Setting priorities for land management to mitigate climate change

Table 6 Revenues and costs for different management options in Euros

	Unit	*Picea*	*Picea*	*Fagus*	*Fagus*	Hardwood	*Populus*	*Triticum*	Straw	*Triticum*
		timber	energy	timber	conservation	afforestation	energy	energy	energy	food
Revenue land subsidies	ha^-1 year^-1	0	0	0	0	0	367.1	367.1	322.1	322.1
Revenue bonus after harvest age has passed	ha^-1 year^-1	0	0	0	120	300	0	0	0	0
Revenue saw wood	m^-3	60	0	70	0	60	0	0	0	0
Revenue pulp wood	m^-3	20	0	25	0	20	0	0	0	0
Revenue energy wood	m^-3	30	30	30	0	30	23	66	56	0
Revenue food	(t dry matter)^-1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	105	105
Costs planting/establishment	ha^-1	1450	1450	0	0	2900	322	213	213	213
Costs fencing once	ha^-1	0	0	1600	0	1600	0	0	0	0
Costs thinning 1 (harvester)	m^-3	11.5	0	11.5	0	11.5	17	0	0	0
Costs thinning 2 (harvester)	m^-3	11.5	0	11.5	0	11.5	17	0	0	0
Costs harvest (motor manual)	m^-3	14.0	14.0	14.0	0	14.0	28	56	56	56
Costs skidding	m^-3	8.0	8.0	8.0	0	8.0	0	0	0	0

Costs differ with slope classes. The values represent costs for slope class "flat" (< 15%). Costs for skidding are supposed to rise by 25% in slope class "medium" and 100% at "steep" slopes compared to costs listed here. These differences are due to special equipment (like cable way) needed for timber extraction at steep slopes. Costs for thinning rise only in the "steep" class by 15% on average due to the need for special machines. Harvest costs (motor manual with chain saw) are assumed to be constant over slope classes

ISSN: 1750-0680