EN Official Journal of the European Union C 230/39

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Contribution of the woodworking sector to the carbon balance’

(own-initiative opinion)

(2015/C 230/06)

Rapporteur: Mr Ludvík JÍROVEC Co-rapporteur: Mr Patrizio PESCI

On 27 February 2014, the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on the

Contribution of the woodworking sector to the carbon balance.

The Consultative Commission on Industrial Change (CCMI), which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 13 November 2014.

At its 503rd plenary session, held on 10 and 11 December 2014 (meeting of 10 December), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 119 votes to 1, with 5 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1. In order to maximise the benefits offered by wood products in the carbon balance and to enhance the competitiveness of the European woodworking industry (1) and its capacity to drive innovation, the European Economic and Social Committee has drawn up the following recommendations.

1.2. The EESC recognises that European and national legislation is having a big impact on the woodworking industries. For this reason, the EESC invites Member States to explore all opportunities related to using wood as an environmentally-friendly material in order to boost the competitiveness of this sector, promote employment and support investment in research and innovation.

1.3. The EESC calls on the European Commission, in consultation with interested stakeholders, to draw up European guidelines on wood supply in order to increase wood supply and promote sustainable use of wood sources. Resource efficiency principles should be included. The recommendations set out in the Good practice guidance on the sustainable mobilisation of wood in Europe (2010) should be taken into consideration and, if necessary, developed.

1.4. The EESC recalls the importance of excluding ‘pallets and recovered post-consumer wood’ from the definition of ‘tertiary biomass.’

1.5. As pointed out in the EESC opinion on ‘Opportunities and challenges for a more competitive European woodworking and furniture sector’ adopted in October 2011 (2), and in line with the principles set out in the recent EU Communication on ‘Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme for Europe’, the EESC highlights the fact that the ‘cascade use’ principle (use, reuse, recycling, energy recovery) — when economically and technically feasible in accordance with specific national and regional features — represents the optimal way to maximise the resource-efficient use of wood. The EESC is pleased that following its request to recognise the importance of the cascade principle of wood, this principle has been transposed into several EU documents such as the European Industrial Renaissance, the New EU Forest Strategy and the Commission staff working document on ‘A blueprint for the EU forest-based industries (woodworking, furniture, pulp & paper manufacturing and converting, printing)’ accompanying the Communication on ‘A new EU Forest Strategy: for forests and the forest-based sector’. However, the EESC cannot support the notion of legally binding rules and is in favour of an open market-based approach and the freedom of market participants.

1.6. Management options for building materials should include measures to avoid recycling materials, such as wood, going to landfills. The EESC calls on the EU Commission and the interested stakeholders to define guidelines and recommendations on wood waste collection and solutions for the treatment of post-consumer wood.

1.7. The EESC calls on the EU Commission to introduce a norm that properly reflects the acoustic characteristics of enclosed spaces, given that that wood can play an essential role in acoustic insulation. In fact wood has the capacity to insulate rooms acoustically from external noises and to reduce reverberation time. Opportunities related to wood applications should be explored.

1.8. The EESC calls upon the Member States and interested stakeholders to define national action plans designed to enhance the use of wood in buildings and green infrastructures. Local authorities should be directly involved in the implementation of these action plans.

1.9. Recognising that wood does not enjoy the same familiarity among builders and architects as other materials, the EESC invites Member States to set up initiatives in order to promote a wood culture. Moreover, the representatives of the European woodworking industries and the European social partners should define coordinated national campaigns in order to give a more attractive image of the sector.

2. Description of the European woodworking sector. Challenges and opportunities. Possible impact of EU legislation on the competitiveness of the sector.

2.1. The European woodworking industries generate an annual turnover of around 122 billion euros on a production value of over 115 billion euros. According to Eurostat, the woodworking industries consisted of more than 3 11 000 companies in 2012. About 1 26 000 companies were active in the furniture business as well. Within the woodworking industries stricto sensu, the sawmill industry accounted for roughly 40 000 companies, while the other sub-sectors of woodworking products counted some 1 45 000 companies. Despite improvements, these figures may not reflect the actual situation since small companies are not necessarily taken into account, depending on the Member State reporting. In the furniture and construction elements sectors, the number of small companies is considerable. Therefore, the real number of firms could be estimated at more than 3 75 000 companies.

