<p>Join our webinar for an overview of the satellite imagery and resources available on GFW. We will be joined by partners from KSAT and Planet to share how this satellite imagery can help users investigate what’s happening in the world’s forests. <a href="https://wri.zoom.us/webinar/register/7617086143771/WN_8_Q9dGGwQT2mqRpd4LgRZA" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Register here!</a></p>


Investigating Deforestation with Satellite Imagery

Climate

Learn about the role forests play in the global climate.

Climate | Global Forest Watch Blog

Data and Research

GFW is first and foremost a data-driven platform. Read the latest forest research and analysis.

Data and Research | Global Forest Watch Blog

carbon

carbon | Global Forest Watch Blog

climate change

climate change | Global Forest Watch Blog

Emissions

Emissions | Global Forest Watch Blog

IPCC

IPCC | Global Forest Watch Blog

Satellite Imagery

Satellite Imagery | Global Forest Watch Blog

Sequestration

Sequestration | Global Forest Watch Blog

David Gibbs

Nancy Harris

<p><a href="https://gfw.global/2MoRaOl" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">New global maps</a> on GFW provide spatially explicit data on emissions, removals and net carbon fluxes from forests.  Whereas previous models only estimate forest carbon fluxes for entire countries or regions, the 30-meter resolution of this data allows users to consistently analyze carbon dynamics in forests down to the local scale. The study was published last week in <a href="https://rdcu.be/cdY40" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><em>Nature Climate Change</em></a>. Here’s what you need to know about the new data.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">How were the forest carbon flux maps created?</h3>



<p>The new maps on GFW were produced using a groundbreaking new model, which applies the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) <a href="https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2019rf/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">guidelines</a> for national greenhouse gas inventories to high-resolution geospatial data. The inputs to the model include ground, airborne and satellite observations of forest change, disturbances (like deforestation, harvest or burning), and the type, age and condition of forests being lost or gained. </p>



<p>Combining these datasets allows for detailed estimates about how each 30×30 meter piece of forest contributes to global emissions and removals. The maps can be used by researchers to generate national, regional or global-scale estimates of forest carbon fluxes. And thanks to their high resolution, they can also be used by those seeking to monitor local forest carbon dynamics, like Indigenous communities.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Forest carbon flux global map" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forests-global-net-carbon-flux-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">How do GFW’s forest carbon numbers compare to other estimates?</h3>



<p>The <a href="https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/index.htm" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Carbon Project</a> (GCP) is the most frequently cited source of data on land-related emissions, but their estimates do not distinguish among forests, grasslands, croplands or other land types. Given that forests are the largest component of land-based fluxes, this is an important distinction. These new maps isolate carbon moving in and out of forests and improve upon past research in a few significant ways.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">1. Consistent methodology maps everything, regardless of human intervention</h3>



<p>At the end of the day, the atmosphere doesn’t care whether emissions come from human activity or natural causes. If we want to slow climate change, we must monitor and address all forest carbon fluxes. The new data on GFW simplifies carbon monitoring by mapping all observed emissions and removals using a single model. In contrast, the GCP data only reports emissions related to human activity (which can be hard to define) and estimates different components (e.g., emissions versus removals) using different models. The subjectivity and complexity inherent to this approach tends to obscure the role of land in climate change, making it difficult to advocate for and implement land-based mitigation solutions.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Forest carbon flux data models compared" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/21.01.27_GFW-Flux-Model-Explainer_Breakdown-of-Carbon-Flux-Estimates-002.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">2. Maps are derived from remote sensing data</h3>



<p>The new maps on GFW are based on satellite-derived data created using a globally consistent method. As such, the results are comparable at multiple scales, whether you are estimating forest carbon fluxes within a small patch of forest or across an entire region. Both the GCP and <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/333/6045/988" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">some other</a> forest-specific carbon flux estimates combine country-reported forest inventory data and models that simulate vegetation growth, metabolism and death. Different countries use a variety of methods to measure forest carbon, creating inconsistencies when the data is combined. Further, nationally reported data is typically not spatially explicit, which prevents estimation of forest carbon fluxes at sub-national scales.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">3. Emissions and removals can be separated</h3>



<p>The new maps on GFW allow for separate estimates of emissions and removals, as well as the net flux between them. This is because the model uses the University of Maryland’s Global Forest Change data, which includes separate data on how much tree cover has been lost, gained, or remains standing. Previous global forest carbon studies have only provided data on net fluxes, while a few studies have disaggregated emissions and removals for the tropics only. GFW’s high-resolution maps of emissions and removals can help decision-makers prioritize different types of conservation or restoration interventions across landscapes.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">4. The model is designed to be continually improved upon as new data becomes available</h3>



<p>For example, new annual tree cover loss data can be folded into the analysis to keep the numbers up to date. As other data, such as drivers of forest loss or more spatially refined carbon removal rates become available, they can be incorporated as well.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">How should the new forest carbon model be used?</h3>



<p>The new forest carbon maps can be used to complement national forest inventories and satellites directly observing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. The new data’s high resolution, transparent methods, global consistency, and separate accounting of emissions and removals makes it useful for a variety of applications.</p>



<ol type="1"><li>In 2023, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change plans to conduct its first <a href="https://unfccc.int/topics/science/workstreams/global-stocktake-referred-to-in-article-14-of-the-paris-agreement" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Stocktake</a> to assess how the world is doing on its commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. All countries will report their land-related carbon fluxes, which include fluxes from forests. Cross-checking these numbers against transparent and independently derived data like GFW’s will be essential for a robust assessment.</li><li>National governments have <a href="https://www.wri.org/ndcs" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">set targets</a> for reducing their emissions under the Paris Agreement, and land and forest emissions are a critical piece of that. Spatial data can help governments decide where to prioritize projects working towards these targets.</li><li>Companies setting <a href="https://sciencebasedtargets.org/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">science-based targets</a> for reducing emissions need to be able to monitor carbon fluxes on the land they own, lease or source products from. National estimates are too coarse and the quality of the data too varied for companies to adequately understand what’s happening in their supply chains from year to year. The higher spatial resolution of the new maps can help companies diligently track carbon on land in and determine where to intervene.</li><li>These new maps can help non-governmental organizations understand the climate impacts of land management decisions, measure what policies and practices are more or less effective at reducing emissions or increasing sequestration, and monitor the extent to which companies and governments are upholding their commitments.</li></ol>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Monitoring is just the first step</h3>



<p>This is just the beginning of a new framework for monitoring global carbon fluxes on land. In the future, new research will address some of the key limitations of the current estimates by mapping emissions from forest degradation and improved detection of forest expansion, refining the accuracy and timeliness of the resulting data.</p>



<p>Meanwhile, this method for mapping both emissions and removals from forests offers unprecedented detail for better management now. Reducing emissions from deforestation, while also scaling up carbon dioxide removals available from forests, is <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">necessary</a> for staying below 1.5 degrees of warming.</p>



<style type="text/css"></style>

New Global Maps Estimate Forest Carbon Fluxes in Unprecedented Detail

<p><a href="https://gfw.global/2MoRaOl" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">New global maps</a> on GFW provide spatially explicit data on emissions, removals and net carbon fluxes from forests.  Whereas previous models only estimate forest carbon fluxes for entire countries or regions, the 30-meter resolution of this data allows users to consistently analyze carbon dynamics in forests down to the local scale. The study was published last week in <a href="https://rdcu.be/cdY40" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><em>Nature Climate Change</em></a>. Here’s what you need to know about the new data.</p>



<h3>How were the forest carbon flux maps created?</h3>



<p>The new maps on GFW were produced using a groundbreaking new model, which applies the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) <a href="https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2019rf/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">guidelines</a> for national greenhouse gas inventories to high-resolution geospatial data. The inputs to the model include ground, airborne and satellite observations of forest change, disturbances (like deforestation, harvest or burning), and the type, age and condition of forests being lost or gained. </p>



<p>Combining these datasets allows for detailed estimates about how each 30x30 meter piece of forest contributes to global emissions and removals. The maps can be used by researchers to generate national, regional or global-scale estimates of forest carbon fluxes. And thanks to their high resolution, they can also be used by those seeking to monitor local forest carbon dynamics, like Indigenous communities.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Forest carbon flux global map" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forests-global-net-carbon-flux-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3>How do GFW's forest carbon numbers compare to other estimates?</h3>



<p>The <a href="https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/index.htm" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Carbon Project</a> (GCP) is the most frequently cited source of data on land-related emissions, but their estimates do not distinguish among forests, grasslands, croplands or other land types. Given that forests are the largest component of land-based fluxes, this is an important distinction. These new maps isolate carbon moving in and out of forests and improve upon past research in a few significant ways.</p>



<h3>1. Consistent methodology maps everything, regardless of human intervention</h3>



<p>At the end of the day, the atmosphere doesn’t care whether emissions come from human activity or natural causes. If we want to slow climate change, we must monitor and address all forest carbon fluxes. The new data on GFW simplifies carbon monitoring by mapping all observed emissions and removals using a single model. In contrast, the GCP data only reports emissions related to human activity (which can be hard to define) and estimates different components (e.g., emissions versus removals) using different models. The subjectivity and complexity inherent to this approach tends to obscure the role of land in climate change, making it difficult to advocate for and implement land-based mitigation solutions.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Forest carbon flux data models compared" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/21.01.27_GFW-Flux-Model-Explainer_Breakdown-of-Carbon-Flux-Estimates-002.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3>2. Maps are derived from remote sensing data</h3>



<p>The new maps on GFW are based on satellite-derived data created using a globally consistent method. As such, the results are comparable at multiple scales, whether you are estimating forest carbon fluxes within a small patch of forest or across an entire region. Both the GCP and <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/333/6045/988" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">some other</a> forest-specific carbon flux estimates combine country-reported forest inventory data and models that simulate vegetation growth, metabolism and death. Different countries use a variety of methods to measure forest carbon, creating inconsistencies when the data is combined. Further, nationally reported data is typically not spatially explicit, which prevents estimation of forest carbon fluxes at sub-national scales.</p>



