Search

We present a new synthesis, based on a suite of complementary approaches, of the primary production and carbon sink in forests of the 25 member states of the European Union (EU-25) during 1990–2005. Upscaled terrestrial observations and model-based approaches agree within 25% on the mean net primary production (NPP) of forests, i.e. 520±75 g C m−2 yr−1 over a forest area of 1.32 × 106 km2 to 1.55 × 106 km2 (EU-25). New estimates of the mean long-term carbon forest sink (net biome production, NBP) of EU-25 forests amounts 75±20 g C m−2 yr−1. The ratio of NBP to NPP is 0.15±0.05. Estimates of the fate of the carbon inputs via NPP in wood harvests, forest fires, losses to lakes and rivers and heterotrophic respiration remain uncertain, which explains the considerable uncertainty of NBP. Inventory-based assessments and assumptions suggest that 29±15% of the NBP (i.e., 22 g C m−2 yr−1) is sequestered in the forest soil, but large uncertainty remains concerning the drivers and future of the soil organic carbon. The remaining 71±15% of the NBP (i.e., 53 g C m−2 yr−1) is realized as woody biomass increments. In the EU-25, the relatively large forest NBP is thought to be the result of a sustained difference between NPP, which increased during the past decades, and carbon losses primarily by harvest and heterotrophic respiration, which increased less over the same period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A full account for carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas balance is presented for the Dutch forest and nature areas for 1990-2002 at a Tier 2.5 level. The paper outlines how complex guidelines can be turned into a practical system, appropriate for a small country, making use of the best knowledge and data available. The net total sink of all processes of the forest and other nature terrains balance is very stable through time around an average of 1.74 million tonnes of CO2 per year. The sink is to a large extent determined by the growth of forest remaining forest, and the harvest taking place in there. Newly added processes in this new National System are significant as well, but they compensate each other. The sources from deforestation and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions (around 900 ktonne CO2) are for two thirds compensated by the sinks from afforestation, dead wood, soil C changes due to land use changes, and trees outside the forest. The land use changes between 1990 and 2000 showed that The Netherlands has an annual deforestation of 2504 ha (0.7% of the forest area) and an afforestation of 3124 ha. Deforestation led in total over the 13 years of 1990-2002 to an emission of 11.2 million tonne CO2 compensated by only 1.9 million tonne CO2 due to afforestation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Finland, Norway and Sweden forest management is presently changing towards a more nature-orientated management. In this study the European Forest Information SCENario (EFISCEN) model was applied to determine how this change might affect the potential for wood production in the three countries. Three different management regimes, traditional, traditional with nature conservation (''conservation''), and longer rotations with nature conservation (''conservation +''), were combined with two alternative felling levels. The results show that conserving 6.1-8.8% of the older forests in the southern regions had no limiting effects on production levels, as foreseen by the European Timber Trend Studies V by the UN-ECE for Finland and Sweden. Under the conservation + scenario, maximum sustainable felling levels decreased to 84, 79 and 72% of the present levels in Finland, Norway and Sweden, respectively. Increasing the rotation length put more pressure on the older age classes and thus did not increase the average age of the forest. If the consumption of wood increases as quickly as indicated by other studies, it will be hard to fulfil that demand and at the same time conserve considerable areas of forest in the southern regions of the countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this Letter, a middle initial and additional affiliation have been added for author G. J. Nabuurs; two statements have been added to the Supplementary Acknowledgements; and a citation to the French National Institute has been added to the Methods; see accompanying Author Correction for further details. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]