2.2. Throughout the EU, the woodworking sector has seen a steep fall in the number of jobs in 2012. The average fall amounted to 4,4 %, but the figures ranged from — 3,2 % in Germany to even — 13,7 % in Spain. Croatia and Denmark showed the biggest increases in the number of jobs while Spain (– 13,7 %), Cyprus (– 13,1 %) and Slovakia (– 11,5 %) experienced the biggest falls in 2012. European and national policies have a strong impact on the competitiveness of the woodworking sector. As highlighted in the EU Competitiveness Report 2014, production, labour and raw material costs tend to be much higher in Europe than in many other regions leading to a high risk of delocalisation for large parts of the sector. For this reason, Europe should demand that products entering the EU market have the same social, environmental and safety standards as the ones produced in Europe. Moreover, the EESC highlights the fact that Europe’s woodworking sector continues to face significant increases in production costs, especially as regards resins and energy. European energy costs are three times higher than in the USA.

2.3. The development of renewable energy and related subsidies is reducing the availability of wood raw materials and is increasing their price. In 2012, approximately 15 % or 182 million cubic metres of the total wood harvested in the ECE region was estimated to have been wood fuel. From the most recent ECE/FAO Joint Wood Energy Enquiry (JWEE 2011), it appears that wood energy is the principal component of renewable energy, accounting for 38,4 % of all renewables. According to the recent European ‘Study on the wood raw material supply and demand for the EU wood-processing industries’ commissioned by the European Commission to Indufor (3), ‘the amount of wood used for energy purposes in the EU would be equivalent to today’s total wood harvested, were the renewable energy target to be achieved by 2020. By 2016, a shortfall of 63 Mm3 of wood vis-à-vis the wood requirements anticipated by EU Member States in their National Renewable Energy Action Plans will occur.’

2.4. Considering the new European Communication on the ‘energy and climate framework 2030’ and the demand of increasing the share of renewable energy to at least 27 % by 2030, the EESC considers it essential to consider various ways to improve wood mobilisation in the EU — for example by taking into account the recommendations in the Good practice guidance on the sustainable mobilisation of wood in Europe, which was published in 2010 — and to identify solutions for avoiding any distorted competition between the different users of biomass resources.

2.5. With this in mind, the EESC invites Member States to evaluate the amount of wood biomass in the country or region that is clearly available for energy use and the volumes the woodworking industry already uses as raw material.

2.6. Moreover, the EESC deplores the persistence in several Member States of provisions limiting the use of wood in multi-storey buildings as well as discriminatory fire regulations. Fire regulations form the main obstacle to the use of wood in buildings in many countries. European standards for fire safety in buildings have been agreed, but fire safety will continue to be a national responsibility. These regulations should be removed immediately because they clearly represent market barriers to the expansion of wood products in the construction sector (4).

2.7. Finally, the EESC deplores the exclusion of the European wood-based panel and sawmill sectors from the list of sectors deemed vulnerable to carbon leakage any longer. The removal of these sectors from the list will most likely intensify the already ongoing delocalisation of the abovementioned manufacturing sectors to countries outside the EU. Keeping both sectors in the list is essential in order to limit the negative impact of the competitive pressure that all companies are suffering due to the tremendously increased wood costs caused by the competition with the biomass energy sector. From 2008 to 2013, the European wood-based panels sector alone closed 51 plants, which resulted in a capacity loss of 10 386 Mm3. Some of these closed lines have been dismantled and reassembled outside the European Union’s borders. Maintaining manufacturing industries within European borders must represent a priority for all policy makers and in particular for the European Commission. For this reason, the relevant general directorates of the EU Commission are urged to take measures in order to guarantee the competitiveness of the European industries and avoiding delocalisation of manufacturing sector.

2.8. One effective measure to ensure the competitiveness of European industry and to prevent the delocalisation of production could be a new energy/carbon tax which would stop the discrimination of European producers.

3. Enhancing the use of wood products for reducing CO2 emissions to fight climate change

3.1. Global warming constitutes a major political concern. Indeed it seriously impacts human health and natural resources. The choices we make about the materials we use can have a significant effect on the carbon dioxide emissions that are one of the main causes of global warming. The terminology of ‘green’ and/or ‘environmentally-friendly’ products are assuming wider acceptance among producers and consumers. At the same time national and European policies are set in order to encourage these products. The EESC considers that the LCA (5) (Life-Cycle Assessments) represents the appropriate environmental management tool for the future.

