Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Biomass and Bioenergy

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe

Research paper

Economic and environmental assessment of agro-energy wood

biomass supply chains
L. Paolotti*, G. Martino, A. Marchini, A. Boggia
Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Section of Applied Economics, University of Perugia, Borgo XX Giugno 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The aim of this study is to conduct an economic and environmental assessment of forest biomass for
Received 14 June 2016 heating, in particular two types of firewood and three types of wood chips were analyzed. Regarding
Received in revised form economic aspects, an analysis was made of production costs and revenues (per tonne of biomass),
17 November 2016
considering all the stages involved “from the woods to the mouth of the boiler.” For the environmental
Accepted 23 December 2016
Available online 12 January 2017
analysis, conducted using life cycle assessment, the stages taken into account went from “the woods to
the heat produced”. The wood biomasses were compared to each other and to fuel oil and natural gas.
The economic analysis showed that at current market prices it is more profitable to produce firewood
Keywords:
Wood biomass
rather than wood chips. As concerns the environmental aspects, the results of the LCA showed that, for
Agro-energy the same heat output, forest wood-based fuel has an environmental impact lower than fuel oil, but still
Economic analysis higher than natural gas. There are no big differences in the impact of various wood fuels. In the
Environmental assessment conclusion, some ways for improvement have been proposed, in terms of both the economic competi-
Life cycle assessment tiveness of the agro-energy supply chains considered and the reducing of their environmental impact.
Sustainability © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Renewable energies already play a role of national and inter-
national importance as a result of the need to replace traditional
energy sources and to fulfil the commitments endorsed as part of
the Kyoto protocol to contrast the ongoing climatic change,
complying also with the measures known as “20-20-20” [1].
Within the category of renewable energy sources, there is
growing interest in agro-energies in particular. Back in 2005, the
European Union issued its “European Biomass Action Plan” [2],
with which it aimed to encourage and increase the use of energy
sources obtained from forestry, agricultural and waste material, as
also the production of biofuels for transport.
Forest biomass is widely available in Europe, but it is largely
unused. In the European Union, only 65% of annual forest growth
that could be harvested is used [2]. Although the low utilization is
due no doubt to economic reasons (negative values of stumpage and
greater competitiveness of the imported product), it is reasonable to
assume that the annual amount harvested can at least double, and
its use for energy could be a driving force in this direction.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: luisa.paolotti@gmail.com (L. Paolotti).
The supply chains for wood biofuels are short chains, which
implies proximity between the places of energy consumption and
production. The short supply chain has several advantages in the
agro-energy sector: from an environmental perspective, it mini-
mizes transport emissions; from an economic perspective, it re-
duces the number of operators involved in the value chain,
ensuring greater distributional equity and profitability for pro-
ducers, an essential aspect for supply chains in which the profit
margins are very low, as in this case; lastly, from the social point of
view, it creates jobs locally.
Surely, profitability of wood supply chains strictly depends on
how these are organized, and which technical parameters are
involved. However, the future prospects of the biomass market for
energy use will also be strongly affected not only by economic
profitability but also by the problem, first raised in 2010 by some
scientists [3,4], of their actual environmental sustainability.
What is being questioned is their alleged “carbon neutrality.”
The logic behind the assumption that wood biomass has “zero
greenhouse effect” is that their combustion or decomposition is
part of the natural carbon cycle and does not increase the amount of
carbon in circulation; on the contrary, when forest biofuels replace
fossil fuels, they are attributed with the merit of reducing green-
house gas emissions [3,4].
The new hypothesis that is now taking hold is that bioenergy is

