Does this mean that carbon sequestration by preservation and afforestation in boreal forests has more bang for the buck than in tropical forests?
Also, does this mean that there is an unexpected benefit of SRM influence on hydrological system--longer carbon residence times? Fred *Researchers paint a new picture of carbon in land ecosystems [26 September 2014]* http://phys.org/news/2014-09-picture-carbon-ecosystems_1.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature13731.html ...The average global carbon turnover time is 23 years, according to a new report published in Nature by an international research team headed by Nuno Carvalhais and Markus Reichstein from the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry in Jena. ***In the tropics, it takes just 15 years before a carbon atom is released back into the atmosphere; in higher latitudes, it takes 255 years. *** Surprisingly, the analysis revealed that precipitation is at least as important as temperature in determining the turnover time. The researchers also established that overall more carbon than was previously thought is stored in land ecosystems - especially in soil. ..."The length of time that a carbon atom remains in the ecosystem is crucial to the carbon balance," says Markus Reichstein, who heads the Biogeochemical Integration Department at the MPI in Jena. The terrestrial balance in the global carbon cycle is an important factor in climate models. However, the way in which land ecosystems will respond to global warming is one of the greatest uncertainties of current climate forecasts. ...The researchers' analyses show that carbon turnover time decreases when precipitation increases. ...The study revealed one unexpected correlation in the savannahs: even in tropical grasslands, carbon turnover time decreases the more precipitation falls. This was certainly unexpected, as more trees grow in these regions due to greater moisture there. "As wood has a long life, we would actually expect that carbon then stays longer in the system," says Reichstein. One possible explanation for the apparent paradox is that fires are more frequent in heavily wooded areas, releasing the carbon faster. Lisa Emmer [email protected] Research Analyst ISCIENCES, L.L.C. ᐧ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
