Advertisement

Maintaining and Enhancing Ecological Carbon Sequestration

  • Bill FreedmanEmail author
Reference work entry
Part of the Handbook of Global Environmental Pollution book series (EGEP, volume 1)

Abstract

Terrestrial ecosystems sequester large amounts of organic carbon (C) in their pools of living and dead biomass. Management actions that increase C uptake and storage in ecological C pools, or that reduce C release from them, contribute to a society’s climate change mitigation objectives. They do this by reducing the rate of accumulation of CO2 and its radiative equivalents in other greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere. Trading systems for GHG credits recognize the validity of ecological offset projects that result in increased C storage in the living and/or dead organic matter of ecosystems. In some circumstances, projects that reduce C release from existing high-C ecosystems are also considered to provide legitimate offsets. Some ecological carbon-offset projects have been criticized from a variety of perspectives, but the problems can mostly be dealt with by means of improved regulations and management actions. In addition to their contribution to climate change mitigation, projects that maintain or accumulate ecological carbon offsets often result in important co-benefits through the conservation of biodiversity and non-carbon environmental services, which are also important societal goals. The co-benefits are, however, much less substantial for projects based on intensively managed ecosystems, such as no-till agroecosystems and plantation forests, compared with those that restore or maintain habitats that are more natural in character.

Keywords

Carbon sequestration (storage) Ecological sequestration Biomass, organic matter Forest Grassland Wetlands Greenhouse gas offsets Climate-change mitigation Biodiversity 

References

  1. Bonnie R, Carey M, Petsonk A (2002) Protecting terrestrial ecosystems and the climate through a global carbon market. Phil Trans R Soc Lond A 360:1853–1873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bridgham SD, Megonigal JP, Keller JK, Bliss NB, Trettin C (2006) The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Canadell JG, Le Quere C, Raupach MR, Field CB, Buitenhuis ET, Ciais P, Conway TJ, Gillett NP, Houghton RA, Marland G (2007) Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks. PNAS 104(47):18866–18870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conant RT, Paustian K, Elliott ET (2001) Grassland management and conversion into grassland: effects on soil carbon. Ecol Appl 11:343–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dembo R, Davidson C (2007) Everything you wanted to know about offsetting but were afraid to ask. Zerofootprint. http://zerofootprint.net/pdf/Everything_Zero_May30.pdf. Accessed Feb 2011
  6. Derner JD, Boutton TW, Briske DW (2006) Grazing and ecosystem carbon storage in the North American Great Plains. Plant Soil 280:77–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ehhalt D, Prather M, Dentener F, Dlugokencky E, Holland E, Isaksen L, Katima J, Kirchhoff V, Matson P, Midgley P, Wang M (2001) Atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases. In: Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, Van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 239–287Google Scholar
  8. Fleming TL, Freedman B (1998) Conversion of natural, mixed-species forests to conifer plantations: implications for dead organic matter and carbon storage. Ecoscience 5:213–221Google Scholar
  9. Freedman B, Keith T (1996) Planting trees for carbon credits. A discussion of context, issues, feasibility, and environmental benefits, with particular attention to Canada. Environ Rev 4:100–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Freedman B, Stinson G, Lacoul P (2009) Carbon credits and the conservation of natural areas. Environ Rev 17:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gorham E, Janssens JA, Glaser PH (2003) Rates of peat accumulation during the postglacial period in 32 sites from Alaska to Newfoundland, with special emphasis on northern Minnesota. Can J Bot 81:429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P, Gregory SV, Lattin JD, Anderson NH, Cline SP, Aumen NG, Sedell JR, Lienkaemper GW, Cromack K, Cummins KW (1986) Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Adv Ecol Res 15:133–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Houghton RA (2003) Revised estimates of the annual net flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1850–2000. Tellus B 55:378–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Houghton RA, Hackler JL, Lawrence KT (1999) The U.S. Carbon budget: contributions from land-use change. Science 285:574–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. IPCC (2000) Land use, land-use change, and forestry. A special report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. IPCC (2007a) Climate change 2007: mitigation of climate change. In: Metz B, Davidson O, Bosch P, Dave R, Meyer L (eds) Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. IPCC (2007b) Methodology reports. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/guide.htm. Accessed Sep 2007
  18. Kapoor K, Ambrosi P (2010) State and trends of the carbon market 2010. Carbon Finance at The World Bank, The World Bank, Washington, DC. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCARBONFINANCE/Resources/State_and_Trends_of_the_Carbon_Market_2010_low_res.pdf. Accessed Feb 2011
  19. Kurz WA, Dymond CC, Stinson G, Rampley GJ, Neilson ET, Carroll AL, Ebata T, Safranyik L (2008) Mountain pine beetle and forest carbon feedback to climate change. Nature 452:987–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leith H (1975) Primary productivity of the major vegetation units of the world. In: Leith H, Whittaker RH (eds) Primary productivity of the biosphere. Springer, New York, pp 203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maltby E, Immirzi CP (1993) Carbon dynamics in peatlands and other wetland soils–regional and global perspectives. Chemosphere 27:999–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Myneni RB, Dong J, Tucker CJ, Kaufmann RK, Kauppi PE, Liski J, Zhou L, Alexeyev V, Hughes MK (2001) A large carbon sink in the woody biomass of Northern forests. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 98:14784–14789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pacala S, Socolow R (2004) Stabilization wedges: solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Science 305:968–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pearson TRH, Brown SL, Birdsey RA (2007) Measurement guidelines for the sequestration of forest carbon. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, General Technical Report NRS-18. Newtown SquareGoogle Scholar
  25. Raupach MR, Canadell JG (2010) Carbon and the anthropocene. Curr Opin Environ Sustainability 2:210–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K et al (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sandor RL, Bettelheim EC, Swingland IR (2002) An overview of the free-market approach to climate change and conservation. Phil Trans R Soc Lond A 360:1607–1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stinson G, Freedman B (2001) Potential for carbon sequestration in Canadian forests and agroecosystems. Miti Adapt Strat Global Change 6:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stinson G, Kurz WA, Smyth CE, Neilson ET, Dymond CC, Metsaranta JM, Boisvenue C, Rampley GJ, Li Q, White TM, Blain D (2011) An inventory-based analysis of Canada’s managed forest carbon dynamics, 1990–2008. Global Change Biol. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02369.xGoogle Scholar
  30. Trofymow JA, Stinson G, Kurz WA (2008) Derivation of a spatially explicit 86-year retrospective landscape-level forest carbon budget for the Oyster River area of Vancouver Island, BC. For Eco Manage 256:1677–1691Google Scholar
  31. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Conference of the Parties, Third Session (1997) Kyoto protocol to the United nations framework convention on climate change, FCCC/CP/1997/L.7/Add.1Google Scholar
  32. United Nations. 1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. UN, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. WBCSD and WRI (2007) Greenhouse protocol initiative. Towards a common standard for business reporting on greenhouse gas emissions. World Business Council for Sustainable Development and the World Resources Institute. http://www.ghgprotocol.org/templates/GHG5/layout.asp?MenuID=849. Accessed Sept 2007
  34. Whittaker RH, Likens GE (1973) Carbon in the biota. In: Woodwell GM, Pecan EV (eds) Carbon and the biosphere. National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, pp 281–302Google Scholar
  35. World Bank (2010) Global carbon market grows to $144 Billion despite financial and economic turmoil. Press Release 26 May 2010. The World Bank, Washington, DC. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCARBONFINANCE/Resources/State_and_Trends_2010_final.pdf. Accessed Feb 2011

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations