I haven't read the paper, but forests also have a cooling effect due to
transpiration (and can benefit regional rainfall if the forest is large
enough). Also, the soil is much cooler under a forest than when the forest
is cut; not sure what this does beyond a regional level (i.e. maybe this
effect is lost at a global scale?). Biodiversity losses from natural
forests (as opposed to tree plantations) are another thing to consider,
whether they 'count' as ecosystem service losses or some other
valuation--e.g., without trees, soil erosion and even landslides can occur
(depending on topography and other factors) and result in various short and
long term costs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jessica Gurevitch
Professor
Department of Ecology and Evolution
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245 USA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Russell Seitz <[email protected]>
wrote:

> This is the first  article I have seen to  economically formalize how to
> weigh the climatic and social  cost of  agricultural albedo change against
> the carbons sequestration and land and  crop value benefits of farming and
> forestry
>
> A the authors note :
>
> "The value of land in both uses is decreased by the warming impact of
> albedo
>
> [(14) and (16)]. Carbon sequestration acts as an opposite force (16).
> These two
>
> forces also contribute to the optimal timber harvest decision (17): the
> clear-
>
> cutting stops the carbon sequestration and releases the sequestered carbon
>
> with a given time profile, but prevents albedo warming caused by a dense
>
> forest stand. The relative effect of these forces is determined by the
> natural
>
> properties of the stand (stand growth, carbon release from carbon pools and
>
> the strength of albedo’s warming power), and the prices assigned to carbon
>
> and albedo. The interplay of the natural processes and the prices of the
>
> externalities determines the optimal harvesting behavior and land use."
>
>
> i intend to alert them to the relevance of their methodology to other
> areas of anthopogenic albedo change, algricultural reservoir albedo
> included/
>
> On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 10:35:47 AM UTC-4, Andrew Lockley wrote:
>>
>> Market-Level Implications of
>> Regulating Forest Carbon Storage and
>> Albedo for Climate Change Mitigation
>> Aapo Rautiainen, Jussi Lintunen, and Jussi Uusivuori
>> We explore the optimal regulation of forest carbon and albedo for climate
>> change
>> mitigation. We develop a partial equilibrium market-level model with
>> socially
>> optimal carbon and albedo pricing and characterize optimal land
>> allocation and
>> harvests. We numerically assess the policy’s market-level impacts on land
>> allocation, harvests, and climate forcing, and evaluate how parameter
>> choices
>> (albedo strength, productivity of forest land, and carbon and albedo
>> prices) affect
>> the outcomes. Carbon pricing alone leads to an overprovision of climate
>> benefits
>> at the expense of food and timber production. Complementing the policy
>> with
>> albedo pricing reduces these welfare losses.
>> Key Words: albedo, carbon, climate, externality, forest, harvest, land
>> use,
>> optimization, timber
>>
> --
> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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 https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to