

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Forests play an important role as "carbon sinks" by absorbing and storing CO2 emissions, but a new study finds that that droughts--expected to become more frequent with climate change--deal that climate-buffering power a blow.
The findings, published this week in the journal Science, show that forests don't recover as quickly after a drought as had been previously thought, indicating a need to adjust climate models.
Researchers gathered tree ring data from over 1,300 sites across the globe to measure growth in periods after severe droughts that have occurred since 1948, and found that for the majority of the forests they studied, trees suffered years-long effects post-drought.
The researchers write: "We found pervasive and substantial 'legacy effects' of reduced growth and incomplete recovery for 1 to 4 years after severe drought."
They found that it took an average of 2 to 4 years for the trees to resume normal growth, with the first year growth happening about 9 percent more slowly than expected, and five percent more slowly the second. That's in contrast to previous ecosystem models that had assumed a quick recovery after drought.
"This really matters because in the future droughts are expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change," stated lead author William R.L. Anderegg, an assistant professor of biology at the University of Utah. "Some forests could be in a race to recover before the next drought strikes," he said.
What's the bottom line in terms of the impact on climate change?
Just looking at semi-arid ecosystems, these 'legacy effects' would mean 1.6 metric gigatons of carbon dioxide over a century. A press release for the study says that amount is roughly equal to one-fourth of the entire U.S. emissions in a year.
"If forests are not as good at taking up carbon dioxide, this means climate change would speed up," Anderegg stated.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Forests play an important role as "carbon sinks" by absorbing and storing CO2 emissions, but a new study finds that that droughts--expected to become more frequent with climate change--deal that climate-buffering power a blow.
The findings, published this week in the journal Science, show that forests don't recover as quickly after a drought as had been previously thought, indicating a need to adjust climate models.
Researchers gathered tree ring data from over 1,300 sites across the globe to measure growth in periods after severe droughts that have occurred since 1948, and found that for the majority of the forests they studied, trees suffered years-long effects post-drought.
The researchers write: "We found pervasive and substantial 'legacy effects' of reduced growth and incomplete recovery for 1 to 4 years after severe drought."
They found that it took an average of 2 to 4 years for the trees to resume normal growth, with the first year growth happening about 9 percent more slowly than expected, and five percent more slowly the second. That's in contrast to previous ecosystem models that had assumed a quick recovery after drought.
"This really matters because in the future droughts are expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change," stated lead author William R.L. Anderegg, an assistant professor of biology at the University of Utah. "Some forests could be in a race to recover before the next drought strikes," he said.
What's the bottom line in terms of the impact on climate change?
Just looking at semi-arid ecosystems, these 'legacy effects' would mean 1.6 metric gigatons of carbon dioxide over a century. A press release for the study says that amount is roughly equal to one-fourth of the entire U.S. emissions in a year.
"If forests are not as good at taking up carbon dioxide, this means climate change would speed up," Anderegg stated.
Forests play an important role as "carbon sinks" by absorbing and storing CO2 emissions, but a new study finds that that droughts--expected to become more frequent with climate change--deal that climate-buffering power a blow.
The findings, published this week in the journal Science, show that forests don't recover as quickly after a drought as had been previously thought, indicating a need to adjust climate models.
Researchers gathered tree ring data from over 1,300 sites across the globe to measure growth in periods after severe droughts that have occurred since 1948, and found that for the majority of the forests they studied, trees suffered years-long effects post-drought.
The researchers write: "We found pervasive and substantial 'legacy effects' of reduced growth and incomplete recovery for 1 to 4 years after severe drought."
They found that it took an average of 2 to 4 years for the trees to resume normal growth, with the first year growth happening about 9 percent more slowly than expected, and five percent more slowly the second. That's in contrast to previous ecosystem models that had assumed a quick recovery after drought.
"This really matters because in the future droughts are expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change," stated lead author William R.L. Anderegg, an assistant professor of biology at the University of Utah. "Some forests could be in a race to recover before the next drought strikes," he said.
What's the bottom line in terms of the impact on climate change?
Just looking at semi-arid ecosystems, these 'legacy effects' would mean 1.6 metric gigatons of carbon dioxide over a century. A press release for the study says that amount is roughly equal to one-fourth of the entire U.S. emissions in a year.
"If forests are not as good at taking up carbon dioxide, this means climate change would speed up," Anderegg stated.