EcologicalModelling, 33 (1986) 231 253 231

ElsevierSciencePublishersB.V., Amsterdam- Printed in The Netherlands

ACIDIFICATION OF FOREST SOILS: MODEL DEVELOPMENT

AND APPLICATION FOR ANALYZING IMPACTS
OF ACIDIC DEPOSITION IN EUROPE

PEKKAKAUPPI,JUHAzuiMARI,MAXIMILIANPOSCH,
LEAKAUPPI
Internstionalltrstilutefor Applied SyslemiAnalysis,A-2361bxenburg (Austria)

and EGBERT MATZNER

ResearchCenterfor Forest Ecosystem / Forest Decline, Uniuersity of Giittingen,
B sgenweg2, D-3400 Giittingen, (Fedetal Republic of Germany)
(AcceptedlT July 1985)

ABSTRACT

Kauppi, P., Kiirniid, J., Posch,M., Kauppi, L. and Matzner,E., 1986.Acidification of forest
soils: model development and applicarion for arallzing impacts of acidic deposition in
Europe. Ecol Modelling,33: 23L-253.

Acidilicatiod is coosideredto be an unfavourableprocessin forest soil. Timber logging,

natural accumulationof biomassin the ecosystem,and acidic depositionare known sources
of acidification.Acidificationcausesa risk of damageto plant roots and subsequentrisk of a
declinein ecosystemproductivity.
A dFamic model is introducedfor describingthe acidificationof forest soils. In l-year
time steps the model calculates the soil pH as a function of the acid stress and rhe buffer
mechanisms of the soil. Acid stressis definedas the hydrogenion input idto the top soil. The
bulfer mechanismscounteractacidification by providing a sink for hydrogen ions. The
conaepts buffet rate ^id buffer capacity are used to quantify the buffer mechaaisms.The
model compares(a) the rate of acid stress(annualamount)with the buffer rate, and (b) the
accumulatedacid stress(over severalyears)with the buffer capacity.Thesetwo compadsons
\-' give an estimateof the soil acidity.
The model wasincorporatedinto the RegiooalAcidification lNformation and Simulation
(RAINS) model system of the International Institute for Applied SyslemsAnalysis for
anal)zing the acidic deposilion problem in Europe. This system links inlormation on energy
production,pollutant emission,pollutant transport, and pollutant deposition.The data on
acid sfess enteringthe soils was obtained lrom other submodels.Data on buffer rate and
buffer capacity were collected from soil maps and geological maps.
The model system as a whole is now available for analyzing the impact of different
emissionscenarios. The soil acidificationmodel assurnes sulfur depositionestimatesfrom the
other submodelsas ioput, and as output it producesestimatesof the acidity of Europearl
forestsoilsin a map format. Additionally it computesthe total areaof forestsin Europewith
the estimatedsoil pH lower tharl any selecledthresholdvalue.Sourcesof uncertaintyin the
soil acidificationmodel are listed and brieflv evaluated.

030+3800/86 /503.50 o 1986ElsevierSciencePublishersB.V.

232

INTRODUCTION

Extensive forest damage has been observed in rural areas of Central

Europe since the 1970's. It was first reported on silver fir (Schiitt, 1977) and
later on Norway spruce, Scots pine, beech, and other tree species(Schiitt et
al., 1983). In 1984, in the Federal Republic of Germany damage was
reported for a forest area of 2549000 ha (Lammel, 1984). Forest damage is a
result of many factors including the direct impact of air pollutants on tree
foliage, soil acidification, and climate. In this study we concentrate on soil
acidification, which has been demonstrated as an important link between air
pollution and forest damage. It is intended that other factors contdbuting to
the forest damage will be incorporated into the model as soon as possible.
The study includes model development and model application. The main
objective of the study is to develop a method for computing the time
evolution of acidification of forest soils. An additional objective is to apply
the model for getting an overview of the forest soil acidification due to air
pollution at the European level.

SOILACIDIFICATION

Soil acidification has been defined as being a decrease in the acid

neutralization capacity of the soil (Van Breemen et al., 1984). Such a
decreasemay coincide with a decreasein soil pH. It may also take place in
conditions of a relatively constant pH assuming efficient buffering processes.
In such a case the buffering of the soil counteracts the effect of acidic
deposition or biomass removal, so that over long periods of time the soil pH
remains stable. Nevertheless the neutralization capacity is being depleted
and the soil is subject to acidification.

Acid stress

Acid stressis defined as the input of hydrogen ions into the top-soil. Acid
stress can result from acidic deposition of air pollutants, from biomass
utilization, and from the natural biological activity of ecosystems (Ulrich,
1983a; Van Breemen et al., 1984). Any one of these sources can dominate
the stream of protons entering the soil. The acid stress due to air pollution
can result from the direct deposition of hydrogen ions or from the indirect
effect of acid-producing substancessuch as the dry deposition of SOr.
Acid stresshas two important aspects.One is the accumulative load of the
stress and the other is the instantaneous rate of the stress. The variable
amount of slress refers to the load, and involves accumulation over several
 233

years.The unit for the amount of stressis kilomolesof acidity per hectare
(kmol ha-r). The variable stressrate refers, in principle, to the time
derivativeof the amount of stressalthoughin practiceit is given as annual
hydrogenion input. The unit for the stressrate is kilomoles of acidity per
hectareper year (kmol ha-l year 1).