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.12.020
0961-9534/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
not always “carbon neutral,” and erroneous accounting may inap-
propriately stimulate the use of forest resources, taking the wood
away from alternative uses having a lesser impacts on climate
change [3,5]. It has been observed that the combustion of biomass
replaces fossil emissions with its own emissions, which can also be
higher per unit of energy [3]; that greenhouse physics is indifferent
to the origin of the pollutant, and once a molecule of CO2 enters the
atmosphere its warming capacity is the same, irrespective of its
origin [5]; that the different time scales with which the fossil and
biogenic carbon interact with the carbon cycle must be taken into
consideration [6]; that the shift from fossil fuels to energy from
wood biomass could lead to an increase of the levels of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere for at least a number of decades [7e9]. The
challenge to the principle of carbon neutrality of biomass is obvi-
ously a crucial issue for supportive policies and incentives for bio-
energy and will require the development of new greenhouse gas
accounting models [6].
The complex picture outlined above makes evident the need to
deepen knowledge about the actual economic and environmental
impact of the use of wood biomass.
Several studies conducted in literature focused on economic
aspects of forest biomass (e.g. technical and cost limitations of
harvest residues recovery [10]; costs estimation of wood chip
production [11]; calculation of parameters like net revenue,
breakeven prices and price elasticity of firewood and wood chips
[12]), or on environmental ones (e.g. environmental impact of fuel
chips [13] or in general of forest logging residues [14]; environ-
mental impacts of roundwood supply chain [15]; analysis of
different wood assortments for the production of raw wood,
without considering residues [16]). Other studies, discussed
beyond in the article, focused on both economic and environmental
aspects of different types of wood biomass [17e20]. All these
studies underlined how the specificity of the chain, and aspects like
chain topology, type of organization, management and regulation,
systems of price, exc. can sensibly affect both economic and envi-
ronmental results.
In this context, the aim of this study is to conduct a specific
economic and environmental assessment of forest biomass for
heating (firewood and wood chips). Five final types of biofuel were
taken into consideration: two types of firewood, obtained with
different removal systems, and three types of wood chips, differing
in terms of processing and final destination. This type of analysis
attempts to be as exhaustive as possible, taking into account both
main wood products and residues and, in relation to the items
analyzed, not only economic or environmental aspects but both of
them, considering standard, therefore repeatable, organizational
procedures.
Regarding the economic aspects, an analysis was made of the
production costs and revenues per unit (per tonne) and per hectare,
considering all the stages involved in the production of wood fuel
“from the woods to the mouth of the boiler.” For the environmental
analysis, conducted using the life cycle assessment (LCA) method-
ology, the stages taken into account instead went from “the woods
to the heat”.
While most of the environmental studies on forest biomass
focus only on greenhouse gases and energy use [13], here a mul-
tiplicity of impact categories is considered. This because, together
with the analysis of the influence on climate change mitigation
(evaluating which of the chains analyzed has lower emissions into
the air of CO2, methane and other greenhouse gases) there are other
environmental impacts that should be taken into account in the
assessment of the environmental sustainability of biofuels [13].
Moreover, the different wood biomass fuels were compared to
each other and to some fossil fuels used for heating (fuel oil and
natural gas). After having analyzed the main economic and
173
environmental results, some ways for improvement have been
proposed, in terms of both the economic competitiveness of the
agro-energy supply chains considered and the reducing of their
environmental impact.
2. Materials and methods
Five types of wood biomass chains were analyzed: firewood
obtained using traditional skidding systems, firewood obtained
using aerial cableway removal systems, class B wood chips (for
biomass power stations), class A2 wood chips (for industrial ther-
moelectric power plants), class A1 wood chips (for domestic
heating systems).
The above mentioned chains were analyzed in the context of
Italian forests, companies and markets, however these present
characteristics that are extendible also to other international con-
texts. The chains were analyzed in the period of time between 2013
and 2015.
The main data related to the technical analysis of the chains
were collected through field visits to two big companies well
established on the market, performing interviews with expert
witnesses. The two companies have been chosen as a reference
model after an extensive analysis of several companies located
within the national territory, as they were found able to well
represent the two most common types of techniques practiced in
the sector (traditional skidding and aerial cableway removal sys-
tems). These direct inquiries led to the identification of the pro-
duction techniques, worksites and operating performance
parameters that reflect the choices widely practiced by companies
in this type of industry. These items are explained in details in
subsection 2.2. Also the makeup of the machinery, the prices of new
machinery and of wood assortments were inferred by direct in-
terviews with expert witnesses of the main logging companies and
consequently estimated. For the environmental analysis, in addi-
tion to the primary data, which were collected through the above
mentioned field visits, some secondary data were needed, mainly
taken from Ecoinvent database [21].
From a methodological point of view, the technical parameters
identified were applied to one hectare of “typical coppice,” in order
to quantify elements useful for subsequent economic and envi-
ronmental assessments.
The economic analysis was performed per tonne of wood
biomass and per hectare. The stages considered in the analysis
went “from the woods to the mouth of the boiler.” The environ-
mental analysis, performed by means of LCA, was made per tonne
of wood biomass, and the stages taken into account instead went
from “the woods to the heat,” i.e. up to the combustion of the
biomass considered.
The following subsections present a brief description of the
wood biomass supply chains analyzed (subsection 2.1), the char-
acteristics of the “Typical Coppice” which has been taken into
consideration as technical reference, together with description of
typical worksites, the production process, including some as-
sumptions made (subsection 2.2). Next, more details about the
economic and environmental methodologies implemented are
presented (subsections 2.3 and 2.4).
2.1. Firewood and forest chips supply chains
The raw material at the base of the firewood supply chain comes
entirely from the woods. The final wood fuel is represented by
firewood, the qualitative and commercial characteristics of which
are defined by the UNI CEN 14961:2005 standard. There are various
commercial sizes, characterized by different lengths and diameters.
On the basis of the moisture content, the firewood is divided into
174 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
ready to use (M
20%), seasoned under shelter (M
30%),
seasoned in the woods (M
40%), and fresh wood (M
65%).
Another key parameter for differentiation is that of the wood
species, or at least the distinction between hardwood and resinous.
The ashes, calculated as a percentage of dry weight, must not
exceed 2%.
In relation to the forest chips supply chain, because of the low
market prices of wood chips compared to firewood, forestry
currently allocates brushwood and wood derived from plant pro-
tection cutting to this production, while agriculture allocates the
wood obtained from dedicated forest plantations (short rotation
coppice) and the pruning and plant removals from orchards, olive
groves and vineyards. The trunks of resinous species, which today
have practically no market, are also suitable for chipping. Also
contributing to the production of wood chips is the scrap from
sawmills and the material coming from urban greenery mainte-
nance, which is thus transformed from landfill waste into a biofuel
with a market value that can contribute to covering the costs. Lastly,
biomass is provided by work on river banks, which reduces the
risks associated with floods.
In commercial practice, wood chips are classified, based on the
intended use, into class A1, A2, and B chip, depending on whether
they are to be used for domestic heating, industrial heating, or
power plants.
2.2. Description of “typical coppice”, stages of the production
process and worksites
On the basis of the direct interviews, the practices and choices
widely performed by companies in this type of industry were
inferred. In order to ensure a common database for the economic
and the environmental analyses, the production techniques of the
worksite and relative yields have been applied to the same “typical
coppice” with the following characteristics:
 type of wood: uneven-aged coppice, consisting of 15% resinous
trees and 85% of hardwood trees (chestnut, turkey oak, oak);
 cutting rotation period: twenty years; cutting type: selection
with the maintaining of “one tree out of four.”
As regards the technologies for woodland use, the application of
two technological packages, which differ as regards the procedures
used for the processing and removal (traditional or cableway sys-
tems) are considered. In the traditional system, feasible in easily
accessed woods with low slopes, the first processing of wood takes
place in the forest and then proceeds with removal and arranging at
the landing of the various assortments (firewood cut into 1 or 2 m
lengths and whole logs); with the second system, the difficult ac-
cess and steep slopes require the use of cableways that carry whole
trees to the landing, where they are then processed. As regards
commissions and assortments, the following assumptions were
made:
 green production of 108 t ha1;
 intended use as lumber for trunks with a diameter of over
40 cm; intended use as firewood for roundwood with a diameter
between 10 and 40 cm;
 abandonment of brushwood in the forest in the case of use of
the traditional skidding system, for both environmental and
economic reasons;
 chipping at the landing of the brushwood obtained from the
limbing of whole tree skidded, utilized to produce class B wood
chips (only in the cableway removal system);
 use of all conifer trees for Class A1 wood chips production (15%
of total green), by means of stationary chipping, at the company
headquarters, of resinous logs left beforehand to season;
 chipping of other assortments of small diameter (less than
10 cm), previously seasoned at the landing until reaching a
moisture content of 30% and then chipped at the landing, for the
production of class A2 wood chips, followed by immediate
transportation of the chips to the final customer (only in the
cableway removal system).
As regard the machinery, the main assumptions are as follows.
 For both removal by the traditional system or by cableway, the
machinery is proportionate to a forested area of 300 ha.
Considering the duration of a cutting shift, the annual use of
machinery is therefore functional to the felling and removal of
15 ha per season.
 Carrying out of chipping at the landing with a mobile chipper for
Class A2 and B chips, and at the company headquarters with
stationary chipper, for the Class A1 chips. For the stationary
chipper, an annual utilization of 1000 h per year (and a life of 10
years) was considered, such as to minimize the fixed costs of
machines of this type.
 For sizing, a band saw complete with log splitter and conveyor
belt (20t/day capacity) is to be used, while transportation pro-
vides for the use of two trucks, one with a capacity of 5 tonnes
and the other 20 tonnes.
Other assumptions include transport distances, labor and mar-
keting methods.
 For the first of these, the following average distances, according
to the “short chain typology” described in the introduction,
were considered: 3 km from the landings to the company
headquarters; 20 km from the landing to the intermediary;
30 km from the company headquarters where the finished
product is processed to the end user. It was also assumed that
the landings are accessible to both tractors and trucks.
 For labor, the employment needs were calculated using the
average unit time required for operations (see Table 1) and
assuming a seasonal employment lasting six months, with an
hourly gross pay of V10.
 For marketing methods, the following was considered: that 70%
of the wood is sold to intermediaries, and the remaining 30% is
transported to the company headquarters, where the stages of
sizing, processing, loading and transport to the final residence
take place; that 50% of the firewood sold by forestry producers is
processed 50% in bulk and 50% on pallets.
The above assumptions, as said, describe a framework of prac-
tices and choices widely performed in this sector, and they are not
pure theoretical assumptions. For this reason, we can expect a
limited variability of results at the varying of the basic parameters,
given the reliability of the experts witnesses we interviewed.
Moreover, the robustness of environmental results is also tested
through uncertainty and sensitivity analysis (presented beyond, in
sections 2.5 and 3.3).
Ultimately, the use of the “typical coppice” makes it possible to
obtain the following types of final forest wood-based fuel: firewood
(logs or on pallets); class B wood chips (for biomass power sta-
tions); class A1 wood chips (for domestic heating systems); class A2
wood chips (for industrial thermoelectric power plants).
Figs. 1 and 2 report the stages, by-products, semi-finished and
finished products obtainable from the typical coppice as above
defined, applying the two traditional skidding (Fig. 1) and cableway
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185 175

Table 1
Worksite for processing stages of wood fuels: outputs and use of labor, machinery and fossil fuels.

