Environment Task Force Newsletter
Ohio State University Extension
Fall, 1997, v1 #3

Fewer Forest Fires Could Benefit Climate

Kyle Sharp, Associate Editor Communications and Technology

Smokey the Bear probably didn't have the Earth's climate in mind when he first urged people to help stop forest fires, but climate change may soon be part of his campaign.

Fewer forest fires could lower the possibility of a future climate change, said Brent Sohngen, Ohio State University environmental economist.

Trees absorb carbon from the atmosphere and store it in leaves, branches, trunks and roots. Many other forest plants also absorb and store carbon. As leaves fall to the ground and trees and plants die, they decay and transfer the carbon to the soil.

But when forests burn, much of the stored carbon is released back into the atmosphere, and a forest's ability to absorb carbon is greatly reduced until trees and plants regrow, Sohngen said. Too much carbon in the atmosphere is what many scientists predict could lead to global warming.

Costs, benefits in millions

Sohngen studied unreserved timberland in the United States--forests outside of national parks, recreation areas, wilderness areas or other areas that cannot be managed for timber harvest--and found that if the number of fires is reduced from its current level, carbon storage can be increased in these lands. Unreserved timberlands make up 93 percent of the total timberland in the United States.

Reducing forest fire damage by 5 percent from 1990 to 2040 could be costly. Estimates show that lowering fire damage that much through fire prevention and firefighting efforts could cost an additional $98.6 million to $1.4 billion.

"It seems costly, and the numbers certainly point that out, but in terms of climate change, forest fire reduction may be beneficial," Sohngen said.

He estimates the combined financial benefit of reduced climate change damages and lower timber prices to be from $112.4 million to $485.7 million.

He arrived at those numbers by estimating the financial damage from global climate change, including such things as a sea level rise, loss of crop productivity and an increased need for air conditioning. He also considered the benefit of increased timber supplies and the resulting lower timber prices.

"Even if more money was spent to reduce fires, the tradeoff could be the lower prices for timber and the increased storage of carbon in forests," Sohngen said.

More precise estimates of fire reduction costs, especially programs that decrease fire frequency, need to be made, but both economics and ecology should be considered when making forest management decisions, he said.