4.7 Article

Cost of potential emerald ash borer damage in US communities, 2009-2019

期刊

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
卷 69, 期 3, 页码 569-578

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.09.004

关键词

Natural disaster; Invasive species; Emerald ash borer; Cost of ash treatment, removal, and replacement

资金

  1. The Nature Conservancy
  2. The National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis
  3. NSF [DEB-0553768]
  4. University of California, Santa Barbara
  5. State of California
  6. U.S. Forest Service Northern Research Station

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire), a phloem-feeding beetle native to Asia, was discovered near Detroit, Michigan and Windsor, Ontario in 2002. As of March 2009, isolated populations of emerald ash borer (EAB) have been detected in nine additional states and Quebec. EAB is a highly invasive forest pest that has the potential to spread and kill native ash trees (Fraxinus sp.) throughout the United States. We estimate the discounted cost of ash treatment, removal, and replacement on developed land within communities in a 25-state study area centered on Detroit using simulations of EAB spread and infestation over the next decade (2009-2019). An estimated 38 million ash trees occur on this land base. The simulations predict an expanding EAB infestation that will likely encompass most of the 25 states and warrant treatment. removal, and replacement of more than 17 million ash trees with mean discounted cost of $10.7 billion. Expanding the land base to include developed land outside, as well as inside, communities nearly double the estimates of the number of ash trees treated or removed and replaced, and the associated cost. The estimates of discounted cost suggest that a substantial investment might be efficiently spent to slow the expansion of isolated EAB infestations and postpone the ultimate costs of ash treatment, removal, and replacement. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据