A Range of Management Strategies for Planted Pine Systems Yields Net Climate Benefits

This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 1 of this Preprint.

Add a Comment

You must log in to post a comment.


Comments

There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.

Downloads

Download Preprint

Authors

Sarah J. Puls , Rachel L. Cook, Justin S. Baker, James L. Rakestraw

Abstract

Managed forests, including plantation systems, play a vital and often underappreciated role in contributing to the global carbon sink and mitigating climate change, and determining the most effective mitigation strategies requires accounting methods that accurately assess the climate effects of forests. We use a dynamic life cycle assessment methodology to compare the climate effects of thirty-six forest management scenarios with varying rotation lengths for loblolly pine plantations in the southern U.S., including both in situ and ex situ greenhouse gas fluxes. We also evaluate the effectiveness of using only carbon stock estimates to assess the net climate effect of a given management strategy relative to radiative forcing metrics. Using carbon stocks as the metric, we failed to attribute management strategies with higher relative climate benefits, emphasizing the need for greenhouse gas accounting methodologies that directly represent the effect of forest management on potential atmospheric warming mitigation efforts. When radiative forcing is used for comparison, our results show that management decisions such as thinning and rotation length should be adjusted based on stand-specific conditions, and that overgeneralized strategies, such as extending rotation lengths, lowered or had little effect on climate benefits for many scenarios.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31223/X5RH8F

Subjects

Forest Sciences

Keywords

loblolly pine, dynamic LCA, silviculture, forest management, carbon accounting, pine plantations

Dates

Published: 2024-06-29 16:22

Last Updated: 2024-06-29 23:22

License

CC BY Attribution 4.0 International

Additional Metadata

Data Availability (Reason not available):
Growth and yield model(28,29) outputs for all tested regimes are provided in the Supplemental Information. Data for carbon stocks and emissions from harvested wood products were generated using the LobWISE 1.1 model(12), which is available for researchers upon request. All subsequent calculations were performed in the programming software, Python 3.11.1. The annual averages for all tested regimes and all metrics generated from these calculations are provided in the Supplemental Information.

Conflict of interest statement:
This paper was part of a special project funded by International Paper, through the Forest Productivity Cooperative. The authors have no competing financial or non-financial interests to declare related to this research.