Spatial accounting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals across global land

The Earth breathes. Every day, forests, soils, and other terrestrial ecosystems take in carbon dioxide from the air and release it back, a constant exchange that has regulated our planet's climate for millennia. Humans have long understood that burning fossil fuels adds extra carbon to this cycle, warming the planet, but the role of the land itself is far more complex. When a forest is cut down, it releases stored carbon; when a tree grows, it pulls carbon out of the air. These opposing forces happen simultaneously across the globe, creating a net balance that determines whether the land acts as a sponge soaking up emissions or a source adding to them. For decades, scientists have tried to measure this balance, but their tools often provided only a blurry, country-level picture, missing the intricate details of where exactly emissions happen and where nature is working to remove them. Without a clear map of these processes, it is difficult to know which lands need protection, which need restoration, and how much progress we are truly making toward a stable climate.

A new study by a team of researchers from the World Resources Institute and international partners has changed the way we see this global exchange. By combining high-resolution satellite images with established methods for counting carbon, they have created the most detailed map yet of greenhouse gas emissions and removals across the world's land. Instead of looking at entire countries or regions, they examined the planet in tiny squares, each about the size of a city block, tracking changes from 2016 to 2024. This approach allowed them to see not just the final result, but the two massive, opposing forces at work: the huge amount of carbon released into the air and the even larger amount nature pulls back out. Their findings reveal that the global land is currently a net sink, meaning it removes more carbon than it emits, but this positive outcome is the result of a delicate and uneven struggle between destruction and growth.

The researchers found that between 2016 and 2024, the world's land emitted an average of 20.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent every year. At the same time, vegetation and soil removed 23.8 billion tons. The difference between these two massive numbers is a net removal of 3.6 billion tons, a figure that helps slow the warming of the planet. However, the story is not uniform. The emissions are highly concentrated in specific areas. Half of all the carbon released from the land comes from just 4.5 percent of the land that emits anything at all. These hotspots are often places where forests are being cleared, where organic soils are drained, or where fires burn. In contrast, the removal of carbon is spread much more widely. Half of the carbon taken out of the air comes from 19 percent of the land that removes it, reflecting the steady, widespread growth of trees and plants across vast landscapes.

This uneven distribution means that the fight to protect the climate requires two different strategies. Because emissions are clustered in small, intense areas, reducing them can be targeted effectively by focusing on those specific hotspots. Preventing deforestation in the Amazon or stopping the drainage of peatlands in Indonesia can yield massive results with relatively focused effort. On the other hand, maintaining and enhancing the land's ability to remove carbon depends on sustaining ecological processes across much larger, more diffuse areas. It requires managing forests so they continue to grow, protecting existing trees, and allowing regrowth to happen. The study shows that many of the regions most critical for keeping carbon in the ground are also the same places where the most carbon is being released, highlighting the challenge of protecting existing stocks while encouraging new growth.

The researchers also broke down where these gases come from and what is happening beneath the surface. Vegetation, primarily trees, is responsible for the majority of both emissions and removals. When trees are lost, they release carbon; when they grow, they absorb it. However, soil plays a significant role as well. Organic soils, which are rich in carbon and often found in wetlands and peatlands, act as a persistent source of emissions when they are drained or burned, releasing carbon continuously. Mineral soils, which make up most of the world's land, showed a smaller net loss of carbon, but this loss still offsets a significant portion of the gains made by forests. The study also distinguished between different types of forest changes. It found that while new forests are important, the vast majority of carbon removal comes from trees that were already there, growing taller and denser over time. This suggests that protecting existing forests is just as critical as planting new ones.

One of the most striking aspects of this work is how it connects the physical reality on the ground with the numbers reported by governments. National reports often group data by land use, such as "forest" or "cropland," which can hide the specific activities driving change. This new framework translates the satellite observations into those same categories, showing that while land-use changes like deforestation are major drivers, the day-to-day management of land—such as logging, shifting cultivation, or forest regrowth—creates a dynamic flux of carbon that is often larger than the changes caused by converting land from one use to another. For instance, in some managed forests, the carbon released by harvesting is balanced by the carbon absorbed by regrowing trees, creating a complex cycle that is only visible when looking at the data with such high resolution.

The study also clarifies the role of different ecosystems. Tropical and subtropical regions are the most dynamic, contributing the majority of both emissions and removals due to rapid forest growth and intense human activity. These areas remain a net sink, but they are also where the most significant losses occur. Temperate and boreal regions, found in North America, Europe, and northern Asia, act as smaller but steady sinks. The research highlights that while the global land sink is a vital buffer against climate change, it is fragile. The balance is maintained by the continuous growth of vegetation and the stability of soil carbon, both of which can be disrupted by fire, drought, or land conversion.

By mapping these processes at a resolution of 30 meters, the researchers have provided a tool that can be used to track progress with unprecedented clarity. This level of detail allows for the monitoring of specific protected areas, indigenous territories, and river basins, showing exactly how much carbon they are storing or releasing. For example, the study found that protected areas and indigenous lands act as significant net sinks, removing carbon from the atmosphere, while some river basins, like the Congo, are currently net sources of emissions. This granular view helps identify where conservation efforts are working and where they are falling short, offering a way to verify claims made by countries and companies about their climate actions.

The researchers acknowledge that no measurement is perfect. Their estimates rely on satellite data and models that make assumptions about how fast trees grow or how much carbon is released when soil is disturbed. They tested these assumptions by comparing their results with other global assessments and found broad agreement, though some differences remain, particularly regarding how fires and soil changes are calculated. These uncertainties do not undermine the main finding: that the land is currently removing more carbon than it emits, but this balance is the result of two massive, opposing flows that are unevenly distributed across the globe. The study does not claim to have solved the mystery of the carbon cycle, but it has illuminated the geography of the problem in a way that was previously impossible.

Ultimately, this work provides a clearer picture of the Earth's breathing. It shows that the land is not a static backdrop but a living, changing system where destruction and regeneration happen side by side. The path to a stable climate depends on understanding this duality. We must reduce the concentrated bursts of emissions coming from deforestation and degraded soils while simultaneously supporting the broad, steady processes of growth that pull carbon from the air. By knowing exactly where these processes are happening, we can make better decisions about how to protect the land, ensuring it continues to serve as a vital partner in the fight against climate change. The map is no longer a blur; it is a detailed guide for action.