This brief provides an overview of the Carbon Canopy, a novel partnership among companies, landowners, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that seeks to leverage markets for ecosystem services to increase the area of southern U.S. forests certified as sustainably managed. It is designed to inform companies, NGOs, and other organizations interested in developing or participating in similar programs that link forest certification with carbon offsets.

The United States needs many different types of forests: some managed for wood products plus other benefits, and some managed for nonconsumptive uses and benefits. The objective of reducing global greenhouse gases (GHG) requires increasing carbon storage in pools other than the atmosphere. Growing more forests and keeping forests as forests are only part of the solution, because focusing solely on the sequestration benefits of the forests misses the important (and substantial) carbon storage and substitution GHG benefits of harvested forest products, as well as other benefits of active forest management.

Forests and global climate are closely linked in terms of carbon storage and releases, water fluxes from the soil and into the atmosphere, and solar energy capture. Understanding how carbon dynamics are affected by stand age, density, and management and will evolve with climate change is fundamental to exploiting the capacity for sustainably managed forests to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. For example, even though temperate forests continue to be carbon sinks, in western North America forest fires and tree mortality from insects are converting some forests into net carbon sources.

Expanding forest biomass use for biofuels and energy generation will compete with traditional forest products, but it may also produce benefits through competition and market efficiency. Short-rotation woody crops, as well as landowners' preferences—based on investment-return expectations and environmental considerations, both of which will be affected by energy and environmental policies—have the potential to increase biomass supply.

Unlike metals, concrete, and plastic, forest products store atmospheric carbon and have low embodied energy (the amount of energy it takes to make products), so there is a substitution effect when wood is used in place of other building materials. Wood used for energy production also provides substitution benefits by reducing the flow of fossil fuel-based carbon emissions to the atmosphere.

The value of carbon credits generated by forest carbon offset projects differs dramatically, depending on the sets of carbon pools allowed by the protocol and baseline employed. The costs associated with establishing and maintaining offset projects depend largely on the protocols' specifics. Measurement challenges and relatively high transaction costs needed for forest carbon offsets warrant consideration of other policies that promote climate benefits from forests and forest products but do not require project-specific accounting.

Policies can foster changes in forest management and product manufacture that reduce carbon emissions over time while maintaining forests for environmental and societal benefits. US policymakers should take to heart the finding of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its Fourth Assessment Report when it concluded that “In the long term, a sustainable forest management strategy aimed at maintaining or increasing forest carbon stocks, while producing an annual sustained yield of timber, fibre, or energy from the forest, will generate the largest sustained mitigation benefit.“ A rational energy and environmental policy framework must be based on the premise that atmospheric greenhouse gas levels are increasing primarily because of the addition of geologic fossil fuel-based carbon into the carbon cycle. Forest carbon policy that builds on the scientific information summarized in this article can be a significant and important part of a comprehensive energy policy that provides for energy independence and carbon benefits while simultaneously providing clean water, wildlife habitat, recreation, and other uses and values.

To help countries that put forward “ambitious REDD+1 plans,” the United States announced it would dedicate $1 billion2 over the 2010-2012 timeframe as part of the U.S. contribution towards the “fast start financing” reflected in the Copenhagen Accord3. The United States supports REDD+ activities because they offer cost-effective opportunities to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions while providing other sustainable development benefits.

Under the current international discussions on climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, much attention is given to the United States, the world's second largetes emitter, and its domestic programs.

On the other hand, forest projects are gradually getting more recognition and suppor as a necessary tool to fight climate change while providing a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits.

This document provides an overview of the current forest carbon market in the United States and describes various forces influencing the associated credits demand.

Over half (56 percent) of America’s forests are privately owned and managed and provide a vast array of public goods and services, such as clean water, timber, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities. These important public benefits are being affected by increased housing density in urban as well as rural areas across the country. The Forests on the Edge project, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, seeks to improve our understanding of where across the country housing density increases, as well as other threats, might affect these critical goods and services. For this study, we map and rank watersheds across the conterminous United States to analyze the relative contributions of private forest land to water quality, timber volume, at-risk species habitat, and interior forest. In addition, we rank watersheds according to the pressures on private forest contributions from increased housing density, wildfire, insect pests and diseases, and air pollution. Results indicate that private forest land contributions to forest cover, clean water, and timber volume are greatest in the East, but are also important in many Western watersheds. Private forests making substantial contributions to interior forest and at-risk species are more uniformly distributed across the country. Development pressures on these contributions are concentrated in the Eastern United States but are also found in the north-central region, parts of the West and Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest; nationwide, more than 57 million acres of rural forest land are projected to experience a substantial increase in housing density from 2000 to 2030. Private forests in both the Eastern and Western United States are under pressure from insect pests and diseases. The bulk of private forests most susceptible to wildfire are located in the West and parts of the Southeast. Lastly, ozone pollution affecting private forests is localized in California and several areas of the East.

In April 2009, Texas Forest Service distributed a three-page survey to 5,193 landowners hoping to gain a better understanding of their perspectives on ecosystem services markets.

The survey was designed to determine interest in these emerging environmental credit markets, as well as identify potential participation barriers. Results will be used to develop programs that provide technical assistance to interested landowners.

Abstract:

Land use and its role in reducing greenhouse gases is a key element of policy negotiations to address climate change. Calculations of the potential for enhanced terrestrial sequestration have largely focused on the technical characteristics of carbon stocks, such as vegetation type and management regime, and to some degree, on economic incentives. However, the actual potential for carbon sequestration critically depends on who owns the land and additional land management decision drivers. US land ownership patterns are complex, and consequently land use decision making is driven by a variety of economic, social and policy incentives. These patterns and incentives make up the 'carbon stewardship landscape'—that is, the decision making context for carbon sequestration. We examine the carbon stewardship landscape in the US state of Colorado across several public and private ownership categories. Achieving the full potential for land use management to help mitigate carbon emissions requires not only technical feasibility and financial incentives, but also effective implementing mechanisms within a suite of often conflicting and hard to quantify factors such as multiple-use mandates, historical precedents, and non-monetary decision drivers.

This analysis examines the impact on Brazil of gradual reductions in deforestation in accordance with its national commitments. Drawing on a variety of published research and economic analysis, Brazil stands to see gross revenue increases between $146-306 billion from ending deforestation by 2030 through a combination of shifting agricultural production, agricultural intensification and improvement, and forest protection financing. These gains are dependent on fulfillment of Brazil’s national commitments for forest protection, and assume no legal, regulatory, or enforcement changes that would increase deforestation.

Access the report in English here.

There are opportunities for forest owners and ranchers to participate in emerging carbon markets and contribute to climate change mitigation through carbon oriented forest and range management activities. These activities often promote sustainable forestry and ranching and broader conservation goals while having the potential to provide a new income stream for landowners. We describe current carbon market opportunities for landowners, discuss common steps they must typically undergo to take advantage of these opportunities, and address related questions. We also provide a synthesis of the existing scientific literature on how different forest and range management practices are thought to contribute to carbon sequestration, including current debates on this topic. The science regarding forestry and carbon sequestration is more advanced and less controversial than that for range management, and more opportunities exist for forest owners to participate in carbon markets than for ranchers. We describe some of the challenges of including landowners in carbon markets, and issues that will likely need to be addressed to develop relevant policy.

The Ecological Society of America has published a new report syntehsizing the state of forest carbon science and how it relates to policy and management options in the United States.  The report is the 13th edition of Issues in Ecology, a publication intended to convey leading scientific research to a general audience using plain language.