A compromise programming model for developing the cost of including carbon pools and flux into forest management.
Saved in:
| Title: | A compromise programming model for developing the cost of including carbon pools and flux into forest management. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Gharis, L.1 lauriegharis@gmail.com, Roise, J.1, McCarter, J.1 |
| Source: | Annals of Operations Research. Sep2015, Vol. 232 Issue 1, p115-133. 19p. |
| Subjects: | Structured programming, Cost analysis, Carbon & the environment, Forest management, Decision making |
| Abstract: | Policy makers need research based decision analysis models that include carbon sequestration and forest products in order to make policies that are both economically viable and effective. Forests and wood products have been identified as important mechanisms for carbon sequestration and storage. Policies often cover carbon sequestration but not product storage and substitution. Furthermore, many researchers have developed and published models on carbon management. However, a gap exists in operational level models that include product substitution. We developed a model to investigate optimal stand level management with competing objectives of maximizing soil expectation value, carbon storage in the forest, and carbon dioxide emission savings from product storage and substitution. Our purpose was to produce an accurate and usable analytical product for Southeastern U.S. foresters growing loblolly pine ( Pinus taeda) in the presence of carbon policies. The decision variables were traditional stand level management variables: planting density, thinning timing and density, and rotation length. Over time these variables influence the proportion of wood going into pulp, chip-n-saw, and sawtimber where each of these classes has an expected use (carbon storage) life. Compromise programming was employed to solve the multiple-objective problem and to demonstrate the tradeoffs between the competing objectives. This type of model demonstrates a practical method for comparing tradeoffs associated with adjusting forest management for a carbon market. The difference in costs among objectives is important for decision makers considering climate change policies, as it represents the minimum value a rational landowner would accept to sequester a unit of carbon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Annals of Operations Research is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 108899573 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: A compromise programming model for developing the cost of including carbon pools and flux into forest management. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gharis%2C+L%2E%22">Gharis, L.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><i> lauriegharis@gmail.com</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Roise%2C+J%2E%22">Roise, J.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McCarter%2C+J%2E%22">McCarter, J.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Annals+of+Operations+Research%22">Annals of Operations Research</searchLink>. Sep2015, Vol. 232 Issue 1, p115-133. 19p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Structured+programming%22">Structured programming</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cost+analysis%22">Cost analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Carbon+%26+the+environment%22">Carbon & the environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Forest+management%22">Forest management</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+making%22">Decision making</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Policy makers need research based decision analysis models that include carbon sequestration and forest products in order to make policies that are both economically viable and effective. Forests and wood products have been identified as important mechanisms for carbon sequestration and storage. Policies often cover carbon sequestration but not product storage and substitution. Furthermore, many researchers have developed and published models on carbon management. However, a gap exists in operational level models that include product substitution. We developed a model to investigate optimal stand level management with competing objectives of maximizing soil expectation value, carbon storage in the forest, and carbon dioxide emission savings from product storage and substitution. Our purpose was to produce an accurate and usable analytical product for Southeastern U.S. foresters growing loblolly pine ( Pinus taeda) in the presence of carbon policies. The decision variables were traditional stand level management variables: planting density, thinning timing and density, and rotation length. Over time these variables influence the proportion of wood going into pulp, chip-n-saw, and sawtimber where each of these classes has an expected use (carbon storage) life. Compromise programming was employed to solve the multiple-objective problem and to demonstrate the tradeoffs between the competing objectives. This type of model demonstrates a practical method for comparing tradeoffs associated with adjusting forest management for a carbon market. The difference in costs among objectives is important for decision makers considering climate change policies, as it represents the minimum value a rational landowner would accept to sequester a unit of carbon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Annals of Operations Research is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=108899573 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10479-013-1519-9 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 19 StartPage: 115 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Structured programming Type: general – SubjectFull: Cost analysis Type: general – SubjectFull: Carbon & the environment Type: general – SubjectFull: Forest management Type: general – SubjectFull: Decision making Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: A compromise programming model for developing the cost of including carbon pools and flux into forest management. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Gharis, L. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Roise, J. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: McCarter, J. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 09 Text: Sep2015 Type: published Y: 2015 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 02545330 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 232 – Type: issue Value: 1 Titles: – TitleFull: Annals of Operations Research Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
