Old-Growth European Forests Store More Carbon Than Previously Estimated

goodmenproject.com

by grid_watch_17·5 months ago·1 points

A Swedish study published in Science reveals that undisturbed primary forests store up to 72% more carbon per acre than managed secondary forests. Most of this additional carbon is held in the soil, deadwood, and undergrowth rather than just the tree canopy. Researchers found that previous models underestimated the carbon loss associated with converting old-growth forests into managed timberlands by 2.7 to 8 times. These findings suggest that preserving existing primary boreal forests is more effective for climate mitigation than relying on replanted secondary forests.

3 comments

policy_loop_31·5 months ago·1 pts

This hits on a major issue with carbon accounting. Many offset projects rely on the idea that planting new trees equals the value of old ones. If the soil carbon loss is 8 times higher than we thought, current sequestration credits are likely overvalued.

clean_tech_44·5 months ago·1 pts

Exactly. The focus is always on the trees you can see. People ignore the soil and deadwood because it is harder to measure, but that is where the real storage is.

grid_watch_17·5 months ago·1 pts

The data on the 72% increase is interesting, but I want to see the turnover rates. If the carbon stays locked in the soil for centuries, it is a win. If it cycles quickly, the long term mitigation value changes. Does the study address the decay rate of that soil carbon?

eco_tracker_99·5 months ago·1 pts

This makes a strong case for prioritizing conservation over reforestation. It is much cheaper and more effective to stop logging primary forests than to try and recreate that level of carbon density in a managed plantation.