Download The Story of Carbon Meet Philip Duffy Also in this Issue

Canopy
FALL 2014
The Story of Carbon
Connecting land and climate
Meet Philip Duffy
Introducing the President-designate
of Woods Hole Research Center
Also in this Issue
Beyond Zero Deforestation
Conversation Between Scientists
How Dynamic are Tropical Forests?
Forgotten Feedbacks
Restoring the Biosphere
Science for the Future of the Earth
Where We Work
Scientists to Watch
Canopy
Contents
1
2
From the Acting President
Board of Directors
4
3 Staff / Board & Donor Spotlights
24Happenings
Research at WHRC: The Story of Carbon
Connecting land and climate.
8
Meet Philip Duffy,
President-Designate
of WHRC
Introducing the Presidentdesignate of WHRC.
12 Where We Work
Research
10
14
16
Letter from the
Acting President
Annual Magazine
of the
Woods Hole Research Center
A map of WHRC research.
Beyond Zero Deforestation
22
Ten up-and-coming WHRC scientists.
Policy
17
Creating a global model for sustainable
agriculture.
Conversation Between Scientists
Drs. Scott Goetz and Susan Natali talk about
arctic research.
How Dynamic are Tropical Forests?
A new way to measure carbon.
front cover:
President-Designate Dr. Philip B. Duffy, photo by Christy Lynch Designs.
back cover:
Dr. Paul Mann on a tributary of the Congo River, photo by Chris Linder.
Scientists to Watch
18
20
Forgotten Feedbacks
Better models that include the role of
permafrost in the future climate system are
needed in order for the global policy community
to respond.
Restoring the Biosphere
Land makes up only one fifth of global carbon
emissions but has the capacity to reduce
emissions by half each year.
Science for the Future of the Earth
Science offers the discovery of things before
they become disruptive and provides options
for overcoming them.
Canopy magazine is published by the Office of
External Affairs of Woods Hole Research Center
(WHRC) in Falmouth, Massachusetts. WHRC
is an independent research institution where
scientists investigate the causes and effects
of climate change to identify opportunities
for conservation, restoration and economic
development around the globe.
Acting President and Senior Scientist,
Dr. Richard A. Houghton
Director of External Affairs, Eunice Youmans
Graphic Designer, Julianne Waite
Copy Editor, Allison White
Contributors
Associate Scientist, Alessandro Baccini, Ph.D.
Director of Annual Giving, Elizabeth Bagley, B.A.
Development Associate, Paula Beckerle, B.A.
Research Associate, Jesse Bishop, M.S.
Senior Scientist, Michael T. Coe, Ph.D.
Research Associate, Tina Cormier, M.S.
Research Assistant, Mary Farina, M.A.
Deputy Director and Senior Scientist,
Scott Goetz, Ph.D
Research Assistant, Kevin Guay, B.S.
Senior Scientist, Robert Max Holmes, Ph.D.
Research Associate, Patrick Jantz
Postdoctoral Fellow, Min Lee, Ph.D.
Research Associate, Paul Lefebvre, M.A.
Assistant Scientist, Marcia Macedo, Ph.D.
Chief Development Officer,
Robert Mollenhauer, M.Ed.
Assistant Scientist, Susan M. Natali, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Fellow, Prajjwal Panday, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Fellow, Johanne Pelletier, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Fellow, Brendan M. Rogers, Ph.D.
Images
Greg Johnson, Ph.D.
Chris Linder
Christy Lynch Design
Woods Hole Research Center
149 Woods Hole Road
Falmouth, MA 02540
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.whrc.org
Newsletter
Subscribe online at www.whrc.org
Copyright
All material appearing in Canopy is copyrighted
unless otherwise stated or it may rest with the
provider of the supplied material. Canopy takes
care to ensure information is correct at time of
printing. The publisher accepts no responsibility
or liability for the accuracy of any information
contained herein.
First of all, I hope you’ll join me in welcoming
our President-designate, Dr. Philip Duffy. This
coming year, the Woods Hole Research Center
will celebrate its 30th anniversary of making
a difference in the world and Phil Duffy is the
right person to lead this institution into the
next 30 years.
WHRC is all about the Land-Climate Connection, and that connection is
largely about carbon. Carbon is the thread that runs through all of the
research at WHRC and the impacts that follow from our work. Carbon
dioxide (CO2) is the major heat-trapping gas under human control. CO2
drives climate change. CO2 is released to the atmosphere as a result
of deforestation and cultivation. CO2 is removed from the atmosphere
when forests grow. Thus, management of land and forests provides a key
mechanism for managing the carbon cycle and, thereby, climate.
Three major initiatives at WHRC define its core mission regarding the landclimate interaction: tropical forests (and their conversion to agricultural
lands), arctic and boreal forests (and their association with permafrost),
and measurement of the annual changes in the carbon stocks of land.
The three initiatives focus on carbon, but in different ways. For example,
the emphasis on REDD (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and
forest Degradation) in the tropics is to reduce emissions of carbon. The
emphasis on boreal and arctic systems is to keep the permafrost frozen so
that the carbon stored there stays locked up and doesn’t get released to the
atmosphere, as it would if the permafrost were to thaw. And the emphasis
on the world’s carbon stocks is to determine how to enlarge them; that
is, to use lands everywhere to remove carbon from the atmosphere. In the
simplest terms, these three initiatives are reducing emissions of carbon
from land, keeping carbon on land, and removing it from the atmosphere,
respectively.
Measuring changes in the amount of carbon stored in forests over the
Earth provides information for scientists studying the global carbon cycle,
for managers seeking to use land consistent with carbon management,
and for decision makers who must adapt to climatic change through
mitigation. Where is carbon being lost? Where is it accumulating? How
fast? What are the potentials for loss and gain? Where are there degraded
lands suitable for reforestation or restoration?
The Center is seeking answers to these questions and depends on
individuals and foundations for support of these initiatives. The initiatives
are based on long-term strengths at the Center and represent vital
interests for sustaining life as we know it on Earth. Those who work at
the Center, whether scientists or not, are here because the Center makes
a positive difference through its research and through the outreach to
policy makers. The work described in the following pages—through the
eyes of different colleagues—represents the primary focus of WHRC. I
hope you enjoy this issue of Canopy.
Best wishes,
Richard Houghton
Acting President
Canopy
Fall 2014
1
Board of Directors
Chair
Wilhelm Merck
Managing Member
Essex Timber Company
Trustee and Treasurer
Merck Family Fund
Vice Chair
Thomas E. Lovejoy
Senior Fellow
United Nations Foundation
Professor
George Mason University
Treasurer
Joseph R. Robinson
Managing Director
MidMark Capital
Clerk
R.J. Lyman
President
General Compression, Inc.
Stuart Goode
Private Investor
David Hawkins
Director, Climate Center
Natural Resources Defense Council
Richard Houghton
Acting President, Senior Scientist
Woods Hole Research Center
Lily Rice Hsia
Consultant
Mather & Hsia
Lawrence S. Huntington
Chairman Emeritus
Fiduciary Trust International
Karen C. Lambert
Environmentalist,
Political Activist
Victoria Lowell
Community Leader,
Conservationist
Constance R. Roosevelt
Conservationist
Acting President
Richard Houghton, Ph.D.
Honorary Directors
Anita W. Brewer-Siljehølm
Neal A. Brown
John Cantlon
Joel Horn
James MacNeill
Mary Louise Montgomery
Gilman Ordway
Gordon Russell
Ross Sandler
Helen B. Spaulding
J.G. Speth
Robert G. Stanton
M.S. Swaminathan
Ola Ullsten
Science Staff
Alessandro Baccini, Ph.D.
Jesse B. Bishop, M.S.
I. Foster Brown, Ph.D.
Ekaterina Bulygina, M.S.
Glenn K. Bush, Ph.D.
Oliver Cartus, Ph.D.
Michael T. Coe, Ph.D.
Tina A. Cormier, M.S.
Mary Farina, M.A.
Gregory J. Fiske, M.S.
Kevin Guay, B.S.
Robert Max Holmes, Ph.D.
Holly Hughes, B.S.
Patrick Jantz, Ph.D.
Josef M. Kellndorfer, Ph.D.
Melaine Kermarc, B.Sc.
Wendy Kingerlee, B.S.
Paul A. Lefebvre, M.A.