<h3>3. Emissions and removals can be separated</h3>



<p>The new maps on GFW allow for separate estimates of emissions and removals, as well as the net flux between them. This is because the model uses the University of Maryland’s Global Forest Change data, which includes separate data on how much tree cover has been lost, gained, or remains standing. Previous global forest carbon studies have only provided data on net fluxes, while a few studies have disaggregated emissions and removals for the tropics only. GFW’s high-resolution maps of emissions and removals can help decision-makers prioritize different types of conservation or restoration interventions across landscapes.</p>



<h3>4. The model is designed to be continually improved upon as new data becomes available</h3>



<p>For example, new annual tree cover loss data can be folded into the analysis to keep the numbers up to date. As other data, such as drivers of forest loss or more spatially refined carbon removal rates become available, they can be incorporated as well.</p>



<h3>How should the new forest carbon model be used?</h3>



<p>The new forest carbon maps can be used to complement national forest inventories and satellites directly observing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. The new data’s high resolution, transparent methods, global consistency, and separate accounting of emissions and removals makes it useful for a variety of applications.</p>



<ol type="1"><li>In 2023, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change plans to conduct its first <a href="https://unfccc.int/topics/science/workstreams/global-stocktake-referred-to-in-article-14-of-the-paris-agreement" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Stocktake</a> to assess how the world is doing on its commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. All countries will report their land-related carbon fluxes, which include fluxes from forests. Cross-checking these numbers against transparent and independently derived data like GFW’s will be essential for a robust assessment.</li><li>National governments have <a href="https://www.wri.org/ndcs" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">set targets</a> for reducing their emissions under the Paris Agreement, and land and forest emissions are a critical piece of that. Spatial data can help governments decide where to prioritize projects working towards these targets.</li><li>Companies setting <a href="https://sciencebasedtargets.org/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">science-based targets</a> for reducing emissions need to be able to monitor carbon fluxes on the land they own, lease or source products from. National estimates are too coarse and the quality of the data too varied for companies to adequately understand what’s happening in their supply chains from year to year. The higher spatial resolution of the new maps can help companies diligently track carbon on land in and determine where to intervene.</li><li>These new maps can help non-governmental organizations understand the climate impacts of land management decisions, measure what policies and practices are more or less effective at reducing emissions or increasing sequestration, and monitor the extent to which companies and governments are upholding their commitments.</li></ol>



<h3>Monitoring is just the first step</h3>



<p>This is just the beginning of a new framework for monitoring global carbon fluxes on land. In the future, new research will address some of the key limitations of the current estimates by mapping emissions from forest degradation and improved detection of forest expansion, refining the accuracy and timeliness of the resulting data.</p>



<p>Meanwhile, this method for mapping both emissions and removals from forests offers unprecedented detail for better management now. Reducing emissions from deforestation, while also scaling up carbon dioxide removals available from forests, is <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">necessary</a> for staying below 1.5 degrees of warming.</p>

What you need to know about how GFW's carbon flux data was created and how it differs from the other estimates out there.

Forest Carbon Flux Data, Explained | Global Forest Watch Blog

Comment

Global Forest Watch Content

https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/gfwGlobal.png

https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/3dc298e411f65b199fc3734919d6934e?s=96&d=mm&r=g

Sarah Ruiz

forestry

forestry | Global Forest Watch Blog

Indigenous lands

Indigenous lands | Global Forest Watch Blog

<p>The world is getting a better understanding of just how important forests are in the global fight against climate change. New research, published in <em><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Farticles%2Fs41558-020-00976-6&data=04%7C01%7CKatie.Lyons%40wri.org%7C947e1cd62f8541d0896f08d8bc9656fc%7C476bac1f36b24ad98699cda6bad1f862%7C0%7C0%7C637466701180980029%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=wn%2B%2Fa0gwQv8GMcuVfDwWaVQi71VU2ZBAmOI%2Fv6rwBik%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Nature Climate Change</a></em> and <a href="https://gfw.global/3fI7mFG" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">available</a> on Global Forest Watch, found that the world’s forests sequestered about twice as much carbon dioxide as they emitted between 2001 and 2019. In other words, forests provide a  “carbon sink” that absorbs a net 7.6 billion metric tonnes of CO2 per year, 1.5 times more carbon than the United States emits annually.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="global forest carbon flux map" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forests-global-net-carbon-flux-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Unlike other sectors, where carbon makes a one-way trip to the atmosphere, forests act as a two-way highway, absorbing CO2 when standing or regrowing&nbsp;and releasing it when cleared or degraded.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Before now, scientists estimated these global “carbon fluxes” from the sum of country-reported data, creating a coarse picture of the role forests play in both carbon emissions and sequestration. With these new data that combine ground measurements with satellite observations, we can now quantify carbon fluxes consistently over any area, from small local forests to countries to entire continents.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="forest carbon fluxes in and out of forests" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/20_01_21-Carbon-Flux-v2_Graphic-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Using this more granular information, we found that the world’s forests emitted an average of 8.1 billion metric tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year due to deforestation and other disturbances, and absorbed 16 billion metric tonnes of CO2 per year.</p>



<p>Here’s a look at what else the new maps tell us about forests and carbon:</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Only one major tropical rainforest remains a strong carbon sink</h3>



<p>Tropical rainforests are far and away the most important ecosystems for mitigating climate change. Tropical rainforests collectively&nbsp;sequester more carbon from the atmosphere than temperate or boreal forests, but they’re also increasingly destroyed for agricultural expansion. The world’s three largest tropical rainforests are located in the Amazon, Congo River basin and Southeast Asia.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="tropical rainforests carbon sinks are threatened" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/rainforests-carbon-flux-amazon-congo-southeast-asia-wri-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Over the past 20 years, forests across Southeast Asia have collectively become a net source of carbon emissions due to clearing for plantations, uncontrolled fires and drainage of peat soils.</p>



<p>The&nbsp;Amazon River basin, which stretches across nine countries in South America, is<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2035-0?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nature%2Frss%2Fcurrent+%28Nature+-+Issue%29" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"> still a net carbon sink</a>, but teeters on the edge of becoming a net <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00508-4" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">source if forest loss continues</a> at current rates. The Amazon basin has experienced heightened deforestation in the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/brazil-environment/deforestation-in-brazils-amazon-skyrockets-to-12-year-high-under-bolsonaro-idUSKBN28B3MV" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">last four years</a> due to clearing for cattle pasture and degradation from fires.</p>



<p>Of the world’s three largest tropical rainforests, only the Congo has enough standing forest left to remain a strong net carbon sink. The Congo’s tropical rainforest sequesters 600 million metric tonnes more carbon dioxide per year than it emits,&nbsp;equivalent to about one-third of the CO2 emissions from all U.S. transportation.</p>



<p>Protecting the remaining forests in all three regions is critical to mitigating climate change.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Protected areas help conserve forest carbon sinks</h3>



<p>The precarious state of the Amazonian carbon sink highlights the need to protect the forests we have left in this region and elsewhere around the world.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/107/24/10821" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Protected areas</a> and Indigenous reserves are some of our most valuable tools in the climate action toolbox, combined with command-and-control policies.</p>



<p>The new map reveals that 27% of the world’s net forest carbon sink falls within protected areas<a>.</a>&nbsp;Looking at individual areas demonstrates just how effective these designations can be in keeping CO2 in forests. &nbsp;</p>



<p>For example, in Brazil, a stark contrast in carbon emissions is evident between the protected Menkragnotí indigenous reserve and the surrounding unprotected forest. Forests in the reserve continue to absorb approximately 10 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide more from the atmosphere than they emit every year — equivalent to the annual carbon emissions from more than 2 million cars. The area surrounding the Menkragnotí indigenous reserve has become a net carbon source due to clearing for mining, pasture and soy. </p>



<p>Recognizing Indigenous Peoples and local communities as owners of their lands, and enforcing those rights, is a <a href="https://www.wri.org/publication/climate-benefits-tenure-costs" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">proven strategy</a> to protect standing forests and enhance carbon stored in them.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Indigenous territory in Brazil is a carbon sink" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forests-indigenous-protected-areas-carbon-sink-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Forestry carbon flux varies based on management practices</h2>



<p>Nowhere is the bidirectional nature of carbon flux more apparent than in the world’s managed forests, which are cut and regrown to produce timber and &nbsp;concentrated mainly in the United States, Canada, China, Europe and Russia. In these managed forest areas, some patches of trees are harvested or thinned at planned intervals, leading to carbon emissions, while others are left to regrow and absorb carbon.</p>



<p>Ultimately, whether managed forests are carbon sources or sinks depends on how they’re managed — how much time elapses between harvest cycles, how much forest is cut, the age of the trees, and, importantly, the total area over which fluxes are calculated. </p>



<p>Zooming in on individual clear-cuts in the new map shows CO2 emissions from the abrupt loss of tree cover during harvest. But at the landscape scale, forestry becomes a patchwork of both CO2 emissions from harvest and carbon removals from previously harvested forests growing back. On the whole, most well-managed forests are net carbon sinks.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="foresty patchwork of sources and sinks" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forest-harvesting-carbon-emissions-removal-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Logging in pristine primary forests, however, still represents a concern with respect to both climate and biodiversity.&nbsp;Unlike secondary forests or fast-rotation pine or eucalyptus plantations, harvesting in <a href="https://www.ancientforestalliance.org/caycuse-watershed-logging-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">old-growth</a> forests releases CO2 that has taken centuries to accumulate — carbon that, once lost, is irrecoverable in our lifetime.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Protecting standing forests is critical for climate mitigation</h3>



<p>Overall, the data show that keeping existing forests standing remains our best hope for maintaining the vast amount of carbon forests store and continuing the carbon sequestration that, if halted, will worsen the effects of climate change.</p>



<p>While <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/want-grow-trees-consider-these-5-lessons" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">planting new trees (the right way</a>) or <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/09/carbon-sequestration-natural-forest-regrowth" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">letting them regrow naturally</a> can play a role in mitigating climate change (and helping communities adapt to its effects), the new data show that forests that have sprouted up in the past 19 years represent less than 5% of the current global forest carbon sink.</p>