Buffering processes

Soil reacts to acid stressdependingon the soil properties.Acid stress

implies influx of hydrogenions, and in the correspondingway the buffering
properties of the soil imply consumptionof hydrogen ions. Buffering is
describedusing two variables,one for the grosspotential and the other for
the rate of the reaction.Both variablesrefer to the intrinsic propertiesof the
soil and can be quantified after fixing the volume of the reactingsoil layer.
Buffer capacity,the grosspotential, is the total reservoirof the buffering
compoundsin the soil. The unit for the buffer capacityis the sameas that
for the amount of acid stress(kmol ha-r).
Buffer rate, the rate variable,is definedas the maximum potential rate of
the reactionbetweenthe buffering compoundsand the hydrogenions. This
variableis neededbecausethe reactionkineticsis sometimesof importance.
The buffer capacity may be high but the rate may limit the hydrogen ion
consumption.Buffer rate is expressedin units which are comparableto
thoseof the stressrate (kmol ha-t year-r).
The proton consumption reactions in soils have been systematically
describedby Ulrich (1981, 1983b).A consecutiveseriesof chemical reac-
tions has been documentedfor soils subject to acidification. Information
regarding the dominant reactions has been used for defining categories,
called buffer ranges.They are briefly described in the following paragraphs
and summadzedin Table 1. The name of each buffer range refers to the
dominant buffer reactionand the typical pH rangesgiven refer to the pH of
a soil/water suspension (pH(H20)).

Carbonatebufferrange. SoilscontainingCaCO, in their fine earth fraction

(calcareoussoils) are classifiedinto the carbonatebuffer range(pH > 6.2).
Ca2* is the dominant cation in the soil solution and on the exchange
surfacesof the soil particles.The buffer capacity of soils in this range is
proportional to the amount of CaCO, in the soil. In a casewhereCaCO, is
evenly distributed in the soil, the buffer rate, i.e. the dissolution rate of
CaCOr, is high enoughto buffer any occurringrate of acid stress.

Silicatebuffer rdnge. If there is no CaCO, in the fine earth fraction and

carbonicacid is the only acid being producedin the soil, the soil is classified
234

TABLE 1
in forestsoils(Ulrich,1981,1983b)
of theacidbufferingreactions
Classification

Buffer pH Base Buffer reaclion

range range saturation
Carbonate 8.0-6.2 1.00 !a!ur + I.l)!(,r - !a + z_d!\Jr

Silicate 6.2-5.0 1.00 0.70 CaAl2SizO8+ 2H2COr + H2O -

Ca2* +2HCO. + A1, Si rO5(OtD I
'
Cation 5.0 4.2 0.70,0.05 clay mineral : Ca+ 2H +
exchange H-clay mineral-H + Ca2*

Aluminium 4.2-3.0 0.05-0.00 AlooH+3H++Altt+2H.O

Iron < 3.8 0.00 FF.}.}H+lI{t-F"l'+)I{-.)

into the silicatebuffer range(6.2 > pH > 5.0). In this range the only buffer
processacting in the soils is the weatheringof silicatesand the associated
releaseof basecations,sincethe dissolutionof aluminouscompoundsis not
significant until a pH of less than 5.0 is reached.The buffer rate is often
quite low, but the buffer capacity is high, as it is formed by the massive
storageof the silicatematedal.The weatheringof silicatesoccursthroughout
all buffer ranges. The switch to lower buffer ranges implies that the
weatheringrate of silicatesis not sufficient to buffer the acid stresscom-
pletely.

Cation exchangebuffer range. The soils are classified into the cation
exchangebuffer range when the cation exchangereactionsplay the major
role in acid buffering: the silicatebuffer range is inadequateto buffer the
acid stresscompletely.The excessstress,not bufferedby the reactionsof the
silicate buffer range, is adsorbedin the form of H*- or Al-ions at the
exchangesites,thus displacingthe basecations.The cation exchangereac-
tions are fast and, therefore,the buffer rate of soils in this rangeeffectively
counteractsany occurring rates of acid stress.The total buffer capacity
(: cation exchangecapacity, CEC,.,) is generally rather low, depending
mainly on the soil texture.The remainingbuffer capacityat any given time
is quantified by basesaturation,the percentageof basecations of the total
CEC. As long as the basesaturationstaysabove5-107o,the excessstressis
buffered by the cation exchangereactionsand the soil pH takes a value
between5.0 and 4.2, the actualvalue dependingon the basesaturation.

Aluminiumbufferrange. Below the critical valueof basesaturationthe soils

are classifiedinto the aluminium buffer range.Hydrogenions are consurned
 235

when releasingaluminiummainly from clay minerals.Thesereactionsmerely

changethe form of acidity from hydrogenions to All+. The leachateis thus
capableof acidifying adjacentecosystems. High aluminium ion concentra-
tions characterizethe soil solution and may causetoxic effects on bacteria
and plant roots. The soil pH is within the range4.2 3.0.
Aluminium compoundsare abundantin soils,so that the buffer capacity
rarely restrictsthe reaction.Buffer rate is decisive:soilsdo not fall below the
aluminium buffer rangeuntil the stressrate exceedsthe production rate of
highlydissolvable Al-hydroxy-compounds.

Iron buffer range. At the extreme stage of acidification, soils may be

classifiedinto the iron buffer range.Increasingsolubility of iron oxides is
observed.This leadsto visible (colour) symptomsin the soil profile, which is
not the casefor aluminium, althoughin quantitativeterms aluminium may
still act as the dominant buffer compound.The pH-values as low as 3.0
indicate that living organismswill suffer from toxicity and nutrient de-
ficiency.

MODEL DEVELOPMENT

Basic assumptions

The requirement of a large spatial scale necessitatesseveral simplifica-

tions in the model. The assumptions affecting the model structure itself are
briefly described here, whereas the additional assumptions included in the
model application at its present stage are discussedin a subsequent chapter.
The soil is considered as a homogeneous box. It is, however, possible to
divide the soil into several layers if it is considered important when estimat-
ing the effects of soil acidification. In fact, this has already been done in
connection with the RAINS surface water acidification model (Kiimhri et
al., 1985), where two layers were introduced.
The ion exchange and buffering properties of organic matter are not
taken into account separately from the inorganic buffer systems. Informa-
tion on the humus content of the soil or the thickness of the moor layer is
not commonly available from different parts of Europe. At least in northern
Europe, where the accumulation of organic matter is significant, it would be
important to take the buffering properties of organic matter into account.
The model was designed Io focus on the year-to-year changes in soil
acidity. Seasonal,monthly or even daily patterns of soil acidity are poten-
tially very important as they may effectively act as key situations triggering
biological effects. Our modei describes the annual baseline level for the
short-term peaks of low or high acidity. In this way it does not directly focus
236