Tedd Saunders
President
Eco-Logical Solutions
Chief Sustainability Officer
The Saunders Hotel Group
Members
Founder
John H. Adams
Merloyd Ludington
George M. Woodwell
Founding Director
Natural Resources Defense Council Publisher and Editor
Merloyd Lawrence Books
Stephen T. Curwood
William Moomaw
Host, Living On Earth
Professor
World Media Foundation
International Environmental Policy
The Fletcher School
Iris Fanger
Tufts University
Dance and Theater
Historian and Critic
Jeremy Oppenheim
Director
Scott J. Goetz
Sustainability and
Deputy Director, Senior Scientist
Resource Productivity
Woods Hole Research Center
McKinsey & Company
Joshua R. Goldberg
Amy Regan
General Counsel and
Vice President
Managing Director
Harbourton Foundation
Financo, Inc.
This list reflects Directors on the Board between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2015.
2
Canopy
Fall 2014
Staff
Deputy Director
Scott J. Goetz, Ph.D.
| Board Spotlight
Min Li, Ph.D.
Marcia N. Macedo, Ph.D.
Dana Mock, B.A.
Zander Nassikas, B.A.
Susan M. Natali, Ph.D.
Neeti Neeti, Ph.D.
Prajjwal Panday, Ph.D.
Johanne Pelletier, Ph.D.
Amanda E.W. Poston, B.A.
Brendan M. Rogers, Ph.D.
Kathleen Savage, M.Sc.
John D. Schade, Ph.D.
Seth Spawn, B.A.
Thomas A. Stone, M.A.
Wayne S. Walker, Ph.D.
Administrative Staff
Elizabeth H. Bagley, B.A.
Tracy Barquinero, M.S.
Paula C. Beckerle, B.A.
Kelly Benway, B.B.A
Florence Carlowicz, B.A.
Shauna Conley, B.S.
Annalisa Eisen
Michael Ernst, M.F.A.
“…the care of the earth is our most ancient and most worthy and, after
all, our most pleasing responsibility. To cherish what remains of it,
and to foster its renewal, is our only legitimate hope.”
― Wendell Berry, The Art of the Commonplace: The Agrarian Essays
Stanley Hammond
Duane H. Martin
Joyce McAuliffe, B.S.
Robert J. Mollenhauer, M.Ed.
Lisa Strock O’Connell, B.S.
Fred Palmer
Camille M. Romano, M.S., C.P.A.
Julianne Waite, B.A.
Allison B. White
Eunice Youmans, M.A.
| Donor Spotlight
Research is my main love. I
believe it is important to
quantify and organize… to find
new ways to do things. For me,
studying and understanding
saves anxiety. It is the key to
alleviating fear. That is why
I believe in the Woods Hole
Research Center and why I
support it.
Ben Hammett
Donor
I love this quote… it is so true. For 20 years I have proudly supported
Woods Hole Research Center, because it is in the business of taking
care of our planet. WHRC’s stellar science defines the causes and
cures of climate change – the greatest challenge of our time. As the
solutions emerge we need to listen, support and act to guarantee a
thriving environment for future generations.
Amy Regan
Board Member
Board member Amy Regan at the finish line for the Triple Bypass Bicycle Ride in Colorado.
Photo courtesy of Bob Hammell.
Canopy
Fall 2014
3
Research at WHRC: The Story of
The
land-climate nexus, for which the Woods Hole
Research Center is known, is all about carbon. Carbon is
the common denominator for nearly all of the research
and education at WHRC, and most policies for dealing
with climatic disruption focus on carbon. Carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere is, by far, the most important driver
of climate change. WHRC scientists seek to understand:
How do practices of land management change
terrestrial carbon stocks? What are the effects of these
land management changes on the Earth’s climate? How
does global warming, in turn, impact terrestrial carbon
stocks? And how can we use land to slow or reverse
climate change? WHRC
scientists work all over
the globe, combining
field work and remote
sensing
technologies
to identify the lands at
greatest risk of losing
carbon
either
from
land management or
climate change. WHRC
scientists study the rate
of permafrost thaw in
the Arctic, deforestation
in the great tropical
forests of the Congo
and
the
Amazon,
agricultural expansion
in the Brazilian Cerrado,
Indonesia, and other countries. Our scientists work
with the governments of Mexico, Columbia, Peru and
Indonesia to quantify and monitor their carbon stocks.
We identify the locations and the management options
for removing carbon from the atmosphere.
4
Canopy
Fall 2014
Carbon is a remarkable element. All of the carbon now on
Earth was present at the Earth’s formation, thus setting
the stage for the emergence of LIFE. The evolution of life
is literally based on carbon. Carbon is called the building
block of life because chains of carbon atoms form the
backbone of every molecule, cell, and tissue in every
living thing on Earth.
That’s one reason carbon is important. A second reason
derives from the first. Because the chemistry of life is
largely carbon, it’s not surprising that the food we eat
(carbohydrates, proteins, fat) for energy and growth is
also largely carbon. Food
webs, including ours as
well as those of terrestrial
and oceanic ecosystems,
are assembled from
carbon.
Those food
webs are a primary
focus
of
ecological
research, carried out by
measuring the exchanges
of carbon between the
environment,
living
organisms, and dead
organic matter (organic
matter is living material
or material derived
from living processes).
What we know about the
functioning of ecosystems is determined by the flows of
carbon (energy), as well as water and nutrients.
But the primary source of energy is the sun. At the
global scale, about 120 billion metric tons of carbon
are transformed annually from inorganic carbon
dioxide to organic matter by terrestrial plants, through
photosynthesis. A similar amount is transformed by the
phytoplankton in the oceans. Photosynthesis uses the
sun’s energy to split water molecules, combining part
of that molecule with carbon dioxide to make organic
matter (e.g., sugar, cellulose, etc.). Green plants, therefore,
whether on land or in the ocean, are the primary source
of organic matter – the primary source of food for the
rest of the planet’s inhabitants. The plants themselves
consume about half of the organic matter they make, or
60 billion metric tons per year. The rest fuels herbivores
and carnivores, as well
as the microbes that
decompose dead organic
matter. These consumers
and
decomposers
complete
the
loop,
turning the remaining
60 billion metric tons of
organic matter back into
carbon dioxide in the
process.
The flip side of carbon
is oxygen. In making
organic matter, plants
release oxygen.
In
consuming
organic
matter, animals and
decomposers (and plants) consume oxygen. Remember,
plants consume about half of what they produce. But
despite the symmetry of carbon dioxide and oxygen in
the processes of photosynthesis and respiration, the
abundances of the gases in the atmosphere are lop-
CARBON
sided. Oxygen comprises about 22% of the atmosphere;
carbon dioxide, about 0.04%. Life and climate are much
more sensitive to small shifts in carbon dioxide than
they are to small shifts in oxygen.
A very small fraction (less than a tenth of a percent)
of the organic matter produced by plants each year
escapes consumption and decomposition and becomes
buried sediments. Over very long time scales, this buried
organic matter may become fossil organic matter, that is,
coal, oil, and natural gas. These fossil forms of organic
matter still contain the energy initially derived from
sunlight, and that energy
has been used by society
for nearly 300 years to
fuel more and more of
the human enterprise.
During the last century,
we reduced our burning
of wood and reduced our
reliance on grass- and
grain-fed animals for
transportation. Instead,
we switched to using the
fossil deposits laid down
over millions of years.
The difference between
the rate at which organic
matter is converted to
fossil fuels and the rate at which we are burning these
fossil deposits makes all the difference in the world.
We are releasing back to the atmosphere over a few
centuries the carbon dioxide that took millions of years
to bury in the first place. Although such burial is going
Canopy
Fall 2014
5
on today, it is at a rate a thousand
times slower than we are releasing
it. And the largest reservoir of
carbon, the ocean, can’t keep up
with the rate of release. That’s why
the concentration of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere is increasing, and
why it will take thousands of years
for the oceans and atmosphere
to come to a new equilibrium, in
which most of the released carbon
will be in the ocean rather than the
atmosphere.
That’s the third reason why
carbon is interesting: carbon in the
atmosphere traps the sun’s heat and
warms the Earth. Most of the heat
trapping is from carbon dioxide,
released to the atmosphere when
fossil fuels are burned and when
forests are cleared and the land
cultivated.
But carbon is also contained in
methane – molecule for molecule
20 times more potent than carbon
dioxide at trapping heat – and in
other heat-trapping gases, as well.
6
Canopy
Fall 2014
Because most of the carbon is
emitted as carbon dioxide, however,
we can simplify the discussion
by considering carbon in general,
rather than the specific gases that
contain it.
