森林再生は以前考えられていたよりも費用対効果が高い(Reforestation is more cost-effective than previously thought)

2024-07-24 カリフォルニア大学バークレー校(UCB)

＜関連情報＞

• https://nature.berkeley.edu/news/2024/07/reforestation-more-cost-effective-previously-thought
• https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02068-1

気候緩和のための自然林再生と植林の費用対効果 Cost-effectiveness of natural forest regeneration and plantations for climate mitigation

Jonah Busch,Jacob J. Bukoski,Susan C. Cook-Patton,Bronson Griscom,David Kaczan,Matthew D. Potts,Yuanyuan Yi & Jeffrey R. Vincent
Nature Climate Change  Published:24 July 2024
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-02068-1

Abstract

Mitigating climate change cost-effectively requires identifying least-cost-per-ton GHG abatement methods. Here, we estimate and map GHG abatement cost (US$ per tCO₂) for two common reforestation methods: natural regeneration and plantations. We do so by producing and integrating new maps of implementation costs and opportunity costs of reforestation, likely plantation genus and carbon accumulation by means of natural regeneration and plantations, accounting for storage in harvested wood products. We find natural regeneration (46%) and plantations (54%) would each have lower abatement cost across about half the area considered suitable for reforestation of 138 low- and middle-income countries. Using the more cost-effective method at each location, the 30 year, time-discounted abatement potential of reforestation below US$50 per tCO₂ is 31.4 GtCO₂ (24.2–34.3 GtCO₂ below US$20–100 per tCO₂)—44% more than natural regeneration alone or 39% more than plantations alone. We find that reforestation offers 10.3 (2.8) times more abatement below US$20 per tCO₂ (US$50 per tCO₂) than the most recent IPCC estimate.