Land use policy must undergo substantial changes over the next few years as we move towards the goal of climate neutrality – reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing CO₂ sequestration.

This is the forecast given by Jurģis Jansons (also the institute's director) and Andis Lazdiņš, leading researchers at the Latvian State Forest Research Institute "Silava". They acknowledge that the targets set by Latvia and the European Union as a whole for reducing CO₂ emissions – and in particular for increasing sequestration in the land sector – are difficult to achieve. "By 2030 Latvia must already have cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 17%, which can partly be addressed by increasing CO₂ sequestration, but in forestry a five-year horizon is far too short to achieve meaningful results," explains A. Lazdiņš, acknowledging that forests are seen as CO₂ sinks that could offset the emissions produced by agriculture, yet in reality this is not feasible, because in forestry five years is a very short period – a tree (a forest stand) cannot grow in a few years, it needs several decades.

"If in 1990 forests together with wood products in Latvia sequestered 12 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, 30 years later – in 2022 – it was only 1 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. Why? First of all because a great deal has changed over that period, and also because, according to State Forest Service data, 34 years ago the annual felling volume was 3.5-4.5 million m³, whereas in recent years, according to Latvian national forest monitoring data, it has reached 20 million m³. Moreover, at that time felling took place mainly in state forests, while in other forests the production of roundwood products was minimal because ownership was being transformed; at the same time stands grew older and some simply perished – they died just as old people do at the end of their lives," explains A. Lazdiņš. He recalls that another uncontrolled process was going on in parallel, namely that land unusable for agriculture or of low fertility became overgrown with trees and shrubs (approximately 10%), which increases the volume of CO₂ sequestration. "The CO₂ sequestration volumes of these 'shrublands' have already been counted in Latvia's emissions and removals balance," A. Lazdiņš emphasises.

Forests cannot cushion the land sector

"The theoretical calculation is that in order to offset the CO₂ emissions produced by agricultural organic soils, the growing stock of wood would have to increase by 5 million m³ every year. To offset other emissions produced by agriculture, a further increase in growing stock of roughly 3 million m³ a year is needed, which would altogether mean an annual increase in growing stock of 8-9 million m³ a year – and that is not achievable at the current level of logging, which supplies the resources for Latvia's wood industry producing export-capable goods," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked how forests could fulfil the role of CO₂ sink – of shock absorber – for agriculture. He points out that in such a theoretical model the total growing stock would have to increase by 90-100 million m³ over ten years, by 2030. In theory this could be achieved by a political decision to cut logging volumes in Latvia by 70%, though that would cause a shortage of wood raw material for wood processors, reduce export revenue, and wipe out a very significant number of jobs and volume of tax paid in the regions.

"That does not, however, mean that such a theoretical solution would deliver CO₂ sequestration on the necessary scale, because young stands do not sequester CO₂ to the same extent as maturing stands; moreover, forests will grow older, and older stands in particular will no longer be CO₂ sinks – they will be neutral or producers of CO₂ emissions," is how A. Lazdiņš assesses the question of whether forests can theoretically deliver climate neutrality, adding that there have been initiatives in the forest sector to replace unproductive stands with productive young stands which in the long run would not only produce a great deal of oxygen but would also become a good supply base of wood resources for the wood industry operating in Latvia.

"In reality, because of the European Commission's interpretation, it was not possible to implement this mechanism at EU level; moreover, apart from 2022, there were no real consumers – buyers – for low-value wood, with the result that the cost of replacing these stands (logging, wood transport, purchase of seedlings, planting, tending) substantially exceeded the income that could be obtained from selling the wood from them," explains A. Lazdiņš.

Several prescriptions

"There is no single prescription that fits every situation in life," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked what should be done. Drawing on foreign experience and solutions, he says he can put forward ideas, but responsibility for implementing them must be taken by landowners themselves; to steer those ideas in the direction the state needs, a specific national policy with the appropriate instruments will be developed.

"Organic soils on agricultural land are identified as a major source of emissions (as large as those from Latvia's entire energy sector); of these, around 100,000 ha are found in field blocks declared for agricultural subsidies, while for a further 100,000 ha or so no area payments are claimed, and these have most likely become overgrown with shrubs."

"The solution would be to afforest a significant share of these soils (at least 150,000 ha), so that they would turn from CO₂ emitters into CO₂ sinks, and their balance would even be positive," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked to name the best possible solution with the greatest effect. He adds that a far more debatable question would be the afforestation of agricultural land used as pasture or for producing fodder.

"Most likely it will be necessary to work out how much pasture and other grassland Latvia needs, but there is another nuance, namely the requirements imposed on farmers – crop growers – in recent years regarding greening, which, put simply, means growing grass on a certain area," explains A. Lazdiņš. He predicts that the question of afforesting agricultural land will be a very hot topic in talks between the governing politicians and farmers' organisations, and that afforestation of agricultural land will most likely require a programme and appropriate funding.

"Estimates by the European Commission and other experts show that Latvia would need to afforest 350,000 to 500,000 ha of land, although that figure may well be exaggerated," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked how large the areas that could be afforested in Latvia might be, stressing that it will be possible to speak far more precisely about these figures after some time has passed.

"Growing grass does indeed sequester CO₂, but the effect is small and short-lived; moreover, CO₂ emissions from arable land can be lower than from grassland, because with efficient management of a given area a considerably greater quantity of biomass can be grown, which sequesters CO₂ and thereby improves the net emissions balance," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked whether growing grass is beneficial for CO₂ sequestration. Groups (clumps) of trees in fields, as well as shelterbelts or avenues of trees, could also make their contribution to CO₂ sequestration and more besides – all the more so if these trees reduce the leaching of nutrients into ditches, since trees take up nutrients and use them for longer than agricultural crops do, and CO₂ sequestration would also be greater than in grass buffer strips.

"There are concerns that such a solution would cause drainage system pipes to become 'overgrown', which is a solvable issue," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked whether planting trees near drainage systems would paralyse them. Another solution he sees is the use of sewage sludge in short-rotation coppice, or willow plantations, ensuring that the sludge is used safely for the environment and human health while depositing carbon in the soil and rapidly producing a large quantity of biomass.

"Potentially, 15,000 to 20,000 ha of sludge fields could be planted with willow stands, turning emissions into sequestration," estimates A. Lazdiņš. He is relatively sceptical about the idea of converting mineral soils used as arable land for crop production into grassland. "In Europe such an initiative is nothing new, but the effect is very slight, because at the northern edge of the temperate climate zone, where Latvia lies, it does not have a huge impact," explains A. Lazdiņš. Another solution he sees is increasing the growth rate of trees (their annual increment). "Forests can be fertilised with wood ash, promoting and stimulating annual increment in much the same way as the use of mineral fertiliser does in crop production," explains A. Lazdiņš.

He allows that in Latvia nitrogen fertiliser alone may not be enough and that phosphorus fertiliser is also needed, while on peat soils potassium fertiliser is required. Finland, meanwhile, plans to carry out rewetting of forests, although there is no unambiguous scientific evidence of a positive effect on reducing CO₂ emissions (in summer the groundwater level drops and these soils generate CO₂ emissions) or, conversely, on sequestration – but it is a political decision.

"Similar puzzles and dilemmas to Latvia's, only with their own specific nuances," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked whether Lithuania and Estonia face a situation similar to Latvia's in relation to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing sequestration volumes. "There is one more theoretical possibility for sequestering CO₂, namely that Latvia should produce boards instead of wood pellets, because for boards the release of CO₂ emissions is estimated over 25 years and for pellets over just one year; however, such a solution would mean changes in the energy sector, and not only in Latvia but especially in those countries that are the largest consumers of this Latvian-made product," notes A. Lazdiņš.

Jurģis Jansons points to a further possibility – research and expertise by scientists: "Scientists found a new calculation model that halved the level of greenhouse gas emissions from peatlands, and it was immediately 'built into' all the calculations. Scientists cannot and will not be able to claim that human activity does not produce emissions, but research can show their real rather than imagined levels (which so far have considerably exceeded those obtained in research)," J. Jansons emphasises.

