Yes I know.  But many forests are growing, not static, and in fact are a huge impact on the carbon cycle:<p>&gt;In the past few decades, the world&#x27;s forests have absorbed as much as 30% (2 petagrams of carbon per year; Pg C year−1) of annual global anthropogenic CO2 emissions1 — about the same amount as the oceans.<p>Furthermore, for reasons not yet understood, even static forests appear to be a continuing carbon sink over measured timescales.<p>&gt; Much has been learned about the carbon cycle in forests, but there are still too many gaps in our knowledge. New observations have called long-accepted theories into question: the finding that unharvested forests, for example, are absorbing more carbon than they release2, accounting for half the sink, is contrary to the tenet of ecology, known as Odum&#x27;s framework, that carbon flows in natural forests should be in equilibrium.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;carbon-sequestration-managing-forests-in-uncertain-times-1.14687" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nature.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;carbon-sequestration-managing-for...</a>