Jump to content
  • Library: Increase in forest carbon emissions

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By David Bysouth, Julee J. Boan, Jay R. Malcolm, Anthony R. Taylor
    Recent research has shown forest-related emissions reported in national greenhouse gas inventories are much lower than global estimates from models summarized in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports. A substantial part of this discrepancy could be explained by conceptual differences in what is counted as part of the anthropogenic forest carbon sink and the way countries report on their forest harvesting sectors. With Canada as a case study, we used published National Inventory Report and Common Reporting Format tables to isolate emissions and removals directly associated with forestry from those associated with forests more broadly. Forestry-related factors that affect CO2 emissions and removals include tree harvesting, post-harvest forest regeneration and growth, and carbon storage in long-lived harvested wood products. We found that between 2005 and 2021, forestry in Canada represented a net source of carbon (annual mean = 90.8 Mt. CO2e), and that total area logged was a significant predictor of net forestry emissions. In contrast, Canada’s NIR reported a small net carbon sink during the same time period (annual mean = −4.7 Mt. CO2e). We show this discrepancy can be explained by Canada’s GHG reporting approach that claims GHG emissions from wildfires are natural, but GHG removals from forests at the age of commercial maturity, despite being primarily natural disturbance origin, are anthropogenic. This reporting approach may lead to climate mitigation policies that are ineffectual or detrimental to reducing net carbon in the global atmosphere.
    (2024) High emissions or carbon neutral? Inclusion of “anthropogenic” forest sinks leads to underreporting of forestry emissions.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    Economic modelling of the global carbon cost of harvesting wood from forests shows a much higher annual cost than that estimated by other models, highlighting a major opportunity for reducing emissions by limiting wood harvests.
    By Liqing Peng, Timothy D. Searchinger, Jessica Zionts, Richard Waite
    After agriculture, wood harvest is the human activity that has most reduced the storage of carbon in vegetation and soils1,2. Although felled wood releases carbon to the atmosphere in various steps, the fact that growing trees absorb carbon has led to different carbon-accounting approaches for wood use, producing widely varying estimates of carbon costs. Many approaches give the impression of low, zero or even negative greenhouse gas emissions from wood harvests because, in different ways, they offset carbon losses from new harvests with carbon sequestration from growth of broad forest areas3,4. Attributing this sequestration to new harvests is inappropriate because this other forest growth would occur regardless of new harvests and typically results from agricultural abandonment, recovery from previous harvests and climate change itself. Nevertheless some papers count gross emissions annually, which assigns no value to the capacity of newly harvested forests to regrow and approach the carbon stocks of unharvested forests. Here we present results of a new model that uses time discounting to estimate the present and future carbon costs of global wood harvests under different scenarios. We find that forest harvests between 2010 and 2050 will probably have annualized carbon costs of 3.5–4.2 Gt CO2e yr−1, which approach common estimates of annual emissions from land-use change due to agricultural expansion. Our study suggests an under-appreciated option to address climate change by reducing these costs.
    (2023) The carbon costs of global wood harvests.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Huy Tran, Edie Juno and Saravanan Arunachalam
    Despite a significant increase in United States biomass energy sector activity, including domestic bioenergy deployment and wood pellet production for overseas exports, the associated criteria pollutant emissions are not well quantified in current regulatory emissions inventories. We present an updated U.S. emissions inventory, with emphasis on wood-based biomass pretreatment (e.g., drying, condensing, storage of wood pellet) and the use of biomass for energy generation. As a significant number of wood pellet production facilities are not included in current inventories, we find that this sector’s emissions could be potentially underestimated by a factor of two. Emissions from biomass-based facilities are on average up to 2.8 times higher than their non-biomass counterparts per unit energy. We estimate that 2.3 million people live within 2 km of a biomass facility and who could be subject to adverse health impacts from their emissions. Overall, we find that the bioenergy sector contributes to about 3–17% of total emissions from all energy, i.e., electric and non-electric generating facilities in the U.S. We also review some drivers of bioenergy expansion, such as various feedstocks and technologies deployed with an emphasis on wood-based bioenergy and discuss their implications for future air quality and health impacts.
