Abstract Harvested wood and paper products can store large amounts of carbon long-term but also contribute to carbon emissions once discarded. Currently, several tools are used for inventory and reporting carbon in wood and paper products in the U.S. Carbon in wood and paper is tracked from initial manufacturing, through its lifetime, and final fate (e.g., dumps, landfills, incinerated, or recycled). Once discarded into landfills, a portion of wood and paper is assumed permanently stored; however, carbon storage of specific products can vary widely which influences carbon storage and emissions estimates. Using historical California harvest data and state-level inventory model, HWP-C vR, this research built model capacity for expanding and refining waste parameters, such as product-level decay half-lives and proportions of permanent carbon storage to reduce waste parameter uncertainty. By updating the proportion of carbon permanently stored in landfilled wood and paper products and by adding product-specific discard pathways, carbon in solid waste disposal sites cumulatively increased moderately by about 11.77 MMT CO 2 Eq and emissions decreased by about 11.18 MMT CO 2 Eq in California from 1953 to 2020. Updated parameters furthermore made it possible to compare product-level carbon storage and emissions within landfills such as newspaper, office paper, coated paper, cardboard, plywood, and lumber. The cumulative wood product categories resulted in similar amounts of carbon compared with paper products – 28.21 MMT CO 2 Eq (0.415 MMT CO 2 Eq annually) and 27.39 MMT CO 2 Eq (0.403 MMT CO 2 Eq annually) respectively; however, the carbon storage of wood products was much higher than paper, with 164.07 MMT CO 2 Eq (2.413 MMT CO 2 Eq annually) stored compared with 31.41 MMT CO 2 Eq (0.462 MMT CO 2 Eq annually) respectively. These carbon emissions and storage estimates illustrate the value in understanding carbon dynamics at the product-level particularly when considering climate impacts from landfill emissions even after product disposal.
Lucey et al. (Thu,) studied this question.