Natural CO₂ emitters are not counted

Although there are natural CO₂ emitters in the world and in Latvia – volcanoes, geysers, and bogs too – these are not taken into account in countries' net CO₂ emissions and removals calculations. "CO₂ emissions produced by natural ecosystems are outside the whole accounting system, and they can pump out as much as they like – it is not attributed to countries," notes A. Lazdiņš. He acknowledges that in theory natural emissions can be counted and calculated, but in practice accurate accounting of them is impossible.

"There is research on the 'behaviour' of bogs which shows that, for example, Teiču bog is shrinking in particular places by about 2 cm a year according to data published by Copernicus, which means CO₂ and also methane emissions that are far more harmful to the climate; but there is no research on why this is happening – whether for some natural reason or under the influence of some economic activity in the vicinity of the bog or even in the past," says A. Lazdiņš. He points out that over the past 100 years nitrogen-containing mineral fertilisers have been used far more, and as a result the presence of nitrogen in soil and air has increased substantially.

"It is undeniable that wet forests – reed-bed, swamp and bog forest types – produce natural CO₂ emissions, only these are not calculated (counted). As soon as a drainage ditch is dug or peat extraction begins, the situation changes and these emissions have to be counted," explains A. Lazdiņš. He points out that the task of scientists is to move fully to accounting for greenhouse gas emissions from anthropogenic impact (resulting from direct or indirect human activity): we dig a ditch – emissions arise, although there are examples where research shows precisely the opposite – a ditch that has been dug reduces emissions.

"I doubt the EU would allocate funding for such research, because it would paint a picture that is politically incorrect for the current situation and would run counter to the EU's premises and its future direction," assesses A. Lazdiņš. He does acknowledge that in the LIFE REstore project real research data on CO₂ emissions has already confirmed that their actual scale is almost half of what was originally attributed to Latvia. "It seemed odd that Finland has a lower emissions level, that Estonia's was set higher than Finland's, and that Latvia's was twice as high again as Estonia's, even though the climatic conditions are by no means radically different," notes A. Lazdiņš. He acknowledges that these emission volumes attributed to Latvia can be reduced to the real ones by persuading the European Commission with the relevant research data.

"In the desert there are no CO₂ emissions, and consequently no such challenges and no problems associated with them," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked what is being done in southern countries. He concludes that this problem most affects countries in the northern hemisphere, which are the region producing and supplying wood products, and far less those countries which lie to the south and are the consumers of this wood and its products. "That is our history, but I doubt we should be going back to such times," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked whether, 200 years ago in Latvia, when forests were planted to stop dunes migrating and to prevent sandstorms, CO₂ emissions were not lower than in 2020.

The puzzle of tree felling

The forest monitoring system created in Latvia by the Latvian State Forest Research Institute "Silava" shows that the increment in growing stock has fallen slightly over the past 5 years – at present it can be said that 25.20±0.28 million m³ of wood grows in Latvia each year, whereas 5 years ago the figure was 26.70±0.29.

"That comes as a surprise not only to wood processors but possibly also to politicians; scientists, however, cannot present what is desired as what actually is, because that would contradict the very essence of being a scientist – the data they provide must be verifiable, as the rules of scientific activity also require," concludes J. Jansons. "It is undeniable that at first it may seem confusing that national statistics show about 13 million m³ of trees felled in forests each year, while forest monitoring data put the annual volume of felled wood (including tree tops and bark) at 20 million m³. We concluded that felled forests do not differ at the level of area (ha), because the discrepancy between forest monitoring and State Forest Register data in terms of area was only 1.7% – not counting, of course, the roughly 10% of forests for which no information is included in the State Forest Register at all. In the cubic metre data for felled wood the discrepancy is considerably greater, because in monitoring the diameter and length of each tree is measured in the field, whereas State Forest Service data are based on reports submitted by forest owners and mostly indicate the stock of merchantable (sold) wood. Comparing information on felling volumes in the national forest monitoring and at AS "Latvijas valsts meži", we found this difference to be only a little over 1%, which is explained by the different algorithms for calculating tree volume used by monitoring scientists and those built into harvester accounting programmes," explains J. Jansons. He points out that another source of felled wood volume is tree stands and trees outside forest land – the removal of overgrowth from fields, pastures and drainage ditches. "Silava" has also carried out wood flow modelling, in which wood obtained in Latvia plus imported wood matches the volume of wood products produced and sold in Latvia (with a processing coefficient), which only confirmed the monitoring data on the real volumes of wood felled in Latvia.

