Geology topics

Andrew J. Plantinga

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew J. Plantinga.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Natural climate solutions provide robust carbon mitigation capacity under future climate change scenarios

Natural climate solutions (NCS) are recognized as an important tool for governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and remove atmospheric carbon dioxide. Using California as a globally relevant reference, we evaluate the magnitude of biological climate mitigation potential from NCS starting in 2020 under four climate change scenarios. By mid-century NCS implementation leads to a large increase in net carbon stored, flipping the state from a net source to a net sink in two scenarios. Forest and conservation land management strategies make up 85% of all NCS emissions reductions by 2050, with agricultural strategies accounting for the remaining 15%. The most severe climate change impacts on ecosystem carbon materialize in the latter half of the century with three scenarios resulting in California ecosystems becoming a net source of carbon emissions under a baseline trajectory. However, NCS provide a strong attenuating effect, reducing land carbon emissions 41-54% by 2100 with total costs of deployment of 752–777 million USD annually through 2050. Rapid implementation of a portfolio of NCS interventions provides long-term investment in protecting ecosystem carbon in the face of climate change driven disturbances. This open-source, spatially-explicit framework can help evaluate risks to NCS carbon storage stability, implementation costs, and overall mitigation potential for NCS at jurisdictional scales.

California↗

USGS2014

Change in agricultural land use constrains adaptation of national wildlife refuges to climate change

Land-use change around protected areas limits their ability to conserve biodiversity by altering ecological processes such as natural hydrologic and disturbance regimes, facilitating species invasions, and interfering with dispersal of organisms. This paper informs USA National Wildlife Refuge System conservation planning by predicting future land-use change on lands within 25 km distance of 461 refuges in the USA using an econometric model. The model contained two differing policy scenarios, namely a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario and a ‘pro-agriculture’ scenario. Regardless of scenario, by 2051, forest cover and urban land use were predicted to increase around refuges, while the extent of range and pasture was predicted to decrease; cropland use decreased under the business-as-usual scenario, but increased under the pro-agriculture scenario. Increasing agricultural land value under the pro-agriculture scenario slowed an expected increase in forest around refuges, and doubled the rate of range and pasture loss. Intensity of land-use change on lands surrounding refuges differed by regions. Regional differences among scenarios revealed that an understanding of regional and local land-use dynamics and management options was an essential requirement to effectively manage these conserved lands. Such knowledge is particularly important given the predicted need to adapt to a changing global climate.

Environmental Conservation↗

USGS2013

Current and future land use around a nationwide protected area network

Land-use change around protected areas can reduce their effective size and limit their ability to conserve biodiversity because land-use change alters ecological processes and the ability of organisms to move freely among protected areas. The goal of our analysis was to inform conservation planning efforts for a nationwide network of protected lands by predicting future land use change. We evaluated the relative effect of three economic policy scenarios on land use surrounding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wildlife Refuges. We predicted changes for three land-use classes (forest/range, crop/pasture, and urban) by 2051. Our results showed an increase in forest/range lands (by 1.9% to 4.7% depending on the scenario), a decrease in crop/pasture between 15.2% and 23.1%, and a substantial increase in urban land use between 28.5% and 57.0%. The magnitude of land-use change differed strongly among different USFWS administrative regions, with the most change in the Upper Midwestern US (approximately 30%), and the Southeastern and Northeastern US (25%), and the rest of the U.S. between 15 and 20%. Among our scenarios, changes in land use were similar, with the exception of our “restricted-urban-growth” scenario, which resulted in noticeably different rates of change. This demonstrates that it will likely be difficult to influence land-use change patterns with national policies and that understanding regional land-use dynamics is critical for effective management and planning of protected lands throughout the U.S.

PLoS ONE↗