Nitrogen fertilization increases N2O emission but does not offset the reduced radiative forcing caused by the increased carbon uptake in boreal forests

Net primary production in boreal coniferous forests is generally severely limited by N deficiency. Nitrogen fertilization has thus the potential to strongly increase forest tree biomass production in the boreal region and consequently increase the biosphere uptake of atmospheric CO2. Increased N availability may though increase the production and emission of soil N2O, counteracting the climate mitigation potential from increased forest biomass production. Studies in the boreal region on the net effect on the climate mitigation potential from N fertilization are scarcer than in other biomes. Therefore, we explored how N affected soil GHG fluxes in two boreal field N-loading experiments, of which one is a long-term experiment (40 years), and the other established 6 years before investigation. We also estimated whether the increased soil N2O emission could offset the N-driven increased C sequestration by the trees. Nitrogen additions affected the soil GHG fluxes in both stands. Soil N2O emission was enhanced by N addition at every fertilization rate, though marginally compared to the reduced soil CO2 emission and the increased atmospheric CO2 uptake and biomass production. The estimated annual uptake of CH4 by soil under long-term N addition increased. The magnitude of soil CH4 uptake was on the same order of magnitude as the increase in soil N2O emissions caused by N addition, when compared as CO2 equivalents. In conclusion, forest N fertilization in boreal areas increased the GHG net uptake and, thus, provides a means to mitigate increasing atmospheric concentrations of GHG

What happens to trees and soils during five decades of experimental nitrogen loading?

High deposition of nitrogen was postulated to drive losses of NO3 - and nutrient base cations, causing soil acidification, nutrient deficiencies reducing tree growth and ultimately tree mortality. We tested these predictions in a uniquely long-term study involving three NH4NO3 addition treatments (N1-N3) in a boreal Pinus sylvestris forest. The lowest level (N1), 30 kg N ha− 1 yr− 1 was applied during 50 years. Twice this rate (N2) was added 38 years, followed by 12 years of recovery, while thrice this rate (N3) was added 20 years followed by 30 years of recovery. We compared tree growth, changes in foliar and soil chemistry among treatments including control plots without N additions. As predicted, the N treatments lowered soil pH and reduced soil base saturation by around 50 %. They also lowered foliar levels of Ca, Mg, K, P and B initially, but after 50 years only Ca and Mg remained lower than in the control. Lack of B motivated a single addition of 2.5 kg ha− 1 after ten years of N treatment. Tree stem growth became and then remained higher in N1 than in the other treatments through the 50 years of treatments. In N2 and N3, foliar δ15N increased during the N-loading phase, but declined during the recovery phase, indicating a return of ectomycorrhizal fungi and their role in tightening the N cycle in N-limited forests. In the terminated, initially highest N treatments, N2 and N3, the trees even show signs of returning to Nlimitation. In these treatments, the soil base saturation remains lower, while the pH was only lower at 0–10 depth in the mineral soil, but not in the 10–20 cm depth horizon or in the superficial organic mor-layer. Accurately documenting the effect of N additions on forest growth required a long-term approach, where reasonable rates of application could be compared with extreme rates. Such long-term experiments are necessary to support forest management in achieving goals for developing future forests as they shift in response to major, global-scale changes

Long-term yield and biodiversity in stands managed with the selection system and the rotation forestry system: A qualitative review

There is an increasing interest in implementing Continuous Cover Forestry (CCF) as a tool to mitigate negative effects of the traditional rotation forestry system on biodiversity. However, the effects of CCF on forest growth and yield and on biodiversity is still poorly known. In this qualitative review, we compare biodiversity and longterm yield between the selection system, which is a type of CCF practiced in full-storied forests, and the traditional rotation forestry system. We specifically focus on forests dominated by Picea abies, which is a tree species of high economic relevance. Our literature search resulted in 17 publications on stand growth and yield and 21 publications on biodiversity. A majority of simulation studies found a higher long-term yield in the rotation forestry system, but it is challenging to conclude which system is the most productive. The magnitude of the difference in yield between systems, and how it varies across different environmental conditions, remains to be determined. For biodiversity, comparisons of species assemblage and individual species were only made to certain phases of the rotation cycle (recent clearcuts and middle-aged stands). Nevertheless, two aspects can be highlighted: i) the species assemblage in clearcuts differ substantially from stands managed with the selection system. Some of these effects may however be short lasting as examplified by studies on beetle assamblages showing that middle-aged rotation forestry stands become more similar to stands managed with the selection system, ii) the selection system maintains a similar species assemblage as the uncut control during the first years after cutting. In conclusion, management with the selection system may come with a loss in long-term stand yield, but much of the species assemblage is maintained after logging. We recommend future studies to specifically focus on long-term effects on biodiversity - in particular on species of conservation concern. There is also a need to establish a long-term research infrastructure to further develop the field

Carbon balances of bioenergy systems using biomass from forests managed with long rotations: bridging the gap between stand and landscape assessments

Studies report different findings concerning the climate benefits of bioenergy, in part due to varying scope and use of different approaches to define spatial and temporal system boundaries. We quantify carbon balances for bioenergy systems that use biomass from forests managed with long rotations, employing different approaches and boundary conditions. Two approaches to represent landscapes and quantify their carbon balances–expanding vs. constant spatial boundaries–are compared. We show that for a conceptual forest landscape, constructed by combining a series of time-shifted forest stands, the two approaches sometimes yield different results. We argue that the approach that uses constant spatial boundaries is preferable because it captures all carbon flows in the landscape throughout the accounting period. The approach that uses expanding system boundaries fails to accurately describe the carbon fluxes in the landscape due to incomplete coverage of carbon flows and influence of the stand-level dynamics, which in turn arise from the way temporal system boundaries are defined on the stand level. Modelling of profit-driven forest management using location-specific forest data shows that the implications for carbon balance of management changes across the landscape (which are partly neglected when expanding system boundaries are used) depend on many factors such as forest structure and forest owners' expectations of market development for bioenergy and other wood products. Assessments should not consider forest-based bioenergy in isolation but should ideally consider all forest products and how forest management planning as a whole is affected by bioenergy incentives–and how this in turn affects carbon balances in forest landscapes and forest product pools. Due to uncertainties, we modelled several alternative scenarios for forest products markets. We recommend that future work consider alternative scenarios for other critical factors, such as policy options and energy technology pathways

On the role of forests and the forest sector for climate change mitigation in Sweden

We analyse the short- and long-term consequences for atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations of forest management strategies and forest product uses in Sweden by comparing the modelled consequences of forest resource use vs. increased conservation at different levels of GHG savings from carbon sequestration and product substitution with bioenergy and other forest products. Increased forest set-asides for conservation resulted in larger GHG reductions only in the short term and only when substitution effects were low. In all other cases, forest use was more beneficial. In all scenarios, annual carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration rates declined in conservation forests as they mature, eventually approaching a steady state. Forest set-asides are thus associated with increasing opportunity costs corresponding to foregone wood production and associated mitigation losses. Substitution and sequestration rates under all other forest management strategies rise, providing support for sustained harvest and cumulative mitigation gains. The impact of increased fertilization was everywhere beneficial to the climate and surpassed the mitigation potential of the other scenarios. Climate change can have large—positive or negative—influence on outcomes. Despite uncertainties, the results indicate potentially large benefits from forest use for wood production. These benefits, however, are not clearly linked with forestry in UNFCCC reporting, and the European Union\u27s Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry carbon accounting, framework may even prevent their full realization. These reporting and accounting frameworks may further have the consequence of encouraging land set-asides and reduced forest use at the expense of future biomass production. Further, carbon leakage and resulting biodiversity impacts due to increased use of more GHG-intensive products, including imported products associated with deforestation and land degradation, are inadequately assessed. Considerable opportunity to better mobilize the climate change mitigation potential of Swedish forests therefore remains

Forests, bioenergy and climate change mitigation: are the worries justified?

No abstract availabl

Forests, bioenergy and climate change mitigation: are the worries justified?

No abstract availabl

Boreal and temperate forest supply chain

201