Table 1.
CALAND land categories.
Fig 1.
CALAND region (white lines) and ownership (shading) boundaries for California.
This map was made using GRASS GIS 7.4.1.
Fig 2.
CALAND initial 2010 land type distribution (shading) and region (white lines) boundaries for California.
This map was made using GRASS GIS 7.4.1.
Fig 3.
The CALAND model calculates annual changes in landscape carbon and associated fluxes of CO2, CH4 and black carbon. The four main processes are implemented in numbered order and the carbon state is updated after each process. Net ecosystem carbon exchange includes the effects of relevant management practices and optionally the effects of climate change. Forest management includes disposition of harvested, fuel-reduction, and urban forest mortality biomass. Wildfire area is specific to the selected climate option. Land type conversion includes various restoration types, reforestation, and afforestation in addition to baseline land use and land cover change. Direct interactions among the processes are shown by dashed arrows.
Fig 4.
General CALAND carbon dynamics across all land types.
Climate, wildfire, land cover change, and management can affect net vegetation and soil carbon fluxes and mortality rates. See Table 2 for each land type’s carbon pools.
Fig 5.
CALAND forest management carbon dynamics.
There are two separate pathways to wood products and bioenergy: 1) the traditional harvest pathway and 2) a slash pathway from traditionally uncollected harvest residue and disturbed biomass (understory, down dead, and litter). Discarded wood products decay as CO2 and CH4. These dynamics also apply when Forest is converted to Urban area or Cultivated land.
Table 2.
CALAND carbon pools.
Table 3.
Prescribed scenarios for CALAND simulations.
Fig 6.
Annual per-area effects of individual practices in isolation, based on either 12 years of continuous implementation or 32 years of continuous implementation.
Practices with larger effects. Negative values represent reduced emissions, and the mean case values shown by the bars are listed. The lines designate the uncertainty limits based on low and high emission cases as determined by input carbon values. These values are calculated by dividing the cumulative benefit by the product of the cumulative implementation area and the number of implementation years.
Fig 7.
Annual per-area effects of individual practices in isolation, based on either 12 years of continuous implementation or 32 years of continuous implementation.
Practices with smaller effects. Negative values represent reduced emissions, and the mean case values shown by the bars are listed. The lines designate the uncertainty limits based on low and high emission cases as determined by input carbon values. These values are calculated by dividing the cumulative benefit by the product of the cumulative implementation area and the number of implementation years.
Fig 8.
Cumulative benefits (negative) or costs (positive) of individual practices in isolation.
Note that a) forest management effects are an order of magnitude larger than b) most practices and two orders of magnitude larger than c) water- and Cultivated-related practices.
Fig 9.
Cumulative emissions of three BAU management scenarios with respect to no management.
These are based on either the sum of individual practice simulations or a single simulation that applies the practices simultaneously. Shading represents uncertainty for each of the two BAU All scenarios. BAU Plus No Mdw = BAU Plus No Meadow. See Table 3 for scenario definitions.
Fig 10.
Uncertainty in cumulative BAU management emission estimates.
These are based on a) absolute landscape carbon exchange, b) BAU All emissions with respect to no management, and c) benefits of implementing restoration (sans Meadow), soil conservation, and avoided conversion to Urban area (BAU Plus No Meadow) with respect to BAU management (BAU All). The shaded area denotes output ranges due to uncertainties in input carbon densities and fluxes, and the two scenarios distinguish between the default land-use-driven baseline land use/cover change (solid line; LULCC) and the alternative remotely-sensed baseline land use/cover change (dashed line; alt LULCC). See Table 3 for scenario definitions.