Symposium helps spur carbon trading programs for Chesapeake’s forests
Sally Claggett is the Chesapeake Bay Program coordinator with the USDA Forest Service at the Chesapeake Bay Program.
I get a
thrill whenever I see forests on equal billing with farm lands in the Chesapeake region. Especially
when it comes to something BIG like carbon sequestration. Of course, one acre
of forest land can sequester much more carbon than one acre of agricultural
land -- 1-2 tons of carbon per acre per year for forest, compared to roughly
0.3-0.5 ton per acre per year for farmland. But when it comes to best
management practices for water quality, and well, eating, agriculture is king.
Kudos to Delaware, which is now only 30% forested (the smallest
percentage of forest for any of the six Bay states), to take on carbon for its champion
role in the Chesapeake
clean-up. When it comes to carbon, it’s all about taking advantage of existing
volunteer markets, such as the Regional
Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) and the Chicago Climate Exchange, and
potential regulatory markets in the United States’ future
From a
global perspective, the U.S.
is playing catch-up with carbon. Our nation did not ratify Kyoto in 1997 when 84 other countries signed
on. These countries are legally bound to reduce carbon emissions, with the
average target being to reduce emissions by 5% below 1990 levels. Here in the U.S., the
states have largely taken the leadership on reducing greenhouse gases, with
some big regional programs such as RGGI, the Western Climate Initiative
and the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Accord taking off. Last year, Congress got serious with the Lieberman-Warner
Climate Security Act, but it didn’t pass. Both of the prospective new
administrations have promised to enact climate legislation. Most likely only
after the economy settles down -- I mean up. It’s an exciting time for many who
have talked for nearly two decades about the need.
Back to
the symposium …
How will
the markets actually reduce greenhouse gases? It’s not shuffling money around. It
has to do with being cost-effective, promoting innovation and, indirectly,
better land use decisions. Big questions abound, however; like: will it work?
The top six issues are certainty, baseline, leakage, permanence,
additionality
and double
counting.
Once some
of the issues start being resolved, there’s great potential for forestry, since
80% of the forest land in this region is privately owned. The Bay Bank has moved
from concept to design and will be up and running in fall 2009. The Bay
Bank will facilitate both farm and forest landowner access to multiple
ecosystem markets (not just carbon) and conservation programs through an
easy-to-use online marketplace. Supporting aspects of the Bay Bank, such as the Spatial
Lands Registry, will be up sooner. The Spatial Lands Registry is one of
those tools that will help reduce issues such as certainty, baseline and
permanence. When a tool does this, it also reduces the make-it or break-it
transaction costs.
The
all-important new regulations will determine the direction of these burgeoning
markets. There need to be more drivers
to direct more businesses and people to invest in carbon sequestering
practices. The target reductions and rules need to be reasonable so a variety
of private landowners can take part in the market and get a worthwhile return
on their investment. The Delaware symposium is
helping with the outreach and understanding that will be needed for any market
to succeed.
What’s
good for carbon is good for water quality. Less cars, more forests and farms,
better-managed farms and forests, and hopefully, hopefully, a postponement of
sea level rise. That would be very good for the Chesapeake. For that matter, good for the
world.