3.2. Europe can drastically reduce CO2 emissions by increasing the carbon sink created by its forests (by optimising their management) and by enhancing the use of sustainably produced wood products. It is scientifically proven that the use of wood products in construction and everyday life has a positive effect on the climate. The amount of carbon stored in trees and related wood products depends on the tree species, growth conditions (environment), the age of a tree and the density of surrounding trees. Nevertheless, it has been demonstrated that substituting a cubic metre of wood for other construction materials results in a significant average of 0,75 to 1t in CO2 savings. Additionally, 1 m3 of wood stores 0,9 t of CO2.

3.3. A recent Yale University-led study entitled ‘Carbon, fossil fuel and biodiversity mitigation with wood and forests’ (6) discovered that using more wood in building and bridge construction would substantially reduce global carbon dioxide emissions and fossil fuel consumption. The researchers found that increasing the use of wood products to the equivalent of 34 % would have profound and positive effects. Between 14 % and 31 % of global CO2 emissions could be avoided by storing CO2 in the cellulose and lignin of wood products.

3.4. The EESC calls on the European Commission to support Member States and the European forestry sector in identifying and putting in place measures and, possibly, incentives for the use of harvested wood products with long life cycles (7). The longer the wood is used and reused, the longer it locks in carbon dioxide. Wooden material waste (stricto senso) can be minimised mainly because all parts of wood can be used and reused efficiently, whereas it can ultimately always be burnt to recover its energy (8). If Europe wants to effectively tackle climate change, the Member States and European institutions should encourage the use of wood products and create a favourable political context in which the life cycle of wood is maximised.

4. Wood in construction

4.1. Constructing and operating buildings has significant environmental benefits. Globally, buildings are responsible for 20 % of all water consumption, 25 to 40 % of energy use, and 30 to 40 % of GHG emissions. The choice of products used to build or renovate has a significant impact on the environment. For this reason the EESC recognises that wood plays an important role in the development of sustainable and environmentally-friendly buildings. The opportunities relating to the use of wood in construction are not fully exploited and this affects the competitiveness of the woodworking industries. The EESC wants to analyse how to improve this situation without creating any detrimental effects for other materials.

4.2. Wood has long been recognised as an environmentally-friendly material for a wide variety of products. Life cycle assessment studies worldwide have proven that wood products offer great environmental advantages. Wood is one of the few 100 percent renewable building materials, it stores CO2 and it is a natural insulator due to air pockets within its cellular structure. It is a safe, sturdy and dependable material — even under high stress conditions such as hurricanes and earthquakes as well as during a fire.

4.3. End-of-life management options for building materials include elements such as reuse, recycling and recovering. The present situation shows that a lot of construction waste still goes to landfills, increasing the burden on landfill loading and operation. Materials such as wood can be recycled directly into the same product for reuse or can be reconstituted into other usable products. The EESC points out that recycling requires reprocessing that is usually not economically feasible unless efficient collection is organised near the material source. For this reason, the EESC calls on the EU Commission and the stakeholders involved to collect all good practices existing at national level in order to define guidelines and recommendations on wood waste collection and solutions for the treatment of post-consumer wood. Reducing and recycling construction and demolition materials can reduce overall construction and disposal costs as well.

4.4. The construction industry is the biggest user of wood products. In a country such as Finland, approximately 70-80 % of Finnish wood products end up being used in construction. Timber frame construction has recently gained ground in several European countries, most notably the UK, Ireland and France. Nevertheless, the EESC recognises that the use of wood can contribute to the development of the green economy and for this reason it should be promoted.

4.5. The EESC recognises that knowledge of the advantages of using wood in construction is rather limited. This is not only the case for architects; end-users too often do not know enough about wood properties. This limited knowledge often leads to the limited utilisation of wood and consequently to problems that negatively affect the image of wood. Moreover, the lack of skilled workers in timber frame housing construction curtails the development of this construction method in many European countries.

4.6. The EESC calls on the European woodworking industries and the related social partners to set up coordinated information campaigns in order to give a more attractive image of the sector. Young people should be encouraged to choose education and training schemes which properly prepare them for a career in the woodworking industry.