    (2023) Emissions of wood pelletization and bioenergy use in the United States.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Brendan Mackey, William Moomaw, David Lindenmayer and Heather Keith
    Abstract: Meeting the Paris Agreement global warming target requires deep and rapid cuts in CO2 emissions as well as removals from the atmosphere into land sinks, especially forests. While international climate policy in the land sector does now recognize forest protection as a mitigation strategy, it is not receiving sufficient attention in developed countries even though they experience emissions from deforestation as well as from logging of managed forests. Current national greenhouse gas inventories obscure the mitigation potential of forest protection through net carbon accounting between the fossil fuel and the land sectors as well as within the different categories of the land. This prevents decision-makers in national governments, the private sector and civil society having access to all the science-based evidence needed to evaluate the merits of all mitigation strategies. The consequences of net carbon accounting for global policy were investigated by examining annual inventory reports of four high forest cover developed countries (Australia, Canada, USA, and Russia). Net accounting between sectors makes a major contribution to meeting nationally determined contributions with removals in Forest Land offsetting between 14% and 38% of the fossil fuel emissions for these countries. Analysis of reports for Australia at a sub-national level revealed that the State of Tasmania delivered negative emissions due to a change in forest management—a large and rapid drop in native forest logging—resulting in a mitigation benefit of ∼22 Mt CO2-e yr–1 over the reported period 2011/12–2018/19. This is the kind of outcome required globally to meet the Paris Agreement temperature goal. All CO2 emissions from, and atmospheric removals into, forest ecosystem carbon stocks now matter and should be counted and credited to achieve the deep and rapid cuts in emissions needed over the coming decades. Accounting and reporting systems therefore need to show gains and losses of carbon stocks in each reservoir. Changing forest management in naturally regenerating forests to avoid emissions from harvesting and enabling forest regrowth is an effective mitigation strategy that can rapidly reduce anthropogenic emissions from the forest sector and simultaneously increase removals of CO2 from the atmosphere.

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Jennifer Skene and Michael Polanyi
    A glaring omission in Canada’s climate policy is undermining the rigour and integrity of the government’s climate commitments, leaving unaddressed the net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from one of the country’s highest-emitting sectors: the logging industry. A new analysis of government data conducted by Nature Canada and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NDRC) shows that the logging industry is one of Canada’s major GHG emitters, with a footprint that’s equal to more than 10 percent of Canada’s overall emissions. This figure, which is a conservative estimate, places the logging sector’s GHG emissions on par with oil sands production and higher than emissions from electricity generation.
    However, Canada does not clearly report the logging sector’s emissions. Instead, logging emissions can only be calculated through a complex process of piecing together official data dispersed across various government sources (some of which are available only upon request). In addition, unlike its approach to all other high-emitting sectors, the Government of Canada has not articulated a clear strategy to reduce this sector’s emissions, effectively exempting the logging industry from its keystone climate policies.
    The exclusion of this high-emitting sector jeopardizes Canada’s climate ambition. The government’s achievement of its commitment to reduce Canada’s emissions to 40 to 45 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 depends on a full and accurate accounting of—and effective actions to reduce— emissions from all sectors of the economy. The lack of recognition of the logging sector’s significant emissions also leads to a fundamentally flawed basis for forest sector policy decisions, including forest carbon regulation, perpetuating policy decisions grounded in the myth of logging’s carbon neutrality and exempting the industry from accountability.
    Canada’s climate leadership depends on a comprehensive accounting and mitigation of impacts across all sectors. The atmosphere does not distinguish between emissions from logging and those from fossil fuels and, by the government’s own numbers, the logging industry ranks among Canada’s greatest climate liabilities. Canada should transparently and accurately report logging emissions, addressing them alongside emissions from all other high-emitting sectors in its 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) and other policies.
    This report outlines the key findings from the new Nature Canada and NRDC technical report, and proposes key policy recommendations for the Government of Canada to address the high level of GHG emissions from the logging sector. These recommendations include: 1.) Transparently report the logging industry’s emissions; 2.) Develop a strategy for reducing these emissions; 3.) Directly regulate the sector’s emissions; and 4.) Address biases, flaws, and omissions in Canada’s logging emissions accounting.
    Download the report: (2022) Lost-in-the-Woods-Report Canada’s Hidden Logging Emissions Are Equivalent to Those from Oil Sands Operations.pdf

    Conservation North
    Scientists Michelle Connolly and Dr. Dominick DellaSala in the field obtaining data used to determine the amount of forest carbon in the Interior Wet Belt forests of BC (Photo: Conservation North)
    Prince George, BC—An international team of scientists have published a new peer-reviewed study on the importance of protecting primary forests in BC’s Interior Wetbelt (IWB) bioregion for the climate.  Scientists from the University of Northern British Columbia, Griffith University in Australia, the Conservation Biology Institute in Oregon, Wild Heritage in Oregon and Conservation North were part of the study, which underscores the seriousness of BC’s emissions tied to the logging of old growth forests.