From the perspective of organic
chemists, ecologists, and climate
scientists, carbon is interesting for
different reasons. Those interests
coincide, however, when it comes
to the global carbon budget, which
refers to the alterations in the global
carbon cycle attributable to human
activity. The largest term in the
global carbon budget is the amount
of carbon released annually to the
atmosphere from the combustion
of fossil fuels. Carbon is also
released as a result of deforestation
and other forms of direct human
management of land (for example,
loss of carbon from soil as a result
of cultivation). There are regions
where carbon is accumulating in
forests as a result of management,
but the net effect of management,
globally, is a release of carbon.
The sum of these emissions of carbon
(fossil and land use) must equal the
sum of the sinks (accumulations of
carbon), because all of the carbon
released to the atmosphere must
accumulate somewhere, either
in the atmosphere, the ocean, or
land. Scientists can measure the
annual increase of carbon in the
atmosphere, and can infer the
annual increase in the oceans with
models. And because the global
carbon budget must be balanced, we
can also calculate the accumulation
of carbon on land. It is calculated
so as to make the budget balance,
based on estimates for each of the
other terms. The land sink is the
only term for which there is no
independent estimate. We have
never measured a global terrestrial
sink. We don’t know where it is or
the mechanisms responsible for it,
although the leading hypotheses
explaining it are CO2 fertilization,
nitrogen deposition, and changes
in climate. It is important to note
that this carbon sink on land does
not include the sinks of carbon in
forests that are regrowing as a result
of management (e.g., logged forests,
abandoned agricultural lands).
These sinks are captured in the net
emissions of the Land-Use term.
More interesting than the Global
Carbon Budget is what it says about
the behavior of the global carbon
cycle over time. And the simplest
index of the global carbon cycle is the
“airborne fraction,” which is simply
an index of the fraction of emissions
that remains in the atmosphere. If
the atmosphere accumulated all
of the carbon emitted from human
activity, the airborne fraction would
be 1. If the atmosphere accumulated
none of the annual emissions (that
is, if the land and oceans took up
all of the emissions), the airborne
fraction would be 0.
Although the airborne fraction
varies considerably from year to
year and from decade to decade, it
seems not to have trended either
upward or downward over the last
50 years. It has remained close
to 0.5; half of the emissions have
remained in the atmosphere. That
observation is remarkable. It means
that the uptake of carbon by land and
ocean has increased in proportion
to emissions. The land and oceans
have been removing approximately
half of the emissions,
even though emissions
have doubled over the
last few decades.
The stability of the
airborne fraction is
remarkable
because
many of the responses
we would expect from
a
warming
world
would tend to increase
that fraction (reduce
the uptake by land
and ocean). Both the
warming of the ocean
and an increase in
its acidity would be
expected to reduce the ocean’s
uptake of more carbon. Apparently
those reductions have been offset
by increased uptake through
other processes. The same is true
for land. A warmer land surface
should thaw permafrost, exposing
to decay rich organic matter that’s
been frozen for centuries. If such
emissions are increasing, they are
being offset by increased sinks from
other mechanisms... but we don’t
know why. As mentioned above,
the leading hypotheses explaining
increased terrestrial uptake of
carbon are CO2 fertilization, nitrogen
deposition, and changes in climate.
Keeping a watchful eye on the
airborne fraction is critical. It will be
the first indication that the carbon
cycle is beginning to change … or
not. Determining the mechanisms
responsible is also critical. If we
knew those mechanisms, we could
predict more confidently whether
and how the fraction might change
in response to climate change or
other global change.
A final point about land and carbon.
Although the contribution of land
management to global warming
is only about 10% of the problem
(10% of total carbon emissions), its
contribution to the solution could be
50%. Stopping deforestation could
reduce global emissions of carbon
by 10%. But allowing the world’s
secondary forests to grow (without
further harvests) and expanding
new forests onto millions of acres
that supported forests in the past
but no longer do so could take about
4 billion metric tons of carbon out
of the atmosphere each year. The
annual uptake of carbon through
these management practices would
diminish after a few
decades as the forests
age, so the solution
is not a permanent
one.
Nevertheless,
such management, if
timed strategically to
coincide with reduced
fossil fuel dependency,
could
keep
carbon
dioxide concentrations
from increasing during
those crucial decades of
transition.
Needless to say, there are
many reasons besides
carbon management for
restoring the biosphere to a healthy
and productive state. Carbon is not
the only thing that matters. But it
has some compelling attributes
that make it convenient, not the
least of which is that it can be
measured as well as managed…
and tied quantitatively to climate.
Carbon is the largest player in the
land-climate story and this is the
story of WHRC.
WHRC Land-Climate Mission
• Document and monitor carbon sinks and stores on land
• Identify strategies for preventing additional emissions
• Identify and quantify restorative options in forests and soils to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere
• Work with stakeholders to implement these climate-smart land management strategies.
Haiku poems and artwork by Gregory C. Johnson, used with permission from ‘Climate Change Science 2013: Haiku’. For the complete set of haikus,
please visit daily.sightline.org/ClimateHaiku.
Canopy
Fall 2014
7
Meet Philip Duffy
You have an interesting background
with experience in academia, the
policy world and climate change
communications. How will these
experiences inform your work at
WHRC?
Photo by Christy Lynch Designs.
On
October 7, the Board of the
Woods Hole Research Center
named Dr. Philip B. Duffy as the
next president of WHRC.
Dr.
Duffy currently serves as the
White House National Science
and Technology Council’s Senior
Advisor to the US Global Change
Research Program. In this role he
is involved in international climate
negotiations, domestic climate
policy and the coordination of
domestic global change research.
Prior to his work with the White
House, Dr. Duffy was Chief Scientist
for Climate Central, an organization
dedicated to increasing public
understanding and awareness of
climate change. Dr. Duffy has held
senior research positions with
the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory and visiting positions at
the Carnegie Institution for Science
and the Woods Institute for the
Environment at Stanford University.
He has a Ph.D. in Applied Physics
from Stanford University.
Soft-spoken, with an irreverent wit,
Dr. Duffy radiates the kind of energy
that compels one to lean in. Eunice
Youmans sat down with him to
discuss the future of WHRC.
8
Canopy
Fall 2014
What unites all of those experiences
is the fact that they were all
motivated by the desire to use
my scientific knowledge and
credibility to move society forward
in addressing climate change. I
hope that these varied experiences
will allow me to help WHRC to
continue to do great science and
to be effective in communicating
the results and importance of that
science to policymakers and to the
public.
Based on your publications, it seems
you have interests in climate change
adaptation, extreme weather risk
and climate modeling. How do your
research interests dovetail with the
current work of WHRC?
My overarching interest is in
furthering science that has clear
societal relevance, and that’s
also the Center’s mission. More
specifically, I want to use science
to help address the grand societal
challenge of climate change, and
that’s what the Center is all about.
So my interests match perfectly
with the mission of WHRC.
Are there particular projects that
are closer to your heart?
The tropics and the Arctic are
critical regions in the sense that
how we manage them will have a
strong influence on the trajectory
of future climate. Good choices will
act to limit climate change, and poor
choices would make the problem
much worse. I am particularly
excited by the work that WHRC is
doing in these regions.
You are a physicist. Does that give
you a bit of a different perspective
on climate change than that of an
ecologist or a hydrologist?
Climate change is very multidisciplinary, so climate-change
researchers have diverse academic
backgrounds.
An education in
physics provides a strong set of
quantitative tools that can be applied
to problems in many areas. On the
other hand, I have had to overcome
never having any academic training
whatsoever in climate, not even
geophysical fluid dynamics! Also,
my physics training was very oldfashioned in that it was very focused
on, well, theoretical physics. There
was essentially nothing on realworld applications. Nor were we
taught how to solve equations using
computers, which is what I ended
up spending much of my life doing!
As you are well aware, communicating
the science of climate change is
challenging. We always struggle
to communicate scientific facts
without over qualifying to the point
of unintelligibility. Based on your
experience with Climate Central,
how do you balance scientific
veracity and clear communication
for a general audience?
I believe that it should be possible
to explain our work to pretty much
anyone. If it’s not, then maybe we
shouldn’t be doing it. The most
important thing I want people to
understand about what WHRC does
is why it’s important.
You spent three years as a science
advisor in the White House. Prior
to that, the great bulk of your
experience had been in academia.
Was there anything that really
surprised you?
I had no idea what to expect! Who
on the outside has any idea what
President-Designate of WHRC
goes on inside the White House?
In some ways it’s amazing and
unique, and I have often asked
myself how a public-school kid from
Providence ended up there. I can
also remember being at a goingaway party thinking, “Wow, this
is just like any other office. A lame
going-away party where no one
knows what to say.”
and your role as the President of
WHRC?
