- Award ID(s):
- 1832042
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10331585
- Publisher / Repository:
- Dryad
- Date Published:
- Edition / Version:
- 2
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- ["Nature Based Solutions","Bioenergy","Cellulosic bioenerg","soil carbon","croplands","grazing land","forest land","Forest management","Agriculture practices","climate change mitigation","carbon cycle modeling","negative CO2 emissions","reforestation","carbon dioxide","nitrous oxide (N2O)","carbon capture and sequestration","BECCS","CCS","electric vehicles","FOS: Agricultural sciences"]
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: 129435298 bytes
- Size(s):
- ["129435298 bytes"]
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Afforestation and reforestation (AR) on marginal land are nature-based solutions to climate change. There is a gap in understanding the climate mitigation potential of protection and commercial AR with different combinations of forest plantation management and wood utilization pathways. Here, we fill the gap using a dynamic, multiscale life cycle assessment to estimate one-century greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation delivered by (both traditional and innovative) commercial and protection AR with different planting density and thinning regimes on marginal land in the southeastern United States. We found that innovative commercial AR generally mitigates more GHGs across 100 y (3.73 to 4.15 Giga tonnes of CO 2 equivalent (Gt CO 2 e)) through cross-laminated timber (CLT) and biochar than protection AR (3.35 to 3.69 Gt CO 2 e) and commercial AR with traditional lumber production (3.17 to 3.51 Gt CO 2 e), especially in moderately cooler and dryer regions in this study with higher forest carbon yield, soil clay content, and CLT substitution. In a shorter timeframe (≤50 y), protection AR is likely to deliver higher GHG mitigation. On average, for the same wood product, low-density plantations without thinning and high-density plantations with thinning mitigate more life cycle GHGs and result in higher carbon stock than that of low-density with thinning plantations. Commercial AR increases the carbon stock of standing plantations, wood products, and biochar, but the increases have uneven spatial distributions. Georgia (0.38 Gt C), Alabama (0.28 Gt C), and North Carolina (0.13 Gt C) have the largest carbon stock increases that can be prioritized for innovative commercial AR projects on marginal land.more » « less
-
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
-
Abstract Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) has been proposed as a potential climate mitigation strategy raising concerns over trade‐offs with existing ecosystem services. We evaluate the feasibility of BECCS in the Upper Missouri River Basin (UMRB), a landscape with diverse land use, ownership, and bioenergy potential. We develop land‐use change scenarios and a switchgrass (
Panicum virgatum L.) crop functional type to use in a land‐surface model to simulate second‐generation bioenergy production. By the end of this century, average annual switchgrass production over the UMRB ranges from 60 to 210 Tg dry mass/year and is dependent on the Representative Concentration Pathway for greenhouse gas emissions and on land‐use change assumptions. Under our simple phase‐in assumptions this results in a cumulative total production of 2,000–6,000 Tg C over the study period with the upper estimates only possible in the absence of climate change. Switchgrass yields decreased as average CO2concentrations and temperatures increased, suggesting the effect of elevated atmospheric CO2was small because of its C4 photosynthetic pathway. By the end of the 21st century, the potential energy stored annually in harvested switchgrass averaged between 1 and 4 EJ/year assuming perfect conversion efficiency, or an annual electrical generation capacity of 7,000–28,000 MW assuming current bioenergy efficiency rates. Trade‐offs between bioenergy and ecosystem services were identified, including cumulative direct losses of 1,000–2,600 Tg C stored in natural ecosystems from land‐use change by 2090. Total cumulative losses of ecosystem carbon stocks were higher than the potential ~300 Tg C in fossil fuel emissions from the single largest power plant in the region over the same time period, and equivalent to potential carbon removal from the atmosphere from using biofuels grown in the same region. Numerous trade‐offs from BECCS expansion in the UMRB must be balanced against the potential benefits of a carbon‐negative energy system. -
Land-use land-cover (LULC) changes are occurring rapidly in Southeast Asia (SEA), generally associated with population growth, economic development and competing demands for land. Land cover change is one of the vital factors affecting carbon dynamics and emissions. SEA is an important region to study urban-caused LULC emissions and the potential for nature-based solutions (NBS) and nature climate solutions (NCS), as it is home to nearly 15% of the world’s tropical forests and has some of the world’s fastest rates of urban growth. We present a fine-scale urban cluster level assessment for SEA of current (2015) and future (2050) scenarios for carbon sequestration service and climate mitigation potential. We identified 956 urban clusters distributed across 11 countries of SEA. Considering the urban expansion projected and decline in forests, this region could see a carbon loss of up to 0.11 Gigatonnes (Scenario SSP4 RCP 3.4). Comparing carbon change values to urban emissions, we found that the average offset value ranging from −2% (Scenario SSP1 RCP 2.6) to −21%. We also found that a few medium and large urban clusters could add to more than double the existing carbon emissions in 2050 in the SSP3 and SSP4 RCP 3.4 scenarios, while a minority of clusters could offset their emissions under SSP1. Our study confirms that NCS, and particularly reforestation, are in many cases able to offset the direct emissions from land cover conversion from SEA urban clusters. Hence, documenting the plausible LULC transitions and the associated impacts gains significance in the SEA region as the results can be useful for informing policy and sustainable land management.
-
Abstract Substitution of wood for more fossil carbon intensive building materials has been projected to result in major climate mitigation benefits often exceeding those of the forests themselves. A reexamination of the fundamental assumptions underlying these projections indicates long-term mitigation benefits related to product substitution may have been overestimated 2- to 100-fold. This suggests that while product substitution has limited climate mitigation benefits, to be effective the value and duration of the fossil carbon displacement, the longevity of buildings, and the nature of the forest supplying building materials must be considered.