    The IWB is a vast, largely forested area of 16.5 million ha along the western flanks of the Canadian Rockies and northern Columbia Mountains. The IWB contains rare old growth spruce forests (referred to in other parts of the world as Boreal Rainforest) and the rare Inland Temperate Rainforest. Logging in this ecosystem accelerated from the 1970s to the 2000s.
    According to lead researcher Dr. Dominick DellaSala: “The region contains under-appreciated carbon stocks that can help Canada meet its climate and conservation targets. In their natural state, these forests constitute an irreplaceable natural climate solution, but we’re turning them into lumber and threatening to turn them into pellets.”
    The Government of Canada has pledged to protect 30 percent of its lands and waters by 2030 in order to mitigate the climate crisis.
    The study used data collected in the field, as well as government datasets to estimate how much carbon is contained within unlogged old growth spruce, redcedar and hemlock forests, and how much has been emitted to the atmosphere by clearcut logging.
    Dr. Art Fredeen, a study co-author at UNBC added, “The Interior Wetbelt contains some of the most carbon dense forests on the planet.” He noted that, “if we summed up all of the carbon from historically logged timber in the IWB it would exceed BC’s total greenhouse gas emissions for 2019, 9 times over. Instead of increasing BC’s carbon debt by further logging old carbon-rich landscapes, we should be conserving them.”
    Ecologist and co-author Michelle Connolly explains that: “There need to be major forestry reforms that protect carbon-dense old-growth forests, allow degraded forests time to recover the logging-related carbon debt, and improve monitoring of carbon stocks and stock changes. This is what the promised ‘paradigm shift’ ought to look like on the ground.”
    Dr. DellaSala adds that, “for the very first time, we have a comprehensive assessment of how important BC’s interior rainforests are to the global climate and how much has been lost to logging. In the case of climate change, the forest is worth far more standing than cut down for wood products.”
    The study reported that nearly one-quarter of the entire IWB has been logged, the majority within the inland rainforest since the 1970s, resulting in live above-ground carbon declining by at least 18 percent. However, this is likely an underestimate because a) government data appear to underestimate the amount of aboveground carbon storage in the most carbon-rich stands, and b) logging has been concentrated in low to mid-elevations (below 2000 m) where carbon density is the greatest. That is, the province is under-reporting logging-related carbon emissions by as much as 75 percent.
    Ecosphere - 2022 - DellaSala - Estimating carbon stocks and stock changes in Interior Wetbelt forests of British Columbia .pdf
    The summary above was provided by Conservation North.

    Michelle Connolly
    By Mark E. Harmon, Chad T. Hanson and Dominick A. DellaSala
    Abstract: Biomass combustion is a major biogeochemical process, but uncertain in magnitude. We examined multiple levels of organization (twigs, branches, trees, stands, and landscapes) in large, severe forest fires to see how combustion rates for live aboveground woody parts varied with tree species, size, and fire severity in Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws.) and mixed conifer-dominated forests of the Sierra Nevada, California, USA. In high severity fire patches, most combustion loss was from branches < 2 cm diameter; in low to moderate severity patches, most was from bole charring. Combustion rates decreased as fire severity declined and with increasing tree size. Pinus species had little branch combustion, leading them to have ≈50% the combustion rate of other taxa. Combustion rates could be 100% for small branch segments and up to 57% for small tree aboveground woody biomass in high severity fire patches. However, combustion rates are very low overall at the stand (0.1%–3.2%) and landscape level (0.6%–1.8%), because large trees with low combustion rates comprise the majority of biomass, and high severity fire patches are less than half of the area burned. Our findings of low live wood combustion rates have important implications for policies related to wildfire emissions and forest management.
    (2022) Combustion of Aboveground Wood from Live Trees in Megafires, CA, USA.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Peter Wood for Sierra Club BC
    BC’s Strategic Climate Risk Assessment identifies 15 climate risks, several of which have the potential to create catastrophic impacts for BC's communities. Overall, the assessment found that the greatest climate-related risks were severe wildfire, seasonal water shortage, and heat wave events. It also found that events such as severe river flooding were of “high consequence,” though less likely to occur.
