Schlagwort: afforestation

Nature- Rohatyn et al. (2023): Large variations in afforestation-related climate cooling and warming effects across short distances

Shani Rohatyn, Eyal Rotenberg, Fyodor Tatarinov, Yohay Carmel, Dan Yakir IN: Commun Earth Environ 4, 18; https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00678-9

The authors show in a four-year study that the biogeochemical vs. biogeophysical balance in paired forested and non-forested ecosystems across short distances (approximately 200 Km) and steep aridity gradient (aridity index 0.64 to 0.18) can change dramatically. The required time for the forestation cooling effects via carbon sequestration, to surpass warming effects associated with the forests’ reduced albedo and suppressed longwave radiation, decreased from 213 years in the driest sites to 73 years in the intermediate and 43 years in the wettest sites.

LINK

Betting on Forests and Soils to Reach Net-Zero

January 19th, 2023; 1:00 pm – 2:00 pm EST

Join the Institute for Carbon Removal and Policy for the next event in its webinar series Scrubbing the Skies: The Role of Carbon Dioxide Removal in Combating Climate Change. This series will focus on scientific, technological, legal, political, and justice-focused issues associated with carbon dioxide removal. The host for the series will be Wil Burns, Visiting Professor in the Environmental Policy & Culture Program at Northwestern University. The fourth webinar in this series is: „Betting on Forests and Soils to Reach Net-Zero.“

LINK

Hong et al. (2023): Effects of Afforestation on Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Accumulation Depend on Initial Soil Nitrogen Status

Songbai Hong, Nan Cong, Jinzhi Ding, Shilong Piao, Lingli Liu, Josep Peñuelas, Anping Chen, Timothy A. Quine, Hui Zeng, Benjamin Z. Houlton IN: AGU Global Biochemical Cycles 37 (1); https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GB007490

In this study, the authors conducted an intensive field sampling investigation including 610 pairs of afforested and control plots in northern China and extensively compiled a global data set containing 211 afforested-control pairs worldwide to evaluate responses of soil N concentrations and C:N ratios to afforestation and further explored their major regulator.

LINK

Masisi et al. (2022): Fighting climate change with bamboo in Africa: The case of Kyela, Rungwe and Mufindi districts – Tanzania

Bhoke Masisi, Astrid Zabel, Jürgen Blaser, Suzana Augustino IN: Advances in Bamboo Science 1, 100009,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bamboo.2022.100009

Taking Tanzania as an example, the authors lay a special focus on bamboo carbon sequestration and storage potential and assess the dynamics of carbon stocks: (i) across an elevation gradient, (ii) between indigenous and exotic bamboo species, and (iii) between intensively and extensively managed bamboo ecosystems. The authors collected data from 60 destructive sample plots and estimated biomass carbon stocks in the aboveground carbon pool.

LINK

Jayakrishnan & Bala [Preprint]: A comparison of the climate and carbon cycle effects of carbon removal by Afforestation and an equivalent reduction in Fossil fuel emissions

Koramanghat Unnikrishnan Jayakrishnan & Govindasamy Bala IN: Biogeosciences Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2022-227, in review, 2022.

In this paper, the authors compare the climate and carbon cycle consequences of carbon removal by afforestation and an equivalent fossil fuel emission reduction using simulations from an intermediate complexity Earth system model. The author’s simulations show that the climate is cooler by 0.36 °C, 0.47 °C, and 0.42 °C in the long term (2471–2500) in the case of reduced fossil fuel emissions compared to the case with afforestation when the emissions follow the SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, respectively.

LINK

The Land Gap Report

This Land Gap Report shows how countries’ climate plans, if implemented, will increase the aggregate demands made on land. The report quantifies the aggregate demand for land and land-use change to address climate mitigation in the climate pledges submitted by Parties to the UNFCCC. A key finding is that countries’ climate pledges assume that almost 1.2 billion hectares of land can be prioritized for carbon dioxide removal. An international team analyzed commitments made for years 2030, 2050, and 2060 — looking at individual pledges and the implications for land use.

LINK

Science-Rohatyn et al. (2022): Limited climate change mitigation potential through forestation of the vast dryland regions

Shani Rohatyn, Dan Yakir, Eyal Rotenberg, Yohay Carmel IN: Science Vol 377, Issue 6613, pp. 1436-1439, DOI: 10.1126/science.abm9684

Actual climatic benefits of forestation are uncertain because the forests’ reduced albedo can produce large warming effects. Using high-resolution spatial analysis of global drylands, the authors found 448 million hectares suitable for afforestation. This area’s carbon sequestration potential until 2100 is 32.3 billion tons of carbon (Gt C), but 22.6 Gt C of that is required to balance albedo effects.

LINK

NCX Completes the First Cycle of the Natural Capital Exchange

Loren Myers on ncx.com

NCX completed the first full cycle of the Natural Capital Exchange. 119 landowners across the southeastern United States participated in the project, electing to defer their timber harvest for one year. Using Basemap, the high-resolution forest map of the US, landowners were given an estimate of the amount of carbon sequestration potential on their property at the beginning of the project.

LINK

Dooley et al. (2022): Carbon removals from nature restoration are no substitute for steep emission reductions

Kate Dooley, Zebedee Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen IN: One Earth, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.06.002.

The authors estimate the global removal potential from nature restoration constrained by a “responsible development” framework and the contribution this would make to a 1.5°C temperature limit. They conclude that additional carbon sequestration via nature restoration is unlikely to be done quickly enough to notably reduce the global peak temperatures expected in the next few decades. Land restoration is an important option for tackling climate change but cannot compensate for delays in reducing fossil fuel emissions.

LINK