Carbon Profile of the Managed Forest Sector in Canada in the 20th Century: Sink or Source?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada contains 10% of global forests and has been one of the world's largest harvested wood products (HWP) producers. Therefore, Canada's managed forest sector, the managed forest area and HWP, has the potential to significantly increase or reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases. Using the most comprehensive carbon balance analysis to date, this study shows Canada's managed forest area and resulting HWP were a sink of 7510 and 849 teragrams carbon (TgC), respectively, in the period 1901-2010, exceeding Canada's fossil fuel-based emissions over this period (7333 TgC). If Canadian HWP were not produced and used for residential construction, and instead more energy intensive materials were used, there would have been an additional 790 TgC fossil fuel-based emissions. Because the forest carbon increases in the 20th century were mainly due to younger growing forests that resulted from disturbances in the 19th century, and future increases in forest carbon stocks appear uncertain, in coming decades most of the mitigation contribution from Canadian forests will likely accrue from wood substitution that reduces fossil fuel-based emissions and stores carbon, so long as those forests are managed sustainably.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".