<p>Although important to give these young forests the chance to grow into old ones, protecting primary and mature secondary&nbsp;forests today is most important for curbing climate change. &nbsp;<strong>&nbsp;</strong></p>



<p>With these new maps, we can identify with unprecedented detail those forests that are capturing and emitting the most carbon. The maps can also be continually improved as better data become available. This gets us one step closer to tracking progress toward reducing emissions from deforestation and identifying where forests are being successfully managed — and where they need more protection.</p>



<iframe loading="lazy" width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EEuO28hB9rg" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”="">  

 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2021/01/forests-carbon-emissions-sink-flux" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 

 



 

</div> 

 

<hr>



<style type="text/css"></style>

Forests Absorb Twice as Much Carbon as They Emit Each Year

<p>The world is getting a better understanding of just how important forests are in the global fight against climate change. New research, published in <em><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Farticles%2Fs41558-020-00976-6&amp;data=04%7C01%7CKatie.Lyons%40wri.org%7C947e1cd62f8541d0896f08d8bc9656fc%7C476bac1f36b24ad98699cda6bad1f862%7C0%7C0%7C637466701180980029%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=wn%2B%2Fa0gwQv8GMcuVfDwWaVQi71VU2ZBAmOI%2Fv6rwBik%3D&amp;reserved=0" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Nature Climate Change</a></em> and <a href="https://gfw.global/3fI7mFG" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">available</a> on Global Forest Watch, found that the world’s forests sequestered about twice as much carbon dioxide as they emitted between 2001 and 2019. In other words, forests provide a  “carbon sink” that absorbs a net 7.6 billion metric tonnes of CO2 per year, 1.5 times more carbon than the United States emits annually.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="global forest carbon flux map" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forests-global-net-carbon-flux-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Unlike other sectors, where carbon makes a one-way trip to the atmosphere, forests act as a two-way highway, absorbing CO2 when standing or regrowing&nbsp;and releasing it when cleared or degraded.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Before now, scientists estimated these global “carbon fluxes” from the sum of country-reported data, creating a coarse picture of the role forests play in both carbon emissions and sequestration. With these new data that combine ground measurements with satellite observations, we can now quantify carbon fluxes consistently over any area, from small local forests to countries to entire continents.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="forest carbon fluxes in and out of forests" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/20_01_21-Carbon-Flux-v2_Graphic-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Using this more granular information, we found that the world’s forests emitted an average of 8.1 billion metric tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year due to deforestation and other disturbances, and absorbed 16 billion metric tonnes of CO2 per year.</p>



<p>Here's a look at what else the new maps tell us about forests and carbon:</p>



<h3>Only one major tropical rainforest remains a strong carbon sink</h3>



<p>Tropical rainforests are far and away the most important ecosystems for mitigating climate change. Tropical rainforests collectively&nbsp;sequester more carbon from the atmosphere than temperate or boreal forests, but they’re also increasingly destroyed for agricultural expansion. The world’s three largest tropical rainforests are located in the Amazon, Congo River basin and Southeast Asia.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="tropical rainforests carbon sinks are threatened" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/rainforests-carbon-flux-amazon-congo-southeast-asia-wri-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Over the past 20 years, forests across Southeast Asia have collectively become a net source of carbon emissions due to clearing for plantations, uncontrolled fires and drainage of peat soils.</p>



<p>The&nbsp;Amazon River basin, which stretches across nine countries in South America, is<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2035-0?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nature%2Frss%2Fcurrent+%28Nature+-+Issue%29" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"> still a net carbon sink</a>, but teeters on the edge of becoming a net <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00508-4" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">source if forest loss continues</a> at current rates. The Amazon basin has experienced heightened deforestation in the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/brazil-environment/deforestation-in-brazils-amazon-skyrockets-to-12-year-high-under-bolsonaro-idUSKBN28B3MV" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">last four years</a> due to clearing for cattle pasture and degradation from fires.</p>



<p>Of the world’s three largest tropical rainforests, only the Congo has enough standing forest left to remain a strong net carbon sink. The Congo’s tropical rainforest sequesters 600 million metric tonnes more carbon dioxide per year than it emits,&nbsp;equivalent to about one-third of the CO2 emissions from all U.S. transportation.</p>



<p>Protecting the remaining forests in all three regions is critical to mitigating climate change.</p>



<h3>Protected areas help conserve forest carbon sinks</h3>



<p>The precarious state of the Amazonian carbon sink highlights the need to protect the forests we have left in this region and elsewhere around the world.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/107/24/10821" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Protected areas</a> and Indigenous reserves are some of our most valuable tools in the climate action toolbox, combined with command-and-control policies.</p>



<p>The new map reveals that 27% of the world’s net forest carbon sink falls within protected areas<a>.</a>&nbsp;Looking at individual areas demonstrates just how effective these designations can be in keeping CO2 in forests. &nbsp;</p>



<p>For example, in Brazil, a stark contrast in carbon emissions is evident between the protected Menkragnotí indigenous reserve and the surrounding unprotected forest. Forests in the reserve continue to absorb approximately 10 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide more from the atmosphere than they emit every year — equivalent to the annual carbon emissions from more than 2 million cars. The area surrounding the Menkragnotí indigenous reserve has become a net carbon source due to clearing for mining, pasture and soy. </p>



<p>Recognizing Indigenous Peoples and local communities as owners of their lands, and enforcing those rights, is a <a href="https://www.wri.org/publication/climate-benefits-tenure-costs" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">proven strategy</a> to protect standing forests and enhance carbon stored in them.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Indigenous territory in Brazil is a carbon sink" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forests-indigenous-protected-areas-carbon-sink-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<h2>Forestry carbon flux varies based on management practices</h2>



<p>Nowhere is the bidirectional nature of carbon flux more apparent than in the world’s managed forests, which are cut and regrown to produce timber and &nbsp;concentrated mainly in the United States, Canada, China, Europe and Russia. In these managed forest areas, some patches of trees are harvested or thinned at planned intervals, leading to carbon emissions, while others are left to regrow and absorb carbon.</p>



<p>Ultimately, whether managed forests are carbon sources or sinks depends on how they’re managed — how much time elapses between harvest cycles, how much forest is cut, the age of the trees, and, importantly, the total area over which fluxes are calculated. </p>



<p>Zooming in on individual clear-cuts in the new map shows CO2 emissions from the abrupt loss of tree cover during harvest. But at the landscape scale, forestry becomes a patchwork of both CO2 emissions from harvest and carbon removals from previously harvested forests growing back. On the whole, most well-managed forests are net carbon sinks.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="foresty patchwork of sources and sinks" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/forest-harvesting-carbon-emissions-removal-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Logging in pristine primary forests, however, still represents a concern with respect to both climate and biodiversity.&nbsp;Unlike secondary forests or fast-rotation pine or eucalyptus plantations, harvesting in <a href="https://www.ancientforestalliance.org/caycuse-watershed-logging-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">old-growth</a> forests releases CO2 that has taken centuries to accumulate — carbon that, once lost, is irrecoverable in our lifetime.</p>



<h3>Protecting standing forests is critical for climate mitigation</h3>



<p>Overall, the data show that keeping existing forests standing remains our best hope for maintaining the vast amount of carbon forests store and continuing the carbon sequestration that, if halted, will worsen the effects of climate change.</p>



<p>While <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/want-grow-trees-consider-these-5-lessons" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">planting new trees (the right way</a>) or <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/09/carbon-sequestration-natural-forest-regrowth" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">letting them regrow naturally</a> can play a role in mitigating climate change (and helping communities adapt to its effects), the new data show that forests that have sprouted up in the past 19 years represent less than 5% of the current global forest carbon sink.</p>



<p>Although important to give these young forests the chance to grow into old ones, protecting primary and mature secondary&nbsp;forests today is most important for curbing climate change. &nbsp;<strong>&nbsp;</strong></p>



<p>With these new maps, we can identify with unprecedented detail those forests that are capturing and emitting the most carbon. The maps can also be continually improved as better data become available. This gets us one step closer to tracking progress toward reducing emissions from deforestation and identifying where forests are being successfully managed — and where they need more protection.</p>



<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EEuO28hB9rg" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”="">  

 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2021/01/forests-carbon-emissions-sink-flux" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 

 



 

</div> 

 

<hr>

New data maps global carbon flux in forests, letting us quantify CO2 emissions and sequestration in local forests or countries to continents.

Quantifying Carbon Fluxes in Forests | Global Forest Watch Blog

Carbon Sequestration

Carbon Sequestration | Global Forest Watch Blog

natural regeneration

natural regeneration | Global Forest Watch Blog

Reforestation

Reforestation | Global Forest Watch Blog

Susan Cook-Patton

Kristine Lister

<p>There’s increasing recognition of how nature can help tackle the climate crisis. From protecting standing forests to planting new trees, forests offer significant climate mitigation benefits. Now, new research shows that letting forests regrow on their own could be a secret weapon to fighting climate change.</p>



<p>Experts at WRI, The Nature Conservancy and other institutions mapped potential rates of carbon capture from “natural forest regrowth” – a restoration method distinct from active tree-planting – initiatives where trees are allowed to grow back on lands previously cleared for agriculture and other purposes. The results, <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2686-x" target="_blank">published in <em>Nature</em></a> and available on <a href="https://gfw.global/3ndMdVE" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Forest Watch </a> show that letting forests regrow naturally has the potential to absorb up to 8.9 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year through 2050, while still maintaining native grasslands and current levels of food production.<strong> That’s the equivalent of soaking up 23% of global emissions from the atmosphere every year. </strong></p>



<p>This is on top of the carbon sequestration already provided by existing forests, which currently absorb around 30% of CO2 emissions each year.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="natural forest regrowth could capture 23% of all carbon emissions" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Carbon_Emissions_natural_forest_regeneration_WRI.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Benefits of balancing reforestation and natural forest regrowth</h3>



<p>While decarbonization of fossil fuels and other industrial emissions remain essential pieces of the emissions-reduction puzzle, nature also has a major role to play. The United Nations declared the 2020s as the “Decade of Ecosystem Restoration,” calling for massive restoration of degraded lands to help with climate change mitigation.</p>



