An Improved Grid-Based Carbon Accounting Model for Forest Disturbances from Remote Sensing and TPO Survey Data

Abstract

Forest disturbance is one of the main drivers of forest carbon flux change. How to accurately estimate the carbon flux caused by forest disturbance is an important research problem. In a previous study, the authors proposed a Grid-based Carbon Accounting (GCA) model that used remote sensing data to estimate forest carbon fluxes in North Carolina from 1986 to 2010. However, the original model was unable to track legacy emissions from previously harvested wood products and was unable to consider forest growth conditions before and after forest disturbance. This paper made some improvements to the original GCA model to enable it to track fluxes between all major aboveground live carbon pools, including pre-disturbance growth and growth of undisturbed forests, which were not included in the initial model. Based on existing timber product output (TPO) survey data and annual TPO records inversed from remote sensing data, we also worked to clarify the distribution ratios of removed C between slash and different wood product pools. Specifically, the average slash ratio for North Carolina was calculated from the difference between the C removed and the C flowing into the wood product as calculated from TPO survey data. County- and year-specific ratios were then calculated using the annual TPO records obtained from remote sensing and TPO survey data, dividing the removed remaining C into pools P1, P10, and P100, which were then applied to each 30 m pixel based on the county and year to which the pixel belonged. After compensating for these missing legacy emissions and adjusting forest growth rates from Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) data, we estimated a net carbon sink of 218.1 Tg of the flux associated with live aboveground biomass and harvested wood products from North Carolina woodlands over the 25-year study period (1986–2010). This estimate is close to the greenhouse gas emission and sink data provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for North Carolina and is comparable to estimates reported by several other studies.