Operational assessment tool for forest carbon dynamics for the United States: a new spatially explicit approach linking the LUCAS and CBM-CFS3 models

• Published in: Carbon balance and management 2022-02, Vol.17 (1), p.1-1, Article 1
• Main Authors: Sleeter, Benjamin M., Frid, Leonardo, Rayfield, Bronwyn, Daniel, Colin, Zhu, Zhiliang, Marvin, David C.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Annual variations; Carbon; Carbon balance; Carbon budget; Carbon sequestration; Carbon sinks; Carbon storage; CBM-CFS3; Climate change; Climate variability; Earth and Environmental Science; Ecosystems; Emissions; Environment; Environmental Management; Estimates; Forest ecosystems; Forestry; Forests; Gain-Loss; Land cover; Land management; Land use; LUCAS; Methodology; Modelling; Terrestrial ecosystems; Terrestrial environments
• ISSN: 1750-0680; 1750-0680
• DOI: 10.1186/s13021-022-00201-1

Background Quantifying the carbon balance of forested ecosystems has been the subject of intense study involving the development of numerous methodological approaches. Forest inventories, processes-based biogeochemical models, and inversion methods have all been used to estimate the contribution of U.S. forests to the global terrestrial carbon sink. However, estimates have ranged widely, largely based on the approach used, and no single system is appropriate for operational carbon quantification and forecasting. We present estimates obtained using a new spatially explicit modeling framework utilizing a “gain–loss” approach, by linking the LUCAS model of land-use and land-cover change with the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector (CBM-CFS3). Results We estimated forest ecosystems in the conterminous United States stored 52.0 Pg C across all pools. Between 2001 and 2020, carbon storage increased by 2.4 Pg C at an annualized rate of 126 Tg C year −1 . Our results broadly agree with other studies using a variety of other methods to estimate the forest carbon sink. Climate variability and change was the primary driver of annual variability in the size of the net carbon sink, while land-use and land-cover change and disturbance were the primary drivers of the magnitude, reducing annual sink strength by 39%. Projections of carbon change under climate scenarios for the western U.S. find diverging estimates of carbon balance depending on the scenario. Under a moderate emissions scenario we estimated a 38% increase in the net sink of carbon, while under a high emissions scenario we estimated a reversal from a net sink to net source. Conclusions The new approach provides a fully coupled modeling framework capable of producing spatially explicit estimates of carbon stocks and fluxes under a range of historical and/or future socioeconomic, climate, and land management futures.