on the potentially crucial events but it estimates trends of increasing

probabilities of such events.This restriction of focus made it possible to
excluderedox processesand sulphateadsorptionprocessesfrom the model.
It was assumedthat these processesgenerateseasonalvariability in soil
acidity which levelsout in the long run without affecting the year-to-year
trend.
The weatheringrate of silicatesand the connectedreleaseof basecations
is assumedto be independentof the soil pH. In some laboratory experi-
mentsit has been shownthat the releaseof silicatesincreaseswith decreas-
ing pH (e.g.Wollast, L967; Busenbergand Clemency,1975; Stumm et al.,
1983). However, the releaseof silica does not necessarilyimply that base
cationsare releasedat the samerate. They may precipitatewith aluminium
compoundsto form clay minerals.Increasedbasecation leachingis usually
due to cation exchangereactions,not necessarilyto increasedweathering
rate. In Solling,FederalRepublicof Germany,no deviationin the weather-
ing rate of silicatefrom the long-term averagehas been observed,although
the pH of the soil has decreased(Matzner, unpublished).

MODELSTRUCTURE

The model describessoil acidification in terms of the sequenceof the

buffer ranges.It compares(a) the amount of stress(cumulativevalue over
the time period of interest)with the buffer capacity,and (b) the stressrate
(year-to-yearbasis) with the buffer rate. The comparisonsare made sep-
arately for the carbonate,silicate and cation exchangebuffer ranges.The
model thus assumesthat valuesfor the buffering variables- buffer capacity
and buffer rate - are determinedseparatelyfor eachof thesebuffer ranges.
For the aluminium and iron ranges,and equilibrium approachwas chosen.
The soil pH is assumedto stayin equilibriumwith solid phasesof aluminium
compounds.
All the buffering variablesdo not haveto be consideredin the model.The
buffer rates of the carbonaterange and the cation exchangerange are so
high that in practicethey cannot be exceededby any occurring rate of acid
stress.Moreover, the buffer capacitiesof silicate and aluminium ranges
cannotbe exhaustedin the time scaleof hundredsof years.The iron rangeis
assumedto be quantitativelyirrelevantfor buffering at pH-valuesabove3.0.
In this way the number of buffering variablesactually included into the
model reducesto four. The excludedvariablesreceivevalueshigh enough
not to affect the model output.
The model is usedby taking the given pattern of acid stressas the input
variable.The programcomparesthe (annual)acid stresswith the buffer rate
determinedfor the prevailingbuffer range.It alsocomparesthe accumulated
 23'l

amount of acid stresswith the buffer capacity.With thesecomparisonsthe

program calculateswhich buffer range prevails each year, and then com-
putes the approximationof the prevailingsoil pH.
Acid stressto the top soil is partly or totally neutralizedby the weathering
of carbonateor silicate minerals. It is assumedthat soils containing free
carbonates(calcareoussoils) always have a buffer rate high enough to
neutralizeany rate of acid stress;in this casethe soil pH is assumedto stay
at 6.2 as long as the buffer capacity of this range is not exhausted.In

stress' = siress-brsi
BC'6p = BCgg- slress

cE ) 0.7 CECb!
5.0<pHs5.6

BC'cE> o.o ?

pH = e(stress.,P,E,o)
4,Aapll <4.2

3.8<pH<4.0

Fig. 1. Flow diagram of the soil acidification oode1.

238

non-calcareous soils, neutralization depends on the intensity of silicate

weathering (silicate buffer rate). As long as this buffer rate is greater than
the acid stress no decreasein soil pH is assumed to occur.
If the acid stress exceedsthe actual buffer rate of silicates, the hydrogen
ions gradually replace the base cations of the exchange sites of the soil
particles thus decreasing the base saturation of the soil. The capacity of the
cation exchange buffer system is depleted at a rate equal to the difference
between the acid stress rate and the buffer rate of silicates. Buffering within
the silicate buffer range, essentially due to weathering of the silicate mineral,
acts through all the buffer ranges. In other words, the cation exchange
capacity is a result of an input of cations from chemical weathering as well
as of a depletion of cations by ion exchange. The same gradual character
was introduced for the recovery. The soil pH is then estimated on the basis
of the prevailing base saturation within the cation exchange range and the
upper aluminium range at pH 5.6-4.0. If the cation exchange capacity is
totally exhausted the hydrogen ion concentration is assumed to be de-
termined by equilibrium with solid phase aluminium which implies dissolu-
tion or precipitation of aluminium until an equilibrium state is reached. The
specific equations incorporated into this model structure are presented as an
Appendix. The main characteristics of the model are summarized in the flow
chart (Fig. 1).

MODEL DEMONSTRATION

The dynamic features of the model are demonstrated in this section by

producing two input-output patterns. These figures describe the reactions of
only one soil type, Dystric Cambisol (Bd). Table 2 indicates the characteris-
tics of this soil type assumed to prevail at the beginning of the 100-year

TABLE 2
andparameter
Initial conditions (Soiltpe: DystricCambi-
valuesfor modeldemonstration
sol. Bd)

Carbonatebuffer capacity BCco 0.0 Kmot na

Silicatebuffer rate br", 1.0 Kmol na yeat
CatioDexchangebuffer capacity BCce 170.0 Kmol na _
Total cation exchangecapacity cEcror 1100.0 kmol ha
Volumet.icwater contefltat @f 0.2'7
field capacity
Precipitation;CentralEurope 0.90 m year
Evapotranspiration;CentralEurcpe E 0.50 m year
 239

T I I l E ( Y E A R S]

Fig. 2. Input-output relationship:responseof the soil to an increasingstress(thick line: soil

pH).