Research is a hobby for me now.
I have two papers in the works,
which I spend probably four hours
on a month. But those four hours
are relaxing.
What do you see as the public role of
the Woods Hole Research Center?
It is important for
scientists involved
“If humanity is to
in climate change to
speak publicly about
meet the grand
what we do. I notice
challenge of
that WHRC has had
I like to involve all
events concerning
climate change,
interested parties in
issues of local and
making
decisions.
organizations like
regional significance,
One of the good
like
ocean
WHRC will play a
things about working
acidification. I hope
with smart people is
critical role, by solving we can continue to do
that they often have
that. That being said,
key science problems
good ideas; in many
I feel pretty strongly
cases, though, you
that
scientists
and bringing those
won’t hear them
and
scientific
solutions into the
unless
you
ask.
organizations
And people always
need to be wary
policy realm.”
appreciate
having
of advocacy.
The
input into a decision,
most valuable asset
even if it does not turn out the way
of both individual scientists
they hope. That’s especially true
and organizations like WHRC is
of scientists, who by nature like to
scientific credibility; that credibility
figure things out for themselves,
is compromised if we are seen as
and balk at being told what to do.
advocates. When I advise senior
I also believe in being open with
policymakers, I try very hard to
folks about things that affect them,
convey what science has to say with
good and bad. In the long run, that
as little “spin” as possible. In the
builds trust.
You have led small
and large teams. How
would you describe
your
management
style?
You
are
first
and foremost a
scientist, and I
imagine there are
several
research
questions
you
would
like
to
answer. How will
you
successfully
combine
your
research projects
long run, that’s best for all parties.
An advisor who has a reputation
as a straight shooter is trusted and
sought after.
You biked in the California Climate
Ride. How many miles did you ride?
Why did you do it?
Well, I love cycling; it used to be a
big part of my life. I also care a lot
about climate change, so when I
was invited to do the Climate Ride,
I did not hesitate to accept. I think
we rode 300 or 400 miles; I don’t
remember exactly. We had fantastic
weather and the route through
Northern California (where I have
lived most of my life) was just
beautiful. Unfortunately, our dog
died while I was on the ride, and
my poor wife had to handle that sad
event by herself.
What haven’t I asked that people
should know about you?
I was introduced to climate science
back in the 1980s by my mom, who
was a researcher on paleoclimates
(ice ages and so on) at Brown
University. At first I was attracted
by the interestingness of the
science, but pretty quickly I realized
that climate change is much more
than interesting science. Now one
of my kids is going into the field
professionally as well, and I am
enjoying being a mentor to her. So
for me it’s much more than a job!
Canopy
Fall 2014
9
Research
Beyond Zero Deforestation:
Creating a Global Model for Sustainable Agriculture
Michael Coe and Marcia Macedo
2020
could be a magic year
for Brazil. Although it is home to
one of the world’s largest carbon
storehouses, the Amazon rainforest,
Brazil is also the world’s fifth largest
emitter of greenhouse gases, much
of it historically from deforestation.
2020 is the deadline Brazil has
set for itself to reach a targeted
40% reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions and an 80% reduction in
deforestation. 2020 is also the year
when Brazil’s agricultural outputs
are projected to increase by 40%
or more. Brazil is poised to become
a global model for sustainable
agriculture – and the world is
watching to see if it can pull off this
massive increase in agricultural
production,
while
preventing
deforestation and the CO2 emissions
that come with it.
Photo by Paulo Brando.
10
Canopy
Fall 2014
Brazil has come a long way since
signing the Kyoto Protocol in 1998
and has become a leader in carbon
management, mainly by controlling
deforestation in the Amazon. In
2005 Brazilian President Luiz Inácio
“Lula” da Silva made an international
commitment to reduce deforestation
in the Amazon by 80%, compared to
the 1995-2005 average. He codified
this commitment in 2008, when he
signed the National Plan on Climate
Change into law. Soon after, the
government introduced its LowCarbon Agriculture program, which
provides roughly $1.5 billion in
annual subsidized loans aimed at
increasing agricultural productivity,
while reducing carbon emissions
and supporting forest restoration.
At the same time the nation set aside
hundreds of millions of acres of
Amazon forests as strict protected
areas, where no deforestation could
occur.
As it strengthened forest and
agricultural governance, Brazil
also improved enforcement of
environmental
laws.
National
and state programs began to take
advantage of existing satellite
technologies to monitor forests,
enabling officials to “see” and rapidly
respond to illegal deforestation.
Private initiatives and publicprivate partnerships sprang up to
support environmental compliance
through international certification
standards, commodity roundtables,
and boycotts of products produced
on newly-deforested land. These
improvements in transparency and
governance led to a rapid decline in
illegal deforestation. Today, Brazil
is widely touted as a conservation
success story, having protected 80%
of the original Amazon and reduced
annual deforestation from more
than 4.9 million acres in 1995-2005
to less than 1.6 million acres after
2008. This reduction prevented the
release of 3.2 billion tons of CO2 into
the atmosphere.
These impressive conservation
achievements occurred as Brazil
was becoming an agricultural
powerhouse, the only tropical
country to compete in the realm of
global commodity markets. Beef
exports increased more than fivefold from 2000-2010, and Brazil is
now the world’s leading producer
of soybeans, sugar cane, coffee, and
oranges. Over nearly a decade, Brazil
has shown that forest conservation
does not necessarily have to come at
the expense of economic activity.
However, Brazil’s successes have
not eliminated the environmental
consequences
of
agriculture.
Achieving ever-greater production
without new deforestation has
required large-scale intensification.
Farmers are now planting two or
three crops per year and grazing
more heads of cattle per acre than
ever before, attempting to squeeze
more and more out of the same
parcel of land. Doing so requires
more fertilizer and pesticide inputs
and building more infrastructure
to store and transport goods, all
of which can have unintended
environmental consequences.
WHRC scientists have found the
perfect laboratory for studying
these consequences – a working
soybean farm embedded in the
Amazon forest. The 200,000acre Fazenda Tanguro, one of
Brazil’s largest soybean farms,
has become a hub of scientific
activity aimed at understanding the
environmental costs of intensive
agriculture. WHRC scientists study
the interplay between agricultural
expansion and intensification, and
its consequences for climate, water
and food security, and ecological
function. Together with Brazilian
colleagues, they have shown that
deforestation warmed the land
○
surface by as much as 5 C, reduced
the amount of water recycled to the
atmosphere by 25%, and increased
the water exported to the oceans by
25%. If not aggressively addressed,
these changes may affect regional
climate and have severe impacts on
fire frequency, crop productivity,
and economic development.
Using satellite observations and
computer models, the WHRC
science team has been able to scale
up the field measurements made
at Tanguro to all of Brazil. During
their nearly ten years working in
the region, they have documented
the importance of good governance
to the environment, but none of
this research would really matter
if not put to good use. To make
this research relevant for Brazil
and the globe, the team works
closely with colleagues at several
Brazilian institutions, including the
Amazon Environmental Research
Institute, Federal University of
Minas Gerais, and the Land Alliance.
These partnerships provide an
outlet for communicating their
scientific findings of human
impacts to farmers, ranchers, and
policymakers. Together this group
has been able to influence public
dialogues on the importance of
conservation and federal policy.
The world is watching while
Brazil struggles to create viable
policies, emphasizing ecologically
and
economically
sustainable
management of land, and to create a
new development paradigm for the
world to follow. And through sound
science WHRC is there to help.
Canopy
Fall 2014
11
Where We Work
Svalbard, Norway: Biomass mapping.
Alaska, USA: Arctic vegetation and
landscape effects on permafrost
vulnerability; biomass mapping.
Russia: Arctic vegetation and landscape
effects on permafrost vulnerability.
Chersky, Siberia: Impacts of boreal forest
fires on permafrost carbon loss; training
next generation of arctic researchers.
Europe: Mapping deforestation
and forest degradation.
Healy, Alaska, USA: Climate
impacts on carbon balance of
subarctic tundra.
Alaska, USA, Canada
& Russia: Collect and
analyze a time-series
of biogeochemical
samples from Arctic
rivers for assessing
environmental change.
Florida, USA: Study of mangroves
to predict impacts of climate
change on coastal ecosystems.
Mexico: Biomass mapping, land cover
change, technical capacity building
and training to monitor carbon stocks.
Mexico, Colombia, Peru: Mapping deforestation
and forest degradation; REDD+ monitoring.
