We found that provincial-height times replacement advantages of future fuels was in fact slightly smaller than those individuals projected regarding modern-day fuels (Fig
We believed lower and you will higher replacing benefits on analyses once the suspicion about replacing advantages leads to uncertainty for the mitigation efficiency having times and factors . 4), however, modern-day fuels got better regional distinction, especially for places with high industrial opportunity consult and you may reduced society, just as the results regarding an early on study . During the remote teams, electricity explore is evolving through several programs (the fresh new Brush Opportunity having Rural and you can Remote Teams (CERRC) program , this new Native Of-Diesel Effort , and in 2018 the fresh new CleanBC bundle launched the prospective to minimize by 2030 new diesel application in-off-grid groups because of the 80%.
Uncertainty on replacing professionals to have wood issues was analyzed of the playing with highest and you can lower substitution professionals to have sawnwood and you may boards. A current review of education with examined replacing benefits to possess timber , located an average unit displacement component that is in the variety away from philosophy found in this study, but more information on displacement issues by item form of and you will nation was useful, including more information on avoid-spends and associated equipment lifetimes (age.g. [5, 8]). Information regarding substitution masters to have pulp and you may paper is limited, and now we presumed you will find zero replacing benefit, but because of the proportion out of C within this class (25% in order to 34% away from wood merchandise), polishing these situations could have high has an effect on on the net GHG cures. Whatever the uncertainties concerning genuine magnitude out-of replacing pros, the results obviously show that deeper mitigation experts can be done courtesy formula you to (1) improve the C maintenance time in collected timber products of the favouring long-existed over quick-stayed facts as well as bioenergy, and you may (2) enable the usage of timber facts to change emission-rigorous materials, e.g. about strengthening market.
To possess coming analyses, it will be good for features spatial information on coming society and you will commercial fuel consumption for every fossil fuels
In terms of the economic analyses, similar studies have compared mitigation costs for various mitigation scenarios at the national scale and for specific activities [45, 56, 68]. In this study, we used regionally differentiated economic assumptions by three broad regions (northern interior, southern interior, sudy coastal region) as well as at the timber supply area (TSA) level for the Bioenergy scenarios in order to capture the spatial variation in market price and production cost (Additional file 1: Table S9). The cost and price assumptions associated with the bioenergy scenarios and the substitution effects were TSA-specific depending on residue availability, bioenergy facility type, transportation distance (simple estimates), and fuel mix. We assumed that log prices would be affected if harvest shifted among log grades due to mitigation scenarios. However, no change in market prices of HWP was assumed in any scenario because HWP prices are usually determined by large-scale markets while log markets are relatively regional. Costs related to forest management were affected if harvest activities were altered by mitigation scenarios, for instance, logging costs increased in conservation scenarios because more dispersed cut blocks were needed to keep the same harvest characteristics (e.g., diameters, tree species, etc.). We also assumed a fixed $50/tCO2e carbon price over the entire period for slashburning as a penalty in the baseline to reflect a possible policy change to include slashburning in BC's existing carbon pricing . Manufacturing costs were also impacted by changes in production efficiency that then depend on the availability of input materials. Additional recovered fiber under Higher Utilization was assumed to be used in HWP following the same proportions as in the baseline, thus a lower manufacturing cost was assumed for pulp and paper production due to higher efficiency, but a higher manufacturing cost for solid wood products because of lower log quality. Similarly, higher manufacturing costs were assumed for all HWP in the conservation scenarios due to lower efficiency. In the LLP scenario, we assumed economy of scales increased manufacturing costs of pulp and paper (+ 2%) and decreased costs for solid wood products (? 2%) .