European Union (EU) countries' divergence in the role of forests as carbon sinks has increased this week following a decision by the European Parliament Environmental Committee on the calculation rules.
The committee on Tuesday defined that the period 2000-2012 will be the reference for the carbon sink assessment. Cutdowns exceeding the average of that period will be regarded as increasing emissions, and the country concerned would have to reduce emissions elsewhere.
The committee had changed the draft of the EU commission, but remained far from the line proposed by Finland who would like simply to observe the growth of forests and then compare the cutdown plans to that growth.
Finland currently uses 60 million cubic metres of forest annually, but would like to raise the level to 80 million.
Norbet Lins, the rapporteur of the report at the committee, described the result as "a compromise between the forest rich countries and the environmental organizations". But representatives of Finland said the decision was unjust as Finland and Sweden possess the largest forest reserves in the EU.
Mikael Ohlstrom, a senior expert at the Finnish Confederation of Industries told the business daily Kauppalehti that the result was "a blow to the vistas for growth in the bioeconomy". There are several major expansions under consideration in Finland for biomass and pulp industries.
However, Ohlstrom saw some possibilities for further lobbying due to the narrow margin of the vote. The committee vote result was 29-38. He believed the parliamentay plenum in October could end up with a different result.
The central organization of Finnish agricultural producers said it was "very disappointed" as the EU decision did not acknowledge the "development dynamics of Finnish forestry".
Finnish Member of European Parliament Nils Torvalds said on Yle on Tuesday that except in Finland and Sweden, European forests are splintered and small. He pointed out that in Britain the famous forest of Sherwood, known for Robin Hood, has been practically cut away.
He said the core problem in the EU is the reluctance of the member countries to carry a joint responsibility. This applies to the forestry issue as well and Finland and Sweden may end up with an unacceptable level of responsibility, he said.
Anneli Jaatteenmaki, a Finnish member of the European parliament, maintained the decision was "unjust for Finland". "We do not cut down forests in excess of their growth, and thus the carbon sink level would persist", Jaatteenmaki told Yle.
At the same time, Sampo Soimakallio, a senior researcher at the governmental Finnish Environment Institute, said the basic target of the committee's plan was to maintain the level of ambition in environmental matters "at a high enough level".
Talking to national broadcaster Yle on Wednesday, Soimakallio underlined the need to secure the overall impact of the EU climate policy.
Asked to comment on the views that the possible burden on Finland and Sweden would be "excessive", Soimakallio said it would require an overall analysis on the impact of climate policies, using various criteria. He said he had not seen such a survey being initiated.
Environmental organizations have accused Finland and other countries with large forests of trying to water down the rules of calculation. The European Union has committed itself to reducing carbon gas emissions 40 percent by 2030. The new rules for calculation are to take effect in 2021.
During the upcoming months, the forest issue will also be discussed between member countries in the EU ministerial council. On that occasion, Finland is also a minority, along with France and some smaller EU countries with plenty of forests.
