the United States
and its relation to soil and site factors and management practices: A
review. USDA Forest Service Report PNW-GTR-222.
HAYNES, R.W. 1990. An analysis of the
timber situation in the United States: 1989--2040. USDA Forest Service
General Technical Report RM-GTR-199.
HAYNES, R.W, D.M. ADAMS, and J.R. MILLS.
1995. The 1993 RPA timber assessment update. USDA Forest Service Report
RM-GTR-259.
HYDE, WE 1997. Policies today and for the
future. In Wood in our future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press and
National Research Council.
INCE, P.J. 1994. Recycling of wood and
paper products in the United States. Madison, WI: USDA Forest Products
Laboratory.
KAFUS INDUSTRIES. 1999. Kafus options
147,000 acres in Arizona as proposed site for increased kenaf fibre production.
News release. Available online at www. Kafus.com/pr/news.html.
MOULTON, R.J., F. LOCKHART, and J.D.
SNELLGROVE. 1996. Tree planting in the United States 1995. Washington,
DC: USDA Forest Service.
OHMANN, L.E 1984. Biomass in conifer
plantations of northeastern Minnesota, USDA Forest Service Research Paper
NC-247.
POWELL, D.S., J.L. FAULKNER, D.R. DARR, Z.
ZHU, and D.W. MacCLEERY. 1993. Forest resources of the United States,
1992. USDA Forest Service Report RM-GTR234.
SMITH, W.B., J.L FAULKNER, and D.S. POWELL.
1994. Forest statistics of the United States, 1992. USDA Forest Service
Report GTR-NC-168.
US BUREAU OF THE CENSUS. 1975.
Historical statistics the United States, colonial times to 1970.
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
-----.1996. Statistical abstract of the
United States. 116th ed. Washington, DC: US Government Printing
Office.
US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA). 1993.
Agricultural statistics 1993. Washington, DC: US Government Printing
Office.
WAGGONER, PE., J.H. AUSUBEL, and I.K.
WERNICK. 1996. Lightening the tread of population on the land: American
examples. Population Development and Review 22(3):53145.
WERNICK, I.K., RE. WAGGONER, and J.H.
AUSUBEL. 1998. Searching for leverage to conserve forests: The industrial
ecology of wood products in the US Journal of Industrial Ecology
1(3):125-45.
Iddo K Wernick (e-mail:
iw4@columbia.edu) is associate research scientist, Earth Institute, Columbia
University New York, NY 10027; Paul E. Waggoner is scientist, Connecticut
Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven; and Jesse H. Ausubel is director,
Program for the Human Environment, Rockefeller University, New York. A more
detailed analysis, on which this article is based, is available online at
http://phe.rockefeller.edu/forests.
|