Limitations in sequestering carbon in forests

1
Limitations in sequestering carbon in forests

• By
• Promode Kant
• Indian Forest Service

2
Annual addition to atmospheric carbon-di-oxide

• Atmosphere gives 2 Gt C to surface ocean and 3 Gt
  C to terrestrial ecosystems annually thru
  photosynthesis
• Atmosphere receives 1.5-2 Gt C from deforestation
• Atmosphere receives 6.5 Gt C from fossil fuel use
  and cement production

3
The possibilities in forestry

• NEP Net Ecosystem Production is the net
  accumulation of organic matter by an ecosystem,
  NEP Net Primary Production heterotrophic
  respiration (losses caused by herbivory and by
  decomposition of debris in soil biota). Global
  Estimation at 10 GtC/yr
• Net Biome Production (NBP) is the net production
  of organic matter in a region containing many
  ecosystems and includes other anthropogenic and
  natural causes of respiration also like
  harvesting, fires forest clearances, etc. Global
  estimate at 10 of NEP.

4
THE REALITY only 1 approved CDM project yet in
forestry sector
5
Afforestation/Reforestation projects under CDM

• 20 project methodologies proposed
• 11 rejected or withdrawn
• Changes suggested in 4
• 2 under examination
• Only 1 approved in China 33K tCO2/year

6
Why?

• Difficulties in establishing additionality
• Difficulties in assessing leakages
• Difficulties in baseline assessment
• Conflict with biodiversity conservation

7
Why?

• Issue of non-permanence of carbon sequestered
  temporary CERs heavy discount on tCERs
• Leading to low economic viability of the projects
• Carbon credits not enhancing economic returns
  over simple plantation projects also makes
  additionality difficult to establish

8
Does the recent approval in China signify
progress?

• 4000 ha AR project in two sites, deforested since
  1950, in Pearl River Basin in southern China 33
  K CO2 per annum, 30 yrs crediting period, about
  1M t CO2 total
• Existing vegetation has remained degraded with
  lt20 crown density over last many years
• Reforestation with 5 species including eucalyptus
  to enhance productivity
• Leakages on account of removal by people has been
  considered negligible
• Leakages considered only on account of N2O
  emission thru fertilizer use and in
  transportation of harvested timber by using
  fossil fuel much easier to assess

9
Does the recent approval in China signify
progress?

• Return on investment without CER 8.4 and with
  CER 15.7
• Norm in China for agricultural investment is 12,
  hence it was presumed that without CERs this
  project would not have been taken up. Hence
  additional
• Large gap between required investment and
  availability of funding among local communities
  and low chances of obtaining loans from
  commercial banks taken as barrier to investments.
  Hence additional as financial barriers would have
  prevented the project otherwise

10
The replicability of Chinese methodology

• Without project local farmers would have had no
  access to quality planting material. Hence
  additional
• Also there were no existing skills in forest
  management which are now being brought in. Hence
  additional
• Additionality tests appear to have become
  reasonable, hence it should help other projects
  in future
• But leakage assumptions may not hold for other
  tropical countries like India with large
  dependency on forests by local people
• Also biodiversity conservation requirements may
  not hold in more warmer and humid conditions as
  the species mix would be far more complex

11
The replicability of Chinese methodology

• Land opportunity costs are usually prohibitive
  unlike the Chinese case where lands were
  considered unattractive for other uses
• Transaction costs for monitoring, measurements
  etc elsewhere may be prohibitively high unlike in
  Chinese case, with the central govt being a
  participant, where the resources of the Chinese
  Academy of Forestry are being utilized at
  operational costs alone
• Reforestation projects may continue to encounter
  difficulties

12
Is agro-forestry a better option?

• Yes, easier to assess and manage leakages in
  private holdings, lower transaction costs,
  sharing of costs with agricultural operations,
  lowered costs of ensuring biodiversity
  conservation and sustainable development, no
  difficulty of obtaining stakeholders consent
• But definition chosen by most countries for
  forests may pose biggest problem

13

National Forest definitions National Forest definitions National Forest definitions National Forest definitions
  Minimum crown cover 10-30 Minimum area 0,05 ha - 1ha Minimum height 2- 5 m
China 20 0.067 2
Costa Rica 30 1.000 5
Congo 30 1.000 5
Honduras 30 1.000 5
India 30 0.050 5
Nicaragua 20 1.000 4
Uganda 30 1.000 5
Vietnam 30 0.500 3
Yemen 30 0.500 3
14
Is agro-forestry a better option?

• Except for China Nicaragua these definitions
  favour reforestation of degraded areas as all
  degraded lands lt30 crown cover eligible for
  reforestation under CDM
• But unfavorable to agriforests as farmers would
  be required to create a crown cover of minimum
  30 density to claim C credits excessive shade
  - not possible with most agricultural crops
• small minimum land area requirement is not of
  help as it enhances transaction costs

15
The real options in forestry

• Heavy discounts on temporary CERs, high
  transaction monitoring costs, higher risks
  limit AR
• Forests as source of renewable energy for
  replacing fossil fuel, both wood and seeds,
  leading to permanent CERs, easier to cross
  additionality tests and leakage assessments, show
  much greater promise

16
THANKS