Will U.S. Forests Continue to Be a Carbon Sink?

Maximizing carbon sequestration potential in Chinese forests through optimal management

Forest carbon sequestration capacity in China remains uncertain due to underrepresented tree demographic dynamics and overlooked of harvest impacts. In this study, we employ a process-based biogeochemical model to make projections by using national forest inventories, covering approximately 415,000 permanent plots, revealing an expansion in biomass carbon stock by 13.6 ± 1.5 Pg C from 2020 to 2100, with additional sink through augmentation of wood product pool (0.6-2.0 Pg C) and spatiotemporal optimization of forest management (2.3 ± 0.03 Pg C). We find that statistical model might cause large bias in long-term projection due to underrepresentation or neglect of wood harvest and forest demographic changes. Remarkably, disregarding the repercussions of harvesting on forest age can result in a premature shift in the timing of the carbon sink peak by 1-3 decades. Our findings emphasize the pressing necessity for the swift implementation of optimal forest management strategies for carbon sequestration enhancement.

Near-term investments in forest management support long-term carbon sequestration capacity in forests of the United States

The forest carbon sink of the United States offsets emissions in other sectors. Recently passed US laws include important climate legislation for wildfire reduction, forest restoration, and forest planting. In this study, we examine how wildfire reduction strategies and planting might alter the forest carbon sink. Our results suggest that wildfire reduction strategies reduce carbon sequestration potential in the near term but provide a longer term benefit. Planting initiatives increase carbon sequestration but at levels that do not offset lost sequestration from wildfire reduction strategies. We conclude that recent legislation may increase near-term carbon emissions due to fuel treatments and reduced wildfire frequency and intensity, and expand long-term US carbon sink strength.

Projecting U.S. forest management, market, and carbon sequestration responses to a high-impact climate scenario

The impact of climate change on forest ecosystems remains uncertain, with wide variation in potential climate impacts across different radiative forcing scenarios and global circulation models, as well as potential variation in forest productivity impacts across species and regions. This study uses an empirical forest composition model to estimate the impact of climate factors (temperature and precipitation) and other environmental parameters on forest productivity for 94 forest species across the conterminous United States. The composition model is linked to a dynamic optimization model of the U.S. forestry sector to quantify economic impacts of a high warming scenario (Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5) under six alternative climate projections and two socioeconomic scenarios. Results suggest that forest market impacts and consumer impacts could range from relatively large losses (-$2.6 billion) to moderate gain ($0.2 billion) per year across climate scenarios. Temperature-induced higher mortality and lower productivity for some forest types and scenarios, coupled with increasing economic demands for forest products, result in forest inventory losses by end of century relative to the current climate baseline (3%-23%). Lower inventories and reduced carbon sequestration capacity result in additional economic losses of up to approximately $4.1 billion per year. However, our results also highlight important adaptation mechanisms, such forest type changes and shifts in regional mill capacity that could reduce the impact of high impact climate scenarios.

How the future of the global forest sink depends on timber demand, forest management, and carbon policies

Deforestation has contributed significantly to net greenhouse gas emissions, but slowing deforestation, regrowing forests and other ecosystem processes have made forests a net sink. Deforestation will still influence future carbon fluxes, but the role of forest growth through aging, management, and other silvicultural inputs on future carbon fluxes are critically important but not always recognized by bookkeeping and integrated assessment models. When projecting the future, it is vital to capture how management processes affect carbon storage in ecosystems and wood products. This study uses multiple global forest sector models to project forest carbon impacts across 81 shared socioeconomic (SSP) and climate mitigation pathway scenarios. We illustrate the importance of modeling management decisions in existing forests in response to changing demands for land resources, wood products and carbon. Although the models vary in key attributes, there is general agreement across a majority of scenarios that the global forest sector could remain a carbon sink in the future, sequestering 1.2-5.8 GtCO2e/yr over the next century. Carbon fluxes in the baseline scenarios that exclude climate mitigation policy ranged from -0.8 to 4.9 GtCO2e/yr, highlighting the strong influence of SSPs on forest sector model estimates. Improved forest management can jointly increase carbon stocks and harvests without expanding forest area, suggesting that carbon fluxes from managed forests systems deserve more careful consideration by the climate policy community.

