MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414382364 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.127335

Incorporating enhanced rock weathering into sustainable forest management

2025· article· en· W4414382364 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ian Power, Shaun A. Watmough, Adam Gorgolewski, Larissa M M Wallisch, Jonathan Spence, Sasha Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
Canadian institutionsHaliburton Forest & Wild Life ReserveUniversity of AlbertaTrent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTides FoundationGoogle.org
KeywordsWeatheringSustainable forest managementSilvicultureForest managementCarbon sequestrationAmendmentSite selectionLogging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhanced rock weathering (ERW) can be implemented in managed forests that use selective harvesting through trail networks for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) while improving soil health by neutralizing excess acidity and restoring base cations. Wollastonite-rich rock powder (Wo = 28.4 wt% and D 50 = 350 μm) was applied using a tractor and spreader from a trail in Haliburton Forest, Ontario, Canada, to evaluate the practicability and challenges of incorporating ERW into silviculture practices. The intended amendment dosage of 5 t/ha aimed to replace soil Ca losses due to historic acidic deposition. Based on trail networks mapped in Haliburton Forest and a spreading width of 12 m, 85 % of the forest area could potentially be amended, assuming no overlapping areas. Spreading of 5 t/ha over the annually harvested area (∼700 ha) has a maximum potential to sequester 1120–1270 t CO 2 /yr based on the CDR potential of the amendment (377–427 kg CO 2 /t), calculated using its bulk geochemical composition. Assuming the same trail coverage as in Haliburton Forest and a dosage of 5 t/ha wollastonite-rich amendment, managed forests undergoing selection harvest in the United States and Canada have a maximum potential to sequester 4.5–5.1 Mt CO 2 /yr. The CDR rate of forest ERW requires field-based monitoring and life-cycle assessments. This application test successfully showed the technical feasibility of incorporating ERW into forest management via trail networks. However, it also demonstrated considerable spatial heterogeneity in dosages (0.8–6.7 t/ha), varying by proximity to trail centers, obstructions such as large trees, and overlapping applications in dense trail networks, which challenges the accuracy and verifiability of carbon credits generated. Selecting monitoring sites near trail centers and away from large obstructions and trail junctions will help ensure dosages are representative of the larger application. Furthermore, we recommend verifying dosages to avoid over- or under-estimating CDR in future forest ERW studies. • Forests have great potential for CO 2 removal (CDR) via enhanced rock weathering (ERW). • Applying alkaline rock powders for ERW may also improve soil and forest health. • Inaccurate CDR quantification can result from amendment and dosage heterogeneity. • Dosages at monitoring sites must be representative of the overall average dosage. • Monitoring should be near the trail centers, away from obstructions and other trails.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental ManagementSame topicCO2 Sequestration and Geologic InteractionsFrench-language works237,207