Biomass burning fuel consumption rates: a field measurement database
Author:
van Leeuwen T. T., van der Werf G. R., Hoffmann A. A., Detmers R. G., Rücker G., French N. H. F., Archibald S., Carvalho J. A., Cook G. D., de Groot W. J., Hély C.ORCID, Kasischke E. S., Kloster S., McCarty J. L., Pettinari M. L., Savadogo P., Alvarado E. C., Boschetti L., Manuri S., Meyer C. P., Siegert F., Trollope L. A., Trollope W. S. W.
Abstract
Abstract. Landscape fires show large variability in the amount of biomass or fuel consumed per unit area burned. These fuel consumption (FC) rates depend on the biomass available to burn and the fraction of the biomass that is actually combusted, and can be combined with estimates of area burned to assess emissions. While burned area can be detected from space and estimates are becoming more reliable due to improved algorithms and sensors, FC rates are either modeled or taken selectively from the literature. We compiled the peer-reviewed literature on FC rates for various biomes and fuel categories to better understand FC rates and variability, and to provide a~database that can be used to constrain biogeochemical models with fire modules. We compiled in total 76 studies covering 10 biomes including savanna (15 studies, average FC of 4.6 t DM (dry matter) ha−1), tropical forest (n = 19, FC = 126), temperate forest (n = 11, FC = 93), boreal forest (n = 16, FC = 39), pasture (n = 6, FC = 28), crop residue (n = 4, FC = 6.5), chaparral (n = 2, FC = 32), tropical peatland (n = 4, FC = 314), boreal peatland (n = 2, FC = 42), and tundra (n = 1, FC = 40). Within biomes the regional variability in the number of measurements was sometimes large, with e.g. only 3 measurement locations in boreal Russia and 35 sites in North America. Substantial regional differences were found within the defined biomes: for example FC rates of temperate pine forests in the USA were 38% higher than Australian forests dominated by eucalypt trees. Besides showing the differences between biomes, FC estimates were also grouped into different fuel classes. Our results highlight the large variability in FC rates, not only between biomes but also within biomes and fuel classes. This implies that care should be taken with using averaged values, and our comparison with FC rates from GFED3 indicates that also modeling studies have difficulty in representing the dynamics governing FC.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference156 articles.
1. Akagi, S. K., Yokelson, R. J., Wiedinmyer, C., Alvarado, M. J., Reid, J. S., Karl, T., Crounse, J. D., and Wennberg, P. O.: Emission factors for open and domestic biomass burning for use in atmospheric models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 4039–4072, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-4039-2011, 2011. 2. Amiro, B. D., Todd, J. B., Wotton, B. M., Logan, K. A., Flannigan, M. D., Stocks, B. J., Mason, J. A., Martell, D. L., and Hirsch, K. G.: Direct carbon emissions from Canadian forest fires, 1959–1999, Can. J. Forest Res., 31, 512–525, https://doi.org/10.1139/x00-197, 2001. 3. Andreae, M. O. and Merlet, P.: Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 15, 955–966, 2001. 4. Araújo, T., Carvalho Jr., J., and Higuchi, N.: A tropical rainforest clearing experiment by biomass burning in the state of Pará, Brazil, Atmos. Environ., 33, 1991–1998, 1999. 5. Archibald, S., Scholes, R. J., Roy, D. P., Roberts, G., and Boschetti, L.: Southern African fire regimes as revealed by remote sensing, Int. J. Wildland Fire, 19, 861–878, https://doi.org/10.1071/WF10008, 2010.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|