Amazon River: Measure carbon fluxes.
Brazil, Bolivia and Peru: Building
an early warning system for extreme
events in the tri-national region.
Madre de Dios, Peru: Advise regional government on adaptations to
climate change; work with university
professors to build conservation
capacity in Peru and Brazil.
San Martin and Ucayali, Peru: REDD+
monitoring; capacity building with indigenous leaders to address the impacts of
climate change in Ucayali.
Amazon: Examine fire, land use and the
savannization; examine the environmental
impacts of soybean agriculture.
Howland Forest, Maine & Harvard
Forest, Massachusetts, USA: Study
impacts of changing climate on carbon
cycling in forest; measure greenhouse
gases in soils.
Appalachian Region: Assess ecosystems vulnerabilities to climate
change for US Park Service.
Amazon River Floodplain:
Measure impacts of flood and
drought on ecosystems; analyze
the impacts of land use change.
Xingu River Basin:
Biomass mapping.
Cerrado: Examine land
use change to understand
the impacts and opportunities for carbon storage.
Tanguro Ranch: Deforestation,
temperature and solar reflection
changes; fire and land use in the
Amazon; agriculture, climate
change and freshwater supply;
agricultural intensification and
nitrous oxide emissions.
Pan-Tropic: REDD+ Monitoring.
India, USA, Africa, Colombia, Peru:
Developing studies for the next USA/
India Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)
mission.
Eastern Central Africa: Carbon and
deforestation maps.
Equateur Province, Democratic Republic
of Congo: Work with local communities to
improve land-use management and governance to limit deforestation.
Mbandaka, Democratic Republic of
Congo: Evaluate land management
strategies to identify best practices to
reduce deforestation and degradation.
Mato Grasso and Acre, Brazil:
REDD+ monitoring; agriculture,
climate change and freshwater
supply in Mato Grasso.
Planet-wide: Global map of aboveground
biomass; global map of forest extent and change.
REDD+ is the United Nations program for
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and
forest Degradation.
12
Canopy
Fall 2014
Woods Hole Research Center
Canopy
Fall 2014
13
Research
Conversation Between Scientists
Scott – The other challenge is that
not all permafrost is the same.
Nobody knows how fast permafrost
will thaw across the Arctic, because
permafrost is variable with some of
it having very high, easily converted
carbon and other with much less.
Drs. Scott Goetz and Susan Natali talk about arctic research
Dr. Scott Goetz uses satellite imagery
to study ecosystem responses to
environmental change in the Arctic,
particularly documenting vegetation
changes (such as greening and browning
of boreal and tundra ecosystems) due
to warmer temperatures. Dr. Susan
Natali designs field experiments and
collects field data across the Arctic
to understand the role of permafrost
thaw in future climate trajectories.
Where Dr. Goetz’s research shows that
warming temperatures in the Arctic
can lead to greater vegetation growth,
Dr. Natali’s research finds that more
carbon is emitted from soils than is
taken up by vegetation due to warming
temperatures. They sat down one Friday
afternoon to discuss their research.
Susan – What is driving the
greening you see in the Arctic? Is
it permafrost thaw, changes in soil
moisture, temperature or nutrients,
or is it something else?
Scott – I don’t think we know for
sure. It seems that temperature
is a big factor with a longer
growing season leading to higher
photosynthetic rates, but there may
be a whole cycle of other processes
related to nutrient cycling.
Susan – Our field studies are
consistent with your results,
but we have found that
microbes also benefited from
the longer growing season,
and that microbes respired
greater amounts of CO2 when
warmed. We have also found
that when we factor in winter
microbial respiration, the
carbon taken up by plants
14
Canopy
Fall 2014
Susan – That’s right. One thing
that has really surprised me is that
even the starting point, the amount
of carbon contained in permafrost,
really varies across different models.
How do we figure out where we will
be in 2100 or 2300 when there is not
a consensus on how much carbon is
stored in permafrost now?
during the growing season
was offset by carbon respired
annually, resulting in a
system that is a net source of
atmospheric carbon.
Scott – Right. That is the challenge
with the satellite record in the
Arctic. It is only light half of the
year so we are missing a big piece
of the picture. That is, the piece
you capture with winter respiration
measurements, and they change the
whole story.
Scott – Ice content of permafrost
is another big research question
because that can determine how
vulnerable permafrost is to thaw.
Susan – Can you detect ice in
permafrost with remote sensing?
Susan – It would be great if we could
link winter respiration numbers
with some sort of measurement we
could detect during the growing
season. Maybe snow depth and
snow cover or freeze and thaw
cycles could be linked to growing
season net primary production
(NPP).
Scott – Length of snow-on season
might be a good indicator of relative
warmth. Then there is this whole
hydrologic component that could
be measured in terms of how wet
different sites are. What do you
think is driving winter respiration?
Is it the insulating effect of snow?
Susan – Sure, it is temperature. So,
yes, it is the insulating effects of
snow combined with other factors
such as how much carbon is in the
soil, what the composition of the
organic matter is in soil, and how
much unfrozen water is available.
We know these things affect winter
respiration. That’s where we need
to go, figure out what is driving
winter respiration and scale it up.
Photos by Paul Lefebvre.
Scott – We know that we could with
electrical resistivity measurements
from a helicopter or on the ground.
You can put probes in the ground to
detect ice content, but there is no
way to do it over very large areas.
We could work at your field sites
and link what we know about ice
wedges and content, permafrost
composition and your respiration
measurements. We could get at very
large areas with radar, especially long
wavelength P-band radar. Those
are some direct ways. We could
also use some more indirect ways,
like looking through time using
LIDAR to map surface topography.
We could then come back to those
same sites, maybe at the beginning
of the thaw season and the peak
of the thaw season, to measure
how much the ground surface has
subsided with thaw. We could infer
something about ice content from
those observations. We need to do
a lot more of this.
Susan – What about the browning
you have seen in the Arctic. Can it
be linked to permafrost thaw and
soil moisture? Is it precipitation or
is it water availability as a result of
permafrost thaw?
Scott – I don’t think anything
related to browning is necessarily
related to precipitation directly,
but it is a drought effect. We are
pretty sure it is related to the
drying effects of air, that is, long hot
and dry days with low humidity.
These warmer growing seasons in
consecutive years are leading to
greater tree mortality rates. That’s
the browning we are looking at now
in the Boreal forests. In contrast,
across the expanse of the tundra,
we have seen ubiquitous greening
everywhere we look.
Susan – Well, even within the Boreal
system across the Arctic, there
are big differences in vegetation
types, with Larch forests in Siberia
and Evergreen conifers in North
America. Are there differences in
the response of these Boreal forests
to warming?
Scott – That’s right. There are
some areas in Siberia showing a
browning effect, but it is not nearly
as evident as it is in North America.
Your earlier question about the
relationship between browning and
permafrost thaw is a really good
one. We don’t have a good handle
on that because we don’t really
know how variable permafrost
is across these landscapes. We
need better maps of extent
and distribution of permafrost,
especially throughout the areas
where it is less continuous.
Susan – We have a lot more work
to do!
Scott – We sure do.
Canopy
Fall 2014
15
Research
Policy
How Dynamic Are Tropical Forests?
Forgotten Feedbacks
Alessandro Baccini and Richard A. Houghton
Susan Natali
We know from the global carbon
budget that carbon is accumulating
on land despite the losses of
carbon from deforestation and
degradation, and in addition to
the accumulations resulting from
management. We don’t know where
or why the additional carbon is
being accumulated, but it is. One
place to look for the accumulation
is in forests, and forest
inventories in mid-latitude
countries suggest that indeed
the carbon stocks of forests
are growing, although not
enough to balance the global
carbon budget. In the tropics,
where forest inventories are
rare, it is not so clear that
forests are taking up carbon,
in part because deforestation
affects so much of the tropics.
But an on-going sampling of
plots in South America and
Africa suggest that unmanaged
forests are taking up carbon.
The suggestion is controversial
because one would not expect
grown forests to continue to
accumulate carbon. At some point
they have to reach an equilibrium
where the carbon accumulated in
growth is balanced by the carbon
lost as a result of mortality. Is the
observed accumulation balanced
by losses in forests not sampled? Or
is there an accumulation of carbon
driven by some change in the global
environment, for example as a
result of higher levels of CO2 in the
atmosphere or changes in climate?
We don’t know much about the
dynamics of tropical forests. We
don’t know how often tropical
16
Canopy
Fall 2014
forests are disturbed, for example
by storms, fires, droughts, etc. Are
most tropical forests growing? Or
are the equal areas accumulating
and losing carbon?