Projecting the Impact of Socioeconomic and Policy Factors on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Carbon Sequestration in U.S. Forestry and Agriculture

Understanding greenhouse gas mitigation potential of the U.S. agriculture and forest sectors is critical for evaluating potential pathways to limit global average temperatures from rising more than 2° C. Using the FASOMGHG model, parameterized to reflect varying conditions across shared socioeconomic pathways, we project the greenhouse gas mitigation potential from U.S. agriculture and forestry across a range of carbon price scenarios. Under a moderate price scenario ($20 per ton CO2 with a 3% annual growth rate), cumulative mitigation potential over 2015-2055 varies substantially across SSPs, from 8.3 to 17.7 GtCO2e. Carbon sequestration in forests contributes the majority, 64-71%, of total mitigation across both sectors. We show that under a high income and population growth scenario over 60% of the total projected increase in forest carbon is driven by growth in demand for forest products, while mitigation incentives result in the remainder. This research sheds light on the interactions between alternative socioeconomic narratives and mitigation policy incentives which can help prioritize outreach, investment, and targeted policies for reducing emissions from and storing more carbon in these land use systems.

Land-based measures to mitigate climate change: Potential and feasibility by country

Land-based climate mitigation measures have gained significant attention and importance in public and private sector climate policies. Building on previous studies, we refine and update the mitigation potentials for 20 land-based measures in >200 countries and five regions, comparing "bottom-up" sectoral estimates with integrated assessment models (IAMs). We also assess implementation feasibility at the country level. Cost-effective (available up to $100/tCO₂ eq) land-based mitigation is 8-13.8 GtCO₂ eq yr^-1 between 2020 and 2050, with the bottom end of this range representing the IAM median and the upper end representing the sectoral estimate. The cost-effective sectoral estimate is about 40% of available technical potential and is in line with achieving a 1.5°C pathway in 2050. Compared to technical potentials, cost-effective estimates represent a more realistic and actionable target for policy. The cost-effective potential is approximately 50% from forests and other ecosystems, 35% from agriculture, and 15% from demand-side measures. The potential varies sixfold across the five regions assessed (0.75-4.8 GtCO2eq yr^-1 ) and the top 15 countries account for about 60% of the global potential. Protection of forests and other ecosystems and demand-side measures present particularly high mitigation efficiency, high provision of co-benefits, and relatively lower costs. The feasibility assessment suggests that governance, economic investment, and socio-cultural conditions influence the likelihood that land-based mitigation potentials are realized. A substantial portion of potential (80%) is in developing countries and LDCs, where feasibility barriers are of greatest concern. Assisting countries to overcome barriers may result in significant quantities of near-term, low-cost mitigation while locally achieving important climate adaptation and development benefits. Opportunities among countries vary widely depending on types of land-based measures available, their potential co-benefits and risks, and their feasibility. Enhanced investments and country-specific plans that accommodate this complexity are urgently needed to realize the large global potential from improved land stewardship.

The economic costs of planting, preserving, and managing the world's forests to mitigate climate change

Forests are critical for stabilizing our climate, but costs of mitigation over space, time, and stakeholder group remain uncertain. Using the Global Timber Model, we project mitigation potential and costs for four abatement activities across 16 regions for carbon price scenarios of $5-$100/tCO2. We project 0.6-6.0 GtCO2 yr-1 in global mitigation by 2055 at costs of 2-393 billion USD yr-1, with avoided tropical deforestation comprising 30-54% of total mitigation. Higher prices incentivize larger mitigation proportions via rotation and forest management activities in temperate and boreal biomes. Forest area increases 415-875 Mha relative to the baseline by 2055 at prices $35-$100/tCO2, with intensive plantations comprising <7% of this increase. Mitigation costs borne by private land managers comprise less than one-quarter of total costs. For forests to contribute ~10% of mitigation needed to limit global warming to 1.5 °C, carbon prices will need to reach $281/tCO2 in 2055.