    There is a large body of scientific literature that documents the impact that industrial logging has on the severity and frequency of many of these events, yet the Assessment did not consider this information. This presents a major blind spot that could undermine the assessment’s findings and the effectiveness of the Province’s response in defending communities from worsening climate impacts.
    This report attempts to address this gap in order to understand the role that forests
    in B.C. can play in either mitigating or exacerbating those risks, depending on how we manage them. It finds that nine of these risks are substantially affected by forest management, some of which could have catastrophic consequences for the health and safety of local communities.
    (2021) Intact Forests, Safe Communities.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    A report by Natural Resources Defense Council, Nature Canada, Environmental Defence Canada and Nature Québec
    Protecting the world’s forests, just like a rapid transition away from fossil fuels, is essential to avoiding the worst impacts of climate change. Forests, in addition to their importance in maintaining biodiversity, play an irreplaceable role in global carbon regulation, absorbing one-third of human-caused carbon emissions from the atmosphere annually and storing this carbon long-term in their soil and vegetation. This is why forest protection and restoration are key pillars of international efforts to advance natural climate solutions (i.e., actions that preserve and enhance ecosystems’ role in absorbing and storing carbon). Preserving primary forests, which are forests that have never been impacted by significant human disturbance, is particularly critical. These forests, which are rapidly disappearing, hold unique value for the climate and biodiversity. Once gone, they are irreplaceable on any meaningful human timescale.
    (2021) How carbon loopholes for logging hinder Canada's climate leadership.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By the Science Alliance for Forestry Transformation
    We ask for a moratorium on forest harvesting for biomass until science-based policy has been developed to regulate the industry. The emerging wood pellet industry increases harvesting pressure on B.C.’s forest ecosystems. Inadequate regulation, combined with economic opportunity based on flawed carbon accounting, threatens to increase short-term carbon emissions, decrease carbon storage and undermine biodiversity conservation. A bioenergy-driven harvest spike would challenge B.C.’s emission targets.
    (2021) B.C. Forest Bioenergy Policy Suggestions.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    A letter by 200 of the top US forest and climate scientists
    In 2020, as multiple legislative proposals attempted to shoehorn measures that would increase logging, or increase funding for logging, into COVID-19 stimulus packages, over 200 top U.S. climate and forest scientists asked Congressional leaders to avoid using the pandemic emergency as a means for stripping away forest protections and promoting logging. In a historic and unprecedented letter sent to Congress, the scientists concluded that, in order to avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis, moving beyond fossil fuel consumption is not enough, and we must also increase forest protections and shift away from energy-intensive and greenhouse-gas polluting wood consumption.
    (2020) Over 200 Top U.S. Climate and Forest Scientists Urge Congress: Protect Forests to Mitigate Climate Crisis.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Suzanne W. Simard et al
    Temperate forests provide crucial ecosystems services as living sinks for atmospheric carbon (C) and repositories of biodiversity. Applying harvesting at intensities that minimize losses offers one means for mitigating global change. However, little is known of overstory retention levels that best conserve ecosystem services in different regional climates, and likewise as climate changes. To quantify the effect of harvest intensity on C stocks and biodiversity, we compared five harvesting intensities (clearcutting, seedtree retention, 30% patch retention, 60% patch retention, and uncut controls) across a climatic aridity gradient that ranged from humid to semi-arid in the Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests of British Columbia. We found that increased harvesting intensity reduced total ecosystem, aboveground, and live tree C stocks 1 year post- harvest, and the magnitude of these losses were negatively correlated with climatic aridity. In humid forests, total ecosystem C ranged from 50% loss following clearcut harvest, to 30% loss following large patch retention harvest. In arid forests this range was 60 to 8% loss, respectively. Where lower retention harvests are sought, the small patch retention treatment protected both C stocks and biodiversity in the arid forests, whereas the seedtree method performed as well or better in the humid forests. Below-ground C stocks declined by an average of 29% after harvesting, with almost all of the loss from the forest floor and none from the mineral soil. Of the secondary pools, standing and coarse deadwood declined in all harvesting treatments regardless of cutting intensity or aridity, while C stocks in fine fuels and stumps increased. The understory plant C pool declined across all harvesting intensities in the humid forests, but increased in arid forests. Shannon’s diversity and richness of tree and bryoid species declined with harvesting intensity, where tree species losses were greatest in the humid forests and bryoid losses greatest in arid forests. Shrub and herb species were unaffected. This study showed that the highest retention level was best at reducing losses in C stocks and biodiversity, and clearcutting the poorest, and while partial retention of canopy trees can reduce losses in these ecosystem services, outcomes will vary with climatic aridity.
