Carbon conundrums: Do United States' current carbon market baselines represent an undesirable ecological threshold?

D’Amato, Anthony W.; Woodall, Christopher W.; Weiskittel, Aaron R.; Littlefield, Caitlin E.

doi:10.1111/gcb.16215

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, plots thinned from below may rapidly recover carbon sequestration rates equivalent to control plots, while stands that experienced dominant and crown thinning operations may have longer periods to carbon recovery [ 42 ]. However, thinning can also confer important forest structural qualities important for management of forest carbon beyond maximization of standing aboveground carbon stocks [ 13 ••], such as conferring resistance to low or medium-intensity wildfire in fire-prone landscapes and insect/pathogen outbreaks [ 13 ••, 103 ]. Further research on these co-benefits and the coupling of thinning with extended rotations is needed to validate the use of thinning as a forest carbon management tool.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying the Effect Size of Management Actions on Aboveground Carbon Stocks in Forest Plantations

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of the Review Improved forest management is a promising avenue for climate change mitigation. However, we lack synthetic understanding of how different management actions impact aboveground carbon stocks, particularly at scales relevant for designing and implementing forest-based climate solutions. Here, we quantitatively assess and review the impacts of three common practices—application of inorganic NPK fertilizer, interplanting with N-fixing species, and thinning—on aboveground carbon stocks in plantation forests. Recent Findings Site-level empirical studies show both positive and negative effects of inorganic fertilization, interplanting, and thinning on aboveground carbon stocks in plantation forests. Recent findings and the results of our analysis suggest that these effects are heavily moderated by factors such as species selection, precipitation, time since practice, soil moisture regime, and previous land use. Interplanting of N-fixing crops initially has no effect on carbon storage in main tree crops, but the effect becomes positive in older stands. Conversely, the application of NPK fertilizers increases aboveground carbon stocks, though the effect lessens with time. Moreover, increases in aboveground carbon stocks may be partially or completely offset by emissions from the application of inorganic fertilizer. Thinning results in a strong reduction of aboveground carbon stocks, though the effect lessens with time. Summary Management practices tend to have strong directional effects on aboveground carbon stocks in plantation forests but are moderated by site-specific management, climatic, and edaphic factors. The effect sizes quantified in our meta-analysis can serve as benchmarks for the design and scoping of improved forest management projects as forest-based climate solutions. Overall, management actions can enhance the climate mitigation potential of plantation forests, if performed with sufficient attention to the nuances of local conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying the Effect Size of Management Actions on Aboveground Carbon Stocks in Forest Plantations

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Field trials indicate that seedlings planted outside of appropriate seed zones are maladapted and perform poorly in terms of growth and survival because of climatic differences between seed sources and planting sites (Leimu and Fischer, 2008;Alberto et al, 2013). Additionally, the broadening objectives of reforestation from timber production toward ecological services and function, climate mitigation, and resilience requires a wider array of species and seed sources to be considered for reforestation (Crowe and Parker, 2008;Clark et al, 2023;Warner et al, 2023). Many non-timber species (specifically native angiosperms, e.g., Quercus sp., Acer sp., Populus sp., etc.)…”

Section: What Approaches To Reforestation Can Foster Resilience To Cl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Natural capital markets also have shortcomings with respect to scaling reforestation in a manner that is effective for climate mitigation while avoiding potential negative impacts. For example, current and emerging protocols reward developers for planting fast-growing, dense plantations that maximize standing biomass (D' Amato et al, 2022). However, such plantations also increase the risk of wildfire losses and thus reduce the durability of carbon stocks (Hurteau et al, 2019;North et al, 2021).…”

Section: What Approaches To Reforestation Can Foster Resilience To Cl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These models were not designed to simulate irregular, clumped, or spatially complex planting regimes (e.g., ICO methodology). As a result, this may incentivize project developers to prescribe reforestation plans that have fewer species and less structural and functional diversity in favor of meeting verification standards and maximizing carbon yields (D' Amato et al, 2022). Despite these shortcomings, there are clear pathways and principles for mitigating climate impacts by restoring forests while avoiding negative impacts (Griscom et al, 2017;Fargione et al, 2018;Ellis et al, 2024) including significant opportunities for reforestation in the western U.S. (Cook-Patton et al, 2020).…”