In the absence of systematic forest
inventories, there’s never been a
way to measure the area of forests
losing carbon (and how much) and
The Arctic is warming at twice the
rate of the rest of the globe, and that
warming threatens a vast release of
carbon locked within permafrost
(frozen soil) – an amount that
represents more carbon than has
been emitted through all of fossil
fuel combustion to date. Projections
of the impacts of permafrost thaw
on the global climate system vary
widely because scientists do not yet
understand how fast or how much
carbon will be released. The timing
and magnitude are uncertain, but
the climate effects of a warming
Arctic are clear: permafrost thaw
will release more carbon into the
atmosphere and further amplify
climate change. Yet, permafrost
thaw and the associated climate
feedbacks are not included in the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) climate models.
tropical America. These findings are
consistent with the results obtained
by comparing the loss of carbon
from land-use change with the gains
reported from the sampled plots.
We are confident that the WHRC
method measures the net change in
aboveground carbon.
However, our measurements of
carbon density are for areas
500 meters by 500 meters,
and that area is large enough
to include both forests that
are gaining carbon and forests
that are losing it. Thus, we
don’t have a precise estimate
of how much carbon is being
lost (from disturbances and
degradation, for example)
and how much is being gained
(as a result of forest growth).
We have determined the net
change but lack the gross rates
Cartography by Greg Fiske. of carbon loss and gain.
the area of forests gaining carbon
– until WHRC developed a satellitebased method for measuring the
aboveground carbon density in
forests and woodlands. We have
now measured the aboveground
carbon density for tropical forests
at an annual interval between the
years 2002 and 2012. We can now
answer the questions: Are there
visible changes in carbon density?
How many forests are losing carbon;
how many are gaining it; and do the
two cancel each other out?
We found a mixed answer. Overall,
the carbon lost during the decade
was greater than the carbon
gained. The greatest loss was in
The way to get at gross rates is to
try the WHRC method at a higher
spatial resolution than 500m x
500m. The smaller pixels should
help identify more areas as either
gaining or losing carbon, and the net
change should remain the same.
We would also like to separate the
losses into those from deforestation
and those from degradation. And
to separate the changes in carbon
density into those from human
management and those from natural
processes. This last attribution is
extremely challenging, but it would
reveal the potential for humans to
manage the global carbon cycle.
WHRC is up to the challenge.
Thawing permafrost on
exposed riverbank oozes into
the Kolyma River in Siberia.
Photo by Chris Linder.
The IPCC was formed in 1988 by
the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) and the World
Meteorological
Organization
(WMO) to examine current scientific
research on the role of human
activities on a changing climate.
The IPCC issues assessment reports
which draw on the expertise of more
than 2,000 scientists from nearly 160
countries to examine the physical
science of the changing climate, the
impacts of these changes, and policy
options for mitigating these effects.
Unfortunately, the most recent Fifth
IPCC Assessment report does not
include the effects of permafrost
carbon feedbacks on climate.
In 2012, a UNEP report found that
permafrost thaw could substantially
intensify global warming if warming
occurs as projected in the Arctic.
The report also suggests that
thawing permafrost could radically
change ecosystems and break down
infrastructure. These impacts are
already visible in the Arctic with
“drunken” trees, sinking buildings
and the Russian pipeline break,
which resulted in the largest oil spill
on the land.
These impacts are dangerous and
obvious, but the greatest danger
from permafrost thaw is invisible
at its source and it is irreversible.
Permafrost contains 1.5 trillion
tons of carbon – twice the amount
of carbon that is in the atmosphere
today. As it thaws, carbon can be
converted by microbes into carbon
dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4),
a heat-trapping gas that is 28 to
34 times more powerful than CO2
on a 100 year timescale. Further,
arctic warming has occurred many
times faster than earlier climate
models
predicted,
rendering
current warming projections too
conservative. Permafrost thaw has
the potential to up-end all future
climate projections, but human
actions can minimize its effects.
Current climate models without
permafrost feedbacks underestimate
future warming trends.
Better
models that include the role of
permafrost in the future climate
system are needed in order for the
global policy community to respond.
Canopy
Fall 2014
17
Policy
Restoring the Biosphere
Richard A. Houghton
The following sentence appeared
in the July 31, 2014, issue of New
Scientist: “Scientists are betting that
if there are intelligent beings outside
of Earth’s galaxy, they’ve probably
been polluting their environment
just like we have, a fact that could
one day unlock clues leading to their
discovery (my italics).” Is that what
our intelligence has brought us… to
be recognized by our pollution?
120 billion metric tons of carbon
are released back to the atmosphere
through the complementary process
of decomposition (or respiration).
Enter humans. Not much changed
at first. We hunted and gathered,
like other animals, and we used fire
that converted the carbon in organic
matter to carbon dioxide, skipping
the process of decomposition –
hardly noticeable to the global
environment. A few hundred
thousand years ago there were only
a few million of us.
Before there were people on Earth,
the planet functioned in a way not
very different from
the way it functions
“Every year about
Then some groups
today.
Plants
take
discovered
that
carbon dioxide out of
120 billion metric
they could make
the atmosphere to feed
life easier if they
tons of carbon are
themselves
through
stayed in one spot
fixed into organic
photosynthesis creating
and grew their
food (organic matter)
own
(domestic)
matter by green
from inorganic carbon. A
crops and meat
plants, and about
instead of hunting
by-product is oxygen. A
and gathering. It
few organisms can form
120 billion metric
didn’t happen all
organic matter through
tons
of
carbon
are
at once, but settled
chemosynthesis,
starting
but most of the food
released back to the agriculture,
about
10,000
years
that we and the rest
ago,
began
to
replace
atmosphere through
of the animals on
forests and other
Earth share comes
the complementary natural ecosystems
from
photosynthesis.
with croplands and
process of
What we don’t eat
pastures. As forests
accumulates as organic
decomposition (or
were cleared, the
matter in soils. There
carbon stored in
respiration).”
it forms the food for
trees was emitted to
microbes that convert
the atmosphere as
the organic matter back into carbon
carbon dioxide. Again, the emissions
dioxide, releasing nutrients and
were minor, less than a half of
consuming oxygen in the process.
billion tons of carbon per year. The
That’s the global carbon cycle.
carbon dioxide concentration of the
Every year about 120 billion metric
atmosphere didn’t increase because
tons of carbon are fixed into organic
the oceans could keep up with
matter by green plants, and about
absorption of those emissions.
18
Canopy
Fall 2014
Somewhere along in the industrial
revolution, the substitution of coal,
oil, and gas for wood (or whale oil)
began to add carbon dioxide to the
atmosphere faster than the oceans
or growing forests could take it out,
and the concentration of carbon
dioxide began to increase. There
were perhaps a billion of us then.
Our use of fossil fuels has increased
since then, partly because there
are more of us and partly because
each of us uses more energy than
our grandparents did. In 2013 we
emitted about 10 billion tons of
carbon to the atmosphere from
burning fossil fuels, and we released
another billion tons from our
continued conversion of forests and
tropical peatlands to agricultural
lands, for the production of food and
fuel.
During the centuries that preceded
the industrial revolution the
concentration of carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere was 278 ppm (parts
per million) (that’s 0.0278%). In
2014 the concentration reached
400 ppm, and its growth is faster
than ever. Stopping at 450 ppm
looks unlikely. 278 ppm is what
the concentration would be in the
absence of intelligent life on Earth.
But the expansion of agricultural
areas over the last ten thousand
years did more than reduce the
amount of carbon held in vegetation
and add it to the atmosphere.
Cultivation also reduced the amount
of carbon of soils. In rich soils, crop
production flourished anyway. But
in poor soils, over-cropping reduced
the fertility of soil, diminished
yields, and led to abandonment and
moving on to the next plot of fertile
land. Depleted soils are slow to
return to forests, and today there are
formerly forested lands that support
neither agriculture nor forests. We
call these lands degraded, or, where
forests have made less than a full
come-back, degraded forests.