    (2020) Harvest Intensity Effects on Carbon Stocks and Biodiversity Are Dependent on Regional Climate in Douglas-Fir Forests of British Columbia.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    A report by the US Forest Service
    Forests are considered a natural solution for mitigating climate change because they absorb and store atmospheric carbon. With Alaska boasting 129 million acres of forest, this state can play a crucial role as a carbon sink for the United States. Until recently, the volume of carbon stored in Alaska’s forests was unknown, as was their future carbon sequestration capacity.
    In 2007, Congress passed the Energy Independence and Security Act that directed the Department of the Interior to assess the stock and flow of carbon in all the lands and waters of the United States. In 2012, a team composed of researchers with the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Forest Service, and the University of Alaska assessed how much carbon Alaska’s forests can sequester.
    The researchers concluded that ecosystems of Alaska could be a substantial carbon sink. Carbon sequestration is estimated at 22.5 to 70.0 teragrams (Tg) of carbon per year over the remainder of this century. In particular, Alaska’s dense coastal temperate forests and soils are estimated to sequester 3.4 to 7.8 Tg of carbon per year. Forest management activities were found to have long-term effects on the maximum amount of carbon a site can sequester. These findings helped inform the carbon assessment sections of Chugach and Tongass National Forests’ land management plans.
    Forestry as a Natural Climate Solution- The Positive Outcomes of Negative Carbon Emissions (2020).pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By William R. Moomaw et al
    Climate change and loss of biodiversity are widely recognized as the foremost environmental challenges of our time. Forests annually sequester large quantities of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), and store carbon above and below ground for long periods of time. Intact forests—largely free from human intervention except primarily for trails and hazard removals—are the most carbon-dense and biodiverse terrestrial ecosystems, with additional benefits to society and the economy. Internationally, focus has been on preventing loss of tropical forests, yet U.S. temperate and boreal forests remove sufficient atmospheric CO2 to reduce national annual net emissions by 11%. U.S. forests have the potential for much more rapid atmospheric CO2 removal rates and biological carbon sequestration by intact and/or older forests. The recent 1.5 Degree Warming Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change identifies reforestation and afforestation as important strategies to increase negative emissions, but they face significant challenges: afforestation requires an enormous amount of additional land, and neither strategy can remove sufficient carbon by growing young trees during the critical next decade(s). In contrast, growing existing forests intact to their ecological potential—termed proforestation—is a more effective, immediate, and low-cost approach that could be mobilized across suitable forests of all types. Proforestation serves the greatest public good by maximizing co-benefits such as nature-based biological carbon sequestration and unparalleled ecosystem services such as biodiversity enhancement, water and air quality, flood and erosion control, public health benefits, low impact recreation, and scenic beauty.
    (2019) Intact Forests in the United States- Proforestation Mitigates Climate Change and Serves the Greatest Good.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Beverly E. Law et al
    Strategies to mitigate carbon dioxide emissions through forestry activities have been proposed, but ecosystem process-based integration of climate change, enhanced CO2, disturbance from fire, and management actions at regional scales are extremely limited. Here, we examine the relative merits of afforestation, reforestation, management changes, and harvest residue bioenergy use in the Pacific Northwest. This region represents some of the highest carbon density forests in the world, which can store carbon in trees for 800 y or more. Oregon’s net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) was equivalent to 72% of total emissions in 2011–2015. By 2100, simulations show increased net carbon uptake with little change in wildfires. Reforestation, afforestation, lengthened har- vest cycles on private lands, and restricting harvest on public lands increase NECB 56% by 2100, with the latter two actions contributing the most. Resultant co-benefits included water availability and biodiversity, primarily from increased forest area, age, and species diversity. Converting 127,000 ha of irrigated grass crops to native forests could decrease irrigation demand by 233 billion cubic metres per year. Utilizing harvest residues for bioenergy production instead of leaving them in forests to decompose increased emissions in the short- term (50 y), reducing mitigation effectiveness. Increasing forest carbon on public lands reduced emissions compared with storage in wood products because the residence time is more than twice that of wood products. Hence, temperate forests with high carbon densities and lower vulnerability to mortality have substantial potential for reducing forest sector emissions. Our analysis framework provides a template for assessments in other temperate regions.
