Sources and sinks of greenhouse gases in the landscape: Approach for spatially explicit estimates

Climate change mitigation is a global response that requires actions at the local level. Quantifying local sources and sinks of greenhouse gases (GHG) facilitate evaluating mitigation options. We present an approach to collate spatially explicit estimated fluxes of GHGs (carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide) for main land use sectors in the landscape, to aggregate, and to calculate the net emissions of an entire region. Our procedure was developed and tested in a large river basin in Finland, providing information from intensively studied eLTER research sites. To evaluate the full GHG balance, fluxes from natural ecosystems (lakes, rivers, and undrained mires) were included together with fluxes from anthropogenic activities, agriculture and forestry. We quantified the fluxes based on calculations with an anthropogenic emissions model (FRES) and a forest growth and carbon balance model (PREBAS), as well as on emission coefficients from the literature regarding emissions from lakes, rivers, undrained mires, peat extraction sites and cropland. Spatial data sources included CORINE land use data, soil map, lake and river shorelines, national forest inventory data, and statistical data on anthropogenic activities. Emission uncertainties were evaluated with Monte Carlo simulations. Artificial surfaces were the most emission intensive land-cover class. Lakes and rivers were about as emission intensive as arable land. Forests were the dominant land cover in the region (66%), and the C sink of the forests decreased the total emissions of the region by 72%. The region's net emissions amounted to 4.37 ± 1.43 Tg CO2-eq yr−1, corresponding to a net emission intensity 0.16 Gg CO2-eq km−2 yr−1, and estimated per capita net emissions of 5.6 Mg CO2-eq yr−1. Our landscape approach opens opportunities to examine the sensitivities of important GHG fluxes to changes in land use and climate, management actions, and mitigation of anthropogenic emissions.

Climate change mitigation is a global response that requires actions at the local level. Quantifying local sources and sinks of greenhouse gases (GHG) facilitate evaluating mitigation options. We present an approach to collate spatially explicit estimated fluxes of GHGs (carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide) for main land use sectors in the landscape, to aggregate, and to calculate the net emissions of an entire region. Our procedure was developed and tested in a large river basin in Finland, providing information from intensively studied eLTER research sites. To evaluate the full GHG balance, fluxes from natural ecosystems (lakes, rivers, and undrained mires) were included together with fluxes from anthropogenic activities, agriculture and forestry. We quantified the fluxes based on calculations with an anthropogenic emissions model (FRES) and a forest growth and carbon balance model (PREBAS), as well as on emission coefficients from the literature regarding emissions from lakes, rivers, undrained mires, peat extraction sites and cropland. Spatial data sources included CORINE land use data, soil map, lake and river shorelines, national forest inventory data, and statistical data on anthropogenic activities. Emission uncertainties were evaluated with Monte Carlo simulations. Artificial surfaces were the most emission intensive land-cover class. Lakes and rivers were about as emission intensive as arable land. Forests were the dominant land cover in the region (66%), and the C sink of the forests decreased the total emissions of the region by 72%. The region's net emissions amounted to 4.37 +/- 1.43 Tg CO2-eq yr(-1), corresponding to a net emission intensity 0.16 Gg CO2-eq km(-2) yr(-1), and estimated per capita net emissions of 5.6 Mg CO2-eq yr(-1). Our landscape approach opens opportunities to examine the sensitivities of important GHG fluxes to changes in land use and climate, management actions, and mitigation of anthropogenic emissions. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer reviewed