"It must be borne in mind that these felling volume figures (for both final felling and thinning) also affect the increment in growing stock and hence the volume of CO₂ sequestration, particularly if young stands do not sequester as much as maturing stands," says J. Jansons. He acknowledges that monitoring also confirms roughly 0.5 million m³ less deadwood than 5 years ago – the explanation may be linked to the very high wood prices in the second half of 2022 and to dealing with damage from the European spruce bark beetle and limiting its further spread.

"The better tended the forests, the less deadwood there will be," J. Jansons replies when asked what most affects the amount of dead wood in a forest. At the same time he acknowledges that Latvia's total growing stock of around 680 million m³ (of which 33% is in mature forests, meeting the criteria for final felling, outside nature protection areas) is a significant resource, but nowhere is it laid down how large it ought to be.

"A green warehouse cannot last for ever – if it is not used, the resource in it perishes, sooner or later it rots; at the same time, as forests grow older, the rate of increment in their stock declines," explains J. Jansons. He points out that the roots of Latvia's felling ages for tree species go back to Soviet times – to 1949, when a study was carried out into how long pines would have to grow to reach the sawlog diameter needed by the economy and be processed economically.

"If we fell more, then logically there will for a time be less total wood resource; that has to be reckoned with and understood – young stands do not grow that quickly, although young stands established with high-quality planting material and properly tended are far faster-growing and more productive. This is also confirmed by "Silava" monitoring data – over the past 10 years the increase in productivity in stands aged 20-30 years has reached almost 30%," says J. Jansons. In his view, as global wood product prices fall and felling in private forests declines, the overall stock increment curve will soon turn upwards again.

In winter there is no CO₂ sequestration in Latvia

"Research is under way and continuing; as new data are obtained, insights and conclusions change too, and they may well change decisions that will affect more than one sector," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked about the CO₂ sequestration of a particular tree species, expressing a cautious attitude towards the figures that have been circulating, according to which a single tree is capable of absorbing as much as 21.7 kg of carbon dioxide a year, which means that over 40 years a tree processes about 1 tonne of carbon dioxide. The stem volume of such a tree might be around 0.8 m³. However, if one recalculates for all the biomass that a forest sequesters not only in wood but also in litterfall, the figure will be much higher. Most of the CO₂ that is fixed ends up in the soil and helps to increase and maintain the soil carbon stock. "CO₂ sequestration takes place through photosynthesis; in Latvia trees carry out this sequestration only during the active vegetation period, mostly from April to September, until the leaves of broadleaved trees begin to yellow and fall, whereas in winter neither conifers nor broadleaved trees are engaged in producing oxygen – they are in their winter sleep; moreover, there is no difference in the volume of CO₂ sequestration between trees with large and small leaves, or needles," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked when trees in Latvia sequester CO₂. He points out that in effect the entire northern part of the planet does not sequester CO₂ or produce oxygen during winter. "That is a question for scientists in another field," A. Lazdiņš replies when asked what oxygen those living in the northern hemisphere consume in winter. He acknowledges that CO₂ sequestration depends on a number of factors – the place where the particular tree grows, growing conditions, the tree's genetics, its state of health and, in part, its age too. "A pine can live 200 or 300 years, whereas the lifespan of a birch is only around 90 years, and an aspen grows old and begins to rot after just 30," A. Lazdiņš notes on how tree lifespan depends on species. He explains that an old tree that has died not only fails to sequester CO₂ but actually produces emissions. "There is common sense and there is mathematics: mathematically, broadleaved trees whose leaves fall in autumn have a far more favourable effect on the climate (they become light, so heat is reflected back into space and the planet cools) than conifers do, but common sense says that eradicating conifers and allowing only broadleaved trees to grow is, to put it mildly, absurd, even though in theory it would have a positive effect and mitigate climate change," notes A. Lazdiņš.

First published in the 11 June 2024 issue of the magazine "Dienas Bizness"