Processing stages Worksite description Hourly Use of labor, machinery,

operating fuel
outputs
Labor Machin. Gasoline/
Diesel

t h1 h t1 h t1 L t1

a Cutting and first processing in 1-m 2 workers cutting with chain saws and 2 limbing 1.4 3.41 1.71 1.71
pieces
b Removal 3 workers, of which 1 operating the skidder connected to the tractor 3.6 1.02 0.18 4.27
c Cutting (without processing in the 2 workers cutting with chain saws 1.4 1.71 1.71 1.71
woods)
d Cableway removal 2 workers tying trunks, 1 with cableway remote control þ 1 part-time worker 6.4 0.66 0.19 1.15
operating the excavator with crane
e Processing at the landing in 1-m pieces 2 workers removing bark, 1 worker with chain saw þ 1 part-time worker 4.0 0.30 0.30 1.39
operating the excavator with crane
f Processing at the landing in 2-m pieces 2 workers removing bark, 1 worker with chain saw þ 1 part-time worker 5.0 0.24 0.24 1.11
operating the excavator with crane
g Loading at the landing 1 worker driving the truck and crane þ 4 workers loading wood on the truck 10.0 0.61 0.12 0.37
h Transport from the landing to the Truck, 20 t capacity, average distance 3 km 5.7 0.01 0.01 0.11
company headquarters
i Transport from the landing to the Truck, 20 t capacity, average distance 20 km 5.7 0.05 0.05 0.73
intermediary
l Sizing 2 workers operating the band saw þ 1 operating the forklift 2.9 1.05 0.35 1.11
m Loading on the truck of bulk firewood Dogging crane þ truck, 5 t capacity 10.0 0.10 0.10 0.30
n Loading on the truck of firewood on Forklift þ truck, 5 t capacity 18.8 0.05 0.05 0.05
pallets
o Home delivery Truck, 5 t capacity, average distance 30 km 2.5 0.30 0.30 2.40
p Chipping at the landing Medium wood chipper carried by tractor (diam. 30 cm) þ crane 6.6 0.30 0.15 4.00
q Stationary chipping at the company/ Large stationary wood chipper (diam. 50 cm) þ crane 16.5 0.15 0.06 5.00
platform
r Chipping transport Truck, 20 t capacity, average distance 50 km 5.7 0.18 0.18 1.67

Source: direct interviews with expert witnesses of the main logging companies

Fig. 1. Flow chart of the production of the “typical coppice” used with the traditional skidding removal system.
Source: direct interviews with expert witnesses of the main logging companies

(Fig. 2) removal technologies, suitable, respectively, for woods with gives the hourly operating outputs within the worksites for each of
easy or difficult access. the possible production steps, and the corresponding input of
The evidence of this technical analysis is shown in Table 1, which manpower, machinery, and energy per 1 tonne of final wood fuel.
176 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185

Fig. 2. Flow chart of the production of the “typical coppice” used with the aerial cableway removal system.
Source: direct interviews with expert witnesses of the main logging companies

Table 2 instead describes, for each of the different chains consid-
ered, the total of labor input, machinery and energy needed for the
production of 1 tonne of final wood fuel, obtained by summing the
inputs of the stages that contribute to its production. For example,
the inputs for 1 tonne of firewood were obtained by solving the
following summation (aþbþgþh*0.3þi*0.7þlþm*0.50þn*0.50þo),
in which the letters correspond to the stages thus marked in Table 1.
2.3. Methodology for the economic analysis
The economic analysis was done by evaluating the costs and
revenues of each stage identified in the technical analysis and
taking into account assumptions regarding the worksite and the
management of “typical coppice.” The production costs were
divided into three items: 1) labor costs; 2) energy consumption
costs; 3) machinery and general costs.
For machinery, the operating cost per hour was calculated on the
basis of the worksites and the assumptions regarding the annual
use of the machinery. The specific work unit cost (e.g. cost of felling
or skidding) expressed for area (hectare of coppice) or quantity of
wood biofuel (tonne) were then calculated taking into account the
hourly operating yields at the worksites given in Table 1.

Table 2
Unit inputs of labor, machinery and fossil fuels for the production of forest wood fuels.

Typology of forest wood fuels Use of labor Use of machinery and

fuel

Machin. Gasoline/
Diesel

h ha1 h t1 h t1 L t1

Firewood harvested with traditional skidding system and processed in 1-m pieces (aþbþgþh*0.3þi*0.7þlþm*0.50þn*0.50þo)* 534 6.5 2.8 10.6
Firewood harvested with cableway removal and processed at the landing in 1-m pieces 390 4.8 3.1 8.9
(cþdþeþgþh*0.3þi*0.7þlþm*0.5þn*0.5þo)
Class B forest wood chips (pþr) 41 0.5 0.3 5.7
Class A2 forest wood chips (cþdþpþr) 235 2.8 2.2 8.5
Class A1 forest wood chips (cþdþgþhþqþr) 273 3.3 2.3 10

*The letters in parentheses refer to the stages contributing to the production of each wood fuel considered - see Table 1 for correspondence with letters.
Source: direct interviews with expert witnesses of the main logging companies
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
The operating cost per hour OC is given by (1):
h


OC FC
¼ þ vc
h h
where: FC are the fixed costs per year; vc is the variable cost per
hour; h are the annual hours of use at the worksite. Fixed costs
include the depreciation of machinery and equipment for har-
vesting, interest on the purchase price, maintenance costs, insur-
ance and machinery shelter costs. The hourly variable costs include
wages for machinery operators and worksite personnel (L) and the
costs for fuel, lubricants and other materials (Cfl).
The harvesting worksite variable costs (vc) were calculated as
follows:
Machinery operators and worksite personnel (L):
L ¼ ½ððh1 þ h2 Þ*wÞ
where: h1 are man-hours for the operation of the machinery; h2 are
man-hours for the operation of the harvesting worksite; w is hourly
cost of labor, at V10 h1.
Costs for fuel, lubricants and other materials (Cfl):
 