<p>It’s a powerful message, but too often “<a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/want-grow-trees-consider-these-5-lessons" target="_blank">tree restoration</a>” is seen as synonymous with “tree-planting.” For example, a <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01026-8#ref-CR2" target="_blank">close look</a> at a selection of national restoration commitments made under the Bonn Challenge, UN REDD+ program, Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement, and other schemes reveals that almost half of the current land area slated for restoration in these countries is set to become plantations of commercial trees. Balancing active reforestation of commercial species with natural forest regrowth could make for a more effective approach in terms of both carbon and biodiversity. </p>



<p>The map generated for the recent <em>Nature</em> study can help identify locations where natural forest regrowth has high climate mitigation potential, to be considered alongside active tree-planting initiatives. There are many advantages to letting forests recover on their own: it’s often cheaper and more likely to benefit native wildlife. The new map, viewed alongside other information on the local socioeconomic setting and alternative uses for the land, can provide context for optimizing where to let nature take the lead.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Previous IPCC carbon sequestration estimates are too low</h3>



<p>This latest study shows that potential rates of carbon capture from natural forest regrowth are far higher than previously estimated.</p>



<p>For decades, ecologists have collected data on the ground at different locations around the world about how quickly previously forested areas return to forest and recover carbon after agricultural abandonment or other disturbance. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) periodically compiles these measurements by general ecosystem type to provide default rates, which many countries use to estimate how much carbon dioxides their forests remove from the atmosphere each year as they compile greenhouse gas inventories and set climate mitigation commitments. </p>



<p>The new study found that these generalized IPCC defaults underestimate carbon sequestration rates in young forests by 32% globally, and by <em>a full 50%</em> for tropical forests. This is because the new map captures spatial variability in rates across a landscape much better than a smattering of hard-won field plots can; it’s simply not feasible or cost-effective to measure carbon everywhere. </p>



<p>By using IPCC defaults, many governments may be underestimating the benefits of natural forest regrowth for capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and thus underappreciating its power as a climate change solution.</p>



<iframe loading="lazy" width="670" height="490" frameborder="0" src="https://www.globalforestwatch.org/embed/map/global/?map=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%3D%3D"></iframe>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Where does natural forest regrowth have the most carbon-removal potential?</h3>



<p>Rates at which young forests remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere vary by orders of magnitude around the world; tropical countries in West and Central Africa have the highest rates, while countries in Central Europe and the Middle East have the lowest. And while carbon accumulation rates are usually highest in warmer, wetter climates, they can also vary dramatically at local scales, for example with three-fold variation across Colombia alone.</p>



<iframe loading="lazy" width="670" height="490" frameborder="0" src="https://www.globalforestwatch.org/embed/map/global/?map=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%3D%3D"></iframe>



<p>By harmonizing detailed carbon measurements collected at different locations around the world and combining them with cutting-edge machine learning methods, the new map takes into account how 66 environmental variables influence forest growth rates — everything from topography to daily temperature range to soil texture. This new geospatial information is now easily accessible to governments, civil society organizations and companies via Global Forest Watch.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Forests can help with climate change mitigation and more</h3>



<p>Letting previously forested land recover carbon naturally can contribute to the 730 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide the IPCC says must be removed from the atmosphere by the end of this century to avert the worst effects of climate change. Increasing forest cover can also bring additional benefits beyond climate change mitigation, such as preventing floods, regulating rainfall, slowing biodiversity loss, and sustaining traditional ways of life and economies. </p>



<p>Equipped with a more detailed understanding of forests’ potential to capture carbon dioxide, officials can make rapid assessments on how to best use land for the greatest climate return.&nbsp;</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”="">
 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/09/carbon-sequestration-natural-forest-regrowth" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 
 

</div> 

 

<hr>



<style type="text/css"></style>

Young Forests Capture Carbon Quicker than Previously Thought

<p>There’s increasing recognition of how nature can help tackle the climate crisis. From protecting standing forests to planting new trees, forests offer significant climate mitigation benefits. Now, new research shows that letting forests regrow on their own could be a secret weapon to fighting climate change.</p>



<p>Experts at WRI, The Nature Conservancy and other institutions mapped potential rates of carbon capture from “natural forest regrowth” – a restoration method distinct from active tree-planting – initiatives where trees are allowed to grow back on lands previously cleared for agriculture and other purposes. The results, <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2686-x" target="_blank">published in <em>Nature</em></a> and available on <a href="https://gfw.global/3ndMdVE" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Forest Watch </a> show that letting forests regrow naturally has the potential to absorb up to 8.9 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year through 2050, while still maintaining native grasslands and current levels of food production.<strong> That’s the equivalent of soaking up 23% of global emissions from the atmosphere every year. </strong></p>



<p>This is on top of the carbon sequestration already provided by existing forests, which currently absorb around 30% of CO2 emissions each year.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="natural forest regrowth could capture 23% of all carbon emissions" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Carbon_Emissions_natural_forest_regeneration_WRI.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3>Benefits of balancing reforestation and natural forest regrowth</h3>



<p>While decarbonization of fossil fuels and other industrial emissions remain essential pieces of the emissions-reduction puzzle, nature also has a major role to play. The United Nations declared the 2020s as the “Decade of Ecosystem Restoration,” calling for massive restoration of degraded lands to help with climate change mitigation.</p>



<p>It’s a powerful message, but too often “<a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/want-grow-trees-consider-these-5-lessons" target="_blank">tree restoration</a>” is seen as synonymous with “tree-planting.” For example, a <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01026-8#ref-CR2" target="_blank">close look</a> at a selection of national restoration commitments made under the Bonn Challenge, UN REDD+ program, Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement, and other schemes reveals that almost half of the current land area slated for restoration in these countries is set to become plantations of commercial trees. Balancing active reforestation of commercial species with natural forest regrowth could make for a more effective approach in terms of both carbon and biodiversity. </p>



<p>The map generated for the recent <em>Nature</em> study can help identify locations where natural forest regrowth has high climate mitigation potential, to be considered alongside active tree-planting initiatives. There are many advantages to letting forests recover on their own: it’s often cheaper and more likely to benefit native wildlife. The new map, viewed alongside other information on the local socioeconomic setting and alternative uses for the land, can provide context for optimizing where to let nature take the lead.</p>



<h3>Previous IPCC carbon sequestration estimates are too low</h3>



<p>This latest study shows that potential rates of carbon capture from natural forest regrowth are far higher than previously estimated.</p>



<p>For decades, ecologists have collected data on the ground at different locations around the world about how quickly previously forested areas return to forest and recover carbon after agricultural abandonment or other disturbance. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) periodically compiles these measurements by general ecosystem type to provide default rates, which many countries use to estimate how much carbon dioxides their forests remove from the atmosphere each year as they compile greenhouse gas inventories and set climate mitigation commitments. </p>



<p>The new study found that these generalized IPCC defaults underestimate carbon sequestration rates in young forests by 32% globally, and by <em>a full 50%</em> for tropical forests. This is because the new map captures spatial variability in rates across a landscape much better than a smattering of hard-won field plots can; it’s simply not feasible or cost-effective to measure carbon everywhere. </p>



<p>By using IPCC defaults, many governments may be underestimating the benefits of natural forest regrowth for capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and thus underappreciating its power as a climate change solution.</p>



<iframe width="670" height="490" frameborder="0" src="https://www.globalforestwatch.org/embed/map/global/?map=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%3D%3D"></iframe>



<h3>Where does natural forest regrowth have the most carbon-removal potential?</h3>



<p>Rates at which young forests remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere vary by orders of magnitude around the world; tropical countries in West and Central Africa have the highest rates, while countries in Central Europe and the Middle East have the lowest. And while carbon accumulation rates are usually highest in warmer, wetter climates, they can also vary dramatically at local scales, for example with three-fold variation across Colombia alone.</p>



<iframe width="670" height="490" frameborder="0" src="https://www.globalforestwatch.org/embed/map/global/?map=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%3D%3D"></iframe>



<p>By harmonizing detailed carbon measurements collected at different locations around the world and combining them with cutting-edge machine learning methods, the new map takes into account how 66 environmental variables influence forest growth rates — everything from topography to daily temperature range to soil texture. This new geospatial information is now easily accessible to governments, civil society organizations and companies via Global Forest Watch.</p>



<h3>Forests can help with climate change mitigation and more</h3>



<p>Letting previously forested land recover carbon naturally can contribute to the 730 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide the IPCC says must be removed from the atmosphere by the end of this century to avert the worst effects of climate change. Increasing forest cover can also bring additional benefits beyond climate change mitigation, such as preventing floods, regulating rainfall, slowing biodiversity loss, and sustaining traditional ways of life and economies. </p>



<p>Equipped with a more detailed understanding of forests’ potential to capture carbon dioxide, officials can make rapid assessments on how to best use land for the greatest climate return.&nbsp;</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”="">
 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/09/carbon-sequestration-natural-forest-regrowth" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 
 

</div> 

 

<hr>

New research shows natural forest regrowth, as opposed to reforestation by tree planting, can capture more carbon dioxide from the air than previously thought.

Natural Forest Regrowth and Carbon Capture | Global Forest Watch Blog

Fires

Learn about the complex relationship between forests and fires.

Fires | Global Forest Watch Blog

Burning

Burning | Global Forest Watch Blog

California

California | Global Forest Watch Blog

Fire Season

Fire Season | Global Forest Watch Blog

fires

fires | Global Forest Watch Blog

Oregon

Oregon | Global Forest Watch Blog

Washington

Washington | Global Forest Watch Blog

Thailynn Munroe

Kelly Levin

<p>Fires blazing across the Western United States have claimed dozens of lives, destroyed countless properties, displaced hundreds of thousands of residents, and worsened air quality at a time when the coronavirus pandemic threatens respiratory health. The ominous skies are a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/climate/hurricane-isaias-apple-fire-climate.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">preview</a> of what’s to come in a world of continued inaction on climate change. What was seemingly a distant future is now playing out in front of our eyes. </p>



<p>Wildfires in the Western United States, and around the world, are <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/chapter-3/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">getting worse</a>. Fires in Oregon, Washington and California for the last month are off the charts compared to previous years — and fire season is still not over.</p>



<iframe loading="lazy" width="630" height="460" frameborder="0" src="https://www.globalforestwatch.org/embed/widget/burnedAreaCumulative/country/USA/5?burnedAreaCumulative=eyJjb21wYXJlWWVhciI6ImFsbCJ9"></iframe>



<div class="attribute"> 
Cumulative fire alerts in California.
Visit the Global Forest Watch dashboard to see alerts for <a href="https://gfw.global/2Ruj9v9" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Washington</a> and <a href="https://gfw.global/3c7ZKKa" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Oregon</a>. 

