Here is a collection of carbon (live biomass) map with the links to the data providers and methods: http://biomass.geo-wiki.org

The description of the tool and some analysis are here:

http://www.earthzine.org/2012/06/09/observing-forest-biomass-globally/

Let me know if you want to share your own data.

Thanks Joachim, these are interesting reads. LIDAR seems to be a very promising way to do C assessments. However, at the moment most studies still use airborne LIDAR (the ones you mention as well) rather than satellite borne. Besides, it's a relatively new technique, so it doesn't allow us to recreate historical time series. I would also be interested if people are combining "old data" with new techniques for example.

Josef Kellndorfer, Woods Hole, has done nice data synthesis work in the US.

http://www.whrc.org/mapping/nbcd/index.html

another rich source of info that has emerged is historical analyses of the Landsat data record, initiated by its release for public use. Please advocate for open data policies!

http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/news-archive/news_0139.html

There is a big lack about below-ground biomass data. I've been working with root biomass and wondering about better techniques to measure this compartment.

Here is a collection of carbon (live biomass) map with the links to the data providers and methods: http://biomass.geo-wiki.org

The description of the tool and some analysis are here:

http://www.earthzine.org/2012/06/09/observing-forest-biomass-globally/

Let me know if you want to share your own data.

Our experts in the field of carbon mapping e.g. by GOSAT and OCO are:

Dr. Andre Butz [email protected] (KIT-Germany)

Dr H. Boesch, [email protected] (Uni Leicester, UK)

Dr. Frankenberg, Christian [email protected] (JPL-Pasadena)

So please contact them

bests Klaus Pfeilsticker

See doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/015011

Hi Jorg, this seems to be indeed a very good paper giving an overview of what can be done nowadays, thanks for the tip

If we talk about the carbon mapping,first there should be measurable amount of carbon content after its degradation or after exhaust.

"We propose a method of identifying a subset of the GLAS data which can justifiably be treated as a simple random sample in model-based biomass estimation." - Carbon Balance and Management 2012, 7:10 doi:10.1186/1750-0680-7-10 http://www.cbmjournal.com/content/7/1/10

So can I conclude from all the above that currently the frontier lies at:

-mapping below ground carbon

-standardizing sampling strategies and algorithms to assess both above ground and below ground carbon

...or did I miss something?

I should also mention the international soil carbon network:

http://www.fluxdata.org/nscn/SitePages/ISCN.aspx

This is an effort to gather what data exists re: soil carbon into a global data base. A noble effort.

I think that mapping above ground biomass is more challenging than just standardization of methods. Creation of appropriate methods (including global data collection) is still on the table. There are methods, but I don't think they necessarily agree or work well across the globe. Below ground carbon is even more difficult.

Thanks Kenneth, these collaborative initiatives are very interesting indeed. Perhaps on the same level (although not directly related to Soil Carbon) I could mention the global Global Soil Information Facility (http://www.isric.org/projects/global-soil-information-facilities-gsif).

@Thomas: A small contribution from my side;

http://www.metla.fi/silvafennica/full/sf42/sf423387.pdf

http://webarchive.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/External-World-soil-database/HWSD_Documentation.pdf

@Hammad, thanks for the useful references!

I'll have to sit down now and read all the suggested literature and projects to let it settle...;-)

Any further comments remain more than welcome!

@Thomas: This discussion is also very useful for me, because I am also compiling the literature on "Public Domain Data for Biomass and Carbon Stocks". Yesterday came across this document which may help you a lot.

www21.online-convert.com/download-file/e8179a7b7da3b1cbd1f81c821f506f0f/converted-08a199e7.pdf

Some idea can be taken from a inference that if globe consisting of 100 mass then 33rd part will be biomass from higher measurements.

Hi Thomas, I worked on carbon mapping at a national scale to feed into European estimates in the 1990s. We recognised that, for the UK, soil carbon was more important than vegetation and that land use is a key driver to change in both. We used the satellite derived Land Cover Maps (http://www.ceh.ac.uk/LandCoverMap2007.html) and the Countryside Surveys (http://www.countrysidesurvey.org.uk/) to generate estimates. The work was originally led by Ronnie Milne and is still continuing under Amanda Thomson (see http://ecosystemghg.ceh.ac.uk/). These are a couple of publications, but there were a lot of reports and other documents.

Milne, R. & Brown, T.A. (1997) Carbon in the vegetation and soils of Great Britain. Journal of Environmental Management, 49, 413-433.

Cannell, M.G.R., Milne, R., Hargreaves, K.J., Brown, T.A.W., Cruickshank, M.M., Bradley, R.I., Spencer, T., Hope, D., Billett, M.F., Adger, W.N. & Subak, S. (1999) National inventories of terrestrial carbon sources and sinks: the U.K. experience. Climatic Change, 42, 505-530.

I think it would be better to divide carbon pools into living and non-living biomass, not to below- and above ground biomass. Newest remote sensing technologies give us new opportunities for assessing living biomass. However, there are seemingly no breakthrough innovations in technologies for mapping soil carbon.

Hi Georgi, do you mean to say that it should be carbon in biomass vs. carbon in "non-biomass"? I can indeed imagine that there is a direct link between above ground biomass and below ground (living) biomass, expressed by the shoot to root ration. This is probably less the case with soil carbon in general, although in recent studies that we performed, both in Nepal and Rwanda, we found positive correlations between above ground biomass and soil organic carbon, so there seem to be indirect links (publications for this are in preparation).

@David Howard, thanks for the suggested reports! and websites.

To be precise I mean that it should be like in Verandsky's works: "living organic matter" and "non-living organic matter". The biomass of the vegetation cover forms a large part of the "living organic matter". Litter and soil carbon form the large part of the "non-living organic matter". The amount of litter is normally related to the current vegetation cover. The amount of soil carbon is not always related to the current vegetation cover. I learnt this fact when applied a carbon cycle model to the data on carbon stocks in the forest stands of different age.

Kevin Gurney and others are making some amazing strides with the Hestia Project:

http://hestia.project.asu.edu/

Optical sensors have limited capabilities in carbon stock estimation. I think combination of both optical and microwave remote sensing could be a good solution.

@David Howard @Thomas Groen .Accoriding to David's suggestion.Thomas Groen claimed that they found positive correlations between above ground biomass and soil organic carbon in Nepal and Rwanda. Is that possible that in the regional scale or continental scale soil organic carbon is related to other environmental and vegetative facotrs. Using the remote sensing derived date to estimate soil organic carbon is the popular method at present. And some literature reported a convergence of shoot to root ratio covering many types of ecosystems globally. However the accuracy of the carbon mapping hasn't improved in the past ten years

Josh Perlman at UCDavis is doing important work in this area.