There are some debates in the comments involving process-based comparisons, e.g., when carbon release from decay outweighs carbon sinking from plant metabolism.

There are some debates in the comments involving process-based comparisons, e.g., when carbon release from decay outweighs carbon sinking from plant metabolism. It may be helpful to give this top-level summary from the National Climate Assessment [1]: "Net storage of atmospheric carbon by forests (742 teragrams, or Tg, of CO2 per year from 1990 to 2015) has offset approximately 11% of U.S. CO2 emissions. Assuming no policy intervention – and accounting for land-use change, management, disturbance, and forest aging – U.S. forests are projected to continue to store carbon but at declining rates (35% less than 2013 levels by 2037) as a result of both land use and lower CO2 uptake as forests grow older." [1] https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/6/ https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/6/ -> "Forest Carbon Dynamics" The NCA is your best one-stop-shop for the best current synthesis on such questions, unless you're literally publishing in this specific area (in this case, carbon cycle science at decadal timescales).