study period. When fixing these values the thicknessof the reacting soil
layer was assumedto be 50 cm. Bcca being zero indicates that Dystdc
Cambisolis free of lime. The input for this model demonstrationconsistsof
two hypotheticaltime patternsof the acid stressfor the period of 100 years.
The output is the time pattern of the soil pH, correspondingto the mean
hydrogenion concentrationin the 50-cmsoil layer.
Figure 2 indicatesthat for this soil the pH graduallydeclinesfrom 4.6 to
4.0 in 100yearswhile the soil is subjectto a growing stressfrom 1 to 8 kmol
ha-r year 1.The silicatebuffer rangeaccountsfor the buffering of 1 kmol
ha-r year-1of the acid stress.The excess stressis bufferedby the processes
of the cation exchangerange.After 60 yearsthe buffer capacityof the cation
exchangerangeis decreasedto a basesaturationlevel of 5Vo.At this point,
none of the higher buffer rangesis capableof buffering the stress,and the
soil pH declinesto the level which correspondsto the pH range of the
aluminium buffer system.The acid stress,partly bufferedwithin the silicate
buffer range,finally determinesa new equilibrium pH in the soil solution
according to the aluminium solubility assumed.This processresults in a
slowly decreasingsoil pH due to the growingstressrate.
A dramaticpattern of acid stresswas selectedto summarizethe dynamic
behaviourof the model (Fig. 3). The pattern includesa constantstressof 8
kmol ha I year I for 30 years,a linear declineto zero in the subsequent40
years,and a constantzero stressover the remaining30 years.The soil with
initial conditionsas in Table 2 reactsin the following way: First, there is a
gradual but acceleratingdeclinein pH from 4.6 to 4.2, and then there is a
rapid decline of pH to the aluminium buffer range, near to pH 3.7. The
buffer capacityof the cation exchangerangeis exhaustedand the buffer rate
of the aluminium rangecannot keepthe pacewith the acid stressrate. Next,
there is an increaseof the soil pH to 4.0. Bv that time the acid stresshas
240

I I ] ' 1 E ( Y E F F S]

Fig. 3. Inpul-output relationship:responseof the soil to a decliningstress(thick line : soil

pH).

declinedso that the joint buffering of the silicateand the aluminium ranges
is capable of increasingthe pH. Finally, a recovery starts from pH 4.0
upwards.This is possiblebecausethe acid stressdeclinesto the level where
the silicatebuffer rate alone is capableof buffering the stress.During the
gradual recoveryin the soil, weatheringslowly replaceshydrogen ions by
basecationson the exchangesites.The cation exchangecapacityis refilled,
startingat pH 4.0, at a rate equalto the differencebetweenthe buffer rate of
the silicaterange and the rate of the acid stress.A basesaturationlevel of
4Vowlllbe reachedby the end of the 100-yearperiod.

MODEL APPLICATION

This application is part of the Regional Acidification INformation and

Simulation(RAINS) model systemof the IIASA Acid Rain Project which
has the generalobjectiveof analyzingalternativecontrol strategiesof the
Europeansulfur emissions.The focus of the application is hencerestricted
to the stressdue to air pollution. The IIASA frameworksetsthe prerequisite
of a large spatial scale.The project has provided an energy-emission model
for generatingscenariosof future sulfur emissions in Europe assuming
optional programsfor energydevelopmentand sulfur control (Alcamo et a1.,
1985).The computedemissionsare convertedto sulfur depositionscenarios
by using the long-rangetransportmodel for air pollutants developedwithin
the EMEP-program(seeEliassenand Saltbones,1983).This model has been
applied to RAINS by reducingit to a sourcereceptormatrix (Alcamo et a1.,
1985).Sulfur depositionis then transformedinto an approximation of the
acid stress,and this information is used as the driving variable of the soil
acidificationmodel(Fig. 4).
 241

Fig. 4. The IIASA acid rain framework and procedure for using the model.

Specific assumptions

For the time being, the acid stresswas estimatedon the basis of sulfur
depositiononly, simply by assumingacid stressto be proportional to sulfate
ion equivalentsin the water enteringthe soil. The actual acid stressassoci-
ated with sulfur depositiondependson the neutralizationintensity of e.g.
atmosphericdust and canopy.The spatial variation of theseprocesseswas
not taken into account.A singlerelationshipwas assumed,as the first step
for the whole of Europe.This acid stresscoefficient,o, seemsto havevalues
between0.5 and 0.75 in some Europeanforests(Wright and Johannessen,
1980).Internal proton production,i.e. proton production resultingfrom the
excessaccumulationof cationsin the biomassand humus,was not included
in the estimatesof acid stress.
The EMEP model assumesconstant deposition velocity over all land
surfaces(Eliassenand Saltbones,1983).This assumptionis necessaryas the
modelcoversthe whole of Europe;it would be an enormoustask to describe
the spatial variability of the depositionvelocity in detail. Model validation
suggeststhat, in general,the assumptionof constantdepositionvelocity can
be supportedwhen aiming at modelling the concentrationsof sulfur com-
poundson a large spatialscale.From local experiments,however.it appears
that forestshavea rather strong filtering effect on air pollutants,so that the
depositionvelocity over forestsis larger than that of open land by a factor
of two to three, dependingon the tree species.As forests were the main
target ecosystemfor our model, we consideredit necessaryto include the
filterine effect in the model.
242