</div>



<p>But what’s more troubling is that fires are not growing in isolation. Fires are just one piece of a multi-part climate feedback system — all parts of which are worsening, fueling more rapid <a href="https://gfw.global/3msEseP" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">climate change</a>. </p>



<p>Increased global emissions lead to higher temperatures, which then create drier, more fire-prone conditions. With more fires comes more emissions, perpetuating the entire cycle.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Fires and climate change form a feedback loop" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/fires-emissions-climate-feedback-loop-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>The data show that each aspect of this cycle is getting worse:</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Temperatures on the U.S. west coast have risen by 1.5-2 degrees F since the beginning of the 20th century</h3>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3745113" data-url="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/3745113/embed" aria-label=""><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>Temperatures in California, Washington and Oregon have increased noticeably since the beginning of the 20<sup>th</sup> century. <a href="https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/wa/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Washington</a> state has been 1.5 degrees F warmer on average, and <a href="https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/or/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Oregon</a> and <a href="https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/ca/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">California</a> have seen temperatures that are 2 degrees F higher. At the same time, rain has increasingly replaced snow in the <a href="https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/24/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Northwest</a>, warmer temperatures have reduced snowpack, and <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6488/314.full" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">soils are drying out</a>. All of these factors combine to create drier conditions that allow wildfires to ignite and spread.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">The U.S west coast is on track to surpass annual burned area records</h3>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="burned area on the US west coast 2000-2020" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/fires-us-cumulative-burned-area-2020-wri.gif" width="100%">Cumulative burned area, 2000-2020. Source: National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC).</div>



<p>The western U.S. wildfire season has lengthened by about three days per year <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2015.0178#RSTB20150178F3" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">since the 1970s</a> due to rising temperatures and snow melting earlier in the season. Elevated temperatures dry out vegetation, which then acts as a tinderbox for fires. Despite the risks wildfires pose to homes and lives, <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3314" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">housing growth</a> in once sparsely settled areas near forests and other vegetation has also increased rapidly, leading to more wildfires from human-caused ignitions and more loss of property.</p>



<p>Whether ignited by human activity or lightning strikes, there’s a greater likelihood of fires burning out of control. As these conditions worsen, the overall burned area expands.</p>



<p>Burned area has increased across the United States over the past two decades, and 2020 is particularly bad. The West Coast is <a href="https://grist.org/climate/how-apocalyptic-this-california-western-fire-season-is-in-1-flaming-chart/?utm_campaign=sprout&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=1599793155" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">on track to see more area burned in 2020 than any other year.</a> In California alone, wildfires have already destroyed an area almost the size of the state of Connecticut (<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/14/us/california-wildfires-monday/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">3.2 million acres</a>). </p>



<p>The <a href="https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/6/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">most recent science</a> suggests that with further warming, the Western United States could see 2 to 6 times the annual area burned in 2050 than it does today.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Emissions from 2020’s fires are 3 times higher than usual</h3>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3737206" data-url="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/3737206/embed" aria-label=""><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>As fires burn, carbon stored in trees and other vegetation combusts, releasing carbon dioxide and other potent greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. This means that as fires increase, so do emissions. &nbsp;</p>



<p>Fire-related emissions in 2020 are already 3 times higher than the historical 21<sup>st</sup>-century average in California, Oregon and Washington, and we are by no means at the end of fire season. In California, the worst days of wildfires have generated emissions that are roughly 4 to 8 times higher than the average daily <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">emissions</a> from all economic activity across the state.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Emissions contribute to global temperature rise, accelerating the vicious climate feedback loop</h3>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3745423" data-url="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/3745423/embed" aria-label=""><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>While emissions from fires contribute to the warming that begins this vicious cycle, they are far from the only source of carbon dioxide emissions. Burning fossil fuels — for example to power our homes and our cars — is the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">leading source</a> of emissions globally.</p>



<p>Not too long ago, the idea of surpassing 400 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide, a&nbsp;symbolic threshold which Earth has not experienced for millions of years, felt quite far off. By 2019, CO2 concentrations were well beyond the 400 ppm threshold, reaching <a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/data.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">411 ppm</a>. (For context,&nbsp;pre-industrial concentrations&nbsp;of carbon dioxide were <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">280 ppm</a>). </p>



<p>This buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is rapidly warming the planet. 2019 was the <a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146154/2019-was-the-second-warmest-year-on-record" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">second-warmest</a> since modern record-keeping began, after 2016. The past decade was the <a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146154/2019-was-the-second-warmest-year-on-record" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">warmest on record</a>, with each decade warmer than the one that preceded it.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Curbing climate change, reducing fire risk</h3>



<p>With proper management, fire regimes are a natural and important part of maintaining the long-term vitality of forests across the Western United States. However, we need to be smarter about where we build and rebuild our communities. New housing is increasingly moving closer to forests and other natural vegetation, leading to more wildfires from human-caused ignitions and greater losses to human lives and property. A tiny spark now has potential to cascade into a raging fire, fueled by higher temperatures, drier conditions and rising emissions. </p>



<p>But more importantly, we need to rein in greenhouse gas emissions. If we want to put an end to these record-breaking fires, it’s critical we address the climate feedbacks that are fueling them in the first place.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/us-fires-climate-emissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 
 

</div> 

 

<hr>



<style type="text/css"></style>



<p></p>

6 Graphics Explain the Climate Feedback Loop Fueling US Fires

<p>Fires blazing across the Western United States have claimed dozens of lives, destroyed countless properties, displaced hundreds of thousands of residents, and worsened air quality at a time when the coronavirus pandemic threatens respiratory health. The ominous skies are a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/climate/hurricane-isaias-apple-fire-climate.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">preview</a> of what’s to come in a world of continued inaction on climate change. What was seemingly a distant future is now playing out in front of our eyes. </p>



<p>Wildfires in the Western United States, and around the world, are <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/chapter-3/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">getting worse</a>. Fires in Oregon, Washington and California for the last month are off the charts compared to previous years — and fire season is still not over.</p>



<iframe width="630" height="460" frameborder="0" src="https://www.globalforestwatch.org/embed/widget/burnedAreaCumulative/country/USA/5?burnedAreaCumulative=eyJjb21wYXJlWWVhciI6ImFsbCJ9"></iframe>



<div class="attribute"> 
Cumulative fire alerts in California.
Visit the Global Forest Watch dashboard to see alerts for <a href="https://gfw.global/2Ruj9v9" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Washington</a> and <a href="https://gfw.global/3c7ZKKa" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Oregon</a>. 

</div>



<p>But what’s more troubling is that fires are not growing in isolation. Fires are just one piece of a multi-part climate feedback system — all parts of which are worsening, fueling more rapid <a href="https://gfw.global/3msEseP" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">climate change</a>. </p>



<p>Increased global emissions lead to higher temperatures, which then create drier, more fire-prone conditions. With more fires comes more emissions, perpetuating the entire cycle.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Fires and climate change form a feedback loop" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/fires-emissions-climate-feedback-loop-wri.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>The data show that each aspect of this cycle is getting worse:</p>



<h3>Temperatures on the U.S. west coast have risen by 1.5-2 degrees F since the beginning of the 20th century</h3>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3745113" data-url="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/3745113/embed" aria-label=""><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>Temperatures in California, Washington and Oregon have increased noticeably since the beginning of the 20<sup>th</sup> century. <a href="https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/wa/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Washington</a> state has been 1.5 degrees F warmer on average, and <a href="https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/or/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Oregon</a> and <a href="https://statesummaries.ncics.org/chapter/ca/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">California</a> have seen temperatures that are 2 degrees F higher. At the same time, rain has increasingly replaced snow in the <a href="https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/24/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Northwest</a>, warmer temperatures have reduced snowpack, and <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6488/314.full" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">soils are drying out</a>. All of these factors combine to create drier conditions that allow wildfires to ignite and spread.</p>



<h3>The U.S west coast is on track to surpass annual burned area records</h3>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="burned area on the US west coast 2000-2020" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/fires-us-cumulative-burned-area-2020-wri.gif" width="100%">Cumulative burned area, 2000-2020. Source: National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC).</div>



<p>The western U.S. wildfire season has lengthened by about three days per year <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2015.0178#RSTB20150178F3" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">since the 1970s</a> due to rising temperatures and snow melting earlier in the season. Elevated temperatures dry out vegetation, which then acts as a tinderbox for fires. Despite the risks wildfires pose to homes and lives, <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3314" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">housing growth</a> in once sparsely settled areas near forests and other vegetation has also increased rapidly, leading to more wildfires from human-caused ignitions and more loss of property.</p>



<p>Whether ignited by human activity or lightning strikes, there’s a greater likelihood of fires burning out of control. As these conditions worsen, the overall burned area expands.</p>



<p>Burned area has increased across the United States over the past two decades, and 2020 is particularly bad. The West Coast is <a href="https://grist.org/climate/how-apocalyptic-this-california-western-fire-season-is-in-1-flaming-chart/?utm_campaign=sprout&amp;utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_content=1599793155" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">on track to see more area burned in 2020 than any other year.</a> In California alone, wildfires have already destroyed an area almost the size of the state of Connecticut (<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/14/us/california-wildfires-monday/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">3.2 million acres</a>). </p>



<p>The <a href="https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/6/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">most recent science</a> suggests that with further warming, the Western United States could see 2 to 6 times the annual area burned in 2050 than it does today.</p>