Fortunately, we know that degraded
Restoration of the biosphere enables
us to simultaneously meet the three
forests and degraded lands that
needs of the new climate economy:
once supported forests can support
greater production of food for the
forests again. Many of the lands
next billion people, many of whom
degraded over the last centuries
will be joining the middle class and
can be recovered and can be made
consuming
more;
to produce food or wood
reduced
emissions
at the same time they re“Restoration of
of
greenhouse
accumulate the carbon
stocks that existed prior
gases;
and
economic
the biosphere
So here we are today. We need to
to human intervention.
development
for
reduce emissions of carbon dioxide
has the potential
We might be able to
countries
through
and other greenhouse gases at the
recover to the carbon
supply of resources
to turn the land
same time we need to increase
stocks that existed before
that are demanded by
food production for another billion
from 10% of
humans – even though
the growing appetite
people joining the Earth by 2030.
we still need large areas
for food, feed, fiber,
the problem to
Many of those added will be looking
for agriculture and can’t
fuel, and ecosystem
for a better life, which translates
50% or more of
return all cleared areas
services.
into higher rates of consumption.
back to forests. But even
the solution to
Huge challenges. The good news
Such thinking may
on agricultural lands, not
is that the increased demand for
sound optimistic, but
to mention grasslands,
climatic change
resources such as food and wood has
tundra, marshes, and
optimism is the only
mitigation.”
the potential to fuel the economic
other non-forest lands,
viable alternative. And
development of poor countries
we can increase the
there are indications
where such development is needed.
carbon stocks of soils.
that the process has begun in
some neighborhoods. Tropical
But can we meet these challenges?
And some of the good news is even
deforestation rates have declined
Can we increase crop production at
better. Soils with more carbon
over the last decade, while crop
the same time we reduce emissions?
in them usually produce higher
production has increased in some of
Can we increase yields without
yields of crops. So, as we add
the same countries. Forest area has
cutting down more forests? Can we
carbon to agricultural soils through
been increasing for nearly a century
conservation tillage or no-till, we
deliver more resources and do it
increase yields on the same areas. In
sustainably?
in some developed countries and
short, we restore the
for decades in China and India.
Earth, restore the
Restoration of the biosphere has the
“In 2013 we emitted about 10 billion tons
capacity of natural
potential to turn the land from 10%
ecosystems to carry
of carbon to the atmosphere from burning
of the problem (net emissions of 1
out
ecosystem
billion tons carbon/year) to 50%
fossil fuels, and we released another
services, such as
or more of the solution to climatic
water conservation
billion tons from our continued conversion
change mitigation (3-5 billion
or erosion control
tons of carbon uptake/year). And
in
addition
to
of forests and tropical peatlands to
that’s only the carbon side of the
withdrawing
agricultural lands, for the production of
accounting. Doesn’t that sound like
carbon from the
a more intelligent way of managing
atmosphere. It is a
food and fuel.”
win, win, win.
our resources?
Canopy
Fall 2014
19
Policy
Science for the Future of the Earth
Richard A. Houghton
sinks, and to include only those
The two preceding stories go
sources and sinks that can be
somewhat farther than reporting
attributed to management – not
the results of environmental
those attributable to nature or
research. They make statements
random events. The rationale is
about what should be done, and why
that we should be rewarded and
it should be done. They advocate.
penalized for our actions, not for
The “Forgotten Feedbacks” piece
processes beyond our
advocates for including
direct control. But
permafrost thaw in
“Science offers the the warming itself is
future climate models
so that those models
discovery of things largely attributable
to human activity,
will do a better job of
to
be
concerned
so the emissions
predicting the future
about before they
of
carbon
from
rate and extent of global
warming and climate
become disruptive, thawing permafrost
are also attributable
change. “Restoring the
and
options
for
(indirectly) to human
Biosphere”
advocates
dealing with and
activity. The difficulty
using land management
is that the sources
strategically for the time
overcoming such
and sinks attributable
required to transition
concerns.”
to
warming
are
away from fossil fuels.
communal; they can’t
Both pieces are based on
be easily attributed to particular
research, and both suggest specific
changes for dealing with climatic
activities, industries, sectors, and
disruption. They are opinions based
nations. Nevertheless, there is a
on science. They advocate change.
need for the policy makers to begin
to determine how to include these
The “Forgotten Feedbacks” piece
indirect effects in their system of
could go farther. It could point
credits and debits. That is one
out that the current mind-set for
policy implication for the “Forgotten
managing carbon is to reduce
emissions and increase carbon
Feedbacks” research.
Taking a step back, imagine where
we’d be if the science behind
these two pieces had never been
carried out – if we didn’t have the
knowledge to be concerned about
permafrost thaw or if we didn’t
know that one option for stabilizing
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
was land management. We would
have a limited understanding of
both the dangers and the solutions
to climatic disruption.
That’s what science offers: the
discovery of things to be concerned
about
before
they
become
disruptive, and options for dealing
with and overcoming such concerns.
And this role of science is why
governments have long recognized
the need to invest in research.
Lately, our government has been
forfeiting that responsibility and
we need your help. Our research is
for the common good. Think of it
as conservation writ large – not for
individual species or habitats, but
at a global level for all species and
all habitats. Science for the future
of the Earth. It helps us define
what’s needed to achieve a greener,
healthier, more productive planet.
Imagine
a world not dependent on fossil fuels
that allows natural systems to
regulate the Earth’s temperature
Invest in the future of the Earth
Invest in research
Please make your gift to
support the
Woods Hole Research Center today.
“Our research is for the common good. Think of it as conservation writ large – not for
individual species or habitats, but at a global level for all species and all habitats.”
Photo by Chris Linder.
20
Canopy
Fall 2014
Canopy
Fall 2014
21
I am the first Ph.D. in my family, and as far back as I can remember, I have been curious
about how people live around the globe and care about nature. When I was 18, I went
to Nicaragua for an international solidarity project. It was an eye-opening experience on
poverty, inequality and the role of a healthy environment for human well-being. Climate
change is the biggest challenge we face. I do my research
because I have hope that we can find solutions to reduce
poverty and protect the resources of our planet, and I want to
be a part of the solutions.
Johanne Pelletier
Marcia Macedo
Postdoctoral Fellow
Assistant Scientist
Prajjwal Panday
Brendan M. Rogers
Postdoctoral Fellow
Inspired by an environmental
science class in college, I
enrolled in semester-long field
courses in the Nevada desert
and Australian rainforest.
I became consumed by the
infinite diversity of life and ecosystems. I knew
then that I would devote my life to understanding
the processes governing them. After college I spent
a year traveling the world and began to grasp the
effects of human activities on the environment.
Pollution, over-population, landscape fragmentation,
invasive species, and climate warming were changing
the biosphere. Climate change is particularly scary, as
it affects every aspect of the Earth’s systems. I believe
that, if we understand the relationship between
human activities and a changing climate better, we
can mitigate the effects of climate change. My work
examining Boreal forest fires is one of the keys to
understanding and managing climate impacts.
Patrick
Jantz
Research
Associate
22
Canopy
Postdoctoral Fellow
My love for science started early
in the foothills of Nepal, where I was fascinated by nature
– streams, brooks, lakes, and rivers in particular. I started
reading Edward Abbey, Rachel Carson, John Muir, and Henry
Thoreau and developed a passion for and commitment
to environmental issues and challenges. At present, my
research focuses on understanding the impacts of climatic
and anthropogenic changes on terrestrial hydrology. I
believe that a better understanding of ecosystem processes
will help prepare us for how an ecosystem may respond
to global climatic and environmental changes. This will
hopefully allow us to communicate openly and honestly to
stakeholders and policymakers to plan for action that will
mitigate potential impacts.
My first college course taught me how to draw a map on the
computer which was really challenging, because before that
I had never even seen a computer! In
the end, I made a beautiful map and
chose GIS as my major and continued
on to my Ph.D. in Earth Systems
and Geoinformation Sciences. I am
interested in the interactions between
climate change and land surface.
I grew up in the suburbs of a medium sized town in the southeastern U.S.
Although the abandoned fields and fragmented forests near my house
provided some wildlife habitat, real wilderness was something I could only
read about. And read I did. Book after book from Thornton W. Burgess, Jim
Kjelgaard, Jack London and others. Later, in college, these childhood excursions
of imagination grew into a love of biology and ecology and led to hikes in the
great mountain ranges, forests and deserts of the US. After
college, a Woods Hole Research Center internship revealed
to me the sheer scale of human actions in the Earth’s wild
places and strengthened my resolve to devote my career to
understanding and mitigating some of the negative impacts
of our time here on Earth. As the geographic focus of my
work has expanded to include developing countries, I’m
internalizing the lesson that ecosystem functions and human
well-being are inseparable, and I use GIS and RS approaches
to identify forest conservation and restoration opportunities
that provide multiple benefits for human and natural systems.