Based on the validation experiments of the EMEP model the average total
deposition of a grid square, d,o,, was assumedcorrect. The deposition on the
forest within this grid, d,, was then assumed to be 0 times larger than the
deposition on open land, d" (1)
dr: Qd" (1)
Since

fdr+ (r - f)do: d,", (2)

where/ is the fraction of forest within the grid, we get for d,
dt: d6&/(L + (0 - 1),f) (3)
from which acid stress,s, was derivedby assumingthat a fraction o of the
acidifying sulfur depositionentersthe soil unneutralized.
s: od, (4)
The abovecalculationproceduretakesinto account(a) the estimatedgross
depositionon eachgrid square,(b) the filtering factor 0, (c) the fraction of
forests in each grid square,/, digitalized from the World Forestry Atlas
(1975), and (d) the acid stressfactor, o. It produces as an output the
allocation of depositionbetweenforests and agricultural land within each
grid square.This specificfeatureof the IIASA model givesthe first priority
to the long-rangetransport model as far as large-scalevariability of deposi-
tion is concernedand yet describesthe filtering effect of forestsby including
small scaleinformation on the distribution of forestsvs. open land within
the grid square.A factor 0 : 2 is usedas long as detailedinformation on the
spatialdistribution of S is not available.For the acid stresscoefficient,o, a
value of o :2/3 waschosenas a tentativeapproximation.
It is conceivablethat forests,as they representareasneglectedby agricul-
ture, grow on particularly susceptiblesoils. Soils which have low specific
weatheringrates and low levelsof base saturationare more susceptibleto
acidificationthan are soils otherwise.The concentrationof forestson poor
soils,althoughhypothetical,was consideredso obviousthat it was included
as part of the model. Rather than assumingthe fraction of forestsconstant
on all soil types we used the following calculationprocedure:forests of a
given grid square were allocated starting from soil tlpes with the lowest
weathering rates and cation exchangecapacity values and continuing until
all forestswere distributed.In this way agriculturewas locatedon the most
fertile soilswhile poor soilsof a grid were assumedfor forests.
In the presentationof results an important indicator is the'critical
acidity'. At presentthe switch to the aluminium buffer range (basesatura-
tion 0.05, pH 4.2) is assumedto imply an increasedrisk of forest damage.
 243

There are severalreasonswhy this degreeof acidity was assumedto be

critical: soil chemistrychangesquite drastically;Al-concentrationin the soil
solution increasesand Ca/Al-ratio reachesthe level that implies the risk of
soil-bornetoxicity to tree roots (Ulrich et al. 1984; Matzner and Ulrich,
1985).More research,however,would be neededto relate the risk of forest
damageto the soil acidity.The final decisionabout the'critical pH' is left to
the model user.

! nitializationof bulferinguariables

Initialization of the soil variableswas basedon the chemistryinformation

availableon Europeansoils, and on the soil thicknessselectedto approxi-
mate the rooting zone. The buffer capacity of the carbonate range is
proportional to the lime content of the soil; the buffer rate of the silicate
rangeis relatedto the chemicalweatheringrate of the silicateminerals; the
buffer capacityof the cation exchangerate dependson the clay content and
base saturation of the soil; and the buffer rate of the aluminrum range
depends on the accessibilityof aluminium compounds. Although such
relationships,especiallythoseregardingthe aluminium accessibilityare only
partially understood,they can be used as a guideline in quantifying the
susceptibilityof the soilsto acidification.The valuesfor the buffer capacities
and buffer rates were initialized accordingly based on the International
GeologicalMap of Europe and the MediterraneanRegion (1972) and the
FAO-UnescoSoil Map of the World (1974).The depth of the reacting soil
was assumedto be 50 cm throughout the study area. The year 1960 was
selectedas the baselineyear.
Detailed soil chemistryinformation regardingthe other soil variableswas
availablefrom the Soil Map. The fraction of each soil type within the grid
squarewas computerizedwith an accuracyof 57o.The resolutionof the map
is such that a standard grid squarewas composedof 1 7 soil t1pes.The
number of different soil tlpes was 80. The soil data baseconsistsof 5212
soil units, the mean number of soil types per grid squarebeing 2.2. One
7O-yearsimulation for the whole of Europe thus requires about 365000
model runs.
Al1 information regardingsoils was stored in a computerizedgrid-based
format. Each grid square had the extension of 1o longitude times 0.5o
latitude. In this way the sizeof a grid was fixed at 56 km in the south-north
direction,but in the east-westdirection it varied from 91 to 38 km depend-
ing on the latitude. The number of grid squareswas 2304.
Initial valuesfor the soil variablesweregivenfor everysoil type (Table 3)'
The Soil Map, however,could not provide the information regarding the
buffer rate of the silicatebuffer rangewhich is equal to the weatheringrate
244

TABLE 3
Buffer capacities of the carbonate and the cation exchangebuffer ranges estimated for the
year 1960 for soil types oJ the FAO-Unesco Soil Map of the World (1974). Soil thickness of
50 cm is assumed.

Soil BCc" BC.. Soil BCc. BC.u Soil BCc" BCcu

type 1.1 type tYPe ::-----:-:---r'l')
lkmol ha (k-"t h.=Tt- (kmorna
Ao 200.0 910.0 KK 8000.0 1170.0 32000.0 1170.0
Bc 500.0 L225.0 Lc 3000.0 t'70.'l . V p 9000.0 36,t().0
Bd 0 165.8 Lf 0 1 3 8 . 8 wd 0 4'1.3
Be 500.0 1824.0 Lg 0 146.3 We 500.0 1410.5
Bg 500.0 180.0 Lo 0 107.3 xk 43000.0 1170.0
Bh 0 136.5 Lv 3000.0 r225.o Xy 40000.0 1225.0
Bk 25000.0 1470.0 Mo 0 1495.0 ZE 15000.0 7225.0
Bv 0 2270.0 od o 72.0 Bc-Lc 3000.0 685.6
ch 0 390.0 Oe 0 168.8 I-Bc 200.0 1050.0
ck 19000.0 2535.0 0 180.0 I-Bc-Lc 1500.0 469.1
cl 0 419.3 Ph 0 49.0 r-Bd 0 151.2
Dd 0 136.5 P 0 68.3 I-Be o 765.6
De 0 136.5 Po 0 78.0 I-Be-Lc 1500.0 533.9
Dg 0 468.0 0 239.2 r-Bh-u 0 136.5
E 20000.0 2600.0 ac 100.0 22'1.5 I-C 500.0 910.0
Gd 0 126.8 Ql 0 117.0 I-E 10000.0 1750.0
Ge 0 302.3 Rca 0 4'7.3 I-L o 1.49.3
Gh o 1,16.3 Rcb 0 136.5 I-Lc 1500.0 153.6
Gm 0 183.8 Rcc 500.0 857.5 I-Lo-Bc 0 408.5
Hc 7000.0 1170.0 Re 0 136.5 I-Lc-E 10000.0 1500.0
Hg 500.0 1820.0 So 500.0 1183.0 I-Po 0 126.8
Hh 1000.0 32L.8 Sm 0 236.3 I-Po-Od 0 108.5
Hl 0 3r2.O Th 0 12'7.5 I-Rc-Xk 20000.0 1500.0
I 0 136.5 Tm 0 1 3 6 . 5 I-Re-R:r 0 106.8
Jc 8000.0 315.0 To 0 183.8 I-U 0 136.5
Je 200.0 1008.0 Tv 0 120.0 Lo-Lc 1500.0 139.1
Kh 0 136.5 II 136.5

