Forest Sequestration Controversy: Old-Growth vs. Young-Growth Forests as Viable Carbon Offsets
Introduction to the Controversy
The purpose of this website is to compare carbon sequestration in Old-Growth vs. Young-Growth Forests in order to determine which is a better carbon offset to carbon dioxide emissions. We explore recent forest sequestration methods such as Reforestation, Afforestation, and Forest Preservation. Select case studies are discussed, stemming from various climatic settings, in order to describe the difference between old-growth and young-growth forests. This website starts by providing a background on recent climate change and carbon offset methods, and then followed by a discussion of key players in the scientific community. We include a network of papers cited frequently by other members of the scientific community with a breif discussion of their work.
Additionally, we identify key players in this debate and include a relevant background on participating government agencies; non-governmental organizations; pertinent legislation; and identify companies with varying degrees of interest in carbon offsets.
There is much controversy over which type of forest biomass is better suited as an offset: old-growth or young-growth. Studies have shown that both are effective carbon sinks, but old-growth forests are better at storing carbon. Young-growth forests, however, are better at sequestering (capturing) carbon. We present the pros and cons of both sides of the controversy; provide a time-line of events; and show how the topic has been exploited in the media, political arena and within the scientific community itself.