The carbon sequestration potential of terrestrial ecosystems

Lal, Rattan; Smith, Pete; Jungkunst, Hermann F.; Mitsch, William J.; Lehmann, Johannes; Nair, P. K. R.; McBratney, Alex B.; Sá, João Carlos de Moraes; Schneider, J.; Zinn, Yuri Lopes; Skorupa, Alba Lucia Araujo; Zhang, Hai Lin; Minasny, Budiman; Srinivasrao, Cherukumalli; Ravindranath, N. H.

doi:10.2489/jswc.73.6.145a

Cited by 236 publications

(164 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

140

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Though cutting fossil fuel consumption provides a direct option to reduce carbon emissions, it is hampered by the fact that the economy in many countries is still powered by fossil energy 2,13 . Vegetation dominates most terrestrial ecosystems (e.g., forests, grasslands, croplands, shrublands, and savannas) and absorbs substantial CO 2 from the atmosphere through a biochemical process called photosynthesis 14 . Hence, biotic measures by improving carbon intake from vegetation provide a viable measure to counteract excessive carbon emissions 5,14 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Vegetation dominates most terrestrial ecosystems (e.g., forests, grasslands, croplands, shrublands, and savannas) and absorbs substantial CO 2 from the atmosphere through a biochemical process called photosynthesis 14 . Hence, biotic measures by improving carbon intake from vegetation provide a viable measure to counteract excessive carbon emissions 5,14 . The net amount of carbon captured by plants through photosynthesis over a given period is called net primary production (NPP) 4,15 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

WITHDRAWN: Assessing terrestrial carbon sink potential from vegetation under optimal land management

Sha

Bai

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global temperature could increase over 1.5 or even 2 °C by the middle of 21st century due to massive emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) — of which carbon dioxide (CO2) is the largest component1. Human activities emit more than 10 PgC (1PgC=1015gC) per year into the atmosphere1, which is regarded as the primary reason for increased atmospheric CO2 concentration and global warming2. Global vegetation sequesters 112–169 PgC each year3, about half of which is released back into the atmosphere through autotrophic respiration while the rest, termed as net primary production (NPP), is for balancing the CO2 emissions from human activities, microbial respiration, and decomposition4. Carbon sequestration from vegetation varies under different environmental conditions5 and could also be significantly altered by land management practices (LMPs)6. Adopting optimal land management practices (OLMPs) helps sequester more CO2 from the atmosphere and mitigate climate changes. Understanding the extra carbon sequestration with OLMPs, or termed as carbon gap, is an important scientific topic that is rarely studied. Here we propose an integrated method to identify the location-specific OLMPs and assess the carbon gap by using remotely sensed time-series of NPP dataset, segmented landscape-vegetation-soil (LVS) zones and distance-constrained zonal analysis. The findings show that the carbon gap from global land plants totaled 13.74 PgC per year with OLMPs referenced from within a 20km neighborhood, an equivalent of ~1/5 of the total sequestered net carbon at the current level; half of the carbon gap clusters in only ~15% of vegetated area. The carbon gap flux rises with population density and the priority for implementing OLMPs should be given to the densely populated areas to enhance the global carbon sequestration capacity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: Assessing terrestrial carbon sink potential from vegetation under optimal land management

Sha

Bai

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, they provide co-benefits such as soil-nutrient restoration, air and water filtration, fire management, and flood control. (See, e.g., Moomaw et al 2019;Moomaw 2017;Bastin et al 2019;Griscom et al 2017;Fargione et al 2018;Dooley et al 2018;Lal 2018;Bai et al 2019;Kane 2015;Rumpel et al 2018;Smith et al 2019;Wright 2017;Nature Conservancy 2016;Zomer et al 2016;Zomer et al 2017;Johnson (undated); Houghton and Nassikas 2018; Smith 2016). However, biological methods of carbon drawdown/sequestration are not the subject of this paper because it is mechanical-chemical methods that have gained the most legislative traction and public financial support.…”

Section: Biological Methods (Not Addressed In This Paper)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Carbon Capture: Public Policy, Science, and Societal Need