5. Social aspects related to enhancing the use of wooden materials and enforcing the role of the woodworking industries in the economy (9)

5.1. The EESC highlights the fact that most woodworkers are trained on the job, picking up skills informally from experienced workers. Most woodworkers learn basic machine operations and job tasks in a few months, but becoming a skilled woodworker often requires two or more years. Employment is also created by providing workers with training and education adapted to the needs and demands of the labour market. Moreover, the EESC reiterates that research and innovation programmes will boost jobs and growth across the EU. For this reason the woodworking sector is encouraged to exploit the opportunities available under the Horizon 2020 programme.

5.2. The recent EU Communication on Resource efficiency in the building sector should be ambitiously implemented by Member States in order to secure investments in renovation of buildings and create employment.

5.3. The EESC recognises that acoustic noise in public areas has a serious impact on human health (10). Not only is wood an important environmentally-friendly material, but if used as insulation material it might have a number of social and health benefits. Indeed, wood can play an essential role in acoustic insulation and as an absorption material. Wood has the capacity to insulate rooms acoustically from external noises and to reduce reverberation time. The EESC calls on the EU Commission to introduce a norm that properly reflects the acoustic characteristics of enclosed spaces. Given that wood can produce sound (by direct striking) and can amplify or absorb sound waves originating from other bodies, opportunities related to wood applications should be explored. Wood also has a scientifically proven positive impact on indoor air quality/comfort.

5.4. At national level, there are several initiatives for educating people about the opportunities for using wood as an environmentally-friendly material, but real coordination is lacking. The growing consumption of wood products is clearly related to information campaigns that should be carried out at national level. The main objective of educational campaigns about wood is to create positive attitudes — technical and cultural — in favour of the use of wood.

5.5. As an interesting example of good practice, the EESC would like to recall the initiative entitled ‘WOODDAYS’. The event (11) was launched on 21 March 2014 in Milan. It was a 10-day programme focused on growing cities and smart, resource-efficient urban densification with wood. The event was set up in order to position wood as a building material with hitherto unrecognised potential in a setting where timber construction will play a major role in the future — right in the heart of our cities. This event will be duplicated in other European cities: Bratislava, Ljubljana and Brussels.

5.6. The EESC would point out that the major green building programmes vary somewhat in their treatment of the use of wood products. While some focus on performance rather than the material used, other programmes place ‘restrictions’ on wood as an acceptable material (without any such ‘requirements’ for other building products). Increasing the use of wood would also impact the EU economy positively in a variety of ways. The EESC accordingly recommends setting mandatory targets for the use of wood in construction following France’s example.

6. Wood mobilisation

6.1. Increasing the use of wood in construction and in everyday life requires solutions and measures in order to enhance wood mobilisation (including solutions designed to recover more wood, wood products and residues from industrial and post-consumer waste, for reuse and recycling) and extend the life cycle of wooden products.

6.2. A sustainable and continuous supply of wood raw material is crucial to maintaining a competitive wood products industry. The recommendations set out in the Good practice guidance on the sustainable mobilisation of wood in Europe (2010) should be taken into consideration and, if necessary, developed.

6.3. In recent years the wood supply has come under strong pressure, primarily due to European and national measures promoting the use of renewable energy sources, which have partly resulted in burning wood. The EESC recalls the importance of excluding ‘pallets and recovered post-consumer wood’ from the definition of ‘tertiary biomass.’ Such materials are a major raw material input into some of the product types manufactured by wood-based panel manufacturers and can, in some cases, account for up to 95 % of the wood input (12).

6.4. The EESC would highlight here that the ‘cascade use’ principle (use, reuse, recycling, energy recovery) — when economically and technically feasible in accordance with specific national and regional peculiarities and the balance between wood demand and supply — will represent the optimal way to maximise the resource-efficient use of wood, the natural raw material. However, the EESC cannot support the notion of legally binding rules and is in favour of an open market-based approach and the freedom of market participants. Using wood in a ‘cascade use’ approach not only secures optimal economic usage of the raw material, it also provides important climate benefits through the continuous carbon storage and substitution effect, prior to its use as a source of energy.

