Economic and political realities present challenges for implementing an aggressive climate change abatement program in the United States. A high-efficiency approach will be essential. In this synthesis, we compare carbon budgets and evaluate the carbon-mitigation potential for nine counties in the northeastern United States that represent a range of biophysical, demographic, and socioeconomic conditions. Most counties are net sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) to the atmosphere, with the exception of rural forested counties, in which sequestration in vegetation and soils exceed emissions. Protecting forests will ensure that the region's largest CO2 sink does not become a source of emissions. For rural counties, afforestation, sustainable fuelwood harvest for bioenergy, and utility-scale wind power could provide the largest and most cost-effective mitigation opportunities among those evaluated. For urban and suburban counties, energy-efficiency measures and energy-saving technologies would be most cost effective. Through the implementation of locally tailored management and technology options, large reductions in CO2 emissions could be achieved at relatively low costs.
How to translate text using browser tools
1 January 2012
Local-Scale Carbon Budgets and Mitigation Opportunities for the Northeastern United States
Steve M. Raciti,
Timothy J. Fahey,
R. Quinn Thomas,
Peter B. Woodbury,
Charles T. Driscoll,
Frederick J. Carranti,
David R. Foster,
Philip S. Gwyther,
Brian R. Hall,
Steven P. Hamburg,
Jennifer C. Jenkins,
Christopher Neill,
Brandon W. Peery,
Erin E. Quigley,
Ruth Sherman,
Matt A. Vadeboncoeur,
David A. Weinstein,
Geoff Wilson
ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE
It is not available for individual sale.
This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
It is not available for individual sale.
BioScience
Vol. 62 • No. 1
January 2012
Vol. 62 • No. 1
January 2012
carbon
climate change
energy
land use