What is the difference between carbon sink and reservoir?

AI Thread Summary
A carbon sink is defined as a natural or artificial reservoir that accumulates and stores carbon for an indefinite period, while a carbon reservoir is a feature that exchanges carbon with other reservoirs. Mature forests are considered carbon reservoirs because they store carbon but do not actively accumulate it, as they have reached a stable state. This means they primarily inhale carbon during the day and release it at night, rather than increasing their carbon storage. The key distinction lies in the ability of carbon sinks to store carbon over time, whereas carbon reservoirs can both store and release carbon. Understanding these differences is crucial for discussions on carbon management and climate change.
Kior
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I am trying to figure out the difference between a carbon sink and a carbon reservoir. The definition for a carbon sink from wikipedia is that “carbon sink is a natural or artificial reservoir that accumulates and stores some carbon-containing chemical compound for an indefinite period. ” And the definition for carbon reservoir is “ Carbon-storing natural feature (such as a forest or the land mass) that exchanges carbon with other reservoirs." My textbook says that mature forests are carbon reservoirs but they are not carbon sinks. So what is the difference between a carbon sink and a carbon reservoir on earth?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it's given right in your definition: one accumulates and the other exchanges (which can be same as releases?). I assume a mature forest is one that is not growing very fast and therefore does not accumulate any more carbon but simply inhales it during the day and releases it back at night? But that is just a guess on my part.
 
I agree. A C sink tends to store carbon. A C reservoir will both store and release.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top