An official website of the United States government
Abstract Atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs) must be reduced to avoid an unsustainable climate. Because carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere and sequestered in forests and wood products, mitigation strategies to sustain and increase forest carbon sequestration are being developed. These strategies require full accounting of forest sector GHG budgets. Here, we describe a rigorous approach using over one million observations from forest inventory data and a regionally calibrated life-cycle assessment for calculating cradle-to-grave forest sector emissions and sequestration. We find that Western US forests are net sinks because there is a positive net balance of forest carbon uptake exceeding losses due to harvesting, wood product use, and combustion by wildfire. However, over 100 years of wood product usage is reducing the potential annual sink by an average of 21%, suggesting forest carbon storage can become more effective in climate mitigation through reduction in harvest, longer rotations, or more efficient wood product usage. Of the ∼10 700 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents removed from west coast forests since 1900, 81% of it has been returned to the atmosphere or deposited in landfills. Moreover, state and federal reporting have erroneously excluded some product-related emissions, resulting in 25%–55% underestimation of state total CO2emissions. For states seeking to reach GHG reduction mandates by 2030, it is important that state CO2budgets are effectively determined or claimed reductions will be insufficient to mitigate climate change.
more »
« less
Land use strategies to mitigate climate change in carbon dense temperate forests
Strategies to mitigate carbon dioxide emissions through forestry activities have been proposed, but ecosystem process-based integration of climate change, enhanced CO 2 , disturbance from fire, and management actions at regional scales are extremely limited. Here, we examine the relative merits of afforestation, reforestation, management changes, and harvest residue bioenergy use in the Pacific Northwest. This region represents some of the highest carbon density forests in the world, which can store carbon in trees for 800 y or more. Oregon’s net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) was equivalent to 72% of total emissions in 2011–2015. By 2100, simulations show increased net carbon uptake with little change in wildfires. Reforestation, afforestation, lengthened harvest cycles on private lands, and restricting harvest on public lands increase NECB 56% by 2100, with the latter two actions contributing the most. Resultant cobenefits included water availability and biodiversity, primarily from increased forest area, age, and species diversity. Converting 127,000 ha of irrigated grass crops to native forests could decrease irrigation demand by 233 billion m 3 ⋅y −1 . Utilizing harvest residues for bioenergy production instead of leaving them in forests to decompose increased emissions in the short-term (50 y), reducing mitigation effectiveness. Increasing forest carbon on public lands reduced emissions compared with storage in wood products because the residence time is more than twice that of wood products. Hence, temperate forests with high carbon densities and lower vulnerability to mortality have substantial potential for reducing forest sector emissions. Our analysis framework provides a template for assessments in other temperate regions.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1553049
- PAR ID:
- 10088562
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Volume:
- 115
- Issue:
- 14
- ISSN:
- 0027-8424
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 3663 to 3668
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Climate change has intensified the scale of global wildfire impacts in recent decades. In order to reduce fire impacts, management policies are being proposed in the western United States to lower fire risk that focus on harvesting trees, including large-diameter trees. Many policies already do not include diameter limits and some recent policies have proposed diameter increases in fuel reduction strategies. While the primary goal is fire risk reduction, these policies have been interpreted as strategies that can be used to save trees from being killed by fire, thus preventing carbon emissions and feedbacks to climate warming. This interpretation has already resulted in cutting down trees that likely would have survived fire, resulting in forest carbon losses that are greater than if a wildfire had occurred. To help policymakers and managers avoid these unintended carbon consequences and to present carbon emission sources in the same context, we calculate western United States forest fire carbon emissions and compare them with harvest and fossil fuel emissions (FFE) over the same timeframe. We find that forest fire carbon emissions are on average only 6% of anthropogenic FFE over the past decade. While wildfire occurrence and area burned have increased over the last three decades, per area fire emissions for extreme fire events