Effects of Forest Management and Elevated Carbon Dioxide on Soil Carbon Storage

Johnson, Dale W.; Henderson, Phyllis

doi:10.1201/9780203739310-12

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ACR and VCS IFM protocols fail to account for advances in soil science, and potentially omit declines in SOC caused by certain IFM practices. In some instances this omission could enable over-crediting by neglecting substantial losses in soil organic matter that are likely not recuperated during the crediting period (Johnson and Curtis, 2001;Jandl et al, 2007;Noormets et al, 2015;Johnson and Henderson, 2018). A growing body of literature indicates that site preparation and ongoing management can cause significant disturbance to soil stocks, especially in litter, organic, and topsoil carbon pools, partially eroding the benefits of biomass stock increases (Jandl et al, 2007;Achat et al, 2015).…”

Section: Soil Carbonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive review of carbon quantification by improved forest management offset protocols

Haya

Evans

Brown

et al. 2023

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improved forest management (IFM) has the potential to remove and store large quantities of carbon from the atmosphere. Around the world, 293 IFM offset projects have produced 11% of offset credits by voluntary offset registries to date, channeling substantial climate mitigation funds into forest management projects. This paper summarizes the state of the scientific literature for key carbon offset quality criteria—additionality, baselines, leakage, durability, and forest carbon accounting—and discusses how well currently used IFM protocols align with this literature. Our analysis identifies important areas where the protocols deviate from scientific understanding related to baselines, leakage, risk of reversal, and the accounting of carbon in forests and harvested wood products, risking significant over-estimation of carbon offset credits. We recommend specific improvements to the protocols that would likely result in more accurate estimates of program impact, and identify areas in need of more research. Most importantly, more conservative baselines can substantially reduce, but not resolve, over-crediting risk from multiple factors.

show abstract

Section: Soil Carbonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive review of carbon quantification by improved forest management offset protocols

Haya

Evans

Brown

et al. 2023

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The greenhouse gases CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O are recognized as the most important contributors to global warming. Large amounts of C and N are stored in the top soil layer (1 m) of the Earth, accounting for about 1500 Pg C (Batjes, 1996;Bruce et al, 1999;Johnson and Henderson, 1995) and an estimated 133 to 140 Pg N (Batjes, 1996;Post et al, 1985). Thus, soil comprises the largest terrestrial C and N pools (Kutsch et al, 2009;Nieder and Benbi, 2008;Schaufler et al, 2010;Schlesinger and Andrews, 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing Redox Potential Effects on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Induced by Water‐Level Changes

Wang

Bogena

Vereecken

et al. 2018

Vadose Zone Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Does conversion of forest to agricultural land change soil carbon and nitrogen? a review of the literature

Murty

Kirschbaum

McMurtrie

et al. 2002

Global Change Biology

804

509

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil carbon is a large component of the global carbon cycle and its management can significantly affect the atmospheric CO2 concentration. An important management issue is the extent of soil carbon (C) release when forest is converted to agricultural land. We reviewed the literature to assess changes in soil C upon conversion of forests to agricultural land. Analyses are confounded by changes in soil bulk density upon land‐use change, with agricultural soils on average having 13% higher bulk density. Consistent with earlier reviews, we found that conversion of forest to cultivated land led to an average loss of approximately 30% of soil C. When we restricted our analysis to studies that had used appropriate corrections for changes in bulk density, soil C loss was 22%. When, from all the studies compiled, we considered only studies reporting both soil C and nitrogen (N), average losses of C and N were 24% and 15%, respectively, hence showing a decrease in the average C : N ratio. The magnitude of these changes in the C : N ratio did not correlate with either C or N changes. When considering the transition from forest to pasture, there was no significant change in either soil C or N, even though reported changes in soil C ranged from −50% to +160%. Among studies that reported changes in soil N as well as soil C, C : N ratios both increased and decreased, with trends depending on changes in system N. Systems with increasing soil N generally had decreased C : N ratios, whereas systems with decreasing soil N had increased C : N ratios. Our survey confirmed earlier findings that conversion of forest to cropland generally leads to a loss of soil carbon, although the magnitude of change might have been inflated in many studies by the confounding influence of bulk‐density changes. In contrast, conversion of forest to uncultivated grazing land did not, on average, lead to loss of soil carbon, although individual sites may lose or gain soil C, depending on specific circumstances, such as application of fertiliser or retention or removal of plant residues.

show abstract

Effects of Forest Management and Elevated Carbon Dioxide on Soil Carbon Storage

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Comprehensive review of carbon quantification by improved forest management offset protocols

Comprehensive review of carbon quantification by improved forest management offset protocols

Characterizing Redox Potential Effects on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Induced by Water‐Level Changes

Does conversion of forest to agricultural land change soil carbon and nitrogen? a review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About