William S. Keeton University of Vermont, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources Towards a Unified Vision of Forest Carbon Management.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

The Carbon Farming Initiative and Agricultural Emissions This presentation was prepared by the University of Melbourne for the Regional Landcare Facilitator.

Advertisements

Carbon debt – Lost in the forest? Niclas Scott Bentsen Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Section for Forest, Nature and Biomass,

Carbon storage in silvopastoral systems Farm Woodland Forum Annual Meeting 13 June 2013 Matthew Upson and Paul Burgess Centre for Environmental Risk and.

Peter S. Curtis Department of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology The Ohio State University Managing Great Lakes Forests for Climate Change Mitigation.

SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT: AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE Tim Rollinson Director General Forestry Commission.

Land-use effects on spatial and temporal patterns of carbon storage and flux in PNW forests David Wallin Department of Environmental Sciences Huxley College.

Persistence of nitrogen limitation over terrestrial carbon uptake Galina Churkina, Mona Vetter and Kristina Trusilova Max-Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry.

US Forest Disturbance Trends observed with Landsat Time Series Samuel N. Goward 1 (PI), Jeffrey Masek 2, Warren Cohen 3, Gretchen Moisen 4, Chengquan Huang.

Mathias Göckede College of Forestry Oregon State University The ORCA2 West Coast Project Synthesizing multiple approaches to constrain regional scale carbon.

US Carbon Trends March 17, USDA Greenhouse Gas Symposium1 Spatial and Temporal Patterns of the Contemporary Carbon Sources and Sinks in the Ridge.

Opportunities to Increase Carbon Sequestration Through Forestry Richard A. Birdsey USDA Forest Service Global Change Research Program Senate Agriculture.

The LULUCF sector: land use, land-use change and forestry

IPCC Mitigation Potential and Costs Land-Use Options Daniel Martino (Carbosur, Uruguay) CLA, Chapter 8 (Agriculture), WGIII Bonn, 12 May 2007.

Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Carbon Storage and Flux in PNW Forests: David Wallin 1 Peter Homann 1 Mark Harmon 2 Warren Cohen 3 Robert Kennedy.

Managing forests for carbon storage Bill Keeton Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources University of Vermont.

Carbon sequestration in China’s ecosystems, Jingyun Fang Department of Ecology Peking University Feb. 14, 2008.

Managing for Forest Carbon Storage. USDA Forest Service GTR NE-343.

Multiple stressors produce a vulnerable landscape Climate change Atmospheric pollution/acid deposition Altered natural disturbance regimes, spread of exotic.

“And see this ring right here, Jimmy?... That’s another time the old fellow miraculously survived some big forest fire.” ENFA/INSEA FORESTRY…..

Carbon Cycle Basics Ranga Myneni Boston University 1/12 Egon Schiele ( ) Autumn Sun 1.

Managing for Forest Carbon Storage. Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change.

Stakeholder consultation on discussion document on GHG mitigation potential within the agriculture and forest sector Portlaoise 15 May 2015 Eugene Hendrick.

Climate Change and Forestry Allan L. Carroll, Ph.D. Natural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Pacific Forestry Centre Victoria, Canada Senior Research.

Carbon and forest management Robert Matthews Forest Research Biometrics, Surveys and Statistics Division Alice Holt Research Station, Farnham.

Forest Inventory Methods and Carbon Analysis Linda S. Heath Richard A. Birdsey USDA Forest Service Northeastern Research Station In Support of the United.

References 1. Zhang F.M., J.M. Chen, Y. Pan, R. A. Birdsey, S.H. Shen, W.M Ju, and L.M. He, Attributing carbon sinks in conterminous US forests to disturbance.

CARBON STOCKS IN TROPICAL FORESTS OF MEXICO Víctor J. Jaramillo 1, Angelina Martínez-Yrízar 2, Luz Piedad Romero-Duque 1, J. Boone Kauffman 3 & Felipe.

Effects of Forest Management on Carbon Flux and Storage Jiquan Chen, Randy Jensen, Qinglin Li, Rachel Henderson & Jianye Xu University of Toledo & Missouri.

Limitations in sequestering carbon in forests By Promode Kant Indian Forest Service.

FEG Autumn Symposium David Read UK Forests and Mitigation of Climate Change.

