If you haven’t figured it out yet, I believe sequestering dead wood–i.e, preserving it in its natural form for hundreds or thousands of years–can contribute to climate change reversal, and this could be a way to get regular people more directly involved in the process. “Additionality” is an important test for ensuring a carbon offset project is actually making a long-term difference. This post argues that sequestering dead wood is strongly additional, especially in forests where wildfire is increasingly common.
The details:
- Dead wood generally releases carbon, which then combines with oxygen to create CO2 gas in the environment–at some point. The question is when, and how.
- Fire is the most immediate conversion to carbon dioxide gas. Fire creates zero ‘carbon sink.’ (Keep in mind that ‘carbon sink’ in this context is a GOOD thing. It keeps carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Also keep in mind that in the context of western north american forests, just about ALL DEAD WOOD will eventually burn, unless it is removed). Fire is obviously a ‘natural’ process, but these days, not always a ‘good’ process for the environment.
- Otherwise, dead wood can also decompose, which gradually leads to carbon release. It sits on the forest floor and rots. The rotting process is quicker where there is more rainfall. In western forests where rain is scarce, the decomposition process can take years, and even decades. While in the form of dead wood on the forest floor, decomposing wood is a carbon sink. However, with today’s prevalence of megafires, the likelihood that dead wood remains on the forest floor until completely decomposed is low. More likely, it will eventually burn.
- Finally, man-made carbon sinks from the forest are the use of wood in long-term products, like construction materials or furniture. The carbon in this wood can remain sequestered for decades or hundreds of years. Other man-made uses create carbon sinks of a less long-lasting nature: Things like paper, napkins, and packaging. Eventually all of these are likely to decompose.
- ‘Additionality’ is an important argument suggesting that any sequestration project must put away carbon that wouldn’t otherwise be put away anyway. I’ve described the three most likely ‘uses’ of deadwood above–Fire, decomposition, and man-made uses. Of these three, certain man-made uses create some lengthy carbon sinks, but most do not. But deadwood that becomes sequestered is extremely unlikely to have been considered for construction materials or furniture anyway.
- Burying dead wood creates additionality in all cases, because almost all wood eventually burns or decomposes. A layer of soil on top of the wood can separate it from oxygen for tens of thousands of years. It’s hard to argue that dead wood does not deliver ‘additionality.’
