Does Burning More Wood Lead to More Forests?

Two years ago, WRI authors published a paper in Nature estimating that wood harvests and use causes 3 gigatons of greenhouse gas emissions annually – roughly three times the emissions of aviation – although these emissions are commonly ignored. The paper used a biophysical model that credited wood use for increased growth rates caused by silvicultural management and storage of carbon in products but accounted for carbon lost to the air from the forest when trees are harvested. In response, some economists submitted a critique to Nature alternatively arguing that wood is carbon neutral or that it is even carbon negative because the demand for wood creates economic responses that lead to more forests. These are critical arguments used by power plants that have gained billions of dollars in financial support in Europe and Asia to burn wood instead of fossil fuels.

In a paper to be published in Nature this coming Wednesday, WRI’s Tim Searchinger and Yale economist Steve Berry address these claims and explain why wood is not carbon neutral using correct and standard accounting. They also explain how economic models claiming that wood harvest leads to more forests are based on pure, large errors in interpreting underlying studies and biased modeling assumptions structures largely ensure these results. In the webinar, Searchinger and Berry will explain the paper. The paper builds on a WRI insider article they published last year.