Brussels, 10 December 2014. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Henri MALOSSE

(1) The EESC follows the definition of ‘woodworking sector’ provided by the European Classification of Economic Activities (NACE) in Code C16: Manufacture of wood and of products of wood and cork, except furniture; manufacture of articles of straw and plaiting materials. Sawmilling and planing of wood. Manufacture of products of wood, cork, straw and plaiting materials. Manufacture of veneer sheets and wood-based panels. Manufacture of assembled parquet floors. Manufacture of other builders’ carpentry and joinery. Manufacture of wooden containers. Manufacture of other products of wood; manufacture of articles of cork, straw and plaiting materials.

(2) Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Opportunities and challenges for a more competitive European woodworking and furniture sector’ (own-initiative opinion) (OJ C 24, 28.1.2012, p. 18).

(3) Indufor is an independent international consulting group with companies in Finland and New Zealand. It provides advisory services to both private and public clients. Their approach encompasses all aspects of sustainable development — economic, social and environmental. Their scope covers sustainable forest management, timberland and plantation investments, forest valuations and due diligence, wood and fibre-based industry, bio-products, forest resource assessment and mapping, climate change and ecosystem services in forest landscapes, forest policy and strategic studies, as well as sustainability and development consulting related to sustainable forest management and land use.

(4) In many countries national building regulations have tended to restrict the use of timber frames for the construction of multi-storey buildings. The reason many countries have refrained from using flammable materials is uncertainty about fires in the buildings. However, extensive research and development has shown that material-neutral building regulations are preferable and for over a decade function-based regulations have been common in many countries. Wood burns, but in a controlled manner, indeed it is possible to estimate how much of the cross section will remain unaffected by the fire after one hour of burning. Timber resists fire very well — when heavy timber burns, a layer of char is created, which helps to maintain the strength and structural integrity of the wood inside, reducing the risk of complete collapse.

(5) LCA is a tool for identifying environmental releases and evaluating the associated impacts caused by a process, product or activity. It is a useful tool for industry in the search for practical and user-friendly decision-making models for environmentally sound product development.

(6) Journal of Sustainable Forestry 33:248-275, 2014.

(7) As recognised in the European Decision COM(2012) 93 final on accounting rules on greenhouse gas emissions and removals resulting from activities relating to land use, land-use change and forestry and on information concerning actions relating to those activities, the increased sustainable use of harvested wood products can substantially limit emissions into and enhance the removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

(8) . The data collected in the recent Italian study, Analysis of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and comparison between the use of post-consumer wood for the production of chipboard wood panels and for renewable energy use, have shown that considering the impact on climate change, the utilisation of recycled raw wood material in a panel production plant is more advantageous than the activity of combustion in a biomass power plant. This study was conducted by the Italian research institute eAmbiente, c/o Parco Scientifico Tecnologico VEGA. The study was presented during the EESC hearing on the contribution of the woodworking sector to the carbon balance held in Mestre (Italy) on 19 September 2014.

(9) The EESC considers that the social aspects and observations presented in the EESC Opinion on Opportunities and challenges for a more competitive European woodworking and furniture sector are still valid.

(10) . ‘Noise health effects are the health consequences of elevated sound levels. Elevated workplace or other noise can cause hearing impairment, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, annoyance, and sleep disturbance. Changes in the immune system and birth defects have been attributed to noise exposure’. (As reported in Passchier-Vermeer W, Passchier WF (2000). Noise exposure and public health. Environ. Health Perspect. 108 Suppl 1: 123–31. doi:10.2307/3454637. JSTOR 3454637. PMC 1637786. PMID 10698728.)

(11) The event ‘WOODDAYS’ is an initiative of pro-Holz Austria in cooperation with the Department of Timber Construction at the Technical University of Munich and with the support of the European Organisation of the Sawmill Industry (EOS) and the European Panel Federation (EPF).

(12) The Italian Group ‘Saviola’ — known for the slogan: ‘Help us save the trees’ — is the leading processor of wood waste in the world, with a recycling capacity of 1,5 million tonnes of post-consumer wood per year. Their production philosophy is based on the recovery and reuse of secondary raw materials that can be reborn and reused without the need to cut down new trees, through an economically and ecologically sustainable process. Types of timber that are collected by the Group: pallets, fruit crates, shipping boxes.