首页> 外文期刊>Forestry and Timber News >Why are Carbon Footprints and Environmental Product Declarations missing the real benefits of timber?
【24h】

Why are Carbon Footprints and Environmental Product Declarations missing the real benefits of timber?

机译:为什么“碳足迹”和“环境产品宣言”没有体现木材的真正利益?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Recent press has cast doubt over how effective forestry is as a useful tool to mitigate climate change. They have concentrated on one article in Science (Naudts et al. 2016) that reports on the albedo effect of the trees and the harvesting techniquesused in recent times in Europe. The results are summarised by Monahan (2016):"The conifers are worse for the climate because they absorb more light with their dark color, trapping heat that would otherwise be reflected back into space. They also release less cooling water, into the atmosphere through evaporation. Together, thesetwo factors were to blame for 0.08'C of the region's warming. Foresters removing trees for wood products contributed another 0.02°C by releasing carbon that would otherwise be stored in forest debris and soil."
机译:最近的媒体对有效的林业作为缓解气候变化的有用工具产生了怀疑。他们专注于《科学》杂志上的一篇文章(Naudts等人,2016年),其中报道了树木的反照率效应以及欧洲近来使用的采伐技术。研究结果由Monahan(2016)总结:“针叶树对气候的影响更大,因为它们会吸收更多的深色光,从而将热量捕获,否则这些热量会反射回太空。它们还会释放较少的冷却水,通过这两个因素共同归因于该地区的气候变暖0.08'C。森林居民为木材产品砍伐树木,释放出了原本可以储存在森林碎片和土壤中的碳,又贡献了0.02°C。”

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号