In the past, intact forests absorbed 7.8 billion metric tons of CO2 annually—about a fifth of all human emissions—but their carbon storage is increasingly at risk from climate change and human activities such as deforestation.
A study from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) shows that failing to account for the potentially decreasing ability of forests to absorb CO2 could make reaching the Paris agreement targets significantly harder, if not impossible, and much more costly.
“Delaying action leads to disproportionately higher costs,” explains Michael Windisch, lead author of the study published in Nature Communications, and PIK guest scientist.
“Right now, our climate strategies bet on forests not only remaining intact, but even expanding,” Windisch says.
“However, with escalating wildfires like in California, and continued deforestation in the Amazon, that’s a gamble. Climate change itself puts forests’ immense carbon stores at risk.”
According to the study, postponing action to reduce emissions and to protect and monitor forests could jeopardize climate targets. “We must act immediately to safeguard the carbon stored in forests,” Windisch emphasizes.
“Otherwise, compensating for potential forest carbon losses through steeper emissions cuts in key emission sectors like energy, industry and transport will become increasingly expensive and possibly unattainable.”
Considering forest carbon losses in climate mitigation pathways
The study analyzed how climate targets can be met despite forests’ reduced capacity for storing carbon.
The authors used REMIND-MAgPIE—an integrated global land and water use modeling as well as an energy-economy modeling system—together with the global vegetation model LPJmL to evaluate how natural disturbances and human impacts on forests influence the feasibility of achieving climate mitigation goals.
The research team compared a foresighted policy response with various delayed and myopic approaches.
Regardless of the assessed disturbance rate, the study revealed just how steep the price of inaction can be. Even a five-year delay in responding to forest carbon loss would lead to a roughly two-fold increase in both the stringency and overall cost of measures to offset that lost carbon, the authors find.
Emission cuts in the energy sector, for instance, would have to be ramped up considerably, supported by a near-doubling of negative emissions capacity—which itself demands a corresponding expansion in land use.
Ultimately, these extra efforts drive up overall costs, and result in GDP setbacks that are approximately double those of immediate action.
The study also highlights that current models may be overly optimistic about future forest carbon storage because they ignore disturbances, overvalue CO2 fertilization and underestimate deforestation. To mitigate climate impacts, safeguard carbon stocks and prevent escalating costs, the scientists recommend immediate action.
Discover the latest in science, tech, and space with over 100,000 subscribers who rely on Phys.org for daily insights.
Sign up for our free newsletter and get updates on breakthroughs,
innovations, and research that matter—daily or weekly.
“Forests are not an infinite resource, but need careful monitoring to detect reductions in carbon sinks early on,” explains Florian Humpenöder, PIK scientist and study author.
He also stresses the need for stronger forest conservation, and faster decarbonization. Forests may absorb less CO2 than expected, making realistic forest carbon projections essential.
“Staying below critical warming thresholds requires more than just hoping forests will remain intact,” concludes Alexander Popp, head of PIK’s Land Use Transition lab and author of the study.
“Alongside protecting forests, it is essential to promote sustainable land use practices– not only to preserve biodiversity but also to avoid drastic economic consequences and to secure our climate future.”
More information:
Michael G. Windisch et al. Hedging our bet on forest permanence for the economic viability of climate targets., Nature Communications (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-57607-x
Provided by
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Citation:
Losing forest carbon stocks could put climate goals out of reach, scientists warn (2025, March 27)
