From Sink to Source: Regional Variation in U.S. Forest Carbon Futures

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2015 Nov 13

PMID 26558439

Citations 23

Authors

David N Wear

John W Coulston

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The sequestration of atmospheric carbon (C) in forests has partially offset C emissions in the United States (US) and might reduce overall costs of achieving emission targets, especially while transportation and energy sectors are transitioning to lower-carbon technologies. Using detailed forest inventory data for the conterminous US, we estimate forests' current net sequestration of atmospheric C to be 173 Tg yr(-1), offsetting 9.7% of C emissions from transportation and energy sources. Accounting for multiple driving variables, we project a gradual decline in the forest C emission sink over the next 25 years (to 112 Tg yr(-1)) with regional differences. Sequestration in eastern regions declines gradually while sequestration in the Rocky Mountain region declines rapidly and could become a source of atmospheric C due to disturbances such as fire and insect epidemics. C sequestration in the Pacific Coast region stabilizes as forests harvested in previous decades regrow. Scenarios simulating climate-induced productivity enhancement and afforestation policies increase sequestration rates, but would not fully offset declines from aging and forest disturbances. Separating C transfers associated with land use changes from sequestration clarifies forests' role in reducing net emissions and demonstrates that retention of forest land is crucial for protecting or enhancing sink strength.

Citing Articles

Investing in U.S. forests to mitigate climate change.

Favero A, Baker J, Sohngen B, Daigneault A, Wade C, Ohrel S Carbon Balance Manag. 2025; 20(1):4.

PMID: 40064712 PMC: 11895230. DOI: 10.1186/s13021-025-00292-6.

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.

Land-use change, no-net-loss policies, and effects on carbon dioxide removals.

Wear D, Wibbenmeyer M Carbon Balance Manag. 2024; 19(1):40.

PMID: 39630338 PMC: 11619289. DOI: 10.1186/s13021-024-00287-9.

US land sector mitigation investments and emissions implications.

Favero A, Wade C, Cai Y, Ohrel S, Baker J, Creason J Nat Commun. 2024; 15(1):9625.

PMID: 39511151 PMC: 11543690. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-53915-w.

Geographic variation in projected US forest aboveground carbon responses to climate change and atmospheric deposition.

Reese A, Clark C, Phelan J, Buckley J, Cajka J, Sabo R Environ Res Lett. 2024; 19:1-12.

PMID: 38752201 PMC: 11091792. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ad2739.

References

Fang J, Kato T, Guo Z, Yang Y, Hu H, Shen H . Evidence for environmentally enhanced forest growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014; 111(26):9527-32. PMC: 4084460. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1402333111. View

Lawler J, Lewis D, Nelson E, Plantinga A, Polasky S, Withey J . Projected land-use change impacts on ecosystem services in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014; 111(20):7492-7. PMC: 4034212. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1405557111. View

Schimel D, Melillo J, Tian H, Mcguire A, Kicklighter D, Kittel T . Contribution of increasing CO2 and climate to carbon storage by ecosystems in the United States. Science. 2000; 287(5460):2004-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.287.5460.2004. View

Coulston J, Wear D, Vose J . Complex forest dynamics indicate potential for slowing carbon accumulation in the southeastern United States. Sci Rep. 2015; 5:8002. PMC: 4303866. DOI: 10.1038/srep08002. View

Hurtt G, Pacala S, Moorcroft P, Caspersen J, Shevliakova E, Houghton R . Projecting the future of the U.S. carbon sink. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99(3):1389-94. PMC: 122200. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.012249999. View

Smith J, Heath L . Carbon stocks and projections on public forestlands in the United States, 1952-2040. Environ Manage. 2004; 33(4):433-42. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-003-9101-x. View

Jackson R, Schlesinger W . Curbing the U.S. carbon deficit. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101(45):15827-9. PMC: 528743. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0403631101. View

McCarthy H, Oren R, Finzi A, Johnsen K . Canopy leaf area constrains [CO2]-induced enhancement of productivity and partitioning among aboveground carbon pools. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006; 103(51):19356-61. PMC: 1748230. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0609448103. View

Schimel D . Carbon cycle conundrums. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104(47):18353-4. PMC: 2141782. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0709331104. View

10.

Kurz W, Stinson G, Rampley G, Dymond C, Neilson E . Risk of natural disturbances makes future contribution of Canada's forests to the global carbon cycle highly uncertain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(5):1551-5. PMC: 2234182. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0708133105. View

11.

Kurz W, Dymond C, Stinson G, Rampley G, Neilson E, Carroll A . Mountain pine beetle and forest carbon feedback to climate change. Nature. 2008; 452(7190):987-90. DOI: 10.1038/nature06777. View

12.

Purves D, Lichstein J, Strigul N, Pacala S . Predicting and understanding forest dynamics using a simple tractable model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(44):17018-22. PMC: 2579370. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0807754105. View

13.

Shevliakova E, Stouffer R, Malyshev S, Krasting J, Hurtt G, Pacala S . Historical warming reduced due to enhanced land carbon uptake. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013; 110(42):16730-5. PMC: 3801041. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1314047110. View

14.

Hudiburg T, Luyssaert S, Thornton P, Law B . Interactive effects of environmental change and management strategies on regional forest carbon emissions. Environ Sci Technol. 2013; 47(22):13132-40. DOI: 10.1021/es402903u. View

15.

Zhou D, Liu S, Oeding J, Zhao S . Forest cutting and impacts on carbon in the eastern United States. Sci Rep. 2013; 3:3547. PMC: 6506451. DOI: 10.1038/srep03547. View

16.

Caspersen J, Pacala S, Jenkins J, Hurtt G, Moorcroft P, Birdsey R . Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in U.S. forests. Science. 2000; 290(5494):1148-51. DOI: 10.1126/science.290.5494.1148. View