<h3>Emissions from 2020’s fires are 3 times higher than usual</h3>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3737206" data-url="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/3737206/embed" aria-label=""><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>As fires burn, carbon stored in trees and other vegetation combusts, releasing carbon dioxide and other potent greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. This means that as fires increase, so do emissions. &nbsp;</p>



<p>Fire-related emissions in 2020 are already 3 times higher than the historical 21<sup>st</sup>-century average in California, Oregon and Washington, and we are by no means at the end of fire season. In California, the worst days of wildfires have generated emissions that are roughly 4 to 8 times higher than the average daily <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">emissions</a> from all economic activity across the state.</p>



<h3>Emissions contribute to global temperature rise, accelerating the vicious climate feedback loop</h3>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3745423" data-url="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/3745423/embed" aria-label=""><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>While emissions from fires contribute to the warming that begins this vicious cycle, they are far from the only source of carbon dioxide emissions. Burning fossil fuels — for example to power our homes and our cars — is the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">leading source</a> of emissions globally.</p>



<p>Not too long ago, the idea of surpassing 400 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide, a&nbsp;symbolic threshold which Earth has not experienced for millions of years, felt quite far off. By 2019, CO2 concentrations were well beyond the 400 ppm threshold, reaching <a href="https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/data.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">411 ppm</a>. (For context,&nbsp;pre-industrial concentrations&nbsp;of carbon dioxide were <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">280 ppm</a>). </p>



<p>This buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is rapidly warming the planet. 2019 was the <a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146154/2019-was-the-second-warmest-year-on-record" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">second-warmest</a> since modern record-keeping began, after 2016. The past decade was the <a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146154/2019-was-the-second-warmest-year-on-record" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">warmest on record</a>, with each decade warmer than the one that preceded it.</p>



<h3>Curbing climate change, reducing fire risk</h3>



<p>With proper management, fire regimes are a natural and important part of maintaining the long-term vitality of forests across the Western United States. However, we need to be smarter about where we build and rebuild our communities. New housing is increasingly moving closer to forests and other natural vegetation, leading to more wildfires from human-caused ignitions and greater losses to human lives and property. A tiny spark now has potential to cascade into a raging fire, fueled by higher temperatures, drier conditions and rising emissions. </p>



<p>But more importantly, we need to rein in greenhouse gas emissions. If we want to put an end to these record-breaking fires, it’s critical we address the climate feedbacks that are fueling them in the first place.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/us-fires-climate-emissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 
 

</div> 

 

<hr>





<p></p>

Increased emissions lead to higher temperatures and more fire-prone conditions. More fires mean more emissions, fueling rapid climate change.

2020 US Fires and the Climate Feedback Loop | Global Forest Watch Blog

A farm landscape sits near a national park in Costa Rica

Explainer

Explainer | Global Forest Watch Blog

Forest Resilience

Forest Resilience | Global Forest Watch Blog

<p>Every year, as forests are cut or burned down, the world loses more and more of a valuable carbon sink. The emissions caused by deforestation are a driving factor in our changing climate. Tropical tree cover loss makes up the <a href="https://gfw.global/337CDwO" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">third largest source of emissions</a> behind China and the United States.</p>



<p>But the link between forests and climate change runs both ways. As the climate heats up, forest ecosystems will experience damage and degradation that threatens to accelerate emissions.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>Forests have adapted to past eras of climate change</strong></h3>



<p>Forests are resilient ecosystems. This is not the first time they have weathered a changing climate. The forests we have today were shaped in part by the warming at the end of the last ice age.</p>



<p>Much of the world used to be covered by massive glaciers that only began to recede about <a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/the-last-glaciation-1434433" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">12,500 years ago</a>. As temperatures rose and the glaciers retreated, trees began to advance back towards the poles, establishing the boreal and temperate forests of the northern hemisphere.</p>



<p>Tropical forests are even older, with some of the oldest ones showing up in the fossil record <a href="https://rainforests.mongabay.com/0304a.htm" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">140 million years</a> ago during the age of the dinosaurs.</p>



<p>Over time, the rise and fall of sea levels and fluctuations in global temperature contributed to the diversity of species that make tropical rainforests so unique. <a href="https://news.umich.edu/tropical-rain-forest-thrived-throughout-last-ice-age/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">Studies of fossilized pollen</a> suggest that the Amazon rainforest withstood the cooler, dryer climate of the last ice age and potentially several ice ages preceding it, making it an incredibly resilient ecosystem.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>What’s different about climate change this time?</strong></h3>



<p>If forests have endured millions of years of climate fluctuations, why are current rising temperatures a cause for concern? For one thing, climate change is happening fast this time around. The global temperature has already risen <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">2 degrees</a> since record keeping began in the 1880s. Earth typically experiences <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC_2WXyORGA" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">climate cycling</a> on the scale of <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2949/why-milankovitch-orbital-cycles-cant-explain-earths-current-warming/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">hundreds of thousands</a> of years.</p>



<p>That’s not to say that rapid climate change has never happened on Earth before. The impact of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs caused <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-happened-seconds-hours-weeks-after-dino-killing-asteroid-hit-earth-180960032/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">dramatic global cooling</a> in a matter of decades. But climate change on short time scales is almost always associated with mass extinction events. Roughly <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-happened-seconds-hours-weeks-after-dino-killing-asteroid-hit-earth-180960032/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">75% of known species</a> were wiped out alongside the dinosaurs. Global climate and temperature changes on short time scales present a serious threat to Earth’s biodiversity.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>Forests are already feeling the impacts of a warmer world</strong></h3>



<p>Already, forest ecosystems have begun to suffer from Earth’s rapid warming. Higher temperatures have led to dryer conditions and longer, hotter growing seasons— perfect kindling for larger forest fires.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="diagram showing how climate change is influencing forest fires" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/climate_change_-and_forest_fires_Global_forest_watch.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Some studies estimate area burned in the United States could increase by <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32491808/ns/us_news-environment/t/twin-plagues-beetles-fire-devour-forests/#.XyB0wp5Kg2x" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">50% by 2050</a>. Canada’s burned area has already doubled since the 1970s. Although temperate and <a href="https://gfw.global/33afSrV" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">boreal forests</a> do experience fires as a natural part of their ecosystems, more frequent, intense fires have the potential to cause serious damage.</p>



<p>Pest infestations are also becoming more common. Milder winters in North America have allowed for parasitic species like the pine beetle to proliferate without sharp freezes to kill off larvae. <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bark-beetles-wildfires-an_b_9445678?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZWNvc2lhLm9yZy8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJvgFPavUUogBhhLKZoL-u-RiTlTSgiN4YniZd27I844KPbfiox0oknuDMeeMT8Sa8-LeWp10ZFm8bX7VBaw4_i4hgNjC532fCYszIJ51_oJlowZ5sGmeipcGPPKHSytWX2UvDZk_VDzfNwRVM8v38bmkIQhhw4mmxIiWDn5HOWt" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">The beetles</a> reproduce under the bark of vulnerable trees, killing them. Dead trees dry out and become kindling for future wildfires that release more carbon and accelerate climate change, enacting a vicious cycle.</p>



<p>In some areas, like the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0411-9/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">arctic or Africa’s Sahel</a>, increased temperatures have allowed for the advance of trees into previously unwooded areas, but the overall impact of climate change will be negative for forests. In the tropics, dryer conditions mean less rainfall, which doesn’t bode well for rainforests. As vegetation dries out, fires could become more common in an ecosystem where they are not natural. Some researchers hypothesize that reaching a certain threshold of drying could push the Amazon over an <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/01/impending-amazon-tipping-point-puts-biome-and-world-at-risk-scientists-warn/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">ecological tipping point</a>, where the environment is no longer able to support a forest. The world’s largest rainforest could degrade to savanna in less than <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/01/impending-amazon-tipping-point-puts-biome-and-world-at-risk-scientists-warn/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">50 years</a>.</p>



<p>Increased soil temperature has also been shown to release more carbon dioxide and higher temperatures from increased carbon dioxide levels could actually <a aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" href="https://e360.yale.edu/features/will-climate-change-upend-projections-of-future-forest-growth" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">stunt plant growth</a>, compromising their ability to continue sequestering carbon. This has serious implications for programs attempting to combat climate change through tree planting.</p>



<p>While protecting and restoring forests may be essential for slowing climate change, reducing carbon emissions is also critical to preserving forests in the first place. Already, the impacts of climate change are being felt from the tropics to the boreal region. If warming continues, the forests we know may look a lot different in the decades to come.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 
 EDITOR’S NOTE 09/01/2020: Article updated to clarify the role of increased carbon dioxide in stunting plant growth.

