Carbon forestry is surprising
Abstract Background Forestry offers possibilities to sequestrate carbon in living biomass, deadwood and forest soil, as well as in products prepared of wood. In addition, the use of wood may reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels. However, harvesting decreases the carbon stocks of forests and inc...
Published in: | Forest Ecosystems |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
SpringerOpen
2018
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 https://doaj.org/article/b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 |
id |
ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 2023-05-15T16:13:04+02:00 Carbon forestry is surprising Timo Pukkala 2018-03-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 https://doaj.org/article/b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 EN eng SpringerOpen http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 https://doaj.org/toc/2197-5620 doi:10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 2197-5620 https://doaj.org/article/b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 Forest Ecosystems, Vol 5, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2018) Carbon balance Carbon sequestration Decomposition model Wood product model Boreal forest Ecology QH540-549.5 article 2018 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 2022-12-31T12:23:41Z Abstract Background Forestry offers possibilities to sequestrate carbon in living biomass, deadwood and forest soil, as well as in products prepared of wood. In addition, the use of wood may reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels. However, harvesting decreases the carbon stocks of forests and increases emissions from decomposing harvest residues. Methods This study used simulation and optimization to maximize carbon sequestration in a boreal forest estate consisting of nearly 600 stands. A reference management plan maximized net present value and the other plans maximized the total carbon balance of a 100-, 200- or 300-year planning horizon, taking into account the carbon balances of living forest biomass, dead organic matter, and wood-based products Results Maximizing carbon balance led to low cutting level with all three planning horizons. Depending on the time span, the carbon balance of these schedules was 2 to 3.5 times higher than in the plan that maximized net present value. It was not optimal to commence cuttings when the carbon pool of living biomass and dead organic matter stopped increasing after 150–200 years. Conclusions Letting many mature trees to die was a better strategy than harvesting them when the aim was to maximize the long-term carbon balance of boreal Fennoscandian forest. The reason for this conclusion was that large dead trees are better carbon stores than harvested trees. To alter this outcome, a higher proportion of harvested trees should be used for products in which carbon is stored for long time. Article in Journal/Newspaper Fennoscandian Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Deadwood ENVELOPE(-117.453,-117.453,56.733,56.733) Forest Ecosystems 5 1 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles |
op_collection_id |
ftdoajarticles |
language |
English |
topic |
Carbon balance Carbon sequestration Decomposition model Wood product model Boreal forest Ecology QH540-549.5 |
spellingShingle |
Carbon balance Carbon sequestration Decomposition model Wood product model Boreal forest Ecology QH540-549.5 Timo Pukkala Carbon forestry is surprising |
topic_facet |
Carbon balance Carbon sequestration Decomposition model Wood product model Boreal forest Ecology QH540-549.5 |
description |
Abstract Background Forestry offers possibilities to sequestrate carbon in living biomass, deadwood and forest soil, as well as in products prepared of wood. In addition, the use of wood may reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels. However, harvesting decreases the carbon stocks of forests and increases emissions from decomposing harvest residues. Methods This study used simulation and optimization to maximize carbon sequestration in a boreal forest estate consisting of nearly 600 stands. A reference management plan maximized net present value and the other plans maximized the total carbon balance of a 100-, 200- or 300-year planning horizon, taking into account the carbon balances of living forest biomass, dead organic matter, and wood-based products Results Maximizing carbon balance led to low cutting level with all three planning horizons. Depending on the time span, the carbon balance of these schedules was 2 to 3.5 times higher than in the plan that maximized net present value. It was not optimal to commence cuttings when the carbon pool of living biomass and dead organic matter stopped increasing after 150–200 years. Conclusions Letting many mature trees to die was a better strategy than harvesting them when the aim was to maximize the long-term carbon balance of boreal Fennoscandian forest. The reason for this conclusion was that large dead trees are better carbon stores than harvested trees. To alter this outcome, a higher proportion of harvested trees should be used for products in which carbon is stored for long time. |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Timo Pukkala |
author_facet |
Timo Pukkala |
author_sort |
Timo Pukkala |
title |
Carbon forestry is surprising |
title_short |
Carbon forestry is surprising |
title_full |
Carbon forestry is surprising |
title_fullStr |
Carbon forestry is surprising |
title_full_unstemmed |
Carbon forestry is surprising |
title_sort |
carbon forestry is surprising |
publisher |
SpringerOpen |
publishDate |
2018 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 https://doaj.org/article/b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 |
long_lat |
ENVELOPE(-117.453,-117.453,56.733,56.733) |
geographic |
Deadwood |
geographic_facet |
Deadwood |
genre |
Fennoscandian |
genre_facet |
Fennoscandian |
op_source |
Forest Ecosystems, Vol 5, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2018) |
op_relation |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 https://doaj.org/toc/2197-5620 doi:10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 2197-5620 https://doaj.org/article/b68dfa6343a54165941142a7c3053fe7 |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-018-0131-5 |
container_title |
Forest Ecosystems |
container_volume |
5 |
container_issue |
1 |
_version_ |
1765998682255130624 |