An Eddy Covariance Mesonet For Measuring Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Coastal South Carolina

Forsythe, Jeremy D.; O'Halloran, Thomas L.; A., Kline, Michael

doi:10.3390/data5040097

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For US-Ha1, extension of the NEE landscape would involve additional EC platforms to fill gaps across the selected area (e.g., 16,500 ha), utilize select remote sensing data and employ models to integrate the data. EC network data fused with remote sensing and diverse models are well described including, for example, FLUXCOM [57,65], and subregional networks [88][89][90][91][92]. An encouraging result has been found in the Howland Forest EC site (US-Ho1), where annual mean NEE fluxes between co-located towers were found to be within 5% of each other [93].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Science to Commerce: A Commercial-Scale Protocol for Carbon Trading Applied to a 28-Year Record of Forest Carbon Monitoring at the Harvard Forest

Bautista

Marino

Munger

2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest carbon sequestration offset protocols have been employed for more than 20 years with limited success in slowing deforestation and increasing forest carbon trading volume. Direct measurement of forest carbon flux improves quantification for trading but has not been applied to forest carbon research projects with more than 600 site installations worldwide. In this study, we apply carbon accounting methods, scaling hours to decades to 28-years of scientific CO2 eddy covariance data for the Harvard Forest (US-Ha1), located in central Massachusetts, USA, establishing commercial carbon trading protocols and applications for similar sites. We illustrate and explain transactions of high-frequency direct measurement for CO2 net ecosystem exchange (NEE, gC m−2 year−1) that track and monetize ecosystem carbon dynamics in contrast to approaches that rely on forest mensuration and growth models. NEE, based on eddy covariance methodology, quantifies loss of CO2 by ecosystem respiration accounted for as an unavoidable debit to net carbon sequestration. Retrospective analysis of the US-Ha1 NEE times series including carbon pricing, interval analysis, and ton-year exit accounting and revenue scenarios inform entrepreneur, investor, and landowner forest carbon commercialization strategies. CO2 efflux accounts for ~45% of US-Ha1 NEE, or an error of ~466% if excluded; however, the decades-old coupled human and natural system remains a financially viable net carbon sink. We introduce isoflux NEE for t13C16O2 and t12C18O16O to directly partition and quantify daytime ecosystem respiration and photosynthesis, creating new soil carbon commerce applications and derivative products in contrast to undifferentiated bulk soil carbon pool approaches. Eddy covariance NEE methods harmonize and standardize carbon commerce across diverse forest applications including, a New England, USA regional eddy covariance network, the Paris Agreement, and related climate mitigation platforms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Science to Commerce: A Commercial-Scale Protocol for Carbon Trading Applied to a 28-Year Record of Forest Carbon Monitoring at the Harvard Forest

Bautista

Marino

Munger

2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, NEE research methods clearly require technological development and cost reduction to accommodate commercial projects including scale-up of NEE data from the NEE footprint to larger areas, controlling for lateral flux leakage, and accounting for the uncertainties of NEE CO2 flux data. The limitations cited are under active development by the forest research and management communities worldwide [19], [60], [61]. A1.)…”

Section: Table 1 Comparison Of Cfcp Features (Annotations Provided In Appendix 1)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Commercial Forest Carbon Protocol Over-Credit Bias Delimited by Zero-Threshold Carbon Accounting

Marino¹,

Bautista²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the use of commercial forest carbon protocols (CFCPs) for more than two decades, claiming ~566 MMtCO2e and a market value of ~USD $15.7 billion, comparative analysis of CFCP methodology and offset results is limited. In this study, five widely used biometric-based CFCPs were characterized, and common characteristics and differences were identified. CFCP claims of net forest carbon sequestration are compared with results of directly measured CO2 by eddy covariance, a meteorological method integrating gross vertical fluxes of forest and soil carbon, and the only alternative non-biometric source of net forest carbon sequestration data available. We show here that CFCPs share a structural feature delimiting forest carbon values by zero-threshold carbon accounting (gC m-2 ≤ 0), a pattern opposite to natural emissions of forest CO2 exchange based on direct measurement and a fundamental biological constraint on net forest carbon storage (i.e., soil efflux, ecosystem respiration). Exclusion of forest CO2 sources to the atmosphere precludes net carbon accounting, resulting in unavoidable over-crediting of CFCP offsets. CFCP carbon results are significantly different from global forest CO2 net ecosystem exchange population results (FluxNet2015 gC m-2) at the 95% to 99.99% confidence levels, inferring an annual median error of ~247% (gC m-2), also consistent with over-crediting. Direct CO2 measurement provides an alternative method for commercial forest carbon products, has the potential to harmonize global markets, and catalyze the role of forests in managing climate change through nature-based solutions.

show abstract

Section: Comparative Analysis Of Cfcp Features (Annotations Provided In Appendix 1)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Commercial Forest Carbon Protocol Over-credit Bias Delimited by Zero-threshold Carbon Accounting

Marino¹,

Bautista²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the use of commercial forest carbon protocols (CFCPs) for more than two decades, claiming ~566 MMtCO2e and a market value of ~USD $15.7 billion, comparative analysis of CFCP methodology and offset results is limited. In this study, five widely used biometric-based CFCPs are characterized, and common characteristics and differences are identified. CFCP claims of net forest carbon sequestration are compared with results of directly measured CO2 by eddy covariance, a meteorological method integrating gross vertical fluxes of forest and soil carbon, and the only alternative non-biometric source of net forest carbon sequestration data available. We show here that CFCPs share a structural feature delimiting forest carbon values by zero-threshold carbon accounting (gC m-2 ≤ 0), a pattern opposite to natural emissions of forest CO2 exchange based on direct measurement and a fundamental biological constraint on net forest carbon storage (i.e., soil efflux, ecosystem respiration). Exclusion of forest CO2 sources to the atmosphere precludes net carbon accounting, resulting in unavoidable over-crediting of CFCP project offsets. CFCP carbon results are significantly different from global forest CO2 net ecosystem exchange population results (FluxNet2015 gC m-2) at the 95% to 99.99% confidence levels, inferring an annual median error of ~247% (gC m-2), consistent with over-crediting. Direct CO2 measurement provides an urgently needed alternative method for commercial forest carbon products that has the potential to harmonize global markets and catalyze the role of forests in managing climate change through nature-based solutions.

show abstract

An Eddy Covariance Mesonet For Measuring Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Coastal South Carolina

Cited by 6 publications

References 31 publications

Science to Commerce: A Commercial-Scale Protocol for Carbon Trading Applied to a 28-Year Record of Forest Carbon Monitoring at the Harvard Forest

Science to Commerce: A Commercial-Scale Protocol for Carbon Trading Applied to a 28-Year Record of Forest Carbon Monitoring at the Harvard Forest

Commercial Forest Carbon Protocol Over-Credit Bias Delimited by Zero-Threshold Carbon Accounting

Commercial Forest Carbon Protocol Over-credit Bias Delimited by Zero-threshold Carbon Accounting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About