Sekera

Lichtenberger

2020

Biophys Econ Sust

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From typhoons to wildfires, as the visible impacts of climate change mount, calls for mitigation through carbon drawdown are escalating. Environmentalists and many climatologists are urging steps to enhance biological methods of carbon drawdown and sequestration. Market actors seeing avenues for profit have launched ventures in mechanical–chemical carbon dioxide removal (CDR), seeking government support for their methods. Governments are responding. Given the strong, if often unremarked, momentum of demands for public subsidy of these commercial methods, on what cogent bases can elected leaders make decisions that, first and foremost, meet societal needs? To address this question, we reviewed the scientific and technical literature on CDR, focusing on two methods that have gained most legislative traction: point-source capture and direct air capture–which together we term “industrial carbon removal” (ICR), in contrast to biological methods. We anchored our review in a standard of “collective biophysical need,” which we define as a reduction of the level of atmospheric CO2. For each ICR method, we sought to determine (1) whether it sequesters more CO2 than it emits; (2) its resource usage at scale; and (3) its biophysical impacts. We found that the commercial ICR (C-ICR) methods being incentivized by governments are net CO2 additive: CO2 emissions exceed removals. Further, the literature inadequately addresses the resource usage and biophysical impacts of these methods at climate-significant scale. We concluded that dedicated storage, not sale, of captured CO2 is the only assured way to achieve a reduction of atmospheric CO2. Governments should therefore approach atmospheric carbon reduction as a public service, like water treatment or waste disposal. We offer policy recommendations along this line and call for an analysis tool that aids legislators in applying biophysical considerations to policy choices.

show abstract

“…Because of the importance of soils in global C dynamics, there is increasing interest in defining soil C pools as the foundation for management and policy decisions that have the potential to reduce atmospheric GHG concentrations. Atmospheric CO 2 fixed by photosynthesis is often stored as SOC, and the formation and stability of SOC depend largely on soil attributes and environmental factors (Lal et al, 2018). The characteristics of soil parent materials, soil texture, and soil drainage class are known to be critical soil properties that influence SOC accumulation at various scales (Angst et al, 2018;Araujo, Zinn, & Lal, 2017;Barré et al, 2017;Wickland, Neff, & Harden, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing publicly available databases to evaluate soil organic carbon in Maine, USA

Bai

Fernandez

2020

Soil Science Soc of Amer J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Elevated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have resulted in growing societal interest in natural climate solutions that include enhancing soil organic carbon (SOC). This study evaluated SOC from three USDA soil databases for Maine, a state that is nearly 90% forested. These databases were: (1) Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA), (2) NRCS Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO), and (3) Rapid Carbon Assessment (RaCA). We compared estimates of SOC density and concentration among databases and analyzed relationships between key soil properties and SOC densities and concentrations. Estimates of SOC density to a 20 cm depth which allows comparison among all three databases were 77 ± 1.2 Mg ha −1 , 95 ± 0.3 Mg ha −1 , and 39 ± 2.2 Mg ha −1 for SSURGO, RaCA, and FIA, respectively. Significant differences existed among databases in SOC density at shallow depth increments, and marked differences existed among databases in the soil depths measured. Analysis of the influence of soil texture and drainage class on SOC highlighted the importance of silt and clay in SOC retention. A hypothetical increase in forest and agricultural SOC was compared to reported Maine GHG emissions to illustrate potential policy implications in the use of soil databases. We conclude that all three databases are valuable but not interchangeable. The database should be carefully chosen to match the objectives of the user. How to cite this article: Bai X, Fernandez IJ. Comparing publicly available databases to evaluate soil organic carbon in Maine, USA. Soil Sci. Soc.

show abstract

The carbon sequestration potential of terrestrial ecosystems

Cited by 236 publications

References 67 publications

WITHDRAWN: Assessing terrestrial carbon sink potential from vegetation under optimal land management

WITHDRAWN: Assessing terrestrial carbon sink potential from vegetation under optimal land management

Assessing Carbon Capture: Public Policy, Science, and Societal Need

Comparing publicly available databases to evaluate soil organic carbon in Maine, USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About