Forests: Carbon sequestration, biomass energy, or both?

There is a continuing debate over the role that woody bioenergy plays in climate mitigation. This paper clarifies this controversy and illustrates the impacts of woody biomass demand on forest harvests, prices, timber management investments and intensity, forest area, and the resulting carbon balance under different climate mitigation policies. Increased bioenergy demand increases forest carbon stocks thanks to afforestation activities and more intensive management relative to a no-bioenergy case. Some natural forests, however, are converted to more intensive management, with potential biodiversity losses. Incentivizing both wood-based bioenergy and forest sequestration could increase carbon sequestration and conserve natural forests simultaneously. We conclude that the expanded use of wood for bioenergy will result in net carbon benefits, but an efficient policy also needs to regulate forest carbon sequestration.

The Influence of Parametric Uncertainty on Projections of Forest Land Use, Carbon, and Markets

This paper uses Monte Carlo methods and regression analysis to assess the role of uncertainty in yield function and land supply elasticity parameters on land use, carbon, and market outcomes in a long-term dynamic model of the global forest sector. The results suggest that parametric uncertainty has little influence on projected future timber prices and global output, but it does have important implications for regional projections of outputs. A wide range of outcomes are possible for timber outputs, depending on growth and elasticity parameters. Timber output in the U.S., for instance, could change by -67 to +98 million m³ per year by 2060. Despite uncertainty in the parameters, our analysis suggests that the temperate zone may sequester +30 to +79 Pg C by 2060 and +58 to +114 Pg C by 2090 while the tropics are projected to store -35 to +70 Pg C and -33 to +73 Pg C for the same time periods, respectively. Attributional analysis shows that uncertainty in the parameters regulating forest growth has a more important impact on projections of future carbon storage than uncertainty in the land supply elasticity parameters. Moreover, the results suggest that understanding growth parameters in regions with large current carbon stocks is most important for making future projections of carbon storage.

Importance of Cross-Sector Interactions When Projecting Forest Carbon across Alternative Socioeconomic Futures

In recent decades, the carbon sink provided by the U.S. forest sector has offset a sizable portion of domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In the future, the magnitude of this sink has important implications not only for projected U.S. net GHG emissions under a reference case but also for the cost of achieving a given mitigation target. The larger the contribution of the forest sector towards reducing net GHG emissions, the less mitigation is needed from other sectors. Conversely, if the forest sector begins to contribute a smaller sink, or even becomes a net source, mitigation requirements from other sectors may need to become more stringent and costlier to achieve economy wide emissions targets. There is acknowledged uncertainty in estimates of the carbon sink provided by the U.S. forest sector, attributable to large ranges in the projections of, among other things, future economic conditions, population growth, policy implementation, and technological advancement. We examined these drivers in the context of an economic model of the agricultural and forestry sectors, to demonstrate the importance of cross-sector interactions on projections of emissions and carbon sequestration. Using this model, we compared detailed scenarios that differ in their assumptions of demand for agriculture and forestry products, trade, rates of (sub)urbanization, and limits on timber harvest on protected lands. We found that a scenario assuming higher demand and more trade for forest products resulted in increased forest growth and larger net GHG sequestration, while a scenario featuring higher agricultural demand, ceteris paribus led to forest land conversion and increased anthropogenic emissions. Importantly, when high demand scenarios are implemented conjunctively, agricultural sector emissions under a high income-growth world with increased livestock-product demand are fully displaced by substantial GHG sequestration from the forest sector with increased forest product demand. This finding highlights the potential limitations of single-sector modeling approaches that ignore important interaction effects between sectors.

