Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-397
https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-397
08 Oct 2024
 | 08 Oct 2024
Status: this preprint is currently under review for the journal ESSD.

Revised and updated geospatial monitoring of twenty-first century forest carbon fluxes

David A. Gibbs, Melissa Rose, Giacomo Grassi, Joana Melo, Simone Rossi, Viola Heinrich, and Nancy L. Harris

Abstract. Forests are a key component of climate change mitigation strategies because they both emit and remove atmospheric carbon dioxide. Earth observation data are increasingly used to estimate the magnitude and geographic distribution of greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes and reduce overall uncertainty in the global carbon budget, including for forests. Here we report on a revised and updated geospatial, Earth observation-based forest carbon flux modelling framework that maps GHG emissions (Gibbs et al. 2024a), carbon removals (Gibbs et al. 2024b), and the net balance between them (Gibbs et al. 2024c) globally from 2001 onwards at roughly 30-meter resolution (Harris et al. 2021, hereafter referred to as the Global Forest Watch (GFW) model). Beyond updating the model to include the most recent years, revisions address some of the original model’s limitations, improve model inputs, and refine the uncertainty analysis. We found that between 2001 and 2023, global forest ecosystems were, on average, a net carbon sink of -5.5 ± 8.1 (one standard deviation) gigatonnes CO2 equivalent yr-1 (Gt CO2e yr-1), which reflects the balance of 9.0 ± 2.7 Gt CO2e yr-1 of GHG emissions and -14.5 ± 7.7 of carbon removals, with an additional -0.20 Gt CO2e yr-1 transferred into harvested wood products. Uncertainty in gross removals was greatly reduced compared to the original model due to refinement of temperate secondary forest carbon removal factor uncertainties.

To increase the conceptual similarity between fluxes from the GFW model and national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs) and further policy relevance, we translated (re-allocated) GFW’s estimates of gross emissions and removals into fluxes from forest land and deforestation, i.e. the land use categories that countries use to report anthropogenic forest-related fluxes from managed land in their NGHGIs. We estimated a global net anthropogenic forest-related sink of -3.5 Gt CO2e yr-1 (-3.7 Gt CO2e yr-1 including transfers into harvested wood products). Emissions from deforestation ranged between 3.3 and 5.0 Gt CO2yr-1 and the net anthropogenic sink in managed forest land ranged between -6.8 and -8.5 Gt CO2e yr-1, reflecting ambiguity about the reporting category to which countries assign emissions from loss of secondary forests within shifting agriculture systems. We categorized the remaining net flux of -2.2 Gt CO2e yr-1 reported by the GFW model as non-anthropogenic (0.37 Gt CO2e yr-1 emissions and -2.5 Gt CO2e yr-1 removals). The magnitude of the GFW model’s annual average deforestation emissions and the global anthropogenic forest sink aligned well with aggregated NGHGIs, although their temporal trends differed; NGHGIs reported a slightly increasing forest land sink and fluctuating deforestation emissions, while the GFW model reported a declining sink and increasing deforestation emissions.

Updates to the model and the revised uncertainty analysis demonstrate a spatially explicit forest carbon flux monitoring framework that is increasingly transparent, operational, timely, and flexible enough to answer research and policy questions. Moreover, the translation of Earth observation-based flux estimates into the same reporting framework as countries use for NGHGIs can help build consensus on land use carbon fluxes, support the independent evaluation of progress towards Paris Agreement goals, and assist national policymakers in locating sources and sinks of forest carbon and their drivers.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
David A. Gibbs, Melissa Rose, Giacomo Grassi, Joana Melo, Simone Rossi, Viola Heinrich, and Nancy L. Harris

Status: open (until 14 Nov 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
David A. Gibbs, Melissa Rose, Giacomo Grassi, Joana Melo, Simone Rossi, Viola Heinrich, and Nancy L. Harris

Data sets

Forest greenhouse gas emissions D. A. Gibbs et al. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/LNPSGP

Forest carbon removals D. A. Gibbs et al. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/V2ISRH

Forest greenhouse gas net flux D. A. Gibbs et al. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/TVZVBI

Model code and software

GFW flux model code D. A. Gibbs et al. https://github.com/wri/carbon-budget

David A. Gibbs, Melissa Rose, Giacomo Grassi, Joana Melo, Simone Rossi, Viola Heinrich, and Nancy L. Harris

Viewed

Total article views: 110 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
88 20 2 110 1 3
  • HTML: 88
  • PDF: 20
  • XML: 2
  • Total: 110
  • BibTeX: 1
  • EndNote: 3
Views and downloads (calculated since 08 Oct 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 08 Oct 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 103 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 103 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 15 Oct 2024
Download
Short summary
Updated global maps of greenhouse gas emissions and sequestration by forests from 2001 onwards using satellite-derived data show that forests are strong net carbon sinks, capturing about as much CO2 each year on average as the United States emits from fossil fuels. After reclassifying fluxes to countries’ reporting categories for national greenhouse gas inventories, we found that roughly two-thirds of the total net flux from forests is anthropogenic and one-third is non-anthropogenic.
Altmetrics