of the parent material. The approximation of this variable was based on

other sources.Ulrich (1983b)reportsa rangeof variation in Europeansoils
from 0.2 to 2.0 kmol ha-r year-r m-r. Four classesfor the reacting50-cm
soil layer were introduced with the following buffer rates 1in kmol ha-r
-
vear r ):

class
buffer rate 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
 245

The GeologicalMap was usedto determineparent materialsof soilsin each

gdd square.Dependingon the dominant parent material the soil of each
grid squarewas classifiedinto one of the abovecategories.
Basedon this information the model is applicablefor producingacidifica-
tion scenariosfor forest soils.The model is run separatelyfor eachsoil type
within the grid square.An estimateof soil pH is the output.

Resultsof modelruns

Two examplescenarioswereintroducedusing the IIASA energy-emission

model, and the long-rangetransportmodel suppliedby the EMEP program.
From 1960 until 1980 the scenarioswere identical. From then on the
scenariosdivergedso that the 'high' depositionscenarioassumedhigh rates
of energydevelopmentthroughout Europe, as defined by the ECE 'trends
continued' scenario(ECE, 1983) linearly extrapolatedto 2030. The 'low'
deposition scenariowas constructedaccording to the ECE 'conservation'
scenario, assuminglower rates of energy use and, in addition to that,
effective measurestaken for the control of sulfur emissions(Fig. 5). The
specific method of generatingdifferent scenariosis presentedelsewhere
(Alcamoet al.,1985).
The model can be used for producing an estimateof the pH rangesof
forest soils in Europe for any selectedscenario and year (Fig. 6). An

R E F E R E N C EY E F F S

Fig. 5. Total sulfur emitted in Europe accordingto the 'high' and 'low' emissionscenario
from coal and oil sectors.
 246

A 7lCF
I Fi+FE

Fig. 6. Model estimatesof the soil acidity in Europein 1980.Si+

Ca representthe silicateand
carbodatebufler ranges,CE cation exchangebuffer range,and Al +
Fe aluminium and iron
buffer ranges.

additional.optio.nis to display the areaswith soils in a critical buffer

range
or areaswith soilsbelow a critical pH. This conceptbearson the notion
th-at
,1"_.1.f forest damageincreasesbelow a critical acidity. A default
9f value
of 4.2 is introducedfor the critical pH but the model ,r"i "_ interactively
selectother values.The area below a critical pH value can be displayed
in
map format, with different shadingsindicating the percentageof
the total
forestareawith soil pH below the selectedvatue
1flg.'21.
For summarizingthe results an option has beei added to disptay
esti_
mates-of the time pattems of the total forest area with soils
berow the
cdtical acidity (Fig. S). The area of the forest in each grid
square is
calculatedand the time evolution of the area of Europeanforests
with soil
pH below a selectedcritical valueis then displaved.
As part of the IIASA study rhis applicarionof the soil acidification
model
is designedfor quick comparisonsof sulfur emissionscenarios.
It is up to
the model user to decidewhat kind of scenariosshould be compared.
The
two exampleswere selectedto demonstratethe model behaviour.
Therefore,
the. examplesare relatively uselessas far as selection of feasible policy
options is concerned.In the following paragraphswe will discuss
the effects
of the'low'vs. the 'high' scenariobut this discussion is intendedmerelyto
demonstratethe propertiesof the model.
By the year 1980,that is assumingthe historical depositionpattern,
the
model predicts a decline in the soil pH over relatively large
regronsof
 24'l

4 -i*":4.

a sz- 30'/ z3sz-Eo% a a s 7 ,- 1 s s ' / ,

Fig. 7. Model estimatesof forest soils below pH 4.2 in 1980.The shadingdetermidesthe

fraction of forest soils below the threshold pH in each grid.

T I N E ( Y E F F SJ

Fig. 8. Time evolution of the total forest area with soils in aluminium and iron buffer range
(pH less than 4-2) in Europe assumingthe two emission scenarios.
248

Fig. 9. A comparisonof the area at risk in 2010,aluminium and iron being the dominaat
bufler ranges, resulting from the high emission scenario (light shading) and from the low
emissionscenario(dark shadiog).

Central Europe.Continuing with the 'high' depositionscenariothe area of

low pH substantiallyenlargesby the year 2010 and much of the soils in
Central Europeand SouthernScandinaviareachthe aluminium buffer range
(Fig.9).
The regionwherethe soilsfall into the aluminium buffer range(pH below
4.2) abeadyappearson the map by 1970.This area,interpretedas the area
at risk of forest damage,increasesby 1980 (Fig. 7) and, with the 'high'
depositionscenario,it is enlargedsubstantiallyby the year 2010(Fig. 9). An
option has been added in the computerprogram for direct comparisonof
the estimatedareasat risk from two scenarios.When the '1ow' scenariois
usedas the input, the resultsindicatemuch lessrisk of forest damageby the
year 2010 (Fig. 9). As indicated by Fig. 8 the forest area with soils more
acidic than the thresholdis estimatedto be twice as large with the 'high'
scenarioas with the 'low' scenario.

