| 基于InVEST与CA-Markov模型的昆明市碳储量时空演变与预测 |
| 摘要点击 790 全文点击 249 投稿时间：2023-02-08 修订日期：2023-03-11 |
| 查看HTML全文
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 中文关键词 土地利用变化 碳储量 InVEST模型 CA-Markov模型 昆明市 |
| 英文关键词 land use change carbon storage InVEST model CA-Markov model Kunming City |
| 作者 | 单位 | E-mail | | 帕茹克·吾斯曼江 | 中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院, 北京 100193
自然资源部农用地质量与监控重点实验室, 北京 100193 | B20203210942@cau.edu.cn | | 艾东 | 中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院, 北京 100193
自然资源部农用地质量与监控重点实验室, 北京 100193 | | | 方一舒 | 中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院, 北京 100193
自然资源部农用地质量与监控重点实验室, 北京 100193 | | | 张益宾 | 清华大学建筑学院, 北京 100083 | | | 李牧 | 天津商业大学公共管理学院, 天津 300133 | | | 郝晋珉 | 中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院, 北京 100193
自然资源部农用地质量与监控重点实验室, 北京 100193 | jmhao@cau.edu.cn |
|
| 中文摘要 |
| 土地利用/覆被变化是引起陆地生态系统碳储量变化的重要驱动因素,影响整个生态系统的碳循环过程.以昆明市为研究案例,在修正碳密度系数的基础上,通过耦合InVEST模型碳储存模块和CA-Markov模型,分析2000~2020年及“三线”约束下未来不同土地利用情景陆地生态系统碳储量变化的时空差异特征.结果表明：①昆明市土地利用类型主要以耕地、林地和草地为主,土地利用转移也发生在三者之间.②2000~2020年,昆明市碳储量整体表现为南低北高的空间分布特征,碳储量逐年下降,累计损失5.27 × 106 t,林地和草地退化是碳储量减少的主要原因.③2020~2030年,4种情景碳储量均有所减少,其中惯性发展情景碳储量下降最明显,主要是建设用地快速扩张引起；耕地保护情景相比惯性发展情景有效减缓了碳储量减少幅度；生态保护情景则能够增强研究区固碳能力,碳储量达到262.49 × 106 t,但不能有效控制耕地面积的减少；防止城市扩张情景有效抑制了建设用地无序扩张,间接防止了碳储量进一步减少.因此,研究区可统筹考虑耕地保护情景、生态保护情景和防止城市扩张情景,既能增加研究区碳汇空间,又能保障粮食和生态安全. |
| 英文摘要 |
| Land use/cover change is an important driving factor for carbon stock changes in terrestrial ecosystems and affects the carbon cycle of the whole ecosystem. Taking Kunming City as a case study, based on the modified carbon density coefficient, this study analyzed the spatio-temporal characteristics of carbon storage changes in the terrestrial ecosystem under different land use scenarios from 2000 to 2020 and "three-line" constraints by coupling the carbon storage module of the InVEST model and CA-Markov model. The results showed that:① cultivated land, forest land, and grassland were the main types of land use in Kunming City, and land use transfer also occurred among the three types. ② From 2000 to 2020, the overall carbon storage in Kunming City was low in the south and high in the north, and the carbon storage decreased yearly with a cumulative loss of 5.27×106 t. The degradation of forest land and grassland was the main reason for the decrease in carbon storage. ③ From 2020 to 2030, the carbon storage of the four scenarios should decrease, and the decline in carbon storage in the inertia development scenario was the most obvious, which was mainly caused by the rapid expansion of construction land. The cultivated land protection scenario effectively slowed down the reduction in carbon storage compared with the inertia development scenario. The ecological protection scenario could enhance the carbon sequestration capacity of the study area, with carbon storage reaching 262.49×106 t, but could not effectively control the reduction in cultivated land area. The scenario of preventing urban expansion effectively inhibited the disorderly expansion of construction land and indirectly prevented further reduction in carbon storage. Therefore, the cultivated land protection scenario, ecological protection scenario, and urban expansion prevention scenario can be considered comprehensively in the study area, which could not only increase the carbon sink space of the study area but also ensure food and ecological security. |
|
|
|