    (2018) Land use strategies to mitigate climate change in carbon dense temperate forests.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By John D Sterman, Lori Siegal and Juliette N Rooney-Varga
    Bioenergy is booming as nations seek to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union declared biofuels to be carbon-neutral, triggering a surge in wood use. But do biofuels actually reduce emissions? A molecule of CO2 emitted today has the same impact on radiative forcing whether it comes from coal or biomass. Biofuels can only reduce atmospheric CO2 over time through post-harvest increases in net primary production (NPP). The climate impact of biofuels therefore depends on CO2 emissions from combustion of biofuels versus fossil fuels, the fate of the harvested land and dynamics of NPP. Here we develop a model for dynamic bioenergy lifecycle analysis. The model tracks carbon stocks and fluxes among the atmosphere, biomass, and soils, is extensible to multiple land types and regions, and runs in ≈1s, enabling rapid, interactive policy design and sensitivity testing. We simulate substitution of wood for coal in power generation, estimating the parameters governing NPP and other fluxes using data for forests in the eastern US and using published estimates for supply chain emissions. Because combustion and processing efficiencies for wood are less than coal, the immediate impact of substituting wood for coal is an increase in atmospheric CO2 relative to coal. The payback time for this carbon debt ranges from 44–104 years after clearcut, depending on forest type—assuming the land remains forest. Surprisingly, replanting hardwood forests with fast-growing pine plantations raises the CO2 impact of wood because the equilibrium carbon density of plantations is lower than natural forests. Further, projected growth in wood harvest for bioenergy would increase atmospheric CO2 for at least a century because new carbon debt continuously exceeds NPP. Assuming biofuels are carbon neutral may worsen irreversible impacts of climate change before benefits accrue. Instead, explicit dynamic models should be used to assess the climate impacts of biofuels.
    (2018) Does replacing coal with wood lower CO2 emissions? Dynamic lifecycle analysis of wood bioenergy.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    Abstract: Management of native forests offers opportunities to store more carbon in the land sector through two main activities. Emissions to the atmosphere can be avoided by ceasing logging. Removals of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere can be increased by allowing forests to continue growing. However, the relative benefits for carbon storage of managing native forests for wood production versus protection are contested. Additionally, the potential for carbon storage is impacted upon by disturbance events, such as wildfire, that alter the amount and longevity of carbon stocks.
    Using a case study of montane ash forests in southeastern Australia, we demonstrated that the total biomass carbon stock in logged forest was 55% of the stock in old growth forest. Total biomass included above- and belowground, living and dead. Biomass carbon stock was calculated spatially as an average across the landscape, accounting for variation in environmental conditions and forest age distribution. Reduction in carbon stock in logged forest was due to 66% of the initial biomass being made into products with short lifetimes (,3 years), and to the lower average age of logged forest (,50 years compared with .100 years in old growth forest). Only 4% of the initial carbon stock in the native forest was converted to sawn timber products with lifetimes of 30–90 years.
    Carbon stocks are depleted in a harvested forest system compared with an old growth forest, even when storage in wood products and landfill are included. We estimated that continued logging under current plans represented a loss of 5.56 Tg C over 5 years in the area logged (824 km2), compared with a potential gain of 5.18–6.05 TgC over 5 years by allowing continued growth across the montane ash forest region (2326 km2). Avoiding emissions by not logging native forests and allowing them to continue growing is therefore an important form of carbon sequestration. The mitigation value of forest management options of protection versus logging should be assessed in terms of the amount, longevity and resilience of the carbon stored in the forest, rather than the annual rate of carbon uptake.
    Managing temperate forests for carbon storage (2014).pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    By Don Heppner, Alex Woods, Jennifer Burleigh, Harry Kope and Lorraine Maclauchlan
    The current, historically unprecedented outbreaks of mountain pine beetle and Dothistroma needle blight in British Columbia are strong indicators that relationships between pests, hosts and climate are being altered as climate changes. Numerous recent pest epidemics elsewhere in North America provide further strong evidence of the impact of changing climate on forest ecosystems.
