SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A new study finds that droughts reduce forests' ability to store carbon. (Photo: Ed Suominen/flickr/cc)
Battered By Drought, Forests Lose Ability to Fend Off Climate Change
'Some forests could be in a race to recover before the next drought strikes'
Jul 31, 2015
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.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
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.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.