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

Alice Favero, Justin Baker, Brent Sohngen, Adam Daigneault, Christopher Wade, Sara Ohrel, Shaun Ragnauth
Author Information
  1. Alice Favero: RTI International, Durham, USA. afavero@rti.org.
  2. Justin Baker: North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA.
  3. Brent Sohngen: The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA.
  4. Adam Daigneault: University of Maine, Orono, USA.
  5. Christopher Wade: RTI International, Durham, USA.
  6. Sara Ohrel: Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.
  7. Shaun Ragnauth: Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.

Abstract

In recent years several U.S. federal policies have been adopted to support forest-based climate mitigation actions. This study focuses on current federal funds allocated to forest for climate change mitigation activities to assess how much they could deliver in terms of net sequestration under a best-case (optimized) scenario where the cheapest abatement options are implemented first and if these funds are in line to achieve domestic targets for 2030 and 2050. Multiple investments pathways are tested under two different assumptions on CO fertilization to provide a range of future mitigation projections from forests. Results show that under annual investments in line with current federal funds (around $640 million), the expected net carbon flux of U.S. forests is around 745 MtCO/yr in 2030 (+���12% increase from baseline) and if the investments expand after 2030 the net flux is expected to be 786 MtCO/yr in 2050 (+���17% increase from baseline). When CO fertilization is accounted for, the projections of net forest carbon sequestration increase by 17% in 2030 and about 1 GtCO net sequestration achieved under federal funds in 2050, increasing the likelihood of meeting both short-term and long-term domestic targets.

References

  1. Science. 2023 Jun 30;380(6652):1324-1327 [PMID: 37384684]
  2. Nat Commun. 2022 Sep 19;13(1):5490 [PMID: 36123337]
  3. Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 12;5:16518 [PMID: 26558439]
  4. Sci Adv. 2020 Mar 25;6(13):eaay6792 [PMID: 32232153]
  5. Glob Environ Change. 2022 Aug;76:1-13 [PMID: 38024226]
  6. For Policy Econ. 2017 Nov 25;87:35-48 [PMID: 32280299]
  7. Land Econ. 2018 Feb 1;94:97-113 [PMID: 32280147]
  8. J For Econ. 2019;34(3-4):205-231 [PMID: 32280189]
  9. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jan 13;112(2):436-41 [PMID: 25548156]
  10. Nat Commun. 2024 Nov 7;15(1):9625 [PMID: 39511151]
  11. PNAS Nexus. 2023 Nov 21;2(11):pgad345 [PMID: 38024401]
  12. Nat Commun. 2020 Dec 1;11(1):5946 [PMID: 33262324]

Grants

  1. Contract #68HERH19D0030, Call Order #68HERH23F0146/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0netfederalfunds2030USclimatemitigationsequestration2050investmentsforestsincreasecurrentforestchangelinedomestictargetsCOfertilizationprojectionsaroundexpectedcarbonfluxbaselinerecentyearsseveralpoliciesadoptedsupportforest-basedactionsstudyfocusesallocatedactivitiesassessmuchdelivertermsbest-caseoptimizedscenariocheapestabatementoptionsimplementedfirstachieveMultiplepathwaystestedtwodifferentassumptionsproviderangefutureResultsshowannual$640million745 MtCO/yr+���12%expand786 MtCO/yr+���17%accounted17%1GtCOachievedincreasinglikelihoodmeetingshort-termlong-termInvestingmitigate

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.