    The interactions between pests, hosts and climate are complex, have co-evolved over centuries, and in many instances, are not well understood. This, together with the uncertainty associated with how regional climates will change, makes it difficult to predict the responses of specific pests to climate change. However, as climate changes, the environmental parameters under which present forests were established will change. When these changes result in increasingly sub-optimal conditions, trees will become physiologically stressed. Stressed trees are generally more attractive, more nutritious, and less resistant to many forest pests. Changes in thermal and moisture environments, combined with changes to host plant conditions, will interact synergistically facilitating the development of insect and pathogen outbreaks. The incidence of forest decline syndromes is also likely to increase as a result of general reductions in forest health.
    Large scale, pest-caused forest decline and mortality will have long-term ecological, social and economic consequences. Timber supplies, water resources as well as other forest resources will be impacted. We anticipate increasing levels of mortality in the standing inventory in many Timber Supply Areas in the province as a result of forest pest activity. Much of the immature growing stock will also be affected by increasing levels of pest-caused mortality, growth losses and regeneration delays. Although the mountain pine beetle epidemic represents a current extreme, in many Timber Supply Areas it is possible that the combined impacts of multiple pests under the influence of climate change could approach a similar magnitude of impact on the remaining timber resource.
    Although there is still much uncertainty regarding the severity and extent of climate change, there are strategies, which could be implemented to mitigate the impacts on forest health. We provide concise recommendations that would better track changing forest health conditions, increase our ability to forecast pest related impacts of climate change, increase the effectiveness of forest planning by proactively incorporating forest health issues and improve our abilities to prevent, mitigate and adapt to changing forest pest conditions. The unprecedented and concurrent outbreaks of insects and diseases in BC emphasize the need to expedite an action plan on the following nine recommendations of equal importance:
    1. Mandate expanded forest health monitoring for forest health agents at the landscape, watershed and stand level, as a component of ministry responsibility;
    2. Build a forest health research section;
    3. Implement modelling projects to predict future forest health impacts;
    4. Maintain forest health strategies and develop climate change risk assessments for each Timber Supply Area;
    5. Review and revise legislation and policy to identify forest health risks and strategies within forest stewardship plans;
    6. Institute landscape-level planning for forest health, as well as for other values;
    7. Develop and implement hazard- and risk-rating systems for forest insects and diseases;
    8. Implement changes to tree species selection and stocking standards to enable facilitated migration;
    9. Enable the research and development of products and tactics for the treatment of forest insects and diseases.
    The management of forest lands has clearly become more challenging as a result of climate change. We believe that our current forest management paradigm, which assumes stable climates and stable forest conditions, could be improved to better cope with highly uncertain future forest conditions. Forest management needs to respond and adapt to accommodate the diverse and innovative practices we will require to manage our forests into the future.
    (2009) The Implications of Climate Change to Forest Health in British Columbia-A Report to the Chief Forester.pdf

    Evergreen Alliance Staff
    A report from the IVEY Foundation and the Canadian Boreal Initiative
    Canada is a country of forests. We have the world’s largest intact forest area in our northern boreal and our temperate and mountain forests contain biodiversity, climate control and economic values that are globally significant.
    Climate change will, and is, having a profound impact on these forest ecosystems. Many impacts, such as increases in average temperature and seasonal shifts, are happening in a more compressed timeframe than originally projected by climate scientists. Insect outbreaks, such as the mountain pine beetle, are occurring at a scale that was unimagined ten years ago and some scientists are beginning to warn that many ecosystems may have a “tipping point” beyond which their resilience will be overcome and completely new ecosystems will replace them. Clearly climate strategies in Canada must include those that address the role of this massive and globally significant forest asset.
    In parallel to these changes in the natural world, society is rapidly accelerating its discussions concerning how to mitigate against rising carbon emissions and climate change impacts. As a result governments, business and civil society are accelerating discussions concerning how to develop an effective mechanism to reduce carbon emissions. Strategies under development include an abundance of voluntary, and a few regulatory, frameworks. While none are identical, many of them contain carbon trading measures that would enable transfers of money from emitters to entities that could sequester or reduce the net rate of carbon emissions. Most of these systems include forests.
    In Canada there is a need to grapple with this emerging market and determine how it can be influenced and directed in a manner that supports the carbon storage and sequestration capacity of forests and conserves forest biodiversity, while helping to reduces our total country-wide carbon emissions (not just those of forests). How to do this involves a strategic discussion among leading advocates for policy reform. It is only in this way that we can arrive at a consensus on the key elements of a carbon reduction strategy that includes forests and a plan to secure the outcomes we seek.
    (2007) Forest Carbon sequestration and avoided emissions.pdf

  • Create New...