Expanding the scope of biogeochemical research to accelerate atmospheric carbon capture

Prescribed fire placement matters more than increasing frequency and extent in a simulated Pacific Northwest landscape

“…Altogether, our simulations indicate that the implementation of prescribed fire must be informed by realistic system-or context-specific conditions, with attention paid to regional differentiation of social and ecological histories, as proposed for scalable climate change mitigation methods (Silva, 2022). Looking ahead, we propose targeting areas of high concern or value to decrease the risk of high-severity fire and to contribute to meeting climate mitigation in tandem with adaptation goals.…”

“…While wildfire can lead to major losses in soil C through combustion and erosion, frequent low-intensity fires can induce the formation of pyrogenic C or fire-induced reductions in microbial priming of soil organic matter, favoring the accumulation of more stable forms of soil C (Pierson et al, 2021). In certain ecological and pedogenic contexts, low-intensity and high-frequency fire disturbances can lead to increased soil C densities and stability (Hunter et al, 2023;Silva, 2022). Models of ecosystem responses to disturbance that include erosional C losses or gains in stable soil pools can inform landscape prioritization for increased C storage across a broad range of spatial and temporal scales (Hunter et al, 2024;Roering et al, 2023) in addition to safer and more impactful adoption of prescribed fire in the management of western forests.…”

The spatiotemporal domains of natural climate solutions research and strategies for implementation in the Pacific Northwest, USA

“…Simply put, these techniques will not work everywhere (Anderson et al, 2019), and in some cases, they may cause unanticipated release of CO 2 or a decrease in the mean residence time of carbon (Silva et al, 2022). Furthermore, many of the social and ecological factors that shape ecosystem dynamics and determine the overall success of potential NCS have yet to be quantified and incorporated into NCS frameworks (Silva, 2022). To advance research in this field, we explore the interactions between plants, soils and climate change.…”

“…The variation in land use and resource availability constraints both the technical and realizable potential for C drawdown and permanence because no single NCS method is appropriate for all bioclimatic conditions (Baldocchi et al, 2018). Thus, scalable projects would require coordination of land use, conservation, and restoration efforts (Bossio et al, 2020;Silva, 2022). Here, we present a geographic-based framework for guiding NCS implementation using soil C stocks (a proxy for belowground sequestration) and projected climate change (a control on future drawdown potential) across multiple ecoregions in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) of the United States.…”

Climate solutions: the next phase of understanding and implementation

“…The most recent global report on climate change mitigation (IPCC 2022) points to three areas of exceptional potential: (i) sustainable agriculture, which could sequester 4.1 PgCO 2 eq yr −1 ; (ii) ecosystem restoration (i.e., protection and sustainable management of forests, savannas, and grasslands), which could sequester 7.3 PgCO 2 eq yr −1 ; (iii) enhanced silicate weathering, which could sequester 1 to 100 PgCO 2 eq yr −1 . A synergistic approach that combines innovations in each of those areas can accelerate carbon capture by improving decision-making at the zone of friction between short-term self-interested gains of individuals and longer-term shared community goals (Silva 2022). But we have yet to address the disconnect between climate change mitigation and adaptation policies in terms of estimating what can be realistically and justly achieved under future scenarios.…”