are relatively constant. In contrast, harvest of mature trees releases a higher density of carbon emissions (e.g., per unit area) relative to wildfire (150–800%) because harvest causes a higher rate of tree mortality than wildfire. Our results show that increasing harvest of mature trees to save them from fire increases emissions rather than preventing them. Shown in context, our results demonstrate that reducing FFEs will do more for climate mitigation potential (and subsequent reduction of fire) than increasing extractive harvest to prevent fire emissions. On public lands, management aimed at less-intensive fuels reduction (such as removal of “ladder” fuels, i.e., shrubs and small-diameter trees) will help to balance reducing catastrophic fire and leave live mature trees on the landscape to continue carbon uptake.more » « less
-
functions and services for human societies. Temperatures are increasing most rapidly in high northern latitudes, altering tree growth and competition dynamics, and modifying disturbance regimes. The effect of these cumulative changes on the ecosystem functions provided by boreal forests is difficult to predict. We used the process-based LANDIS-II forest landscape model to evaluate how climate change and timber harvesting will interact to alter the production of ecosystem functions and services in boreal forests on three study areas across a large latitudinal gradient (11°) in central Siberia. We found that the relative importance of wood harvesting as a disturbance type varied depending on latitude and its impact was always far less than that of fire. Moderate climate change increased the availability of wood for harvest in the northern landscape, but wood availability declined in the southern landscapes under any amount of climate change likely because of an increase in the frequency of fire that kept forests too young for harvest. Modest climate change (RCP6.0) increased productivity and the storage of carbon in all landscapes but severe climate change (RCP8.5) reduced both in the southernmost landscape. Harvesting as a specific driver of change in these boreal forests is likely to be relatively minor except as a forest fragmentation process. Our results provide compelling evidence that status quo forest management in these landscapes is likely not sustainable, suggesting that climate-smart forestry will be needed.more » « less
-
Abstract Western US forests represent a carbon sink that contributes to meeting regional and global greenhouse gas targets. Forest thinning is being implemented as a strategy for reducing forest vulnerability to disturbance, including mortality from fire, insects, and drought, as well as protecting human communities. However, the terrestrial carbon balance impacts of thinning remain uncertain across regions, spatiotemporal scales, and treatment types. Continuous and in situ long‐term measurements of partial harvest impacts to stand‐scale carbon and water cycle dynamics are nonetheless rare. Here, we examine post‐thinning carbon and water flux impacts in a young ponderosa pine forest in Northern Idaho. We examine in situ stock and flux impacts during the 3 years after treatment as well as simulate the forest sector carbon balance through 2050, including on and off‐site net emissions. During the observation period, increases in tree‐scale net primary production (NPP) and water use persistence through summer drought did not overcome the impacts of density reduction, leading to 45% annual reductions of NPP. Growth duration remained constrained by summer drought in control and thinned stands. Ecosystem model and life cycle assessment estimates demonstrated a net forest sector carbon deficit relative to control stands of 27.0 Mg C ha−1in 2050 due to emissions from dead biomass pools despite increases to net ecosystem production. Our results demonstrate dynamics resulting in carbon losses from forest thinning, providing a baseline with which to inform landscape‐scale modeling and assess tradeoffs between harvest losses and potential gains from management practices.more » « less
-
Abstract Scenarios that limit global warming to below 2 °C by 2100 assume significant land-use change to support large-scale carbon dioxide (CO2) removal from the atmosphere by afforestation/reforestation, avoided deforestation, and Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). The more ambitious mitigation scenarios require even greater land area for mitigation and/or earlier adoption of CO2removal strategies. Here we show that additional land-use change to meet a 1.5 °C climate change target could result in net losses of carbon from the land. The effectiveness of BECCS strongly depends on several assumptions related to the choice of biomass, the fate of initial above ground biomass, and the fossil-fuel emissions offset in the energy system. Depending on these factors, carbon removed from the atmosphere through BECCS could easily be offset by losses due to land-use change. If BECCS involves replacing high-carbon content ecosystems with crops, then forest-based mitigation could be more efficient for atmospheric CO2removal than BECCS.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1720064115