Cfl ¼ RP*0:25*0:7*pf þ ðCV*0:005*0:7* pl Þ
where: RP is the rated power of the machine used; pf is the price of
diesel fuel for agricultural use, at V1.80/l; pl is the price of lubricant,
at V4 kg1.
The annual hours of use (h) were calculated taking into account
the basic assumptions and the specific details concerning the wood
cutting season:
h ¼ ðDs *Dd Þ
where: Ds is the duration of the wood cutting season expressed in
days, excluding days when the woods are inaccessible. The harvest
days were assumed to be 144 days per year. Dd is the length of the
day useful for wood cutting expressed in hours (7 h per day). It
follows that the hours of seasonal use of the wood cutting site was
estimated at 1000 h/season.
The case is different for the other machines, which can be used
at times other than for forest use (e.g. cutting of firewood or sta-
tionary chipping), the theoretical use of which extends to the entire
year.
The hourly operating cost is used to determine the total unit cost
TUCi of the i-th step of the process, expressed as following:
OC=h
TUCi ¼
OY
where: OC/h, is the hourly operating cost of the worksite; OY is the
hourly operating yield of the worksite.
Finally, the total production cost of the wood fuel (K) was ob-
tained by summing the unit production costs of all the stages that
contribute to its production and adding to this a flat-rate estimate
of the other production costs (OC) other than the specific costs:
Xn  were the same inferred by the technical analysis, and already
K¼ i¼1
TUCi þ OC
where: TUCi are the specific unit production costs of the n pro-
duction stages necessary to produce the particular wood fuel
considered. OC are costs other than the specific costs, estimated at
10% of revenues (management, administration and surveillance
expenses, work organization and inspection costs, marketing costs,
interest on advanced capital, land capital usage price).
177
In order to express an opinion on the profitability of the pro-
duction of wood biofuels, the unit revenues were compared to the
unit production costs, in accordance with (6), verifying whether or
(1)
not there is a positive value:
UR  K  0 (7)
Where UR and K are total unit revenues and costs of wood
biofuel (expressed in V t1).
The reference values for prices for new machinery and the prices
of wood assortments, which were necessary for the economic
assessment and estimated as above explained, are reported in the
Supporting Information (Table A).
2.4. Methodology for the environmental analysis
(2) The environmental analysis was conducted by means of the Life
Cycle Assessment (LCA). The LCA is a method that makes it possible
to analyze the environmental implications of a product/process/
service during all the stages of its life cycle, through the quantifi-
cation of the use of resources (energy, raw materials, water) and of
emissions into the environment (emissions into the air, water and
soil, waste and co-products) associated with the system being
(3) assessed. The product/process/service is therefore analyzed not just
in the stage of use, but along the entire span of its life, from the
extracting of the raw material to its final disposal. The main
guidelines to be followed to perform an LCA are established by
standards ISO 14040 and ISO 14044: [22,23]. According to the ISO
standards, an LCA consists of four phases: Definition of the goals
and scope; Inventory Analysis; Impact assessment; Interpretation.
The functional unit chosen for the study, which is the unit of
reference for the calculation of cash inflows and outflows from the
(4) system, was established at “1 tonne” of final wood fuel. In keeping
with the objectives and assumptions of this study, the forest wood-
based fuels being investigated were: firewood obtained with the
traditional skidding system; firewood obtained with the cableway
removal system; class B wood chips; class A2 wood chips; class A1
wood chips.
The system boundaries were so defined: the study took into
account all the stages going “from the woods to heating”; therefore,
three main stages were individuated: the first stage of “forest
management”, including all the operations performed inside the
forest; the stage of operations performed at the company head-
quarters and in some cases at the intermediary; the stage of final
combustion, at home or at the plant. All the intermediate transport
processes, and the connected environmental burden in relation to
the distance covered were accounted. Additionally, the LCA
approach allowed to consider the environmental burden connected
(5)
to manufacturing of fossil fuels, which were employed for the
machinery in all the stages, for operations like cutting, chipping,
transport, exc. (indeed, when including in the process the item
related to the fuel, the environmental impacts connected to its
procurement and manufacturing are accounted by the software),
analyzing in this way also the impacts “ex ante” of biomass
production.
The parameters and assumptions considered in the LCA study
(6) considered in the economic assessment (see main assumptions in
section 2.2, Tables 1 and 2, Figs. 1e2). The defining of the meth-
odological approach took into account also the scientific literature
on environmental assessment of the life cycle, with particular
emphasis on applications to biomass [24e30].
The foreground (or primary) data were collected through spe-
cific interviews and visits to the main companies in the logging
sector, the same conducted for the economic analysis. As
178 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
concerning the background (or secondary) data, instead, the main
data concerning the raw materials and the general data for trans-
port, fuel consumption, etc. were extrapolated from the Ecoinvent
Database [21]. The same dataset was used to take data related to the
production phases of oil and natural gas, to be compared with wood
biomass.
For the purposes of the inventory analysis, it was necessary to
find the unitary emissions from combustion of firewood and wood
chips that were missing in the Ecoinvent database, referring to the
average values obtained from 169 combustion tests carried out at
the BLT Wieselbug (Austria) in the 1999e2004 period (Table 3).
For the assessment of environmental impacts, the Eco-indicator
99 method [32] was utilized, one of the methods most widely used
in this area of research. It aggregates the results of an LCA in easily
understandable magnitudes and parameters, called Eco-indicators,
and it is based on “endpoint models”, allowing considering a so
called “damage oriented approach” [32]. According to this method,
all the results of an LCA are firstly aggregated into eleven impact
categories (i.e. Carcinogens, Respiratory Organics, Respiratory In-
organics, Climate Change, Radiation, Ozone Layer, Ecotoxicity, Acidi-
fication/Eutrophication, Land Use, Minerals, Fossil Fuels) which
subsequently are grouped into three main environmental damage
categories: Human Health, Ecosystem Quality, Resources. Simapro
software [33] was used for the calculations.
For purposes of comparison between the wood fuels being
considered and fossil fuels for heating purposes (fuel oil and natural
gas), it was considered significant to assess also the impact with the
useful thermal output being equal, i.e. taking into account not only
the different lower heating value (which is the amount of heat
produced by the complete combustion minus the heat of conden-
sation of the water vapor formed during combustion), but also
different thermodynamic efficiency of the combustors burning
firewood and wood chips (85%) compared to those burning natural
gas or fuel oil (90%). Specifically, the combustion of 12 tonnes of
firewood has been compared with those, equivalent in terms of
useful heat produced (145 GJ), of 14.1 tonnes of wood chips, 3.8
tonnes of fuel oil and 0.00315 tons (4.5 cubic meters) of natural gas.
For each of the three types of chips and two types of firewood,
therefore, the impacts on the 11 main impact categories foreseen by
the Ecoindicator 99 method, then aggregated in the three main
damage categories Human Health, Ecosystem Quality, Resources,
were evaluated. Then, the impact values for each category were
compared with those caused by production of oil and natural gas.
2.5. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis
Uncertainty analysis [34] combined with the sensitivity analysis
allows leading to a transparent increase in confidence in LCA
findings [35]. Accordingly, uncertainty analysis in the Life Cycle
Impact Assessment phase (LCIA) was performed, in order to deal
with possible data variability. It was performed through Monte
Carlo simulation, which has been recognized as the mostly rec-
ommended among the approaches available for uncertainty anal-
ysis in this phase [35,36]. Monte Carlo simulation is suitable for
estimating the uncertainties of LCIA results introduced by the sta-
tistical variability, and temporal, geographical, or technological
Table 3
Emissions of firewood and wood chip boilers expressed in mg N1m3.
Type of boiler NOx COV CO Particulate
Firewood boiler 131 5 100 22
Wood chip boiler 155 <2 28 28
Source: [31].
gaps in the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) data [35]. Based on the un-
certainty of LCI data expressed as a probability distribution, the
Monte Carlo simulation was carried out by running 5000 iterations
at the 95% confidence level.
Moreover, a sensitivity analysis was performed, in order to
evaluate the impact of the change of some inputs on the impact for
each category [37]. Changing the main assumptions, and recalcu-
lating the LCA, allows to better understand the magnitude of the
effect of assumptions made, in order also to clarify under which
assumptions some conclusions are valid [38]. To this purpose, we
changed the quantity of each basic input at a time, leaving the
remaining at their original level, and then we measured the
quantity of the related output changes [39].
3. Results
3.1. Economic analysis results
The analysis of the unit production costs (Table 4) for firewood
shows a general profitability of the various assortments. Wood chip
production costs, on the contrary, allow positive profits only for
class B and A1 wood chips, whereas the costs for class A2 are
slightly lower than unit revenues. The results are obviously better
when the woods are accessible to machinery, as we have assumed
in the case of application of the traditional skidding system. Where,
however, it is necessary to resort to more expensive removal sys-
tems (cableways) due to slopes and orography, unit costs increase,
but they can still ensure positive margins when the woods are
managed correctly and with good commissions.
These results are in line with the special place that the firewood
has, compared to other wood fuels on the Italian market, also in
terms of price. This is even more evident when comparing the
equivalent prices of the heat unit provided by them instead of
comparing the prices of wood fuels (see right part of Table 4).
An examination of this shows that the price of wood chips is
penalized compared to firewood, meaning that the unit of heat
supplied by the various quality classes is assessed at 20%e29% less
than firewood. The low price of green wood at the landing is instead
justified by its nature as a “semifinished” product of forestry ac-
tivities subjected to further processing, storage and distribution to
end users by the intermediary companies. With the two types of
removal - traditional skidding and cableway - the cost structure
changes markedly (Fig. 3).
In the traditional skidding system the use of labor is greater,
accounting for up to 62% in the case of bulk firewood, a percentage
that for this same type of product drops to 51% in the cableway
removal system, in which the savings for labor is offset by the in-
crease in costs for machinery.
For firewood, the purely agro-forestry stages (cutting, first
processing and removal) are those that have the highest costs
(Fig. 4): their incidence is highest, of course, for green wood sold at
the landing (85%) and fluctuates between 60% and 65% of total costs
for other types of firewood logs (dry bulk or on pallets) and removal
systems (traditional skidding/cableway). For the firewood logs, the
other significant stage in terms of costs is that of sizing (about 15%
of the total costs).
3.2. Environmental analysis results
The results of the environmental assessment show that the
impact values per functional unit of the five forest wood fuels
considered are very similar and lower than fossil fuels (fuel oil and
natural gas). Fig. 5 gives as an example a comparison of the impacts,
grouped within the macrocategories of Human Health, Ecosystem
Quality, and Resources, of class A1 chips with fuel oil and natural
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185 179

Table 4
Results of the economic assessment: analysis of production costs and unit revenues of firewood and forest wood chips.