Wood Bioenergy Carbon Accounting – Beyond Carbon Neutrality Ken Skog, Project Leader USDA Forest Service Forest Products Laboratory Madison, Wisconsin.

Global Emissions from the Agriculture and Forest Sectors: Status and Trends Indu K Murthy Indian Institute of Science.

Chapter 10 - Biofuels. Introduction Existing standards for carbon accounting Forestry schemes as carbon offsets Biomass energy in place of fossil fuels.

Is It True? At What Scale? What Is The Mechanism? Can It Be Managed? 150 Is The New 80: Continuing Carbon Storage In Aging Great Lakes Forests UMBS Forest.

Fire Prevention as a GHG Mitigation Strategy Presented by Robert Beach, RTI International Brent Sohngen, The Ohio State University Presented at Forestry.

Climate change and the carbon cycle David Schimel National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder Colorado.

Science Enabled by New Measurements of Vegetation Structure (ICESat-II, DESDynI, etc.) Some Ecological Considerations Jon Ranson & Hank Shugart Co-Chairs.

Challenges and Opportunities in Developing Forest Carbon Accounting Approaches for Use in Regulatory and Financial Trading Schemes Biometrics Working Group.

InVEST Tier 1 Carbon Model. In the Tier 1 model we estimate carbon stock as a function of land use / land cover. Storage indicates the mass of carbon.

A Review of Forest Carbon Sequestration Cost Studies Q: What is Carbon Sequestration? A: Capture and Storage of Carbon in Sinks Terrestrial (forest, agriculture)

Carbon Sequestration in Farm and Forest Ecosystems Sarah Hines April 2009

Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: what does it mean for bioenergy and C sequestration? Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: what does it mean for.

The impacts of land mosaics and human activity on ecosystem productivity Jeanette Eckert.

1 Economics of CO 2 Storage and Sink Enhancement Options: A Utility Perspective Research Funded by DOE, TVA, and EPRI Collaborators: EPRI, MIT, Parsons,

“STEWARDSHIP IN FORESTRY” Forestry Projects for Terrestrial Sequestration -- Regulatory and Public Acceptance Issues -- Jim Cathcart, Ph.D. Oregon Department.

Forestry Projects: Measurement and Monitoring Werner A. Kurz Natural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Victoria, BC, Canada Biological Sequestration.

Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science Disturbance, degradation, and recovery: forest dynamics and climate change mitigation Professor Rod Keenan Acknowledgements.

Is Biomass Burning Worse than Coal? Kevin Bundy & Brian Nowicki Center for Biological Diversity

Carbon Offsets and Financial Opportunities Coastal Fertilization Program Meeting Kevin Astridge – Forest Practices Branch February 4 th, 2008.

What is sustainable management of natural resources, and how can it be measured? Thomas M. Parris Executive Director, New England Office ISciences, LLC.

Experimental gaps and biodiversity responses in the Vermont Forest Ecosystem Management Demonstration Project Bill Keeton Graduate student contributors:

Carbon in United States Forests and Wood Products, : State-by-State Estimates Richard A. Birdsey George M. Lewis USDA Forest Service Global Change.

Carbon InVEST case studies & policy Emily McKenzie 3 April, InVEST Training, Bangkok.

Carbon, mushrooms, and timber – what more could you want

Scott Saleska (U. of Arizona) Lucy Hutyra, Elizabeth Hammond-Pyle, Dan Curran, Bill Munger, Greg Santoni, Steve Wofsy (Harvard University) Kadson Oliveira.

1 UIUC ATMOS 397G Biogeochemical Cycles and Global Change Lecture 18: Nitrogen Cycle Don Wuebbles Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Illinois,

Casey McCabe Global Change: Biome Perspective. (Illustration by Nicolle Rager Fuller, National Science Foundation.)

Role of forests in Finnish climate change policy Ministerial conference and workshop on the role of boreal forest in CO 2 balance Dr. Tatu Torniainen.

Tomas Lundmark SLU Sweden

Climate neutrality and forests

2015 RPA Update: Forest Carbon Projections for the United States

Tropical rainforest: carbon sink or carbon source?

