A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands
Substantial discussion exists concerning the best land use options for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on marginal land. Emissions-mitigating land use options include displacement of fossil fuels via biofuel production and afforestation. Comparing C recovery dynamics under these different options is crucial to assessing the efficacy of offset programs. In this paper, we focus on forest recovery on marginal land, and show that there is substantial inaccuracy and discrepancy in the literature concerning carbon accumulation. We find that uncertainty in carbon accumulation occurs in estimations of carbon stocks and models of carbon dynamics over time. We suggest that analyses to date have been largely unsuccessful at determining reliable trends in site recovery due to broad land use categories, a failure to consider the effect of current and post-restoration management, and problems with meta-analysis. Understanding of C recovery could be greatly improved with increased data collection on pre-restoration site quality, prior land use history, and management practices as well as increased methodological standardization. Finally, given the current and likely future uncertainty in C dynamics, we recommend carbon mitigation potential should not be the only environmental service driving land use decisions on marginal lands.
Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands
Substantial discussion exists concerning the best land use options for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on marginal land. Emissions-mitigating land use options include displacement of fossil fuels via biofuel production and afforestation. Comparing C recovery dynamics under these different options is crucial to assessing the efficacy of offset programs. In this paper, we focus on forest recovery on marginal land, and show that there is substantial inaccuracy and discrepancy in the literature concerning carbon accumulation. We find that uncertainty in carbon accumulation occurs in estimations of carbon stocks and models of carbon dynamics over time. We suggest that analyses to date have been largely unsuccessful at determining reliable trends in site recovery due to broad land use categories, a failure to consider the effect of current and post-restoration management, and problems with meta-analysis. Understanding of C recovery could be greatly improved with increased data collection on pre-restoration site quality, prior land use history, and management practices as well as increased methodological standardization. Finally, given the current and likely future uncertainty in C dynamics, we recommend carbon mitigation potential should not be the only environmental service driving land use decisions on marginal lands.
Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands
Tara L. DiRocco (author) / Benjamin S. Ramage (author) / Samuel G. Evans (author) / Matthew D. Potts (author)
2014
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
IASB-Projekt zu Accounting Standards for Non-Publicly Accountable Entities: Status der Diskussion
| British Library Online Contents | 2005
SRWC bioenergy productivity and economic feasibility on marginal lands
| Online Contents | 2015
Assessing the Carbon Footprint of Biochar from Willow Grown on Marginal Lands in Finland
| DOAJ | 2021
Campaign to make the RICS accountable
| British Library Online Contents | 2003
Design and Construction of Reinforced Earth Walls on Marginal Lands
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2000