Toward full economic valuation of forest fuels-reduction treatments

Ching-Hsun Huang, Alex Finkral, Christopher Sorensen, Thomas E Kolb

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Our goal was to move towardfull economic valuation of fuels-reduction treatments applied to ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests. For each of five fuels-reduction projects in northern Arizona, we calculated the economic value of carbon storage and carbon releases over one century produced by two fuels-reduction treatments of thinning following by prescribed burning every one (Rx10) or two (Rx20) decades and for no treatment followed by intense wildfire once in the first 50 years (HF50) or once in the first 100 years (HF100). Our estimates include two uses of harvested wood, the current use as pallets, and multiproduct use as paper, pallets, and construction materials. Additionally, we included the economic value of damage and loss from wildfire. Results indicate that treatments increase carbon stock in live trees over time; however, the inclusion of carbon emissions from treatments reduces net carbon storage and thereby carbon credits and revenue. The economic valuation shows that the highest net benefit of $5029.74ha-1 occurs for the Rx20 treatment with the HF50 baseline and the high estimated treatment benefits of avoided losses, regional economic benefits, and community value of fire risk reduction. The lowest net benefit of-$3458.02ha-1 occurs for the Rx10 treatment with the HF100 baseline and the low estimated treatment benefits. We conclude that current nonmarket values such as avoided wildfire damage should be included with values of traditional wood products and emerging values of carbon storage to more appropriately estimate long-term benefits and costs of forest fuels-reduction treatments.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)221-231
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Environmental Management
Volume130
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 30 2013

Fingerprint

valuation
Economics
Carbon
wildfire
carbon sequestration
economics
Pallets
carbon
damage
prescribed burning
carbon emission
Wood products
thinning
Wood
Fires
cost
Costs
loss

Keywords

  • Arizona
  • Carbon credit
  • Carbon sequestration
  • Forest economics
  • Pinus ponderosa
  • Restoration

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Engineering
  • Waste Management and Disposal
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Toward full economic valuation of forest fuels-reduction treatments. / Huang, Ching-Hsun; Finkral, Alex; Sorensen, Christopher; Kolb, Thomas E.

In: Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 130, 30.11.2013, p. 221-231.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{cdbf87c9254e4deabca3d0fccb42e1ff,
title = "Toward full economic valuation of forest fuels-reduction treatments",
abstract = "Our goal was to move towardfull economic valuation of fuels-reduction treatments applied to ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests. For each of five fuels-reduction projects in northern Arizona, we calculated the economic value of carbon storage and carbon releases over one century produced by two fuels-reduction treatments of thinning following by prescribed burning every one (Rx10) or two (Rx20) decades and for no treatment followed by intense wildfire once in the first 50 years (HF50) or once in the first 100 years (HF100). Our estimates include two uses of harvested wood, the current use as pallets, and multiproduct use as paper, pallets, and construction materials. Additionally, we included the economic value of damage and loss from wildfire. Results indicate that treatments increase carbon stock in live trees over time; however, the inclusion of carbon emissions from treatments reduces net carbon storage and thereby carbon credits and revenue. The economic valuation shows that the highest net benefit of $5029.74ha-1 occurs for the Rx20 treatment with the HF50 baseline and the high estimated treatment benefits of avoided losses, regional economic benefits, and community value of fire risk reduction. The lowest net benefit of-$3458.02ha-1 occurs for the Rx10 treatment with the HF100 baseline and the low estimated treatment benefits. We conclude that current nonmarket values such as avoided wildfire damage should be included with values of traditional wood products and emerging values of carbon storage to more appropriately estimate long-term benefits and costs of forest fuels-reduction treatments.",
keywords = "Arizona, Carbon credit, Carbon sequestration, Forest economics, Pinus ponderosa, Restoration",
author = "Ching-Hsun Huang and Alex Finkral and Christopher Sorensen and Kolb, {Thomas E}",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
day = "30",
doi = "10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.08.052",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "130",
pages = "221--231",
journal = "Journal of Environmental Management",
issn = "0301-4797",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Toward full economic valuation of forest fuels-reduction treatments

AU - Huang, Ching-Hsun

AU - Finkral, Alex

AU - Sorensen, Christopher

AU - Kolb, Thomas E

PY - 2013/11/30

Y1 - 2013/11/30

N2 - Our goal was to move towardfull economic valuation of fuels-reduction treatments applied to ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests. For each of five fuels-reduction projects in northern Arizona, we calculated the economic value of carbon storage and carbon releases over one century produced by two fuels-reduction treatments of thinning following by prescribed burning every one (Rx10) or two (Rx20) decades and for no treatment followed by intense wildfire once in the first 50 years (HF50) or once in the first 100 years (HF100). Our estimates include two uses of harvested wood, the current use as pallets, and multiproduct use as paper, pallets, and construction materials. Additionally, we included the economic value of damage and loss from wildfire. Results indicate that treatments increase carbon stock in live trees over time; however, the inclusion of carbon emissions from treatments reduces net carbon storage and thereby carbon credits and revenue. The economic valuation shows that the highest net benefit of $5029.74ha-1 occurs for the Rx20 treatment with the HF50 baseline and the high estimated treatment benefits of avoided losses, regional economic benefits, and community value of fire risk reduction. The lowest net benefit of-$3458.02ha-1 occurs for the Rx10 treatment with the HF100 baseline and the low estimated treatment benefits. We conclude that current nonmarket values such as avoided wildfire damage should be included with values of traditional wood products and emerging values of carbon storage to more appropriately estimate long-term benefits and costs of forest fuels-reduction treatments.

AB - Our goal was to move towardfull economic valuation of fuels-reduction treatments applied to ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests. For each of five fuels-reduction projects in northern Arizona, we calculated the economic value of carbon storage and carbon releases over one century produced by two fuels-reduction treatments of thinning following by prescribed burning every one (Rx10) or two (Rx20) decades and for no treatment followed by intense wildfire once in the first 50 years (HF50) or once in the first 100 years (HF100). Our estimates include two uses of harvested wood, the current use as pallets, and multiproduct use as paper, pallets, and construction materials. Additionally, we included the economic value of damage and loss from wildfire. Results indicate that treatments increase carbon stock in live trees over time; however, the inclusion of carbon emissions from treatments reduces net carbon storage and thereby carbon credits and revenue. The economic valuation shows that the highest net benefit of $5029.74ha-1 occurs for the Rx20 treatment with the HF50 baseline and the high estimated treatment benefits of avoided losses, regional economic benefits, and community value of fire risk reduction. The lowest net benefit of-$3458.02ha-1 occurs for the Rx10 treatment with the HF100 baseline and the low estimated treatment benefits. We conclude that current nonmarket values such as avoided wildfire damage should be included with values of traditional wood products and emerging values of carbon storage to more appropriately estimate long-term benefits and costs of forest fuels-reduction treatments.

KW - Arizona

KW - Carbon credit

KW - Carbon sequestration

KW - Forest economics

KW - Pinus ponderosa

KW - Restoration

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84884941748&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84884941748&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.08.052

DO - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.08.052

M3 - Article

C2 - 24091157

AN - SCOPUS:84884941748

VL - 130

SP - 221

EP - 231

JO - Journal of Environmental Management

JF - Journal of Environmental Management

SN - 0301-4797

ER -