Type of wood fuel Average unit Average unit Average unit Lower Heating Heat unit
cost (V t1) revenue (V t1) profit (V t1) Value (MWh t1) price (V MWh1)

Green wood at the landing - T 64.3 75 10.7 3.5 21

Dry firewood, bulk - T 97.3 120 23.1 3.85 34
Dry firewood, pallets - T 101.6 130 28.7 3.85 34
Green wood at the landing - C 75.7 75 0.7 3.5 21
Dry firewood, bulk - C 109.8 120 20.7 3.85 34
Dry firewood, pallets - C 114.2 130 16.2 3.85 34
Class B chips 18.6 53 34.4 2.2 24
Class A2 chips 81.2 80 1.2 3.1 26
Class A1 chips 70.1 100 29.9 3.7 27

T: Traditional system.
C: Cableway removal system.
Source: our elaboration; Source for Lower Heating Value: [31]

Fig. 3. Incidence of labor, energy costs and other costs on the production of forest biofuels (V t1).
T ¼ Traditional skidding system
C ¼ Cableway system
Other costs: other than the specific costs, estimated at 10% of revenues (management, administration and surveillance expenses, work organization and inspection costs, marketing
costs, interest on advanced capital, land capital usage price).

gas, with weight being equal (1 tonne). For simplicity, only the
values relative to A1 chips are reported, instead of the whole set of
wood fuels, because as mentioned the values are quite similar.
The comparison with useful heat being equal (Fig. 6), however,
shows that wood chips have lower values than fuel oil for all three
macrocategories, but higher than natural gas, which results
therefore the fuel that is preferable from an environmental
perspective. Furthermore, Fig. 6 shows that class A1 wood chips
have impact values very close to those of fuel oil for both the Hu-
man Health and the Ecosystem Quality macrocategories. The pro-
duction of oil shows very high values for the category Resources,
while the production of natural gas shows very low values for all
the categories, in comparison to the other two fuels.
Even among the different types of forest wood fuels (Fig. 7), the
impact values are very similar for the first two macrocategories,
although a higher variability is found for Human Health, for which
the fuel with the lowest impact is firewood removed by cableway,
while that with the highest impact is class A2 wood chips. In
relation to the total impact, results show that the wood fuel with
the lowest impact is Class B wood chips (80,35 points), while the
one with the highest impact is Class A2 chips (108,00 points). The
difference in terms of impact on the category Resources (26,22
point in case of Class B and 49,55 in case of A2) seems to notably
affect the global score. All the results are expressed as normalized
Points. Normalization consists of dividing the impact category
indicators by a ‘normal’ value. The most common procedure to
ascertain the normal value is to determine the impact category
indicators for a region during an entire year and divide this result
by the number of inhabitants in that area. Therefore, the final re-
sults are expressed in points; the higher the score, the more
important the impact is [40].
In relation to the environmental impact produced by the single
stages, within each wood biomass chain, the results of the analysis
showed a similar trend for all the chains analyzed. In this case,
results are shown not in relation to the three aggregated macro-
categories but for the 11 single categories of Eco Indicator 99; one
example of the results for A1 Chips is presented in Supporting In-
formation (Fig. A). For each chain, the impact category most
involved was that of Fossil Fuels, influenced mainly by the chipping
process (performed at the company headquarters for A1 chips,
while inside the forest for A2 and B chips) and by all the transport
processes. In the chains of firewood, both traditional and with ca-
ble, the category of Fossil Fuels was again the most involved,
influenced especially by the sizing processes (at the company
headquarters or at the intermediary) and by the transport pro-
cesses. The second impact category most involved was that of
Respiratory Inorganics, mostly influenced in all the chains by the
combustion stage (this is related to the important values for Human
Health discussed hereafter), and only in a less degree by chipping
(in case of chips) and sizing (in case of firewood) processes. Other
180 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
Fig. 4. Incidence of the production process stages on the cost of production of forest biofuels (V t1).
T ¼ Traditional skidding system
C ¼ Cableway system.
impact categories affected, even in minor way, were acidification/
eutrophication (mostly influenced by the combustion stage) and
land use (mostly influenced by chipping and sizing). The rest of the
categories had negligible impacts.
3.3. Results of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis
The Monte Carlo simulation was run with 5000 iterations at the
95% confidence level, for all the alternatives considered. Based on
the probability distribution of the computed category indicator
results (the histogram of the probability distribution for the mac-
rocategory Human Health, in relation to the alternative “Firewood
with traditional system” is given as example in Supporting Infor-
mation, Fig. B), the uncertainty ranges for the characterized impact
categories were derived according to [35] (see Supporting Infor-
mation, Table B and Fig. C).
In relation to sensitivity analysis, also in this case we carried out
the analysis for Class A1, A2 and B Wood Chips, Firewood traditional
and Firewood cableway system. We considered two increased
levels of processes (e.g. processes of Lubricating and Excavation in
Class A2 Wood Chips): the mean increased by one time the stan-
dard deviation and the mean increased by two times the standard
deviation. Standard Deviations were calculated on the original in-
ventory data. We chose a factor for standard deviation (StdDev)
equal to two in order to capture a sufficient range of variation [39].
We then calculated the ratio between the absolute values of the
output and the input changes for each impact category.
The results show a complex picture in which the impacts vary
across the categories. An increase by two times the standard de-
viation causes in all the cases considered impacts larger than in the
case on an increase equal to one time the standard deviation. Fossil
fuels, Land use and Resp. inorganics exhibit the larger impacts in
the most of the cases considered, even though the impacts vary
across the cases. Moreover in Firewood traditional the Climate
change also has a large impact.
Fig. D in Supporting Information illustrates as an example the
outcomes of the case Firewood Cableway system-Lubricating in
which Land use has the large impact, with climate change also
having an important outcome.
4. Discussion
The results of the economic analysis showed a net income for
tonne of wood biomass ranging from 53 (Class B chips) to 130
(Firewood with traditional system) euros. Transposing the results
in data for hectare, in the presence of coppice with commissions
like those we assumed and managed correctly (leaving “1 tree out
of 4”) and in following a twenty-year rotation period, forest man-
agement is able to provide a net income fluctuating between V1500
and V1900 ha1, depending on the conditions of accessibility of the
forests and the different mechanization to be used (traditional
skidding or cableway). The production of wood chips for energy
production is, at current market prices, an income integration
compared to that coming from firewood, which remains central to
the profitability of forest use. It follows that in most cases, except in
the case of species of resinous woods, the exclusive production of
wood chips is not economically profitable.
Wood chips still can constitute an additional income to forestry
companies, especially when obtained from the brushwood left over
from removal by cableway operations, which would otherwise
constitute an unused by-product. Scale sizes are essential in the
production of forest biomass (where operating margins are
extremely low), as also the level of accessibility of forests, which
notably influences the production costs.
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185 181

Fig. 5. Impacts derived from the combustion of Class A1 wood chips, oil and natural gas, with weight being equal (Pt for 1 tonne) e Method Ecoindicator 99.
All the results are expressed as normalized Points. Normalization consists of dividing the impact category indicators by a ‘normal’ value. The most common procedure to ascertain
the normal value is to determine the impact category indicators for a region during an entire year and divide this result by the number of inhabitants in that area. Therefore, the final
results are expressed in points; the higher the score, the more important the impact is.

