European forest carbon balance assessed with inventory based methods—An introduction to a special section

Nabuurs, Gert‐Jan; Hengeveld, G.M.; Werf, Bert van der; Heidema, A.H.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.11.024

Cited by 25 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Radar and lidar are effective at monitoring of vegetation structure, tree height, cover, and disturbance (, , Asner 2009, ). Satellite‐based observation can also be used to obtain coverage of large areas (Nabuurs et al 2010). These techniques can be combined with inventory‐based methodologies to increase statistical certainty when extrapolating to large spatial scales (Dubayah and Drake 2000, Brown 2002).…”

Section: Measuring Forest Carbonmentioning

confidence: 99%

A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States

McKinley

Ryan

Birdsey

et al. 2011

Ecological Applications

402

238

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using forests to mitigate climate change has gained much interest in science and policy discussions. We examine the evidence for carbon benefits, environmental and monetary costs, risks and trade-offs for a variety of activities in three general strategies: (1) land use change to increase forest area (afforestation) and avoid deforestation; (2) carbon management in existing forests; and (3) the use of wood as biomass energy, in place of other building materials, or in wood products for carbon storage. We found that many strategies can increase forest sector carbon mitigation above the current 162-256 Tg C/yr, and that many strategies have co-benefits such as biodiversity, water, and economic opportunities. Each strategy also has trade-offs, risks, and uncertainties including possible leakage, permanence, disturbances, and climate change effects. Because approximately 60% of the carbon lost through deforestation and harvesting from 1700 to 1935 has not yet been recovered and because some strategies store carbon in forest products or use biomass energy, the biological potential for forest sector carbon mitigation is large. Several studies suggest that using these strategies could offset as much as 10-20% of current U.S. fossil fuel emissions. To obtain such large offsets in the United States would require a combination of afforesting up to one-third of cropland or pastureland, using the equivalent of about one-half of the gross annual forest growth for biomass energy, or implementing more intensive management to increase forest growth on one-third of forestland. Such large offsets would require substantial trade-offs, such as lower agricultural production and non-carbon ecosystem services from forests. The effectiveness of activities could be diluted by negative leakage effects and increasing disturbance regimes. Because forest carbon loss contributes to increasing climate risk and because climate change may impede regeneration following disturbance, avoiding deforestation and promoting regeneration after disturbance should receive high priority as policy considerations. Policies to encourage programs or projects that influence forest carbon sequestration and offset fossil fuel emissions should also consider major items such as leakage, the cyclical nature of forest growth and regrowth, and the extensive demand for and movement of forest products globally, and other greenhouse gas effects, such as methane and nitrous oxide emissions, and recognize other environmental benefits of forests, such as biodiversity, nutrient management, and watershed protection. Activities that contribute to helping forests adapt to the effects of climate change, and which also complement forest carbon storage strategies, would be prudent.

show abstract

Section: Measuring Forest Carbonmentioning

confidence: 99%

A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States

McKinley

Ryan

Birdsey

et al. 2011

Ecological Applications

402

238

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Information on canopy recovery is important since canopy height is strongly correlated with live aboveground forest biomass, which, in turn, is correlated to the amount of carbon stored in aboveground live biomass components of a forested area [11][12][13]. Canopy height recovery following a forest fire is an important variable in the carbon balance of northern fire-driven forests [14,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-Fire Canopy Height Recovery in Canada’s Boreal Forests Using Airborne Laser Scanner (ALS)

Magnussen

Wulder

2012

Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canopy height data collected with an airborne laser scanner (ALS) flown across unmanaged parts of Canada's boreal forest in the summer of 2010 were used-as stand-alone data-to derive a least-squares polynomial (LSPOL) between presumed post-fire recovered canopy heights and duration (in years) since fire (YSF). Flight lines of the >25,000-km ALS survey intersected 163 historic fires with a known day of detection and fire perimeter. A sequential statistical testing procedure was developed to separate post-fire recovered canopy heights from pre-fire canopy heights. Of the 153 fires with >5 YSF, 121 cases (89%) could be resolved to a complete or partial post-fire canopy replacement. The estimated LSPOL can be used to estimate post-fire aboveground biomass and carbon sequestration in areas where alternative information is dated or absent. These LIDAR derived findings are especially useful as existing growth information is largely developed for higher productivity ecosystems and not applicable to these ecosystems subject to large wildfires.

show abstract

“…The magnitude of forest biomass plays a key role influencing the global carbon cycle and assisting in meeting greenhouse gas emission targets (Ciais et al 2008, Li et al 2010b, Nabuurs et al 2010. With a large number of statistically valid plots, forest inventories have been recognized as appropriate data for identifying the size and spatial patterns of forest biomass at a regional or national scale (Schroeder et al 1997, Choi et al 2002, Son et al 2007b, Guo et al 2010, Li et al 2010b.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Notes on the biomass expansion factors of Quercus mongolica and Quercus variabilis forests in Korea

Son

Lee

et al. 2012

J. Ecol. Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomass expansion factors, which convert timber volume (or dry weight) to biomass, are used for estimating the forest biomass and accounting for the carbon budget at a regional or national scale. We estimated the biomass conversion and expansion factors (BCEF), biomass expansion factors (BEF), root to shoot ratio (R), and ecosystem biomass expansion factor (EBEF) for Quercus mongolica Fisch. and Quercus variabilis Bl. forests based on publications in Korea. The mean BCEF, BEF, and R for Q. mongolica was 1.

show abstract

European forest carbon balance assessed with inventory based methods—An introduction to a special section

Cited by 25 publications

References 4 publications

A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States

A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States

Post-Fire Canopy Height Recovery in Canada’s Boreal Forests Using Airborne Laser Scanner (ALS)

Notes on the biomass expansion factors of Quercus mongolica and Quercus variabilis forests in Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About