How much does it cost to mitigate soil erosion after wildfires?

In this work, we review the effectiveness of post-fire soil erosion mitigation treatments at reducing erosion rates over the first post-fire year and provide their application costs. This allowed assessing the treatments’ cost-effectiveness (CE), reflecting their cost for preventing a soil loss of 1 Mg. This assessment involved a total of 63 field study cases, extracted from 26 publications from the USA, Spain, Portugal, and Canada, and focused on the role of treatment types and materials, and countries. Treatments providing a protective ground cover showed the best median CE (895 $ Mg-1), especially agricultural straw mulch (309 $ Mg-1), followed by wood-residue mulch (940 $ Mg-1) and hydromulch (2,332 $ Mg-1). Barriers showed a relatively low CE (1,386 $ Mg-1), due to their reduced effectiveness and elevated implementation costs. Seeding showed a good CE (260 $ Mg-1), but this reflected its low costs rather than its effectiveness to reduce soil erosion. The present results confirmed that post-fire soil erosion mitigation treatments are cost-effective as long as they are applied in areas where the post-fire erosion rates exceed the tolerable erosion rate thresholds (say exceed 1 Mg-1 ha-1 y-1) and are less costly than the loss of on- and off-site values that they are targeted to protect. For this reason, the proper assessment of post-fire soil erosion risk is vital to ensure that the available financial, human and material resources are applied appropriately.

GIRONA-GARCÍA Antonio;  CRETELLA Carola;  FERNÁNDEZ Cristina;  ROBICHAUD Peter;  SIMOES VIEIRA Diana;  KEIZER Jan Jacob; 

2023-03-28

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD

JRC132693

0301-4797 (online),   

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479723002669,    https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC132693,   

10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117478 (online),