Gross vs Net Carbon Sequestration

Have you used i-Tree components for your own project? This is the place to tell others about your experiences—and to link to online results, images, reports, and publicity. Relevant topics include project area, challenges, organization, methods, and effects.

Moderators: i-Tree Support, i-Tree Team

Post Reply
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 8:10 pm
Location: Mexico

Gross vs Net Carbon Sequestration

Post by hdelaconcha » Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:12 pm

I am working on the Merida results and ran into something that I just want to be sure.
GROSS C SEC. NET C sequestration.
Strata kg/yr/ha Tonne/yr kg/yr/ha Tonne/yr
Distrito 02 300.51 623.31 249.27 517.03
Distrito 03 510.62 684.80 410.36 550.34
Distrito 04 404.67 643.94 71.74 114.15

the big difference between strata I assume is because of the species mix right?? Strata 02 and 03 reduce by a factor of 1.2+ but 04 reduces 5.6 times. the size of each is 2000 ha 1,341 ha and 1,600 hectares respectively so my guess is the species mix. I just want to check

Horacio de la Concha
Cuernavaca MEXICO
i-Tree Team
Posts: 268
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:45 am

Re: Gross vs Net Carbon Sequestration

Post by Jason.Henning » Mon Jun 26, 2017 10:53 am

Hi Horacio,
You are correct that tree species and tree diameters will be a big driver of those differences. The other variables that impact net sequestration are total tree height, crown light exposure (CLE), tree condition, and field land use. The CLE impacts how quickly the trees grow and therefore how much carbon is sequestered. Similarly, tree condition is used to reduce net sequestration. So any differences between those variables across strata is likely to lead to those differences.
Also, note that for the totals those are expanded based on the area of the stratum. Strata with smaller areas are likely to have smaller sequestration values.
Thanks for your question.
A member of the i-Tree Team
Post Reply