Forest Management and the Expanding Global Forest Carbon Sink

Soil Biological Communities and Aboveground Resilience

A Forest Industry Perspective on Carbon Accounting

CH19: Carbon Sinks and Sources

CH19: Carbon Sinks and Sources

Welcome! Challenges and Opportunities in Developing Forest Carbon Accounting Approaches for Use in Regulatory and Financial Trading Schemes Webinar: Presentation.

Global Forest Carbon Sequestration and Integrated Assessment

Global Forest Carbon Budget (tons of C/y)

Presentation transcript:

William S. Keeton University of Vermont, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources Towards a Unified Vision of Forest Carbon Management

Pan et al A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests. Science Deforestation  ~15% of annual global GGH emissions World forests are a net C sink, sequestering 2.3 Pg/yr Can we enhance the strength of the global forest carbon sink?

From: Kuemmerle, T., P. Olofsson, O. Chaskovskyy, M. Baumann, K. Ostapowicz, C.E. Woodcok, R. Houghton, P. Hostert, W.S. Keeton, and V.C. Radeloff Post-Soviet farmland abandonment, forest recovery, and carbon sequestration in western Ukraine. Global Change Biology 17:1335– 1349.

What is more effective? Passive management, favoring carbon storage in reserves? Reduced harvesting intensity/frequency, favoring carbon storage in managed forests and durable wood products? Intensified forest harvests, favoring fast rates of uptake and emissions offsets achieved through substitution? Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Stand development over time Total carbon Sequestered Greatest rate of carbon uptake

Stand development over time Total carbon Sequestered Greatest level of carbon storage

Competing view #1 Enhanced carbon storage through: Conservation of remaining high-biomass, late-successional/old-growth forests Redevelopment of high-biomass stand structures on some portion of the landscape Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Forest Age (yrs) From: S. Luyssaert et al. (2008), Nature. Old-growth forests are predominantly carbon sinks: Net Ecosystem Production > 0 Ratio of heterotrophic respiration (Rh) to Net Primary Productivity (NPP) < 1 Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

From: Burrascano, Keeton et al Forest Ecology and Management Global distribution of temperate forests by latitude Global Analysis of Temperate Old-growth Forests

Aboveground Biomass vs. Stand Age N=204 N=29 US Northeast US Pacific Northwest Central Carpathians N=18 Tiera Del Fuego, Chile N=31 China N = 143

Competing view #2 Enhanced carbon storage through lower intensity management: Post-harvest structural retention Extended rotations Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Stratified random sample of FIA sites tm 32 stands from the Northern Forest Region 15 stands from the Adirondack Region 3 stands from the Green Mountain Region 14 stands from the White Mountains and western Maine Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Modeled management scenarios Clearcut Variants Shelterwood Variants Selection System Variants (4) (2) 8 active management scenarios, varying harvesting intensity and frequency Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions ANOVA: P < 0.01 Bonferroni multiple comparisons: No management > all treatments Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Model Predictions Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Competing view #3 Reduced emissions (i.e. offsets) achieved through higher intensity management: Substitution of woody biomass for fossil fuels Substitution of wood products for energy intensive building materials Reduced leakage (geographic displacement of harvesting) Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

Perez-Garcia et al Life-cycle approach to analyzing the problem (CORRIM, UW) CORRIM: Life-Cycle Analysis No Mgt, age=160 From Malmheimer et al., JOF 2008 Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity)

From: Eriksson et al Integrated carbon analysis of forest management practices and wood substitution. Can. J. For. Res. 37: 671–681. Viewpoint #1 (old forest reserves) Viewpoint # 2 (decreased harvesting intensity) Viewpoint #3 (increased harvesting intensity) Substitution effects will vary. Assumption of 1:1 substitution How will markets respond in reality?

From: Keeton (2007). George Wright Forum The Sustainable Forest Management Spectrum From Keeton George Wright Forum Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Landscape-scale carbon modeling: must ensure net emissions reductions while meeting range of management objectives From Kurz et al CBM-CFS3: A model of carbon-dynamics in forestry and land-use change implementing IPCC standards. Ecological Modeling

Acknowledgements United States Department of Agriculture, National Research Initiative Northeastern States Research Cooperative USDA McIntire-Stennis Forest Research Program Vermont Monitoring Cooperative U.S. Fulbright Program