</div> 

 

<hr>



<style type="text/css"></style>

Climate Change Will Alter Forests as We Know Them

<p>Every year, as forests are cut or burned down, the world loses more and more of a valuable carbon sink. The emissions caused by deforestation are a driving factor in our changing climate. Tropical tree cover loss makes up the <a href="https://gfw.global/337CDwO" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">third largest source of emissions</a> behind China and the United States.</p>



<p>But the link between forests and climate change runs both ways. As the climate heats up, forest ecosystems will experience damage and degradation that threatens to accelerate emissions.</p>



<h3><strong>Forests have adapted to past eras of climate change</strong></h3>



<p>Forests are resilient ecosystems. This is not the first time they have weathered a changing climate. The forests we have today were shaped in part by the warming at the end of the last ice age.</p>



<p>Much of the world used to be covered by massive glaciers that only began to recede about <a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/the-last-glaciation-1434433" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">12,500 years ago</a>. As temperatures rose and the glaciers retreated, trees began to advance back towards the poles, establishing the boreal and temperate forests of the northern hemisphere.</p>



<p>Tropical forests are even older, with some of the oldest ones showing up in the fossil record <a href="https://rainforests.mongabay.com/0304a.htm" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">140 million years</a> ago during the age of the dinosaurs.</p>



<p>Over time, the rise and fall of sea levels and fluctuations in global temperature contributed to the diversity of species that make tropical rainforests so unique. <a href="https://news.umich.edu/tropical-rain-forest-thrived-throughout-last-ice-age/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">Studies of fossilized pollen</a> suggest that the Amazon rainforest withstood the cooler, dryer climate of the last ice age and potentially several ice ages preceding it, making it an incredibly resilient ecosystem.</p>



<h3><strong>What’s different about climate change this time?</strong></h3>



<p>If forests have endured millions of years of climate fluctuations, why are current rising temperatures a cause for concern? For one thing, climate change is happening fast this time around. The global temperature has already risen <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">2 degrees</a> since record keeping began in the 1880s. Earth typically experiences <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC_2WXyORGA" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">climate cycling</a> on the scale of <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2949/why-milankovitch-orbital-cycles-cant-explain-earths-current-warming/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">hundreds of thousands</a> of years.</p>



<p>That’s not to say that rapid climate change has never happened on Earth before. The impact of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs caused <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-happened-seconds-hours-weeks-after-dino-killing-asteroid-hit-earth-180960032/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">dramatic global cooling</a> in a matter of decades. But climate change on short time scales is almost always associated with mass extinction events. Roughly <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-happened-seconds-hours-weeks-after-dino-killing-asteroid-hit-earth-180960032/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">75% of known species</a> were wiped out alongside the dinosaurs. Global climate and temperature changes on short time scales present a serious threat to Earth’s biodiversity.</p>



<h3><strong>Forests are already feeling the impacts of a warmer world</strong></h3>



<p>Already, forest ecosystems have begun to suffer from Earth’s rapid warming. Higher temperatures have led to dryer conditions and longer, hotter growing seasons— perfect kindling for larger forest fires.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="diagram showing how climate change is influencing forest fires" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/climate_change_-and_forest_fires_Global_forest_watch.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>Some studies estimate area burned in the United States could increase by <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32491808/ns/us_news-environment/t/twin-plagues-beetles-fire-devour-forests/#.XyB0wp5Kg2x" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">50% by 2050</a>. Canada’s burned area has already doubled since the 1970s. Although temperate and <a href="https://gfw.global/33afSrV" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">boreal forests</a> do experience fires as a natural part of their ecosystems, more frequent, intense fires have the potential to cause serious damage.</p>



<p>Pest infestations are also becoming more common. Milder winters in North America have allowed for parasitic species like the pine beetle to proliferate without sharp freezes to kill off larvae. <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bark-beetles-wildfires-an_b_9445678?guccounter=1&amp;guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZWNvc2lhLm9yZy8&amp;guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJvgFPavUUogBhhLKZoL-u-RiTlTSgiN4YniZd27I844KPbfiox0oknuDMeeMT8Sa8-LeWp10ZFm8bX7VBaw4_i4hgNjC532fCYszIJ51_oJlowZ5sGmeipcGPPKHSytWX2UvDZk_VDzfNwRVM8v38bmkIQhhw4mmxIiWDn5HOWt" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">The beetles</a> reproduce under the bark of vulnerable trees, killing them. Dead trees dry out and become kindling for future wildfires that release more carbon and accelerate climate change, enacting a vicious cycle.</p>



<p>In some areas, like the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0411-9/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">arctic or Africa’s Sahel</a>, increased temperatures have allowed for the advance of trees into previously unwooded areas, but the overall impact of climate change will be negative for forests. In the tropics, dryer conditions mean less rainfall, which doesn’t bode well for rainforests. As vegetation dries out, fires could become more common in an ecosystem where they are not natural. Some researchers hypothesize that reaching a certain threshold of drying could push the Amazon over an <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/01/impending-amazon-tipping-point-puts-biome-and-world-at-risk-scientists-warn/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">ecological tipping point</a>, where the environment is no longer able to support a forest. The world’s largest rainforest could degrade to savanna in less than <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/01/impending-amazon-tipping-point-puts-biome-and-world-at-risk-scientists-warn/" target="_blank" aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" rel="noreferrer noopener">50 years</a>.</p>



<p>Increased soil temperature has also been shown to release more carbon dioxide and higher temperatures from increased carbon dioxide levels could actually <a aria-label="undefined (opens in a new tab)" href="https://e360.yale.edu/features/will-climate-change-upend-projections-of-future-forest-growth" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">stunt plant growth</a>, compromising their ability to continue sequestering carbon. This has serious implications for programs attempting to combat climate change through tree planting.</p>



<p>While protecting and restoring forests may be essential for slowing climate change, reducing carbon emissions is also critical to preserving forests in the first place. Already, the impacts of climate change are being felt from the tropics to the boreal region. If warming continues, the forests we know may look a lot different in the decades to come.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 
 EDITOR'S NOTE 09/01/2020: Article updated to clarify the role of increased carbon dioxide in stunting plant growth.

</div> 

 

<hr>

Fires, pest infestations and stunted tree growth— climate change could have big negative impacts on the forests we know and depend upon.

Climate Change Will Alter Forests as We Know Them | GFW Blog

agriculture

agriculture | Global Forest Watch Blog

Forests

Forests | Global Forest Watch Blog

land use

land use | Global Forest Watch Blog

Soil

Soil | Global Forest Watch Blog

Stephanie Roe

<p>The 1.5 mark holds special resonance in the climate struggle. In the Paris Agreement, Parties agreed to try to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius for the best chance at avoiding the worst impacts of climate change.</p>



<p>This August, a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/srccl/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">special report</a>&nbsp;from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change unveiled another 1.5 mark: temperatures over land have&nbsp;<em>already</em>&nbsp;risen by an average of 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 75% more than the global average (which factors in temperature changes over both land and ocean).</p>



<p>If we’re going to keep temperatures on land from rising further, how we manage our land globally – broadly, forests, wetlands and agricultural lands – matters a lot. Earlier this year, the&nbsp;<a href="https://wrr-food.wri.org/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">World Resources Report: Creating a Sustainable Food Future</a>&nbsp;laid out a menu of options that could meet growing demands for food in ways that help stabilize the climate, promote economic development, and reduce poverty.</p>



<p>Last week, a new&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0591-9">study</a>&nbsp;in&nbsp;<em>Nature Climate Change</em>&nbsp;added to this body of science by laying out eight action areas that, if fully implemented, could collectively make the world’s land carbon-neutral by 2040, a carbon sink by 2050, and contribute 30% of the total mitigation necessary to limit warming to 1.5 degrees. This is on top of the 30% of carbon emissions that land already sequesters naturally. Importantly, this can all be delivered in a way that contributes to many other Sustainable Development Goals like cleaner air and water, improved food security and public health, biodiversity and climate resilience.</p>



<p>The new study reconciles what is necessary with what is possible, offering not only a roadmap of timebound solutions to help stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations over the next several decades, but also literal maps of where each action should be prioritized. Here’s where we can go from here.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Forests form the base</h3>



<p>Forest-based actions give us over half the reductions the roadmap requires. The two largest wedges come from&nbsp;<strong>reducing emissions from deforestation</strong>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<strong>restoring forests, wetlands and drained peatlands.</strong>&nbsp;Maintaining and enhancing natural ecosystems is critical because they store more carbon than all existing fossil fuel reserves – not to mention they provide us clean air, water, and habitat for most of Earth’s biodiversity.</p>



<p>Right now, we’re headed the wrong way on deforestation, sidelining one of our best weapons against climate change. A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://forestdeclaration.org/images/uploads/resource/2019NYDFReport.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">report</a>&nbsp;shows that rather than cutting deforestation in half by 2020 as envisioned in the New York Declaration on Forests, average emissions from tropical tree cover loss are 57% higher since 2014 than they were between 2001 and 2013.</p>



<p>Progress at the scale and pace necessary remain elusive for forest restoration, too. While the political will to restore degraded land has increased, efforts to implement restoration promises have been slow to gain traction.</p>



<p>The final tree-related wedge of the roadmap –&nbsp;<strong>improved forest management and agroforestry</strong>&nbsp;— shifts harvest and regeneration practices to enhance carbon stocks and integrates trees into croplands and pastures to provide ecosystem services and enhance farmer incomes. These actions require changes in management but no change to what the land is used for, and could remove approximately 40 gigatons of carbon by mid-century, or as much carbon dioxide as that emitted by the United States over the past six years.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Land sector wedges" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Land_Sector_wedges_v2.gif" width="100%"></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Transforming food from farm to fork</h3>



<p><a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/12/how-sustainably-feed-10-billion-people-2050-21-charts" target="_blank">Major changes to the global food system</a>&nbsp;can significantly increase efficiency, make people healthier, and add up to make a big climate impact.&nbsp;<strong>Reducing emissions from agriculture</strong>&nbsp;is challenging because of the need to produce additional food for the growing global population, although a number of&nbsp;<a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2019/07/10-breakthrough-technologies-can-help-feed-world-without-destroying-it" target="_blank">promising opportunities</a>&nbsp;and new technologies exist. Agricultural actions in the roadmap are tailored for the predominant food produced in each region. Cutting methane emissions from rice production, for example, is a priority in Asia where more than 90% of the world’s rice is grown, while cutting methane emissions from livestock is a priority in countries with large herds. Improving manure and fertilizer management practices helps the global climate, and also cuts down on local water and air pollution. Agricultural soils can also be managed differently to&nbsp;<strong>enhance soil carbon sequestration</strong>&nbsp;, for example by using longer rooted cultivars and preventing soil erosion, although&nbsp;<a href="https://wrr-food.wri.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/creating-sustainable-food-future_2_5.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">uncertainty remains</a>&nbsp;in the science of soil carbon.</p>



<p>Changing food consumption patterns matters, too.&nbsp;<strong>Reducing food loss</strong>&nbsp;through improved handling and storage capacity is a priority for developing countries, while&nbsp;<strong>reducing food waste</strong>&nbsp;should be a focus for developed countries where improved date labeling, consumer nudges and campaigns, and supply chain technology can prevent good food from ending up in the waste bin. Cutting total global food loss and waste in half by 2050 could cut emissions equal to about four years’ worth of U.S. emissions.</p>



