Table 1.
Forest biomass carbon sink under different management scenarios
| SSP scenarioa | Carbon sink of 2020–2100 (Tg C yr−1) | Additional sink after implementation of forest practice (Tg C yr−1)b | Carbon stock loss due to delayed implementation of both practices (Tg C)c | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tree Rep | Rota Ext | N + 5 | N + 10 | N + 15 | ||
| SSP1 | 145–159 | 0.23–1.0 | 4.3–4.7 | 47.9–56.6 | 106.7–113.1 | 130.3–140.8 |
| SSP2 | 158–173 | 0.17–1.0 | 4.5–5.0 | 44.3–62.5 | 113.4–131.6 | 136.3–152.6 |
| SSP3 | 172–188 | 0.28–1.1 | 4.8–5.3 | 45.9–66.9 | 116.1–132.4 | 147.0–162.8 |
| SSP5 | 183–200 | 0.17–1.1 | 5.2–5.6 | 43.9–54.7 | 124.1–134.5 | 149.1–166.2 |
aSSP1-SSP5 indicate the scenarios of SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5, respectively.
bTree Rep: tree replacement; Rota Ext: harvest rotation length extended by 5 years after key year.
cCarbon loss of delayed implementation of management practices was derived from the difference of carbon stock in 2100 between implementation scenarios, N indicate the implementation year and “N + 5”, “N + 10”, and “N + 15” indicate the postponing implementation of both management practices by 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively.