New estimates of carbon storage and sequestration in China's forests: Effects of age-class and method on inventory-based carbon estimation

We developed a volume-to-biomass method based on age groups representative of forest development stages to estimate live tree biomass, C, and biomass and C accumulation rates of China's forests between 1973 and 1993. The data were from plot-level forest inventory, national-level inventory stati...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Climatic change 2004-12, Vol.67 (2-3), p.211-236
Hauptverfasser: PAN, Yude, TIANXIANG LUO, BIRDSEY, Richard, HOME, John, MELILLO, Jerry
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We developed a volume-to-biomass method based on age groups representative of forest development stages to estimate live tree biomass, C, and biomass and C accumulation rates of China's forests between 1973 and 1993. The data were from plot-level forest inventory, national-level inventory statistics, and ecological site studies specified to estimate biomass in different tree components. Our results indicate that carbon storage in China's forests was 4.34 Pg C in the early 1990s, an increase of 13% since the early 1970s. The annual forest C sequestration rate from the late 1980s to early 1990s was 0.068 Pg C/yr and approximately four- to five-times higher than in the 1970s and 1980s. The large C sink in China's forests in the early 1990s was likely related to age structure changes that had developed to more productive stages, a consequence of reforestation and afforestation programs from the 1960s. The results were compared with other C store estimates, which were based on the same inventory data. Various methods can produce estimates that differ in the direction of C flux as well as its magnitude. Separating age groups with the volume-biomass method could cause a 27% difference in estimated carbon pools but an 89% difference in C sequestration rates whereas the biomass density method would provide an estimate that differs by 65% in the C pools.
ISSN:0165-0009
1573-1480
DOI:10.1007/s10584-004-2799-5