Publications
NIBIOs employees contribute to several hundred scientific articles and research reports every year. You can browse or search in our collection which contains references and links to these publications as well as other research and dissemination activities. The collection is continously updated with new and historical material.
2012
Authors
Kjell Andreassen Bernt-Håvard ØyenAbstract
Thirteen Nordic stand growth models have been validated by use of a test data set from long-term research plots in Norway. The evaluated data was from time-series of even-aged, pure stands of Norway spruce, Scots pine and birch (silver birch and downy birch). In selected models from Finland, Norway and Sweden measures of site productivity, mean tree size and various stand characteristics are represented. Different models display both strengths and weaknesses in their predicting ability. Several measures of precision and bias have been calculated and the models are ranked due to their performance. We observed site quality, stand density and average tree size as the three main components in the models. Basal area increment model for spruce from Sweden had the lowest standard deviation with 23%. The mean R2 between residuals and stand characteristics from this model was also low (1.3%), which indicates that independent variables are well included. For Scots pine and birch, Finnish volume increment models showed the best fit to the Norwegian test data, with a R2 between residuals and stand characteristics of 2.8 and 6.7%, respectively. Several of the models from Sweden and Finland predicted the growth as well as stand models frequently in use in Norway. The results indicated that similar forest conditions and traditional even-aged forest management practice in the Nordic countries could be seen as a suitable basis for developing a joint family of growth models. By careful recalibration of existing models, a reasonable accuracy could be achieved and the prediction bias could be reduced.
Authors
Alexander Kopatz Hans Geir Eiken Snorre Hagen Minna Ruokonen Rodrigo Esparza-Salas Julia Schregel Ilpo Kojala Martin Smith Ingvild Wartiainen Paul Eric Aspholm Steinar Wikan Alexander M. Rykov Olga Makarova Natalia Polikarpova Konstantin F. Tirronen Pjotr I. Danilov Jouni AspiAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Kjersti Holt HanssenAbstract
Selective cutting and other continuous cover forestry systems may be used in spruce forests where for instance environmental or recreational considerations are more important than forest production. However, in order for this system to be sustainable, successful regeneration must be achieved. The supply of both light and below-ground resources may influence the growth and development of seedlings. If a diverse tree species composition is desirable, knowledge of the gap sizes necessary to sustain seedling survival and growth of different species is important. We studied the growth of Norway spruce (Picea abies) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) seedlings in the understory, using two Norway spruce sites with selective cutting and group fellings in SE Norway. 4-week old seedlings (henceforth: mini seedlings) were planted in plots with and without trenching in gaps of four different sizes, ranging from 20 to 500 m2. In addition, commercial seedlings of the two species were planted pairwise across the sites. After three years the mini seedlings were dug up and measured, while the survival and growth of the commercial seedlings were followed for eight years. Differences in seedling survival and growth characteristics due to gap size and (for mini seedlings) trenching were analysed using GLM. Mortality was high, especially for pine seedlings. This was due to grazing as well as competition for light and nutrients. Growth of both species was positively correlated with increasing gap size. This applied for height, diameter, shoot volume and needle biomass as well as total dry weight for both spruce and pine seedlings. However, trenching had a significant positive effect on growth too, also in the smallest gaps.
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Sebastian EiterAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Lampros LamprinakisAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Paul Eric AspholmAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
This report has been prepared in the frame of Work Package 3 (Policy) of the Interreg IVB project Bioenergy Promotion. The main rationale of this work package is to support the development of coherent national and (sub)regional policies promoting the sustainable production and consumption of bioenergy. The purpose of the country policy assessment report is to describe the main promotional policies and support schemes for bioenergy and to assess to what extent national policy frameworks contribute to Sustainable Development and integrate related sustainability principles and criteria. At present and in the foreseeable future, the main source of raw materials for bioenergy in Norway is likely to be the forests. However, waste from agriculture, households and industry is another promising source. Investment support needs to be continued, at least at present levels. The main bottlenecks for increased use of bioenergy in Norway are economic, so economic support is necessary. Further development of the standard for sustainable forestry is required, in order to take into account aspects that are not yet covered (see above under Point 3.5). However, there is currently disagreement between the parties to the Living Forests standard, so revision is not likely to take place soon. Current research is being carried out, for example in CenBio and the project “Ecological consequences of increased biomass removal from forests in Norway” on the effects of whole-tree harvesting compared to stem-only harvesting on soil nutrients, carbon stocks, ground vegetation and regeneration). In addition, work is being carried out to study the applicability under Norwegian conditions of the guidelines of other countries such as Sweden, Finland, the UK and Ireland and to prepare preliminary guidelines for Norwegian forestry. There is disagreement on the likely short-term effects of biomass harvesting for bioenergy on carbon sequestration in forest ecosystems (see above under 5.2) and this needs to be further studied. In their present form, the binding EU sustainability criteria for biofuels/bioliquids should not be extended to solid/gaseous biomass used for electricity and heating/cooling. Some changes are necessary to take account of specific conditions e.g. in forestry. For example, it is stated in Point 4 of Article 17 of the Renewable Energy Directive that biofuels and bioliquids shall not be obtained from land that was continuously forested in January 2008 and is no longer continuously forested. It is unclear how this would affect clear-cuts. Also, in Point C7 of Annex V, the 20-year period for calculating carbon stock changes is completely unrealistic for forestry (although this refers to land-use change and it could be argued that felling is not land-use change if the land is used for forest afterwards; this should be clarified). These aspects of the Renewable Energy Directive are already problematic if forest biomass is to be used for biofuels or bioliquids.