Potential complementarity between forest carbon sequestration incentives and biomass energy expansion

There is a growing literature on the potential contributions the global forest sector could make toward long-term climate action goals through increased carbon sequestration and the provision of biomass for energy generation. However, little work to date has explored possible interactions between carbon sequestration incentives and bioenergy expansion policies in forestry. This study develops a simple conceptual model for evaluating whether carbon sequestration and biomass energy policies are carbon complements or substitutes. Then, we apply a dynamic structural model of the global forest sector to assess terrestrial carbon changes under different combinations of carbon sequestration price incentives and forest bioenergy expansion. Our results show that forest bioenergy expansion can complement carbon sequestration policies in the near- and medium-term, reducing marginal abatement costs and increasing mitigation potential. By the end of the century these policies become substitutes, with forest bioenergy expansion increasing the costs of carbon sequestration. This switch is driven by relatively high demand and price growth for pulpwood under scenarios with forest bioenergy expansion, which incentivizes management changes in the near- and medium-term that are carbon beneficial (e.g., afforestation and intensive margin shifts), but requires sustained increases in pulpwood harvest levels over the long-term.

Projecting the Spatial Distribution of Possible Planted Forest Expansion in the United States

As the demand for forest products and carbon storage in standing timbers increases, intensive planting of forest resources is expected to increase. With the increased use of plantation practices, it is important to understand the influence that forest plot characteristics have on the likelihood of where these practices are occurring. Depending on the goals of a policy or program, increasing forest planting could be a desirable outcome or something to avoid. This study estimates a spatially explicit logistical regression function to assess the likelihood that forest plots will be planted based on physical, climate, and economic factors. The empirical results are used to project the potential spatial distribution of forest planting, at the intensive and extensive land-use margins, across illustrative future scenarios. Results from this analysis offer insight into the factors that have driven forest planting in the United States historically and the potential distribution of new forest planting in the coming decades under policy or market scenarios that incentivize improved forest productivity or certain ecosystem services provided by intensively managed systems (e.g., carbon sequestration).

Implications of Alternative Land Conversion Cost Specifications on Projected Afforestation Potential in the United States

The Forestry and Agriculture Sector Optimization Model with Greenhouse Gases (FASOMGHG) has historically relied on regional average costs of land conversion to simulate land use change across cropland, pasture, rangeland, and forestry. This assumption limits the accuracy of the land conversion estimates by not recognizing spatial heterogeneity in land quality and conversion costs. Using data from Nielsen et al. (2014), we obtained the afforestation cost per county, then estimated nonparametric regional marginal cost functions for land converting to forestry. These afforestation costs were then incorporated into FASOMGHG. Three different assumptions for land moving into the forest sector (constant average conversion cost, static rising marginal costs, and dynamic rising marginal cost) were run in order to assess the implications of alternative land conversion cost assumptions on key outcomes, such as projected forest area and cropland use, carbon sequestration, and forest product output.

Cumulative global forest carbon implications of regional bioenergy expansion policies

Several previous studies have evaluated the potential greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits of forest biomass energy relative to fossil fuel equivalents over different spatial scales and time frames and applying a variety of methodologies. This paper contributes to this literature through an analysis of multiple projected sources of biomass demand growth in different regions of the world using a detailed intertemporal optimization model of the global forest sector. Given the range of current policies incentivizing bioenergy expansion globally, evaluating the combined global implications of regional bioenergy expansion efforts is critical for understanding the extent to which renewable energy supplied from forest biomass can contribute to various policy goals (including GHG emissions mitigation). Unlike previous studies that have been more regionally focused, this study provides a global perspective, illustrating how large potential demand increases for forest biomass in one or multiple regions can alter future forest management trends, markets, and forest carbon sequestration in key timber supply regions. Results show that potential near term (2015-2030) biomass demand growth in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere can drive forest resource investment at the intensive and extensive margins, resulting in a net increase in forest carbon stocks for most regions of the world. When the reallocation of biomass away from traditional pulp and sawtimber markets is accounted for, net forest carbon sequestration increases (that stored on the land and in wood products) by 9.4 billion tons CO2 over the near term and 15.4 billion tons CO2 by 2095. Even if most of the increased forest biomass demand arises from one region (e.g., Europe) due to a particularly strong promotion of forest bioenergy expansion, changes in forest management globally in anticipation of this demand increase could result in carbon beneficial outcomes that can be shared by most regions.