Other studies analyzing production costs of forest residues
found comparable values with these current results. For example,
Eker [11] found that the procurement costs for logging residues
ranged from 47.99 to 140.76 $ per tonne, depending on the system
analyzed. Moreover, Sacchelli et al. [12] arrived to similar conclu-
sions about the relation between firewood and chips. In particular,
their forest chain analysis analyzed the importance of firewood in
the regional forest market investigated. Unless firewood volume
reached 57% of the total potential yield, net revenues from forestry
products used for firewood production were approximately 78% of
the total economic value (accounting for the selling of roundwood,
timber pole, etc.). Additionally, they found that “the introduction of
complementary assortments (residues) into the production mix
increased the economic advantages of forestry processes” [12].
However, as for our case study, they underlined that the results
strictly depend on forest characteristics and logistical parameters.
Another comparable result was that innovative forest chains
decrease economic efficiency when there are low prices for energy
residues because of higher investment costs compared to the
mechanization level.
Several other studies conducted in literature focused on eco-
nomic, environmental, or both economic and environmental as-
pects of different types of wood biomass. Some examples are
reported here.
Den Herder et al. [17] investigated fossil and woody biomass-
based energy production chains in the region of North Karelia.
Concentrating on a set of economic, environmental and social in-
dicators the authors assessed the sustainability impacts of changes
in fuel consumption patterns. The study evidence emphasizes the
importance of the economic convenience of specific biomass pro-
duction (wood chips) with respect to oil production, but also it
points out the risk associated to the same patterns of price fluctu-
ation shared by wood chips and oil. Moreover, it is underlined that
the production costs may reduce the convenience of wood chips in
terms of local value added. Notably, the wood biomass chains offer
relevant employment opportunities, whilst environment impacts
draw a less favorable scenario.
A critical point in the sustainability of the biomasses chain is
their articulation in several stages. Elghali [18] focuses on the in-
terdependencies among the bioenergy chain stages. The authors
point out that the bioenergy supply chains involve a large number
of inter-dependent actors (growers, biomass intermediaries, plant
owners and operators, regulatory authorities and the public). A
critical question is then how to integrate technical and values-
based information in the decision problem. In this perspective a
framework is designed to meet these requirements, incorporating
stakeholders concerns in decision-making, to guide private sector
and local planning decisions and government policies. The study is
intended to inform best practice guidelines, assurance schemes,
policy and regulation, and financial and social risk assessment and
182 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
Fig. 6. Impacts derived from the combustion of Class A1 wood chips, oil and natural gas, with useful heat being equal (Pt) e Method Ecoindicator 99.
communication. A framework is proposed which allows one to put
together technical elements and stakeholders expectations.
Accordingly, the study concludes that these chains are particularly
vulnerable to risks associated with delays in planning consent, lack
of support from the general public and other stakeholder concerns.
Malik et al. [19], address sustainability issues in cellulose
refinery's supply chain, analyzing the chain stages in a selected
region in Australia. The study assesses both the upstream and
downstream refining stages, and consider as well the life-cycle
effects occurring in conventional industries displaced by the pro-
posed biofuel supply chains. The approach considers the whole
supply chain in the light of the triple bottom line (TBL) considering
social, economic and environmental aspects. Focusing on the chain
stages, Malick et al. (2016) distinguish among the impact originated
on site, by the supplier of the cellulosic industry, the suppliers of
the suppliers and so on. The results indicate that the suppliers of
the first five stages are responsible for more than the 95% of the
economic, social and environmental impacts. Accordingly, under a
methodological point of view the analysis also shows that the
enhanced outcomes can be achieved if top-down and bottom-up
analysis are jointly carried out.
Martire et al. [20] carried out a Sustainability Impact Assess-
ment (SIA) for local bioenergy development in the alpine area of
Lake Como (Italy). Eleven scenarios considering different biomass
utilizations, mechanization levels, combustion technologies, and
subsidies schemes at 2020 are drawn. The study identifies the
system to be analyzed on the basis of the concept of chain topology
(case-specific processes, linked through output and input products)
and considering three different biomasses production and use
processes. Scenarios are then identified and discussed on the basis
of a comprehensive set of indicators. Critical areas of impact are
again energy generation, gross value added, employment, air
pollution, greenhouse gas emission, energy use. The efficiency in
the energy use seems to be the main source of profitability and
environmental sustainability, while the enhancement of biomass
mobilization appears to be a promising goal in policy schemes.
In general, all these studies underlined how the specificity of the
chain, and aspect as chain topology, type of organization, man-
agement and regulation, systems of price can sensibly affect both
economic and environmental results.
Some further important considerations, in relation to the eco-
nomic analysis performed in the present study, concern the con-
sumption of “grey energy”.
The consumption of grey energy, i.e. the energy of fossil origin
consumed in the life cycle of the product analyzed before its final
use, is an important yardstick in relation to the work goals, as it
provides a measurement of energy efficiency that is useful in
avoiding to loose possible economic advantages.
When the grey energy is calculated as a percentage of the lower
heating value of the fuel, it gives us an immediate measure of the
fossil energy incorporated by the product and that has been
absorbed by the production process. In this study the grey energy
was evaluated both as a cost item in its own right (Fig. 3) and in
terms of energy (kWh/t) consumed for the various stages of the
production process, and in terms of a percentage of the lower
heating value of the wood biofuels considered (Table 5).
In this respect, the cableway system showed to be more favor-
able, as the grey energy consumption accounts for 2.6% of the lower
heating value of firewood, a figure that is higher, albeit slightly, in
the traditional skidding system (3.2%). A like percentage (fluctu-
ating between 3.1% and 3.3%) has been found for the production of
forest wood chips.
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185 183

Fig. 7. Impacts derived from the combustion of the different types of forest wood fuels (Pt t1) e Method Ecoindicator 99.

Table 5
Consumption of “grey energy” per production stage and its incidence on the LHV of wood fuels.

Wood fuel Total grey energy (kWh t1) LHVa (kWh t1) Grey energy/LHV (%)

Green wood at the landing (traditional) 83.9 3500 2.4

Green wood at the landing (cableway) 63.5 3500 1.8
Dry firewood (traditional) 121.8 3850 3.2
Dry firewood (cableway) 101.3 3850 2.6
Class B chips 67 2200 3.1
Class A2 chips 101 3100 3.3
Class A1 chips 119 3700 3.2
a
LHV ¼ Lower Heating Value.
Source: our elaboration

Klein et al. [16] analyzed the primary energy production for
different wood assortments, and found that in their case study the
energy-input/output ratio (which is the ratio between the non-
renewable energy consumption in relation to the renewable en-
ergy potential of wood) ranged from 0.010 for beech split logs (best
case) to 0.13 for spruce industrial wood (worst case) to plant/farm
gate.
In relation to the environmental analysis performed, an impor-
tant aspect to explore is the impact connected to category Human
Health. Falling within the Human Health macro-category are: the
impact on climate change (emissions into the air of CO2, methane
and other greenhouse gases), emissions into the air of particulate
matter (PM10) and inorganic substances (SO2 and NOx), which are
the main criticalities for human health arising from the combustion
of wood biomass.
The impact on human health of wood fuels is a matter of
fundamental importance for the development prospects of
biomass, since it is a common belief that the burning of wood is
highly polluting [41].
In this respect the first weak point of wood biomass heating can
be found in particulate matter, especially in comparison with nat-
ural gas [42,31]. The lower the size of the particulates (fine parti-
cles), the more harmful they are for respiratory diseases, and wood
heating systems, fuel oil and coal, in addition to road transport and
certain industrial processes related to energy production or waste
treatment, are among the main sources of their emission [43].
Those produced in the combustion of wood biomass are quite
reactive, as they are made up by more than 83% by particles with a
diameter of less than 1 mm [31] and can penetrate into the deepest
part of the lungs, the alveoli, reaching the blood, carrying organic
184 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
molecules or inorganic compounds that are extremely hazardous to
the health [43].
It should be mentioned, lastly, that among the factors that in
daily practice can generate particulate emissions well beyond the
legal limits even in technologically advanced equipment is incor-
rect operation and use (e.g. loading an excessive quantity of logs,
using material with a high moisture content, closing the air regis-
ters), which can occur especially in the absence of automation, a
problem seen especially with wood-fired combustors [42].
For SO2, a pollutant responsible for acid rain and other respi-
ratory diseases, emissions of wood fuels fall in between those of
natural gas and fuel oil, and are much lower than those produced by
the latter. For nitrogen oxides (NOx), the values are very similar to
fuel oil and about double compared to natural gas.
One category having a particular impact that should be
mentioned is that of climate change, which is accounted for in
terms of CO2 equivalent, a unit of measurement that allows one to
weigh together the emissions of different greenhouse gases (CO2,
CH4, N2O, water vapor) with different climate-altering effects. For
each gas, its equivalent in carbon dioxide is considered by means of
an appropriate coefficient.
From this perspective, given that biomass is considered as a
reserve of carbon and thus “carbon neutral,” its CO2 emissions
resulting from combustion are not counted, but only those from
fossil energy sources used in its life cycle. This explains the low net
impact attributed to wood fuel as regards climate change.
It is interesting to point out that if the CO2 emissions resulting
from the combustion of wood fuels were also calculated, the results
obtained would be the opposite. A focus on this aspect is reported
in Supporting Information (Table C and Fig, E).
For what concerns the results in terms of impact produced by
the single stages, and not comparing in this case wood biomass
with traditional fuels, our study showed that the impact category
most involved was that of Fossil Fuels, influenced mainly by the
chipping process and by all the transport processes. In the chains of
firewood the same result was found, and the category of Fossil Fuels
was influenced especially by the sizing and by the transport
processes.
The study of Dias [13], similarly, found that in chip production
chain the most relevant impact categories were chipping (for all the
systems analyzed), forwarding, transports and bundling. The im-
pacts of these operations arose mostly from diesel combustion.
Other authors also pointed out chipping and transports as the
major hotspots in fuel chip production chains [45e49].
Finally, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis gave useful indica-
tion for inspecting possible data inaccuracy, constituting a useful
tool for more robust Decision Making, policy or comparative as-
sertions [35]. In particular, both uncertainty and sensitivity analysis
provided a more comprehensive knowledge of input, output and
alternatives as scenarios parameters and characteristics. Land use,
fossil fuels and climate change were detected as the categories
most influenced by the variations of inputs.
5. Conclusions
This study intended to perform an economic and environmental
evaluation of agro-energy wood biomass supply chains, consid-
ering five final types of wood biofuel and analyzing all the technical
and organizational parameters contributing to their production,
together with the relative environmental flows.
The economic analysis showed that, at current market prices, it
is more profitable to use forest resources to produce firewood
rather than wood chips. The production of forest wood chips still
provides additional income to forestry companies, although whole
chipping can be profitable only in conifer woods, for which there is
now little demand on the market. The economic analysis also
showed that chipping is profitable for making use of the brush-
wood left over from removal by cableway operations, which would
otherwise constitute an unused by-product.
As it was reasonable to expect, scale sizes are essential in the
production of forest biomass, where operating margins are
extremely low, given the low value of the final products, whether
firewood or wood chips, as the minimization of costs requires the
use of expensive specialized high-performance machinery, to be
used at maximum capacity during the useful season in order to
minimize fixed costs.
If forestry companies do not have at least 300 ha of woods
available, the purchase of their own equipment and machinery for
forest harvesting activities and the final sizing of firewood is not
justified from an economic viewpoint. In these cases the creation of
associative structures becomes essential for the processing of raw
materials and for the optimal management of the final product
according to the model of Austrian logistic platforms. Structures of
this type may also help to counter the abandonment of forest
management.
The abandonment of forest management should be resisted also
for environmental reasons. Woods and forests can in fact be
considered a “common good” and as such should be managed so as
to ensure the renewal of forest formations, bearing in mind that the
physiological activity of producing oxygen by plants is reduced in
adulthood and is highest in growing plants.
It follows that the abandonment of forestry activities should be
opposed, and that private owners should be encouraged, if not
obligated, to carry out sustainable forestry management opera-
tions, which means the felling of trees that are already dead or
diseased, the practicing of improvement cutting according to the
reserve tree or “1 plant out of every 4” methods, the protection of
ancient trees and historical woods, ecological processes, and fair
wages to workers.
As regards environmental concerns, the LCA analysis results
showed that, for the same heat output, the environmental impact of
forest wood fuel is much lower than that of fuel oil, but is still
higher than natural gas. Furthermore, there are no great differences
between the impacts of the various wood fuels, although a slight
advantage can be ascribed to firewood removed by aerial cableway.
This contrasts with the results of the economic analysis, which
showed higher unit production costs in the case of using aerial
cableway removal, a technology that nonetheless remains indis-
pensable for steep slopes or terrains that are difficult to access with
mechanical equipment.
The LCA analysis also showed the strongest impact for “Re-
sources” (consumption of fossil fuels during the life cycle) and
“Human Health” macro-category, ascribable in particular to par-
ticulate matter, SO2 and NOx, while the impact concerning the
category of Climate Change is much lower.
The analysis carried out has shown that by removing the “car-
bon neutral” assumption, the CO2 balance may even be reversed. A
different approach in the counting of carbon dioxide emitted from
biomass is therefore desirable, in consideration of the fact that the
interest in renewable energy is strongly connected to its favorable
impact on climate change.
Acknowledgments
This study was partly funded by the PRIN (“Research Projects of
Relevant National Interest”) Project: “Agriculture in the production
