Papers Published

1. Jackson, R.B. and Jobbagy, E.G. and Avissar, R. and Roy, S.B. and Barrett, D.J. and Cook, C.W. and Farley, K.A. and le Maitre, D.C. and Mccarl, B.A. and Murray, B.C., Trading water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration, Science (USA), vol. 310 no. 5756 (2005), pp. 1944 - 7 [science.1119282] .
   (last updated on 2007/03/27)

   Abstract:
   Carbon sequestration strategies highlight tree plantations without considering their full environmental consequences. We combined field research, synthesis of more than 600 observations, and climate and economic modeling to document substantial losses in stream flow, and increased soil salinization and acidification, with afforestation. Plantations decreased stream flow by 227 millimeters per year globally (52%), with 13% of streams drying completely for at least 1 year. Regional modeling of U.S. plantation scenarios suggests that climate feedbacks are unlikely to offset such water losses and could exacerbate them. Plantations can help control groundwater recharge and upwelling but reduce stream flow and salinize and acidify some soils

   Keywords:
   climate mitigation;forestry;groundwater;soil;