Estimates of forest ecosystem carbon for common reforestation scenarios in the United States
Résumé fourni par la source
This document presents forest carbon stocks and stand-level total volume for common reforestation scenarios in the United States.Eight geographic regions and 13 forest types are represented.These tables complement recent estimates of forest carbon stocks in the conterminous United States (Hoover et al. 2021) and were developed with a similar approach, using the USDA Forest Service's Forest Vegetation Simulator and starting from a "bare ground" condition.The regions, types, and scenarios were selected based on data from the Forest Service and reforestation partner organizations and reflect current commonly used reforestation practices.Two sets of estimates are provided for each region and type, representing different planting densities.Although the uncertainty of results obtained by using generalized estimates may be high relative to other techniques that use site-or project-specific data, growth and yield data for reforestation projects are generally unavailable.Yield data for planted stands are often derived from timber plantations, where planting densities are higher and extensive site preparation and tending treatments are often applied.The tables presented here provide generalized regional estimates of expected carbon accumulation from reforestation projects, developed in a manner consistent with previous forest carbon lookup tables for major forest types in the conterminous United States.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Estimates of forest ecosystem carbon for common reforestation scenarios in the United States
- Date Crossref
- 06/03/2023
- Éditeur
- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station
- Type
- report
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.