Future forests may absorb more carbon dioxide than current forests
Rhett A. Butler, mongabay.com
December 8, 2005
Forests of the future may grow faster and absorb more carbon in a carbon dioxide enriched environment according to a new study by researchers at the Department of Energy (DOE).
Scientists at the DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory and 10 other institutions in the United States and Europe, found that forests grown in plots experimentally enriched with carbon dioxide have higher productivity than forest plots in the current atmosphere. This suggests that future forests may absorb more carbon than forests of today, helping to partially offset rising carbon dioxide levels.
While the study has important implications for modeling future climate change, lead author Rich Norby cautioned increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide should not be ignored.
“Although carbon dioxide fertilization of forests might slow the rate of increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide, a 23 percent increase in productivity is insufficient to stabilize the concentration in the atmosphere,” said Norby.
The research is announced in the ORNL news release that follows.
ORNL-led study shows forests thrive with increased CO2 levels
Oak Ridge National Laboratory release
Forest productivity may be significantly greater in an atmosphere enriched with carbon dioxide, according to findings released today that challenge recent reports that question the importance of carbon dioxide fertilization.
The study, performed by researchers at the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory and 10 other institutions in the United States and Europe, revealed a strong relationship between productivity of forest plots in the current atmosphere and productivity in plots experimentally enriched with carbon dioxide.
“The median response indicated a 23 percent increase in productivity in the future atmosphere,” said ORNL’s Rich Norby, lead author of the paper to be published Dec. 13 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “What was especially surprising to the research team was the consistency of the response across a wide range of productivity.”
 Related articles Temperate forests may worsen global warming, tropical forests fight higher temperatures | 12/05/2005 Growing a forest might sound like a good idea to combat global warming, since trees draw carbon dioxide from the air and release cool water from their leaves. But they also absorb sunlight, warming the air in the process. According to a new study from the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, planting forests at certain latitudes could make the Earth warmer. 70 years after logging, forests don’t hold as much carbon as original forests | 12/05/2005 New research out of Ohio State University suggests that following logging, temperate forests take long periods of time to recover their carbon storing capacity. The scientists examined forests of of the upper Great Lakes region, which were 90% logged at the turn of the century, and found that they store only half the carbon the original forests contained. Poor forest management is blamed for the shortfall. Elevated atmospheric CO2 increases soil carbon | 12/05/2005 An article in the current issue of Global Change Biology indicates that soils in temperate ecosystems might contribute more to partially offsetting the effects of rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations than earlier studies have suggested. Vegetation growth in Arctic could add to global warming | 9/8/05 |
Researchers analyzed data from four experiments in which young forest stands were exposed for multiple years to an atmosphere with a carbon dioxide concentration predicted to occur in the middle of this century. The experiments were conducted in a deciduous forest in Tennessee, a pine forest in North Carolina, a young hardwood stand in Wisconsin and a high-productivity poplar plantation in Italy.
The team calculated net primary productivity the annual fixation of carbon by green plants into organic matter for each of the sites from data on wood, leaf and fine-root production. The results proved surprising.
“When we got together to analyze these data, we expected to spend our time explaining the differences between sites,” said Norby, a member of ORNL’s Environmental Sciences Division. “We were really surprised and excited when all of the data fell neatly onto a single line.”
More detailed analysis of the data revealed the mechanisms of the forest productivity response. In forest stands with a relatively low amount of leaf area, the response to elevated carbon dioxide levels was explained by increased absorption of light. With greater leaf area, however, the response was an increased efficiency of conversion of light energy to organic matter. In separating the overall response into leaf area and light-use efficiency, the analysis meshes well with broader scale analyses based on satellite imagery, Norby said.
Norby notes that this analysis will be especially valuable as a benchmark to evaluate predictions of ecosystem and global models.
“Climate change predictions are dependent on assumptions about the interaction between the biosphere and atmosphere,” Norby said. “However, the contribution of carbon dioxide fertilization to the future carbon global carbon cycle has been uncertain and the models are poorly constrained by experimental data. The close agreement of the productivity predictions of models with the new experimental data should add confidence to overall model results.”
Norby cautioned against viewing these results as a reason to ignore the steadily increasing amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
“Although carbon dioxide fertilization of forests might slow the rate of increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide, a 23 percent increase in productivity is insufficient to stabilize the concentration in the atmosphere,” he said. “The increase in productivity demonstrated in these experiments will most likely be tempered by the stresses of climate warming, ozone pollution or insufficient nitrogen supply. In addition, some of the increased organic matter entering the forest is not sequestered in wood but is rapidly returned to the atmosphere. Understanding the controls on carbon processing by ecosystems remains a priority research challenge.”
This story includes a modified news release (“ORNL-led study shows forests thrive with increased CO2 levels”) from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory
