Scholarlink

<p>Achieving the Paris Agreement’s CO<sub>2</sub> emission reduction goals heavily relies on enhancing carbon storage and sequestration in forests globally. Yet, the increasing vulnerability of carbon stored in forests to both climate change and human intervention is often neglected in current mitigation strategies. Our study explores modelled interactions between key emission sectors, indicating that accelerated decarbonization could meet climate objectives despite forest carbon losses due to disturbances. However, delaying action on forest carbon loss by just five years consistently doubles the additional mitigation costs and efforts across key sectors, regardless of the assessed forest disturbance rates. Moreover, these myopic responses to forest carbon loss are as stringent, or even more demanding, than immediate responses to twice the forest disturbance rate. Our results underline the urgent need to monitor and safeguard forests for the economic feasibility of the Paris Agreement’s climate goals.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Hedging our bet on forest permanence for the economic viability of climate targets

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月27日

查看全文
  • Michael G. Windisch,
  • Florian Humpenöder,
  • Leon Merfort,
  • Nico Bauer,
  • Gunnar Luderer,
  • Jan Philipp Dietrich,
  • Jens Heinke,
  • Christoph Müller,
  • Gabriel Abrahao,
  • Hermann Lotze-Campen,
  • Alexander Popp

摘要

Achieving the Paris Agreement’s CO2 emission reduction goals heavily relies on enhancing carbon storage and sequestration in forests globally. Yet, the increasing vulnerability of carbon stored in forests to both climate change and human intervention is often neglected in current mitigation strategies. Our study explores modelled interactions between key emission sectors, indicating that accelerated decarbonization could meet climate objectives despite forest carbon losses due to disturbances. However, delaying action on forest carbon loss by just five years consistently doubles the additional mitigation costs and efforts across key sectors, regardless of the assessed forest disturbance rates. Moreover, these myopic responses to forest carbon loss are as stringent, or even more demanding, than immediate responses to twice the forest disturbance rate. Our results underline the urgent need to monitor and safeguard forests for the economic feasibility of the Paris Agreement’s climate goals.