Effects of land use change on soil carbon cycling in the conterminous United States from 1900 to 2050

Woodbury, Peter B.; Heath, Linda S.; Smith, James E.

doi:10.1029/2007gb002950

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Afforestation on abandoned agricultural land has acted as a major C sink in the north temperate zone (Woodbury et al . 2007a,b), and most secondary forests continue to sequester C; however, this sink will weaken as these forests mature and as further agricultural abandonment is constrained (Hurtt et al . 2002).…”

Section: Forest Management and Carbon Storagementioning

confidence: 99%

Forest carbon storage: ecology, management, and policy

Fahey

Woodbury

Battles

et al. 2009

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

280

157

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this review is to give ecologists and policy makers a better understanding of forest carbon dynamics and recent policy and management activities in this arena. The ecology of forest carbon is well understood, but measurement and projection of carbon sequestration at small scales can be costly. Some forest management activities qualify as offsets in various carbon markets. To promote wider use, a system is needed that will provide inexpensive and standardized approaches to forest carbon accounting that are not prone to dishonest handling. The prospects are fairly promising for development of such a system, but first, technical and organizational constraints must be overcome. In contrast, the benefits – in terms of greenhouse‐gas reduction – of substituting wood for other building materials, and in displacing fossil fuel energy, could be realized immediately, if standards for calculations can be developed.

show abstract

Section: Forest Management and Carbon Storagementioning

confidence: 99%

Forest carbon storage: ecology, management, and policy

Fahey

Woodbury

Battles

et al. 2009

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

280

157

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, we focus on two countries as case studies. The USA is chosen because of the large LUC in the past and the disparity between the detailed inventory-based estimates (Woodbury et al, 2007) and the model-based estimates Hurtt et al, 2002;Houghton, 2003). In addition, Brazil is chosen because of recent estimates of large area changes in land use and because of the ongoing negotiations on a mechanism of positive incentives for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) initiated at the request of several forest-rich developing countries (Gullison et al, 2007;Oliveira et al, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we reconcile differences in estimates of carbon fluxes from land-use change and forestry for the 1990s?

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The effect of Land Use Change and Forestry (LUCF) on terrestrial carbon fluxes can be regarded as a carbon credit or debit under the UNFCCC, but scientific uncertainty in the estimates for LUCF remains large. Here, we assess the LUCF estimates by examining a variety of models of different types with different land cover change maps in the 1990s. Annual carbon pools and their changes are separated into different components for separate geographical regions, while annual land cover change areas and carbon fluxes are disaggregated into different LUCF activities and the biospheric response due to CO 2 fertilization and climate change. We developed a consolidated estimate of the terrestrial carbon fluxes that combines book-keeping models with process-based biogeochemical models and inventory estimates and yields an estimate of the global terrestrial carbon flux that is within the uncertainty range developed in the IPCC 4th Assessment Report. We examined the USA and Brazil as case studies in order to assess the cause of differences from the UNFCCC reported carbon fluxes. Major differences in the litter and soil organic matter components are found for the USA. Differences in Brazil result from assumptions about the LUC for agricultural purposes. The effects of CO 2 fertilization and climate change also vary significantly in Brazil. Our consolidated estimate shows that the small Correspondence to: A. Ito (akinorii@jamstec.go.jp) sink in Latin America is within the uncertainty range from inverse models, but that the sink in the USA is significantly smaller than the inverse models estimates. Because there are different sources of errors at the country level, there is no easy reconciliation of different estimates of carbon fluxes at the global level. Clearly, further work is required to develop data sets for historical land cover change areas and models of biogeochemical changes for an accurate representation of carbon uptake or emissions due to LUC.

show abstract

“…Many studies have demonstrated that both natural vegetation restoration and tree plantation can significantly promote soil carbon storage [17][18][19][20][21]. Compared with tree plantation, natural vegetation restoration requires a long term process to restore the functioning of the ecosystem.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%