Fall 2014
My grandmother grew up in a tiny town near
the mouth of the Amazon River. As a kid I was
fascinated by her plant-based home remedies
and spent long afternoons listening to her
weave stories of the Amazon’s forests, rivers,
and wildlife. I especially loved hearing about my
dad’s pet capivaras and agoutis. As I grew older,
I learned that the environment they grew up in
was changing rapidly. I did school projects about
the massive Serra Pelada gold mines and rampant
slash-and-burn deforestation. When I was 12, Chico
Mendes, leader of the rubber tapper’s movement,
was murdered for defending the rights of forest
people. That year I visited the Amazon for the first
time and was awed by its vast forests and rivers, rich
plant and animal diversity, and vibrant people. I was
hooked – and I knew then that I wanted to understand
this complex environment so I could help conserve
it. At WHRC, I spend my days studying tropical
forests from space and on the ground. We are trying
to find creative solutions that reconcile the need for
forest conservation and human development.
Kevin Guay
Research Assistant
Min Li
Postdoctoral Fellow
Scientists
Watch
to
Jesse Bishop
Research Associate
Tina Cormier
Research Associate
Ever since I was a little girl, I loved to
play outside; it’s where I felt most alive.
I’d run through the woods and fields
collecting grasshoppers and worms, saving turtles that
were trying to cross the road, and listening to beautiful bird
songs. Over time, I have witnessed disturbing changes in our
environment—rapidly changing land use, pollution of our air
and water, climate change—that have lead to extinctions, food
insecurity, and human health issues all over the world. In my
own backyard, places that I love have been turned into parking
lots and malls. I now have to filter my water to avoid known
carcinogenic toxins that run through the pipes in my town.
Though these issues seem too overwhelming for one person
to change, I decided to pursue an advanced degree in Natural
Resources and do something about them in the best way I
knew how: with science. I hope that the work I do can advance
our understanding of how we affect the environment and what
consequences those actions can have on our well-being.
In college I studied
computer
science,
environmental studies
and geology. I analyzed
algorithms,
wrote
operating systems and
debugged lots of code,
but I also analyzed
water
samples,
explored
renewable
energy sources and studied rock
formations. It was truly an eclectic
experience. When asked what I was
going to do afterwards, my response
was always that I was passionate
about both and hoped that one day
I could find a way to combine them.
Working at Woods Hole Research
Center has been the answer. I am
able to use my programming skills
in conjunction with my knowledge
of the environment and physical
sciences to study land-climate
interactions related to climate
change using satellite data. My
work at WHRC has inspired a deep
interest in ecology and changed the
way that I look at the world.
After spending a year-and-a-half in engineering school, learning how to
flatten terrain and straighten rivers, I realized it wasn’t for me. My childhood
was split between roaming the woods and working in my father’s and
grandfather’s wood shops, so I turned my attention and studies to something
more fitting – forestry. Forest ecosystems have always been appealing to me,
both for their natural beauty and as a renewable source for so many products.
I study forests to help understand and share their value, both to markets and
to the ecosystem.
Mary Farina
Research Assistant
Growing up, I knew
that I wanted to work
toward addressing
global environmental
issues, but I didn’t
know whether science, policy, or
another avenue was the right path for
me. I was very lucky to take a course
on environmental remote sensing in
college. This course introduced me
to the world of geospatial analyses
and helped shape my future goals. I
took more classes, which showed
me how remote sensing, GIS, and
other mapping tools allow us to
monitor environmental conditions at
varying scales. I learned how these
tools can integrate different kinds of
data and help us to understand the
interactions between environmental
and human processes. Aside from
these motivations, working with maps
can be a lot of fun! Here at WHRC, I
am working on projects that combine
satellite data and ground-based
measurements of trees in order to map
biomass across the globe. I’m excited
to contribute to this global endeavor,
and I hope to help produce biomass
data that can be used in future carbon
accounting work.
Canopy
Fall 2014
23
Happenings
October 2013
Board Dinner: A Wild Solution for
Climate Change
Woods Hole Research Center Board member Dr.
Thomas E. Lovejoy presented “A Wild Solution to
Climate Change” to a packed room at the Hotel
Monaco in Washington, DC. Dr. Lovejoy coined the
term biodiversity in the 1980s and has devoted
much of his career to studying and describing the
importance of diversity of plants and animals for the
benefit of functioning ecosystems and for humanity.
He is most well known for introducing the idea of
debt-for-nature swaps.
April 2014
Earth Day Celebration: Ecology and the
Common Good
Associate Scientist Robert Spencer and professional
science and conservation photographer, Chris Linder.
The presentation examined their research trip to
the Siberian Arctic where warming temperatures
threaten to release large quantities of ancient carbon
contained in permafrost and its subsequent effects on
climate change.
July 2014
Photography Exhibit: Sustaining the Earth
Scattered around the globe and part of our collective
legacy are some of the most visually striking places
on Earth, many of which are among the locales
most at risk in a changing climate. A photography
exhibit, “Sustaining the Earth,” mounted in WHRC’s
Harbourton Auditorium, told the story of three
ecosystems, revealing ways in which deforestation,
land disturbance and climate change are affecting
these lands and all of humanity.
The Woods Hole Research Center held an Earth Day
celebration to mark the publication of Ecology and
the Common Good: Great
Issues of the Environment,
a book of essays from the
greatest environmental
science and policy thinkers
of our time. Dr. Sandra
Steingraber, renowned
biologist, author and cancer
survivor spoke to the crowd
about the moral imperative
for scientists to speak
out about environmental
Biologist and author Sandra Steingraber (center) with
threats to human health.
August 2014
Community Lecture: Changing
Climate, Rising Seas: Cape Cod
There is no debate that sea levels are
rising. Here on Cape Cod, even a small
rise will have profound effects, including
increased coastal erosion, greater
vulnerability to storms and stresses
to infrastructure. The questions are,
how much, how soon, and what can we
George Woodwell (left) and Richard Houghton (right)
do about sea level rise? The answers
to these questions depend on our
responses to a changing climate. A community lecture
May 2014
featuring Geologist Rob Thieler from the United States
Community Lecture: Detecting the
Geological Survey (USGS) and WHRC’s Senior Scientist
Max Holmes examined local sea level rise assessments,
Lit Fuse of the Arctic Carbon Bomb
implications and possible adaptations within the
context of the causes and effects of climate change
A community lecture entitled, “Detecting the Lit
Fuse of the Arctic Carbon Bomb,” featured WHRC
around the globe.
24
Canopy
Fall 2014
September 2014
Community Lecture: Extreme Home
Energy Efficiency
Inspired by the green architecture of the Woods Hole
Research Center (WHRC)’s Woodwell building and the
carbon emissions research that motivated its design,
Research Associates Greg Fiske and Jesse Bishop have
developed a passion for home energy efficiency. The
duo led a community lecture describing simple and
advanced techniques that can be employed to reduce
home energy consumption.
October 2014
Conference: Ocean Acidification and
Southern New England
Fossil fuel emissions pump more carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere every day. One quarter of these
emissions are absorbed by the ocean causing it to
acidify, which could have profound and irreversible
effects. Shellfish growers in the Pacific Northwest
have already been impacted through declining oyster
harvests linked directly with ocean acidification.
Fisherman and aquaculturists around the globe are
asking, “Who’s next?”
The Ocean Acidification and Southern New England
Conference will jumpstart the search for solutions for
our region by bringing together coastal resource users,
planners, ocean acidification experts, stakeholders
and other concerned citizens. The goal of the
conference is to find common ground among these
groups concerning the risks to our region from ocean
acidification.
November 2014
WHRC’s Lawrence S. Huntington
Environmental Prize
The Lawrence S. Huntington Environmental
Prize recognizes leaders in the public and private
sector who advance and promote research and
communication on climate, Earth sciences and
conservation. This year Dr. Johan Rockström of
Stockholm University and the Stockholm Resilience
Centre accepted the 2014 prize and delivered an
address entitled, “Human Prosperity within Planetary
Boundaries,” at the New York Yacht Club.
Dr. Houghton Accepts ICCG Award in Venice
On October 2, 2014, Dr. Houghton attended the
International Center for Climate Governance (ICCG)
award ceremony in Venice, Italy, and received the
award for WHRC as the top-rated think tank active in
the field of climate change economics and policy. Dr.
Houghton accepted the graceful Murano glass sculpture
and delivered a speech entitled, “Beyond REDD+: What
management of land can and cannot do to help control
atmospheric CO2.”
Photo by Christy Lynch Design.
Woods Hole Research Center
149 Woods Hole Road
Falmouth, MA 02540
www.whrc.org