Section: What Approaches To Reforestation Can Foster Resilience To Cl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

‘Mind the Gap’—reforestation needs vs. reforestation capacity in the western United States

Dobrowski,

Aghai,

Chichilnisky du Lac

et al. 2024

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tree establishment following severe or stand-replacing disturbance is critical for achieving U.S. climate change mitigation goals and for maintaining the co-benefits of intact forest ecosystems. In many contexts, natural post-fire tree regeneration is sufficient to maintain forest cover and associated ecosystem services, but increasingly the pattern and scale of disturbance exceeds ecological thresholds and active reforestation may be warranted. Our capacity to plant trees, however, is not keeping pace with reforestation needs. This shortfall is uniquely apparent in the western U.S., where wildfire size and severity have increased in recent decades and long-term divestment in the reforestation supply chain has limited our ability to respond to existing needs. Here we present an analysis of key facets of both the supply and demand side of reforestation in the western U.S. and address six questions: (1) What is the current backlog of potential reforestation needs driven by high-severity wildfire?; (2) How will increasing wildfire activity through the end of the century affect potential reforestation needs?; (3) What is our capacity to meet current and future reforestation needs?; (4) How can we scale the reforestation supply chain to meet current and future demands?; (5) What approaches to reforestation can promote forest resilience to climate change and wildfire?; and (6) Where are opportunities emerging from recent policy initiatives, innovative public-private partnerships, and natural capital markets for scaling reforestation? Between 1984 and 2000, annual tree planting capacity met post-fire needs but cumulatively over the last two decades (2000 to 2021) it has fallen short of fire-driven needs by an estimated 1.5 million ha (ca. 3.8 million ac). We anticipate this gap will increase 2 to 3 fold by 2050. Scaling up reforestation efforts to close this gap will require increased investment across all facets of the reforestation supply chain, public-private partnerships, and novel approaches to reforestation that increase the resilience of western forests to drought and wildfire. We highlight emerging opportunities from recent policy initiatives and conservation finance for expanding reforestation efforts.

show abstract

Sapling recruitment as an indicator of carbon resiliency in forests of the northern USA

Harris,

Woodall,

D'Amato

2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tree regeneration shapes forest carbon dynamics by determining long‐term forest composition and structure, which suggests that threats to natural regeneration may diminish the capacity of forests to replace live tree carbon transferred to the atmosphere or other pools through tree mortality. Yet, the potential implications of tree regeneration patterns for future carbon dynamics have been sparsely studied. We used forest inventory plots to investigate whether the composition of existing tree regeneration is consistent with aboveground carbon stock loss, replacement, or gain for forests across the northeastern and midwestern USA, leveraging a recently developed method to predict the likelihood of sapling recruitment from seedling abundance tallied within six seedling height classes. A comparison of carbon stock predictions from tree and seedling composition suggested that 29% of plots were poised to lose carbon based on seedling composition, 55% were poised for replacement of carbon stocks (<5 Mg ha−1 difference) and 16% were poised to gain carbon. Forests predicted to lose carbon tended to be on steeper slopes, at lower latitudes, and in rolling upland environments. Although plots predicted to gain and lose carbon had similar stand ages, carbon loss plots had greater current carbon stocks. Synthesis and applications. Our results demonstrate the utility of considering tree regeneration through the lens of carbon replacement to develop effective management strategies to secure long‐term carbon storage and resilience in the context of global change. Forests poised to lose C due to climate change and other stressors could be prioritized for regeneration strategies that enhance long‐term carbon resilience and stewardship.

show abstract

Carbon conundrums: Do United States' current carbon market baselines represent an undesirable ecological threshold?

Cited by 9 publications

References 12 publications

Quantifying the Effect Size of Management Actions on Aboveground Carbon Stocks in Forest Plantations

Quantifying the Effect Size of Management Actions on Aboveground Carbon Stocks in Forest Plantations

‘Mind the Gap’—reforestation needs vs. reforestation capacity in the western United States

Sapling recruitment as an indicator of carbon resiliency in forests of the northern USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About