Local-Scale Carbon Budgets and Mitigation Opportunities for the Northeastern United States

Economic and political realities present challenges for implementing an aggressive climate change abatement program in the United States. A high-efficiency approach will be essential. In this synthesis, we compare carbon budgets and evaluate the carbon-mitigation potential for nine counties in the n...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Bioscience 2012-01, Vol.62 (1), p.23-38
Main Authors: Raciti, Steve M, Fahey, Timothy J, Thomas, R. Quinn, Woodbury, Peter B, Driscoll, Charles T, Carranti, Frederick J, Foster, David R, Gwyther, Philip S, Hall, Brian R, Hamburg, Steven P, Jenkins, Jennifer C, Neill, Christopher, Peery, Brandon W, Quigley, Erin E, Sherman, Ruth, Vadeboncoeur, Matt A, Weinstein, David A, Wilson, Geoff
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aggression
Agricultural land
carbon
Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide emissions
Carbon sequestration
Climate
Climate change
Consumer Economics
Counties
Emissions
Emissions reduction
Energy
Energy conservation
Energy crops
Environmental protection
Forest cover
Forest protection
Governance
Housing
Land Use
Local Government
Opportunities
OVERVIEW ARTICLES
Pollutant emissions
Population density
Socioeconomics
Studies
Topography
Wind power
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Economic and political realities present challenges for implementing an aggressive climate change abatement program in the United States. A high-efficiency approach will be essential. In this synthesis, we compare carbon budgets and evaluate the carbon-mitigation potential for nine counties in the northeastern United States that represent a range of biophysical, demographic, and socioeconomic conditions. Most counties are net sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) to the atmosphere, with the exception of rural forested counties, in which sequestration in vegetation and soils exceed emissions. Protecting forests will ensure that the region's largest CO2 sink does not become a source of emissions. For rural counties, afforestation, sustainable fuelwood harvest for bioenergy, and utility-scale wind power could provide the largest and most cost-effective mitigation opportunities among those evaluated. For urban and suburban counties, energy-efficiency measures and energy-saving technologies would be most cost effective. Through the implementation of locally tailored management and technology options, large reductions in CO2 emissions could be achieved at relatively low costs.
ISSN:0006-3568
1525-3244
DOI:10.1525/bio.2012.62.1.7