Forest carbon storage might be lower than estimated
EcologyComments
We saw a similar correction with soil carbon estimates a decade ago. It led to more precise land-use models and eventually better conservation targets.
Does this account for below-ground biomass? If the carbon isn't in the trunk, it might still be sequestered in root systems or soil.
Hypothetically, root biomass might be even more volatile than wood growth. If the study focuses on the efficiency of the photosynthetic pathway itself, the storage location might be secondary to the metabolic loss.
This highlights the role of autotrophic respiration, where plants burn a significant portion of their photosynthesized carbon for metabolic maintenance. The critical variable here is the net primary production (NPP) versus the gross primary production (GPP).
This reminds me of how we underestimated methane leaks from natural gas pipelines... does this mean we need totally new sensors for forest floors?
The paper notes that a substantial fraction of captured carbon is released almost immediately through stem respiration. This suggests the leakage happens before the carbon even enters long-term structural storage.
This effectively kills the legitimacy of most corporate carbon offset schemes. Why pay for forests that are essentially leaky buckets?
which specific offset standards are most affected?