DISCUSSION

The model developedin this study can be used for quantifying some
aspectsof the acidification problem of forest soils previously discussedin
only qualitative terms. The soil acidification model and the application to
the Europeanovervieware simplifications,which necessarilyinclude uncer-
 249

tainties.Many solutions,as they standnow, are crude approximationswhich

need clarification in future research.It is the hope of the authors,however,
that the model structurewould act as a tool for organizingthe data and for
identifying researchneeds.Even in its presentstagethe model might appear
useful in evaluatingpoliciesto combat the acidificationof forest soils.
The modelmakesa distinctionbetweenreversibleand irreversiblechanges
in the soil chemistry.Exhaustionof the buffer capacity is in some cases
irreversible.The caseof an insufficient buffer rate, in turn, may be reversi-
ble: the buffer rate is againsuflicientwhen rhe stressrate (annualload) is
reducedbelow a thresholdwhich is the value of the buffer rate variable.This
featureof the model should be useful as it indicateswhether a decreasein
the acid stresswould result in a recoveryof the soil, or whether it would
merelycausea delay in the acidificationprocess.
The model,designedfor forest soils,appearstoo complexfor agricultural
soils. Intensiveagriculturemaintains high pH valuesin soils by meansof
liming and other practices.In theory, the model could be usedfor calculat-
ing, for example, the amount of lime needed to counteract the acidic
deposition.This calculation,however,can be done using more straightfor-
ward methods.
The application of the model to the problem of acidic deposition in
Europe indicatesthat soil buffering fails to maintain adequatepH levelsin
largeparts of Central Europe.In northern Europe,althoughthe buffering is
generallylessefficient, the acidic depositionwould causelesstrouble in this
respect. This does not prove that the problem of soil acidification is
restrictedto Central Europe.Acidification due to biomassaccumulation,i.e.
the so-calledinternal proton production, has a special role in northern
Europe wherelow temperatutesretard biomassdecomposition.High inter-
nal proton production increasesthe susceptibilityof the environmentto the
acidification due to air pollutants. This additional stressneeds to be ad-
dressedin future research.
The soil variableswere initialized for 1960.This doesnot imply that no
acid stresswasassumedbeforethat time. The initialization shouldbe viewed
as fixing a referencepoint rather than a manifestationof the stateof virgin
forests.The initialization should be based on field measurementslin the
presentapplicationthis goal was only partially fulfilled.
The reactingvolumewas fixed at the top 50 cm of the soil. No horizontal
gradients were explicitly assumed.Increasing the reacting volume would
postponethe possibleproblem. Including the gradientswould involve faster
acidificationin the very top of the soil and sloweracidificationin the deeper
layers.The aboveresultscorrespondto the averagesituation in the volume.
This averagevaliremay be inaccuratein somecasesdue to the nonlinearities
of the model.
250

The modellackshydrologicconsiderationssinceit is only dealingwith the

uppermostsoil layer. However,soil permeability and watershedslope may
be important factorsin determiningthe leachingratesof basecations from
the soil horizon. Moreover,the model assumesthat all depositionactually
reactswithin the top soil. This may not alwaysbe the case.The higher the
rate of water input and the coarserthe soil texture, the less favourableare
the conditions to reach chemicalequilibrium betweenthe solutesand the
soil matrix. If part of the depositionflows unchangedthrough the top soil,
the soil responsewill be delayedand the acidificationproblem is transferred
into the adjacentecosystems or to the groundwater.An effort is currently
under way within the IIASA Acid Rain Project to apply the soii acidity
model as a componentof a regionalmodel of surfacewater acidification.
Soil acidificationposesa threat to forestecosystems and generatespredis-
posing stressin ecosystemsas defined by Manion (1981).Forest damage,
however,is a multicausalphenomenon.Many factors are involved such as
ozonepollution, healy metals,exceptionalclimatic conditions,and cultiva-
tion of tree speciesoutside their natural habitats. The interactionsof soil
acidificationand the other factors deserveconcertedresearcheffort. It does
not seempossibletoday to describethe forest damagein satisfactorydetail
with any specific model. But emphasizingthe complexity of the forest
damageas an argumentagainstseriousmodelling efforts may well causea
delay in obtaining a better understandingof the phenomenon.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ProfessorB. Ulrich from the University of Giittingen encouragedthe

developmentof this study, and contributed significantly to the successful
collaborationbetweenIIASA and the University of Gbttingen. We grate-
fully acknowledgehis support.
We would also like to thank Dr. N. van Breemenand Dr. I. Nilsson for
their valuableadviceduring the developmentof this study.

REFERENCES

Alcamo, J., Hordijk, L., Kem?iri,J., Kauppi, P., Posch,M. and Runca, E., 1985.Integrated
analysisof acidificationin Europe.J. Enviroo. Manage.,21;47 61.
Busenberg,E. and Clemency,C.v., 1975.The dissolutionkineticsof feldsparsat 25oC and
atmosphericCO, partial pressure.Geochim.Cosmochim.Acta,4O:4l-49.
ECE, 1983.An Efficieot EflergyFuture. Butterworths,London, 259 pp.
Eliassed,A- and Saltbones,J., 1983. Modeliflg of long-rangetransport of sulphur over
Europe,a two yearmodelrun and somemodelexperiments. Atm. Environ.,17: 1,451-1,4'73.
 251

