Search

Protecting the climate system requires urgently reducing carbon emissions to the atmosphere and increasing cumulative carbon stocks in natural systems. Recent studies confirm that large trees accumulate and store a disproportionate share of aboveground forest carbon. In the temperate forests of the western United States, a century of intensive logging drastically reduced large‐trees and older forest, but some large trees remain. However, recent changes to large tree management policy on National Forest lands east of the Cascade Mountains crest in Oregon and southeastern Washington allows increased harvesting of large‐diameter trees (≥53 cm or 21 inches) that account for just 3% of all stems, but hold 42% of total aboveground carbon. In this article, we describe synergies with protecting large trees for climate mitigation, biodiversity, and forest resilience goals to shift species composition, reduce fuel loads and stem density, and adapt to climatically driven increases in fire activity in eastern Oregon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forests are critical to the planetary operational system and evolved without human management for millions of years in North America. Actively managing forests to help them adapt to a changing climate and disturbance regime has become a major focus in the United States. Aside from a subset of forests wherein wood production, human safety, and experimental research are primary goals, we argue that expensive management interventions are often unnecessary, have uncertain benefits, or are detrimental to many forest attributes such as resilience, carbon accumulation, structural complexity, and genetic and biological diversity. Natural forests (i.e., those protected and largely free from human management) tend to develop greater complexity, carbon storage, and tree diversity over time than forests that are actively managed; and natural forests often become less susceptible to future insect attacks and fire following these disturbances. Natural forest stewardship is therefore a critical and cost effective strategy in forest climate adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides a review and comparison of strategies to increase forest carbon, and reduce species losses for climate change mitigation and adaptation in the United States. It compares forest management strategies and actions that are taking place or being proposed to reduce wildfire risk and to increase carbon storage with recent research findings. International agreements state that safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystems is fundamental to climate resilience with respect to climate change impacts on them, and their roles in adaptation and mitigation. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on impacts, mitigation, and adaptation found, and member countries agreed, that maintaining the resilience of biodiversity and ecosystem services at a global scale is "fundamental" for climate mitigation and adaptation, and requires "effective and equitable conservation of approximately 30 to 50% of Earth's land, freshwater and ocean areas, including current near-natural ecosystems." Our key message is that many of the current and proposed forest management actions in the United States are not consistent with climate goals, and that preserving 30 to 50% of lands for their carbon, biodiversity and water is feasible, effective, and necessary for achieving them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

‘We have kicked the can down the road once again – but we are running out of road.’ – Rachel Kyte, Dean of Fletcher School at Tufts University. We, in our capacities as scientists, economists, governance and policy specialists, are shifting from warnings to guidance for action before there is no more ‘road.’ The science is clear and irrefutable; humanity is in advanced ecological overshoot. Our overexploitation of resources exceeds ecosystems’ capacity to provide them or to absorb our waste. Society has failed to meet clearly stated goals of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Civilization faces an epochal crossroads, but with potentially much better, wiser outcomes if we act now. What are the concrete and transformative actions by which we can turn away from the abyss? In this paper we forcefully recommend priority actions and resource allocation to avert the worst of the climate and nature emergencies, two of the most pressing symptoms of overshoot, and lead society into a future of greater wellbeing and wisdom. Humanity has begun the social, economic, political and technological initiatives needed for this transformation. Now, massive upscaling and acceleration of these actions and collaborations are essential before irreversible tipping points are crossed in the coming decade. We still can overcome significant societal, political and economic barriers of our own making. Previously, we identified six core areas for urgent global action – energy, pollutants, nature, food systems, population stabilization and economic goals. Here we identify an indicative, systemic and time-limited framework for priority actions for policy, planning and management at multiple scales from household to global. We broadly follow the ‘Reduce-Remove-Repair’ approach to rapid action. To guide decision makers, planners, managers, and budgeters, we cite some of the many experiments, mechanisms and resources in order to facilitate rapid global adoption of effective solutions. Our biggest challenges are not technical, but social, economic, political and behavioral. To have hope of success, we must accelerate collaborative actions across scales, in different cultures and governance systems, while maintaining adequate social, economic and political stability. Effective and timely actions are still achievable on many, though not all fronts. Such change will mean the difference for billions of children and adults, hundreds of thousands of species, health of many ecosystems, and will determine our common future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Industries worldwide produce about 47% of energy related carbon dioxide emissions and substantial amounts of additional greenhouse gases (GHGs) from industrial process gases. GHG emissions were found to be lower compared to mid-1970s levels in most industrialized nations. Despite an increase in GHG emission levels in developing nations, the total global emissions have dropped. Various technical processes responsible for past reductions and future possibilities are presented.

The EPA has long been criticized for its slowness in responding to problems such as ozone depletion, toxic contamination and acid rain. This failure to act promptly can be traced, in many ways, to the general reluctance of researchers to meak sweeping conclusions without sufficient data. Fortunately, the dangers of such as approach are now being recognized and steps are being taken to ensure that the EPA is not caught flat-footed again, particularly when new environmental management issues crop up as the danger signs of worsening ecological damage are detected., As the articles in this issue of EPA Journal clearly demonstrate, data have become a major commodity in our society. Quantitative information is needed to understand any environmental problem, evaluate [...]

The carbon stock in Europe's forests is decreasing and the importance of protecting "unmanaged" forests must be recognised in reversing this process. In order to keep carbon out of the atmosphere and to meet the Paris Agreement goals, the remaining primary forests must be protected and secondary forests should be allowed to continue growing to preserve existing carbon stocks and accumulate additional stocks. In order to reverse the decreasing forest carbon stocks in Europe (European Environmental Agency, 2019), the largest forest carbon stores must be protected and additional forests must be allowed to continue accumulating carbon (proforestation). [Extracted from the article]