Protecting climate with forests

JACKSON, R; RANDERSON, J T; CANADELL, J G; ANDERSON, R G; AVISSAR, R; BALDOCCHI, D D; BONAN, G B; CALDEIRA, K; DIFFENBAUGH, N S; FIELD, C B; HUNGATE, B A; JOBBÁGY, E G; KUEPPERS, L M; NOSETTO, M D; PATAKI, D E

Environmental Research Letters

IOP Publishing

Año: 2008 vol. 3 p. 1 - 10

1748-9326

Policies for climate mitigation on land rarely acknowledge biophysical factors, such asreflectivity, evaporation, and surface roughness. Yet such factors can alter temperatures muchmore than carbon sequestration does, and often in a conflicting way. We outline a frameworkfor examining biophysical factors in mitigation policies and provide some best-practicerecommendations based on that framework. Tropical projects—avoided deforestation, forestrestoration, and afforestation—provide the greatest climate value, because carbon storage andbiophysics align to cool the Earth. In contrast, the climate benefits of carbon storage are oftencounteracted in boreal and other snow-covered regions, where darker trees trap more heat thansnow does. Managers can increase the climate benefit of some forest projects by using morereflective and deciduous species and through urban forestry projects that reduce energy use.Ignoring biophysical interactions could result in millions of dollars being invested in somemitigation projects that provide little climate benefit or, worse, are counter-productive.