Efficiency of carbon farms for CO2 sequestration: a comparative analysis of forest and swamp ecosystems in the context of climate change
Keywords:
carbon farms, CO2 sequestration, ecosystem monitoring, climate change, sustainable forest managementAbstract
In the context of global climate change, the search for effective carbon sequestration mechanisms is of paramount importance to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. The present study is devoted to a comparative analysis of the carbon sequestering potential of specialized forest and swamp ecosystems operating in the mode of managed carbon farms. Based on three-year monitoring data (2020-2023), a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of CO2 sequestration in various climatic zones of the Russian Federation was carried out. The study was based on the integration of field measurements using static flow chambers, remote sensing, laboratory analysis of soil and biomass samples, as well as mathematical modeling of the carbon balance. The results demonstrate that, with optimal management, swamp ecosystems are able to sequester an average of 42.7% more carbon than forest ecosystems of a similar area (4.3±0.5 t/ha/year versus 3.0±0.3 t/ha/year). A strong positive correlation (r=0.78, p<0.01) was found between the groundwater level and the intensity of sequestration in swamp ecosystems. The optimal tree stand structure has been determined for forest carbon farms, ensuring maximum CO2 absorption efficiency in different age groups. An economic and ecological model of the functioning of carbon farms has been developed, taking into account the time characteristics of carbon deposition, the risks of natural disturbances and economic profitability. The results obtained can serve as a basis for the formation of a national strategy for the development of projects on managed carbon sequestration and improvement of the methodology of carbon accounting.
References
Вомперский С.Э., Иванов А.И., Цыганова О.П., Валяева Н.А., Глухова Т.В., Дубинин А.И., Глухов А.И., Маркелова Л.Г. Заболоченные органогенные почвы и болота России и запас углерода в их торфах // Почвоведение. 1994. № 12. С. 17-25.
Замолодчиков Д.Г., Грабовский В.И., Краев Г.Н. Динамика бюджета углерода лесов России за два последних десятилетия // Лесоведение. 2011. № 6. С. 16-28.
Чернова О.В., Рыжова И.М., Подвезенная М.А. Опыт региональной оценки изменений запасов углерода в почвах южной тайги и лесостепи за исторический период // Почвоведение. 2016. № 8. С. 1013-1028. DOI: 10.7868/S0032180X16080037.
Frolking S., Roulet N.T. Holocene radiative forcing impact of northern peatland carbon accumulation and methane emissions // Global Change Biology. 2007. Vol. 13. № 5. pp. 1079-1088. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01339.x.
Sirin A., Minayeva T., Yurkovskaya T., Kuznetsov O., Smagin V., Fedotov Y. Russian Federation (European Part) // Mires and Peatlands of Europe: Status, Distribution and Conservation / H. Joosten, F. Tanneberger, A. Moen (eds.). Stuttgart: Schweizerbart Science Publishers, 2017. pp. 589-616.
Nilsson S., Shvidenko A., Stolbovoi V., Gluck M., Jonas M., Obersteiner M. Full Carbon Account for Russia. IIASA Interim Report IR-00-021. Laxenburg: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2000. 180 p.
Strack M. (ed.). Peatlands and Climate Change. Jyväskylä: International Peat Society, 2008. 223 p.
Yu Z., Loisel J., Brosseau D.P., Beilman D.W., Hunt S.J. Global peatland dynamics since the Last Glacial Maximum // Geophysical Research Letters. 2010. Vol. 37. Article L13402. DOI: 10.1029/2010GL043584.
Pan Y., Birdsey R.A., Fang J., Houghton R., Kauppi P.E., Kurz W.A., Phillips O.L., Shvidenko A., Lewis S.L., Canadell J.G., Ciais P., Jackson R.B., Pacala S.W., McGuire A.D., Piao S., Rautiainen A., Sitch S., Hayes D. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world's forests // Science. 2011. Vol. 333. № 6045. pp. 988-993. DOI: 10.1126/science.1201609.
Fridman J., Holm S., Nilsson M., Nilsson P., Ringvall A.H., Ståhl G. Adapting National Forest Inventories to changing requirements — the case of the Swedish National Forest Inventory at the turn of the 20th century // Silva Fennica. 2014. Vol. 48. № 3. Article 1095. DOI: 10.14214/sf.1095.
Turetsky M.R., Benscoter B., Page S., Rein G., van der Werf G.R., Watts A. Global vulnerability of peatlands to fire and carbon loss // Nature Geoscience. 2015. Vol. 8. № 1. pp. 11-14. DOI: 10.1038/ngeo2325.
Leifeld J., Menichetti L. The underappreciated potential of peatlands in global climate change mitigation strategies // Nature Communications. 2018. Vol. 9. Article 1071. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-03406-6.
Hugelius G., Loisel J., Chadburn S. et al. Large stocks of peatland carbon and nitrogen are vulnerable to permafrost thaw // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2020. Vol. 117. № 34. pp. 20438-20446. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1916387117.
Frolking S., Talbot J., Jones M.C., Treat C.C., Kauffman J.B., Tuittila E.-S., Roulet N. Peatlands in the Earth's 21st century climate system // Environmental Reviews. 2011. Vol. 19. pp. 371-396. DOI: 10.1139/a11-014.
Griscom B.W., Adams J., Ellis P.W. et al. Natural climate solutions // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017. Vol. 114. № 44. pp. 11645-11650. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1710465114.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.