Table 2.

Decadal and annual ecosystem and project-induced C sinks (mean ± SD) in the project regions

National ecological restoration projectsDecadal ecosystem C sinksAnnual ecosystem C sink, Tg C per yProject-induced C sink
Biomass, Tg CSoil, Tg CTotal, Tg CDecadal, Tg CAnnual, Tg C per y
Forest Protection479.6 ± 230.0409.5 ± 386.1889.1 ± 449.468.4 ± 34.6181.7*14.0
Grassland Conservation63.8 ± 2.459.9 ± 45.9123.7 ± 46.015.5 ± 5.8117.8 ± 47.814.7 ± 6.0
North Shelter Forest fourth100.4 ± 18.223.82 ± 42.0124.3 ± 45.812.4 ± 4.6119.7 ± 49.012.0 ± 4.9
Sand Control43.1 ± 21.09.2 ± 20.052.3 ± 29.05.2 ± 2.969.7 ± 24.47.0 ± 2.4
GGP181.0 ± 26.189.7 ± 79.4270.8 ± 83.624.6 ± 7.6198.5*18.0
River Shelter Forest second51.4 ± 10.27.4 ± 13.358.8 ± 16.75.9 ± 1.783.0 ± 38.28.3 ± 3.8
Total919.3 ± 233.4599.5 ± 399.81,519 ± 462.9132.0 ± 36.3770.4 ± 82.174.0 ± 8.9
  • The SD was estimated based on the variation in C accumulation and sequestration of six geological regions (as shown in Fig. 2), and the ranges of national-scale C accumulation and C sequestration for each project were acquired based on the standard variation of the biomass, soil, and total sinks and contributions to C sequestration of six geological regions (as individual independent variables), as in the flowing formula: SD National = (ΣSD Regional2)0 0.5.

  • * The estimations of project-induced C sinks for the Forest Protection (including 138.5 Tg C from the new plantings, 31.7 Tg C from biomass C retention resulted from timber reduction strategies, and 11.4 Tg C from soil C retention from soil erosion control, respectively) and GGP were partly based on statistical data and parameters from previous studies (see Methods and Materials and SI Appendix, D) and no SDs were reported here.