Kemeri, J., Posch,M. aod Kauppi, L., 1985.Developmentof a model allallzing sudacewater
acidification on a regiooal scale: application to irdividual basins in Southern Finland. In:
Proc.Workshop15-16 September,1984,Uppsala.NHP Report 10, Nordic Hydrological
Programme,Copenhagen, pp. 151 170.
Lammel, R., 1984. Endg0higeErgebnisseund bundesweiteKartierung der Waldschaden-
serhebung, Allg. Forsr 2.,39i 340-344.
Manion, P.D., 1981.Tree DiseaseConcepts,Prentice-Hall,London, 368 pp.
Matzner,E., 1983.Balancesof elementfluxeswithin differeflt ecosystems impactedby acid
raid. IrI: B. Ulrich and J. Pankrath(Editors),Effectsof Accumulationof Air Pollulantsid
ForestEcosystems. Proc.workshop, 16 19 May 198?,Giittingen.Reidel,Dordrecht,The
Netherlands,pp. 147-155.
Matzner, E. and Ulrich B., 1984. Implications of the chemical soil condition for forest
decline.Experimentia(submitted).
OECD, 1979.The OECD programmeon long range transport of air pollutants. Measure-
ments and findings. Paris, 164 pp.
Reuss,J.O., 1983.Implicationsof the calcium-aluminiumexchangesystemfor the effect of
acid precipitationon soils.J. Eoviron. Qual., 12: 591 595.
Schiitt, P., 19'77.Das Tannensterben,Der Stand unseresWissen iiber eine aktulle und
geffirliche Komplex-Kranlheit der Weisstanne(Abies alba). Forstwiss.Zentralbl., 96:
r'1't-t86.
Schiitt, P., Blascbke,H., Hoque,E'., Koch, W., Lang, K.J. and Schuck,H.J., 1983. Erste
Ergebnisseeioer botanischenI[ventru des 'Fichtensterbens'.Forstwiss.Zentralbl., 102:
201 21.3.
Stumm,W., Fulrer, G. and Kunz B., 1983.The role of surfacecoordinationin precipitation
and dissolutionof mineralphases.Croat. Chim. Acta 56: 593-611.
Ulrich, B., 1981.TheoretischeBetrachtungendes Ionenkreislaufsin Wald6kosystemeo. Z.
Pflanzenernlh.r. Boden-kd..l44t 64'7-659.
Ulrich, b., 1983a.A corcept of forest ecosystemdestabilizationand of acid deposilion as
driving force for destabilization. Io: B. Ulrich and J. Pankrath (Editors), Effects of
Accumulationof Air Pollutantsin ForestEcosystems. Proc.Workshop.16-19 May 1982,
G6ttingen. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands pp. I 29.
Ulrich., B. 1983b. Soil acidity and its relation to acid deposiliod. In: B. Ulrich and J.
Pankrath(Editors),Effectsof Accumuladonof Air Pollutantsin ForestEcosystems. Proc.
Workshop,16-19 May, 1982,Gijttingen.Reidel,Dordrecht,The Netherladdspp. 127 146.
Ulrich, B., Miewes,K.J., Kiinig, N. and Kianna, P.K., 1984.Untersuchungsverfahren und
Kriterien zur Bewertungder Versauerungund ihrer Folgen in Waldbijden. Forst Holzwirt,
391278 286.
Van Breemen,N., Driscoll, C.T. and Mulder, J., 1984.Acidic depositionand intemal proton
sourcesin acidificationof soilsard waters.Nature (London),307. 599-604.
Wollast, R., 1967. Kinetics of the alteration ol K-Feldspar io buffered solutions at low
temperatures. Geochim.Cosmochim.Acta, 31: 635-648.
Wright, R.F. and Johannessen, 1980.Irput output budgetsof major ions at gaugedcatch-
merts in Norway. In: D. Drablss ard A. Tollan (Editors). EcologicalImpact of Acid
Precipitation.Proc.Conf. Sandefjord,Norway, 11-14 March, 1980.SNSF-project,Oslo-As,
pp.25O-251.
Maps:
FAO-Unesco,Soil Map of the luorld,Yols.I, V. Paris,1974.
Bundesaostaltfiir BodenforschungHanno\et, International GeologicalMap of Europeand the
MediterraheonRegioz. Uoesco, Paris, 1972.
Weltforstatlas(lyotld ForestryAhas), Paul Parey,Hamburg/Berlin, 1975.

APPENDIX

The capacityof the cation exchangebuffer system,nclu, is depletedwith

the rate of acid stress,sr, minus the buffer rate of silicates,br., (A1). A
non-linearrelationshipis assumedbetweenthe basesaturationand the soil
pH within the silicate, cation exchangeand the upper aluminium buffer
range,as long as nclu > 0, at pH 5.6-4.0 (A2):

ncl.:3651t - (s'- brr,) (Al)

pH :4.0 + 1.6(nc[u/cnc,,,)3/a (A2)

The shapeof the pH-base saturationrelationship has been adopted from

resultsof an equilibrium model by Reuss(1983).
If ociu: g, equilibrium with gibbsite is assumed.As precipitation in-
filtrates into the soil and mixes with the soil solution, disequilibrium
concentrations [Al3+]" and [H+]" are obtained(A3, A4):
t
[ A 1 3 * ]: " v r [ A l 3 * f ' / ( v , + ( p - r ) ) (A3)

[ H - ] " : ( 4 [ H * l ' - ' + ( " , - n , r , ) ) 7 ( v ,(+p - E ) ) (A4)

where V, is the volume of soil solution at field capacityand P and E mean

annual precipitation and evapotranspiration,respectively.On an annual
basis the infiltrating water volume is assumedto equal P - E. The soil
solution volume is simply definedby:

Vr: @rz (A5)

The soil thickness,z, is fixed at 50 cm and the volumetricwater content

value at field capacity,@.is estimatedseparatelyfor eachsoil type basedon
the grain sizedistribution of the soil. Aluminium is dissolvedor precipitated
until the gibbsiteequilibrium state(A6) is reached.
 253

This process involves a change from disequilibrium concentrations as de-

fined h equation(A7):

[Al3*]'/([Ht]')': r"", K"": 1o*s: (A6)

3 ( [ A 1 3 .- ] "[ e r ' * ] ' ): [ H * l ' - [ H * 1 " (A7)

Combining equations (,{6) and (A7) yields a third-order equation which has
a singlereal root (A8):
3 r " " ( [ H * ] ' ) ' + [ H * ] ' - 3 [ A r 3 * ] -" [ H * ] " : 0 (A8)