Climate mitigation forestry-temporal trade-offs

被引:39
|
作者
Skytt, Torbjorn [1 ]
Englund, Goran [2 ]
Jonsson, Bengt-Gunnar [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Mid Sweden Univ, Dept Ecotechnol & Sustainable Bldg, S-83125 Ostersund, Sweden
[2] Umea Univ, Dept Ecol & Environm Sci, S-90187 Umea, Sweden
[3] Mid Sweden Univ, Dept Nat Sci, S-85170 Sundsvall, Sweden
[4] Swedish Univ Agr Sci, Dept Fish Wildlife & Environm Sci, S-90183 Umea, Sweden
关键词
carbon dioxide exchange; carbon balance; CO2; balance; substitution effect; boreal forest; climate benefit; GAS DISPLACEMENT FACTORS; IMPACT ASSESSMENT; CARBON; SUBSTITUTION; PRODUCT;
D O I
10.1088/1748-9326/ac30fa
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The 1.5 degrees C target for global warming calls for evaluating short-term (30-50 years) climate change mitigation with different forests usage. In the current scientific literature and in the public debate, there are contrasting views on how forests should be managed to maximize total climate benefit, including the use of products and changes in carbon pools. Three major factors influence the conclusions in different studies: (a) time horizon, (b) site productivity, (c) substitution calculations. Here we show the dependency among these factors by an analysis of four harvest scenarios: 95%, 60%, 40% and 0% of growth, which are compared to a business as usual scenario (80%). The analyses are made for five counties in Sweden, which covers a wide range in forest productivities, from 2.5 m(3) ha(-1) yr(-1) (north) to 11.5 m(3) ha(-1) yr(-1) (south). The results show: (a) Reduced harvest levels provide increased climate benefits on short time scales (at least 50 years). (b) Increased harvesting from current level is counterproductive on both short and long term. (c) The potential effect on the carbon balance of a no-harvest scenario in the five counties, is larger (1.1-16 times) than the expected emissions from all other anthropogenic activities until 2045. (d) Short-term climate benefits of reduced harvesting are largest in highly productive forests. Smaller but more long-lasting benefits can be obtained by aiming at harvest reductions in less productive forests. (e) Strategies focused on short-term benefits need to be adapted to the future development of substitution factors and forest growth. If substitution effects become higher, increased harvest levels will be beneficial after 2050 in high productive forests. However, if future substitution effects decrease, which is a plausible and desired development, low harvest strategies are preferred in both short- and long-term time perspectives. We conclude that even moderate reductions of harvest levels would provide substantial climate benefits.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comment on 'Climate mitigation forestry-temporal trade-offs'
    Gustavsson, Leif
    Sathre, Roger
    Leskinen, Pekka
    Nabuurs, Gert-Jan
    Kraxner, Florian
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2022, 17 (04)
  • [2] Reply to Comment on 'Climate mitigation forestry-temporal trade-offs'
    Skytt, Torbjorn
    Englund, Goran
    Jonsson, Bengt-Gunnar
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2022, 17 (04):
  • [3] Integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation in agriculture and forestry: opportunities and trade-offs
    Locatelli, Bruno
    Pavageau, Charlotte
    Pramova, Emilia
    Di Gregorio, Monica
    [J]. WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-CLIMATE CHANGE, 2015, 6 (06) : 585 - 598
  • [4] Unmask temporal trade-offs in climate policy debates
    Ocko, Ilissa B.
    Hamburg, Steven P.
    Jacob, Daniel J.
    Keith, David W.
    Keohane, Nathaniel O.
    Oppenheimer, Michael
    Roy-Mayhew, Joseph D.
    Schrag, Daniel P.
    Pacala, Stephen W.
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2017, 356 (6337) : 492 - 493
  • [5] Afforestation for climate change mitigation: Potentials, risks and trade-offs
    Doelman, Jonathan C.
    Stehfest, Elke
    van Vuuren, Detlef P.
    Tabeau, Andrzej
    Hof, Andries F.
    Braakhekke, Maarten C.
    Gernaat, David E. H. J.
    van den Berg, Maarten
    van Zeist, Willem-Jan
    Daioglou, Vassilis
    van Meijl, Hans
    Lucas, Paul L.
    [J]. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2020, 26 (03) : 1576 - 1591
  • [6] Biodiversity trade-offs and globalizing forestry
    Vihervaara, P.
    Kamppinen, M.
    Kumpula, T.
    Walls, M.
    [J]. FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS, 2013, 26 : 147 - 148
  • [7] Trade-Offs for Climate-Smart Forestry in Europe Under Uncertain Future Climate
    Gregor, Konstantin
    Knoke, Thomas
    Krause, Andreas
    Reyer, Christopher P. O.
    Lindeskog, Mats
    Papastefanou, Phillip
    Smith, Benjamin
    Lanso, Anne-Sofie
    Rammig, Anja
    [J]. EARTHS FUTURE, 2022, 10 (09)
  • [8] Balancing clean water-climate change mitigation trade-offs
    Parkinson, Simon
    Krey, Volker
    Huppmann, Daniel
    Kahil, Taher
    McCollum, David
    Fricko, Oliver
    Byers, Edward
    Gidden, Matthew J.
    Mayor, Beatriz
    Khan, Zarrar
    Raptis, Catherine
    Rao, Narasimha D.
    Johnson, Nils
    Wada, Yoshihide
    Djilali, Ned
    Riahi, Keywan
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2019, 14 (01):
  • [9] Temporal trade-offs in psychophysics
    Barack, David L.
    Gold, Joshua I.
    [J]. CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROBIOLOGY, 2016, 37 : 121 - 125
  • [10] Climate change mitigation: trade-offs between delay and strength of action required
    Naomi E. Vaughan
    Timothy M. Lenton
    John G. Shepherd
    [J]. Climatic Change, 2009, 96 : 29 - 43