<p>Finally, if half of the global population also&nbsp;<strong>shifted towards a more plant-rich diet</strong>&nbsp;, constraining meat consumption to 57 grams per day would lead to emissions cuts equal to another four years of U.S. emissions.</p>



<p>Importantly, these food and forest wedges rely on each other to succeed: changes to food production and consumption are essential to reduce global demand for agricultural land even as the population grows toward 10 billion, allowing the world to reduce deforestation and open up land for reforestation. And conversely,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/06/deforestation-accelerating-despite-mounting-efforts-protect-tropical-forests" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">strong forest protection measures</a>&nbsp;will be necessary to reap the benefits of reduced agricultural pressure.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed" data-src="visualisation/783856?1380"></div><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">The road ahead</h3>



<p><strong>Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)</strong>&nbsp;is deployed only sparingly, on degraded lands and using waste and residues. Most climate models rely heavily on BECCS because achieving the 1.5 degree target is generally considered to be infeasible without substantial carbon removals. But it is the last wedge in the roadmap for a reason: The feasibility and sustainability of large-scale BECCS as a climate solution is not proven. Indeed, WRI has&nbsp;<a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2015/01/why-dedicating-land-bioenergy-wont-curb-climate-change" target="_blank">elsewhere found</a>  that dedicating land specifically for the production of bioenergy—rather than using biomass wastes and residues for energy—is not a good strategy for the climate. Instead, this study’s roadmap relies on deeper emissions reductions from consumption changes such as a shift toward plant-rich diets, which also have health benefits, and on more removals from ecosystem-based sequestration, which enhance vital ecosystem services. Our natural systems can and already do sequester large amounts of carbon, but they will need to be complemented by other sustainable technologies by mid-century.</p>



<p>Every country has land, so every country can play a part in land-based mitigation. It’s also true that every country uses land differently. But if these wedges show anything, it’s that the world will need many kinds of contributions, from forests to food and beyond, to flip the land sector—the anthropogenic emissions and removals related to agriculture and land-use, land-use change and forestry—from a carbon source to a carbon sink.</p>



<p>Finally, the land sector can’t do it alone. Aggressive reductions in fossil fuel emissions and the energy sector (~50% reduction per decade) are a fundamental component of any plan to keep global temperatures in check. This roadmap is just one important piece of a larger journey.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 
BANNER PHOTO: Deforestation in Madagascar. Photo by Jonathan Talbot/WRI. 

 <p></p>

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2019/10/carbon-neutral-land-sector-2040-heres-how-get-there" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 


 

</div> 

 

<hr>



<style type="text/css"></style>

A Carbon-Neutral Land Sector by 2040? Here’s How to Get There

<p>The 1.5 mark holds special resonance in the climate struggle. In the Paris Agreement, Parties agreed to try to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius for the best chance at avoiding the worst impacts of climate change.</p>



<p>This August, a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/srccl/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">special report</a>&nbsp;from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change unveiled another 1.5 mark: temperatures over land have&nbsp;<em>already</em>&nbsp;risen by an average of 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 75% more than the global average (which factors in temperature changes over both land and ocean).</p>



<p>If we're going to keep temperatures on land from rising further, how we manage our land globally – broadly, forests, wetlands and agricultural lands – matters a lot. Earlier this year, the&nbsp;<a href="https://wrr-food.wri.org/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">World Resources Report: Creating a Sustainable Food Future</a>&nbsp;laid out a menu of options that could meet growing demands for food in ways that help stabilize the climate, promote economic development, and reduce poverty.</p>



<p>Last week, a new&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0591-9">study</a>&nbsp;in&nbsp;<em>Nature Climate Change</em>&nbsp;added to this body of science by laying out eight action areas that, if fully implemented, could collectively make the world's land carbon-neutral by 2040, a carbon sink by 2050, and contribute 30% of the total mitigation necessary to limit warming to 1.5 degrees. This is on top of the 30% of carbon emissions that land already sequesters naturally. Importantly, this can all be delivered in a way that contributes to many other Sustainable Development Goals like cleaner air and water, improved food security and public health, biodiversity and climate resilience.</p>



<p>The new study reconciles what is necessary with what is possible, offering not only a roadmap of timebound solutions to help stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations over the next several decades, but also literal maps of where each action should be prioritized. Here's where we can go from here.</p>



<h3>Forests form the base</h3>



<p>Forest-based actions give us over half the reductions the roadmap requires. The two largest wedges come from&nbsp;<strong>reducing emissions from deforestation</strong>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<strong>restoring forests, wetlands and drained peatlands.</strong>&nbsp;Maintaining and enhancing natural ecosystems is critical because they store more carbon than all existing fossil fuel reserves – not to mention they provide us clean air, water, and habitat for most of Earth's biodiversity.</p>



<p>Right now, we're headed the wrong way on deforestation, sidelining one of our best weapons against climate change. A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://forestdeclaration.org/images/uploads/resource/2019NYDFReport.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">report</a>&nbsp;shows that rather than cutting deforestation in half by 2020 as envisioned in the New York Declaration on Forests, average emissions from tropical tree cover loss are 57% higher since 2014 than they were between 2001 and 2013.</p>



<p>Progress at the scale and pace necessary remain elusive for forest restoration, too. While the political will to restore degraded land has increased, efforts to implement restoration promises have been slow to gain traction.</p>



<p>The final tree-related wedge of the roadmap –&nbsp;<strong>improved forest management and agroforestry</strong>&nbsp;— shifts harvest and regeneration practices to enhance carbon stocks and integrates trees into croplands and pastures to provide ecosystem services and enhance farmer incomes. These actions require changes in management but no change to what the land is used for, and could remove approximately 40 gigatons of carbon by mid-century, or as much carbon dioxide as that emitted by the United States over the past six years.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Land sector wedges" src="https://dev-global-forest-watch-blog.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Land_Sector_wedges_v2.gif" width="100%"></div>



<h3>Transforming food from farm to fork</h3>



<p><a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/12/how-sustainably-feed-10-billion-people-2050-21-charts" target="_blank">Major changes to the global food system</a>&nbsp;can significantly increase efficiency, make people healthier, and add up to make a big climate impact.&nbsp;<strong>Reducing emissions from agriculture</strong>&nbsp;is challenging because of the need to produce additional food for the growing global population, although a number of&nbsp;<a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2019/07/10-breakthrough-technologies-can-help-feed-world-without-destroying-it" target="_blank">promising opportunities</a>&nbsp;and new technologies exist. Agricultural actions in the roadmap are tailored for the predominant food produced in each region. Cutting methane emissions from rice production, for example, is a priority in Asia where more than 90% of the world's rice is grown, while cutting methane emissions from livestock is a priority in countries with large herds. Improving manure and fertilizer management practices helps the global climate, and also cuts down on local water and air pollution. Agricultural soils can also be managed differently to&nbsp;<strong>enhance soil carbon sequestration</strong>&nbsp;, for example by using longer rooted cultivars and preventing soil erosion, although&nbsp;<a href="https://wrr-food.wri.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/creating-sustainable-food-future_2_5.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">uncertainty remains</a>&nbsp;in the science of soil carbon.</p>



<p>Changing food consumption patterns matters, too.&nbsp;<strong>Reducing food loss</strong>&nbsp;through improved handling and storage capacity is a priority for developing countries, while&nbsp;<strong>reducing food waste</strong>&nbsp;should be a focus for developed countries where improved date labeling, consumer nudges and campaigns, and supply chain technology can prevent good food from ending up in the waste bin. Cutting total global food loss and waste in half by 2050 could cut emissions equal to about four years' worth of U.S. emissions.</p>



<p>Finally, if half of the global population also&nbsp;<strong>shifted towards a more plant-rich diet</strong>&nbsp;, constraining meat consumption to 57 grams per day would lead to emissions cuts equal to another four years of U.S. emissions.</p>



<p>Importantly, these food and forest wedges rely on each other to succeed: changes to food production and consumption are essential to reduce global demand for agricultural land even as the population grows toward 10 billion, allowing the world to reduce deforestation and open up land for reforestation. And conversely,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/06/deforestation-accelerating-despite-mounting-efforts-protect-tropical-forests" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)">strong forest protection measures</a>&nbsp;will be necessary to reap the benefits of reduced agricultural pressure.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed" data-src="visualisation/783856?1380"></div><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script>



<h3>The road ahead</h3>



<p><strong>Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)</strong>&nbsp;is deployed only sparingly, on degraded lands and using waste and residues. Most climate models rely heavily on BECCS because achieving the 1.5 degree target is generally considered to be infeasible without substantial carbon removals. But it is the last wedge in the roadmap for a reason: The feasibility and sustainability of large-scale BECCS as a climate solution is not proven. Indeed, WRI has&nbsp;<a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2015/01/why-dedicating-land-bioenergy-wont-curb-climate-change" target="_blank">elsewhere found</a>  that dedicating land specifically for the production of bioenergy—rather than using biomass wastes and residues for energy—is not a good strategy for the climate. Instead, this study's roadmap relies on deeper emissions reductions from consumption changes such as a shift toward plant-rich diets, which also have health benefits, and on more removals from ecosystem-based sequestration, which enhance vital ecosystem services. Our natural systems can and already do sequester large amounts of carbon, but they will need to be complemented by other sustainable technologies by mid-century.</p>



<p>Every country has land, so every country can play a part in land-based mitigation. It's also true that every country uses land differently. But if these wedges show anything, it's that the world will need many kinds of contributions, from forests to food and beyond, to flip the land sector—the anthropogenic emissions and removals related to agriculture and land-use, land-use change and forestry—from a carbon source to a carbon sink.</p>



<p>Finally, the land sector can't do it alone. Aggressive reductions in fossil fuel emissions and the energy sector (~50% reduction per decade) are a fundamental component of any plan to keep global temperatures in check. This roadmap is just one important piece of a larger journey.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 
BANNER PHOTO: Deforestation in Madagascar. Photo by Jonathan Talbot/WRI. 

 <p></p>

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2019/10/carbon-neutral-land-sector-2040-heres-how-get-there" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 


 

</div> 

 

<hr>

A Carbon-Neutral Land Sector by 2040? Here's How to Get There