system of safe goods: food and energy”.
We thank Prof. Rossella Pampanini for being crucial in the
implementation of the project.
 L. Paolotti et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 97 (2017) 172e185
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.12.020.
References
[1] European Commission, Communication from the Commission. Europe 2020-A
Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth, Brussels, 3.3.2010 COM,
2010, 2020 final.
[2] European Commission, European Biomass Action Plan, Brussels, COM, 2005,
628 final.
[3] W.H. Schlesinger, M. Allen, V.P. Aneja, et al., Letter to Nancy Pelosi, US House
of Representatives and Harry Reid, US Senate, 17 May 2010.
[4] R.A. Sedjo, Carbon Neutrality, Bioenergy A, Zero-Sum Game? Discussion Paper,
2011, Available at: http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-11-15.pdf
(accessed 14 July 2011).
[5] J.S. Gunn, D.J. Ganz, W.S. Keeton, Biogenic vs. geologic carbon emissions and
forest biomass energy production, GCB Bionenergy 4 (2012) 239e242.
[6] F.X. Aguilar, B. Glavonjic, R. Hartkamp, W. Mabee, K. Skog, Chapter 9: wood
energy market, 2011-2012, in: United Nations Forest Products Annual Market
Review, 2013, pp. 91e101. Online at, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/
timber/publications/FPAMR2013.pdf.
[7] T. Searchinger, S.P. Hamburg, J. Melillo, et al., Fixing a critical climate ac-
counting error, Science 326 (23) (2009).
[8] T. Walker, P. Cardellichio, A. Colnes, J. Gunn, B. Kittler, R. Perschel, C. Recchia,
D. Saah, Biomass Sustainability, Carbon Policy, Study: Report to the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, Manomet
Center for Conservation Sciences, Report No.: NCI-2010-03, 2010.
[9] J. Mckechnie, S. Colombo, J. Cheng, W. Mabee, H.L. Maclean, Forest bioenergy
or forest carbon? Assessing trade-offs in greenhouse gas mitigation with
wood-based fuels, Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (2) (2011) 789e795.
[10] P. Ralevic, M. Ryans, D. Cormier, Assessing forest biomass for bioenergy:
operational challenges and cost considerations, For. Chron. 86 (1) (2010)
43e50.
[11] M. Eker, Assessment of procurement systems for unutilized logging residues
for Brutian pine forest of Turkey, Afr. J. Biotechnol. 10 (13) (2011) 2455e2468.
[12] S. Sacchelli, C. Fagarazzi, I. Bernetti, Economic evaluation of forest biomass
production in central Italy: a scenario assessment based on spatial analysis
tool, Biomass Bioenerg. (2013) 1e10.
[13] A.C. Dias, Life cycle assessment of fuel chip production from eucalypt forest
residues, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19 (2014) 705e717.
[14] J. Giuntoli, S. Caserini, L. Marelli, D. Baxter, A. Agostini, Domestic heating from
forest logging residues: environmental risks and benefits, J. Clean. Prod. 99
(2015) 206e216.
[15] R.M. Handler, D.R. Shonnard, P. Lautala, D. Abbas, A. Srivastava, Environmental
impacts of roundwood supply chain options in Michigan: life-cycle assess-
ment of harvest and transport stages, J. Clean. Prod. 76 (2014) 64e73.
[16] D. Klein, C. Wolf, C. Schulz, G. Weber-Blaschke, Environmental impacts of
various biomass supply chains for the provision of rawwood in Bavaria,
Germany, with focus on climate change, Sci. Total Environ. 539 (2016) 45e60.
[17] M. den Herder, M. Kolstro €m, M. Lindner, T. Suominen, D. Tuomasjukka,
M. Pekkanen, sustainability impact assessment on the production and use of
different wood and fossil fuels employed for energy production in North
Karelia, Finland, Energies 5 (2012) 4870e4891, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
en5114870.
[18] L. Elghali, R. Clift, P. Sinclair, C. Panoutsou, A. Bauen, Developing a sustain-
ability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems, Energy Policy 35
(12) (2007) 6075e6083.
[19] A. Malik, M. Lenzen, A. Geschke, Triple bottom line study of a lignocellulosic
biofuel Industry, GCB Bioenergy 8 (2016) 96e110, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
gcbb.12240.
[20] S. Martire, D. Tuomasjukka, M. Lindner, J. Fitzgerald, V. Castellani, Sustain-
ability impact assessment for local energy supplies' development. The case of
the alpine area of Lake Como, Italy, Biomass Bioenerg. 83 (2015) 60e76.
[21] Ecoinvent. Ecoinvent Data V2.2, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, 2010.
[22] International Organization For Standardization, ISO 14040. Environmental
Management - Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Framework, 2006.
185
[23] International Organization For Standardization, ISO 14044. Environmental
Management - Life Cycle Assessment: Requirements and Guidelines, 2006.
[24] S. Caserini, S. Livio, M. Giugliano, M. Grosso, L. Rigamonti, LCA of domestic and
centralized biomass combustion: the case of Lombardy (Italy), Biomass Bio-
energ. 34 (4) (2010) 474e482.
[25] F. Fantozzi, C. Buratti, Life cycle assessment of biomass chains: wood pellet
from short rotation coppice using data measured on a real plant, Biomass
Bioenerg. 34 (12) (2010) 1796e1804.
[26] S. Ghafghazi, T. Sowlati, S. Sokhansanj, X.T. Bi, S. Melin, Life cycle assessment
of base-load heat sources for district heating system options, Int. J. Life Cycle
Assess. 16 (3) (2011) 212e223.
[27] M.C. Mcmanus, Life cycle impacts of waste wood biomass heating systems: a
case study of three UK based systems, Energy 35 (10) (2010) 4064e4070.
[28] A. Roedl, Production and energetic utilization of wood from short rotation
coppice-a life cycle assessment, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 15 (6) (2010)
567e578.
[29] P. Rousset, A. Caldeira-Pires, A. Sablowski, T. Rodrigues, LCA of eucalyptus
wood charcoal briquettes, J. Clean. Prod. 19 (14) (2011) 1647e1653.
[30] R.A. Urban, B.R. Bakshi, 1,3-Propanediol from fossils versus biomass: a life
cycle evaluation of emissions and ecological resources, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48
(17) (2009) 8068e8082.
[31] V. Francescato, A. Paniz, E. Antonini, Moderne Caldaie e impianti a legna,
cippato e pellet, AIEL, Padova, 2012.
[32] M. Goedkoop, R. Spriensma, (Product Ecology Consultants), The Eco-indicator
99-A Damage Oriented Method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment, Methodol-
ogy Report, third ed., Product Ecology Consultants, Plotterweg, Netherlands,
2001.
[33] Product Ecology Consultants, SimaPro LCA Software, Plotterweg, Netherlands,
1990.
[34] D.R. Johnson, H.H. Willis, A.E. Curtright, C. Samaras, T. Skone, Incorporating
uncertainty analysis into life cycle estimates of greenhouse gas emissions
from biomass production, Biomass Bioenerg. 35 (2011) 2619e2626.
[35] M. Guo, R.J. Murphy, LCA data quality: sensitivity and uncertainty analysis, Sci.
Total Environ. 435e436 (2012) 230e243.
[36] J.F. Contadini, R.M. Moore, P.L. Mokhtarian, Life cycle assessment of fuel cell
vehicles - a methodology example of input data treatment for future tech-
nologies, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. (2002) 73e84.
[37] A. Noshadravan, L. Cheah, R. Roth, F. Freire, L. Dias, J. Gregory, Stochastic
comparative assessment of life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from con-
ventional and electric vehicles, Int. J. Life Cycle Ass 20 (6) (2015) 854e864.
[38] M. Goedkoop, M. Oele, J. Leijting, T. Ponsioen, E. Meijer, Introduction to LCA
with SimaPro, PRe  Consultants, Plotterweg, Netherlands, 2013.
[39] D.M. Hamby, A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of
environmental models, Environ. Monit. Assess. 32 (2) (1994) 135e154.
[40] L. Paolotti, A. Boggia, C. Castellini, L. Rocchi, A. Rosati, Combining livestock and
tree crops to improve sustainability in agriculture: a case study using the Life
Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach, J. Clean. Prod. 131 (2016) 351e363.
[41] B. Hellrigl, Il pellet: notizie e informazioni sulla produzione e l'impiego, Aula
magna N.3, Supplemento scientifico degli approfondimenti di Sherwood -
Foreste ed Alberi Oggi, 2013.
[42] N. Klippel, T. Nussbaumer, Formazione di polveri sottili in apparecchi termici a
legna. Ripercussione sulla salute umana e confronto con la fuliggine prodotta
dai motori diesel, Agriforenergy 1 (2009).
[43] P.M. Mannucci, M. Fronte, Aria da morire. I danni dell’inquinamento alla
salute e le buone azioni per ridurre il problema, Dalai Editore, Milano, 2013,
ISBN 978-886620816-7.
[45] L.N. Eriksson, L. Gustavsson, Biofuels from stumps and small roundwoodd
costs and CO2 benefits, Biomass Bioenerg. 32 (2008) 897e902.
[46] L. Johnson, B. Lippke, E. Oneil, Modeling biomass collection and woods pro-
cessing life-cycle analysis, For. Prod. J. 62 (2012) 258e272.
[47] E.L. Lindholm, S. Berg, P.A. Hansson, Energy efficiency and the environmental
impact of harvesting stumps and logging residues, Eur. J. For. Res. 129 (2010)
1223e1235.
[48] C. Valente, B.G. Hillring, B. Solberg, Bioenergy from mountain forest: a life
cycle assessment of the Norwegian woody biomass supply chain, Scand. J. For.
Res. 26 (2011) 429e436.
[49] C. Whittaker, N. Mortimer, R. Murphy, R. Matthews, Energy and greenhouse
gas balance of the use of forest residues for bioenergy production in the UK,
Biomass Bioenerg. 35 (2011) 4581e4594.