Alpha 2.0
Login Register
» Articles » PMID: 17459169

Carbon Stock Growth in a Forest Stand: the Power of Age

Overview
Journal Carbon Balance Manag
Date 2007 Apr 27
PMID 17459169
Citations 4
Authors
Georgii A Alexandrov
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Understanding the relationship between the age of a forest stand and its biomass is essential for managing the forest component of the global carbon cycle. Since biomass increases with stand age, postponing harvesting to the age of biological maturity may result in the formation of a large carbon sink. This article quantifies the carbon sequestration capacity of forests by suggesting a default rule to link carbon stock and stand age.

Results: The age dependence of forest biomass is shown to be a power-law monomial where the power of age is theoretically estimated to be 4/5. This theoretical estimate is close to the known empirical estimate; therefore, it provides a scientific basis for a quick and transparent assessment of the benefits of postponing the harvest, suggesting that the annual magnitude of the sink induced by delayed harvest lies in the range of 1-2% of the baseline carbon stock.

Conclusion: The results of this study imply that forest age could be used as an easily understood and scientifically sound measure of the progress in complying with national targets on the protection and enhancement of forest carbon sinks.

Citing Articles

Advancing forest carbon projections requires improved convergence between ecological and economic models.

Fuller M, Ganjam M, Baker J, Abt R Carbon Balance Manag. 2025; 20(1):2.

PMID: 39792318 PMC: 11721258. DOI: 10.1186/s13021-024-00290-0.

Allometric models and aboveground biomass stocks of a West African Sudan Savannah watershed in Benin.

Chabi A, Lautenbach S, Orekan V, Kyei-Baffour N Carbon Balance Manag. 2016; 11(1):16.

PMID: 27594897 PMC: 4989002. DOI: 10.1186/s13021-016-0058-5.

Riparian land-use and rehabilitation: impact on organic matter input and soil respiration.

Oelbermann M, Raimbault B, Gordon A Environ Manage. 2014; 55(2):496-507.

PMID: 25432450 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-014-0410-z.

Carbon storage of headwater riparian zones in an agricultural landscape.

Rheinhardt R, Brinson M, Meyer G, Miller K Carbon Balance Manag. 2012; 7:4.

PMID: 22333213 PMC: 3298783. DOI: 10.1186/1750-0680-7-4.

Normative productivity of the global vegetation.

Alexandrov G, Matsunaga T Carbon Balance Manag. 2008; 3:8.

PMID: 19108718 PMC: 2654439. DOI: 10.1186/1750-0680-3-8.

References
1.
Chambers J, Higuchi N, Tribuzy E, Trumbore S . Carbon sink for a century. Nature. 2001; 410(6827):429. DOI: 10.1038/35068624. View
2.
Obersteiner M, Azar C, Kauppi P, Mollersten K, Moreira J, Nilsson S . Managing climate risk. Science. 2001; 294(5543):786-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.294.5543.786b. View
3.
Schulze D, Wirth C, Heimann M . Climate change. Managing forests after Kyoto. Science. 2000; 289(5487):2058-9. DOI: 10.1126/science.289.5487.2058. View
4.
Kindermann G, Obersteiner M, Rametsteiner E, McCallum I . Predicting the deforestation-trend under different carbon-prices. Carbon Balance Manag. 2006; 1:15. PMC: 1766350. DOI: 10.1186/1750-0680-1-15. View
5.
Birdsey R . Carbon accounting rules and guidelines for the United States forest sector. J Environ Qual. 2006; 35(4):1518-24. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2005.0193. View