Overview of the Compliance Offset Protocol for U.S. Forest Projects

Marland, Eric; Domke, Grant M.; Hoyle, Jason; Marland, Gregg; Bates, Laurel; Helms, Alissa; Jones, Benjamin A.; Kowalczyk, Tamara; Ruseva, Tatyana B.; Szymanski, Celina

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-52434-4_2

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results for the American Carbon Registry 62 and the Verified Carbon Standard 63 , both approved project registries by the ARB 52 52 and range in size from ~200 to 250,000 acres providing from 1 to 14 years of GHG reduction data. The CARB-CAR results for forest carbon represent underlying methodologies reported by the CARB 54,55 and CAR 50,165 . The CAR is authorized to provide its services under the CARB Cap-and- .…”

Section: Survey and Analysismentioning

confidence: 57%

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Marino

Mincheva

Doucett

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The commercial asset value of sequestered forest carbon is based on protocols employed globally, however, their scientific basis has not been validated. We review and analyze commercial forest carbon protocols and offsets, claimed to have reduced net greenhouse gas emissions, issued by the California Air Resources Board and validated by the Climate Action Reserve (CARB-CAR). CARB-CAR protocol annual offsets, resulting from forest mensuration and growth simulation models, are compared with a population of forest field sites for which annual net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of carbon was measured directly as flux by CO2 eddy covariance, a meteorologically based method integrating forest carbon pools. We characterize differences between the protocols by testing the null hypothesis that the CARB-CAR commercial annual offset data fall within the boundaries of directly measured forest carbon NEE; gC m-2yr-1 are compared for both datasets. Irrespective of geographic location and project type, the CARB-CAR population annual mean value is significantly different from the NEE population mean at the 95% confidence interval, rejecting the null hypothesis. The CARB-CAR population exhibits standard deviation ~5x that of the NEE natural ranges; the variance exceeds the 5% compliance limit for invalidation of CARB-CAR offsets. Exclusion of the soil carbon pool typical for CARB-CAR net carbon budgets pose insuperable carbon accounting uncertainty for offsets that extend to vendor platforms and policies including the United Nations Program on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation and the Paris Agreement. NEE methodology for commercial forest carbon offsets ensures in situ molecular specificity, verification of claims for net carbon balance, performance-based pricing and harmonization of carbon protocols for voluntary and compliance markets worldwide, in contrast to continuing uncertainty posed by traditional estimation-based forest carbon protocols.

show abstract

Section: Survey and Analysismentioning

confidence: 57%

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Marino

Mincheva

Doucett

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 4 lists the project documents for CAR681 and CAR1161, covering project data reporting, project design, carbon pools used in calculations and verification documents with dates of entry for each into the CARB regulatory registry. A full verification report for CAR681 credits issued was uploaded on 3/11/2015 (Item 1, SCS Global Services) completing the supply chain for CARB markets for the cap-and-trade AB32 system [16]. A full verification statement is not available for CAR1161 offsets.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, the forest landscape conserved by carbon protocols and trading is astonishingly small, ~0.03% of the available land for restoration of ~0.9 billion hectares [12], [15], evidence that existing methods underpinning forest carbon are not economically or ecologically viable. Forest carbon sequestration credits, typically derived from sparse forest mensuration (6-or 12-year timber inventory) [16]- [18] surveys for above ground carbon and use of multiple, carbon denominated growth models [18]- [20], by default, exclude direct measurement of GHG's, limiting in-novative commercial applications. In contrast, direct, hourly, in situ measurement of forest greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes, via eddy covariance, a widely used forest research method [21], [22], resulting in net ecosystem exchange (NEE) [22]- [24], integrates vertical gross fluxes between the forest, soils and the atmosphere resulting in net forest GHG sequestration [25]- [29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of the Howland Forest GHG record, we bring together data and comparisons not reported previously [1] to clarify the quality and validity of forest mensuration protocols, such as those employed by the California Air Resources Board [16] and the Climate Action Reserve [38] (CARB-CAR). The CARB-CAR data are compared to directly measured CO2 flux [39]- [41], the only site where both commercial and research methods were employed contemporaneously across the same project area.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Howland Forest, ME, USA: Multi-Gas Flux Record (CO2, CH4, N2O) Establishes New Forest Products Linked to Social Cost of Emission in Contrast to Carbon Limited Sequestration Proxies

Marino¹,

Bautista²,

Rousseaux³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest carbon sequestration is a widely accepted natural climate solution, however, methods to determine net carbon offsets are limited to commercial carbon proxies and CO2 eddy covariance research. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHG) (e.g., CH4, N2O) receive less attention in the context of forests, in part, due to emphasis on CO2 and the operational requirements and cost for three-gas eddy covariance platforms. In this study, Howland forest flux tower (CO2, CH4) and soil flux data (CO2, CH4, N2O), representing net emission reductions, are linked to their respective social costs to estimate commercial revenue if sold as a GHG social cost forest offset product (GHG-SCF). Estimated annual revenue for GHG-SCF products, applicable to realization of a Green New Deal, range from ~$120,000 covering the site area of ~557 acres in 2021, to ~$12,000,000 for extrapolation to 40,000 acres in 2040, assuming a 3% discount rate. The Howland Forest CO2 flux record for two adjacent towers is compared to California Air Resources Board forest carbon proxy data for compliance sequestration offsets, the only project site where these approaches overlap. Overcrediting, incomplete carbon accounting with annual errors of up to 2,256%, inadequate third-party verification, and limited application to non-CO2 GHG’s are established. In contrast, direct measurement of one or more GHG’s offers new forest products and revenue incentives to restore and conserve forests worldwide.

show abstract

“…In contrast, the forest landscape conserved by carbon protocols and trading is astonishingly small, 0.03% of the available land for restoration of~0.9 billion hectares [12,15], evidence that existing methods underpinning forest carbon are not economically or ecologically viable. Forest carbon sequestration credits, typically derived from sparse forest mensuration (6-or 12-year timber inventory) [16][17][18] surveys for above-ground carbon and use of multiple, carbon denominated growth models [18][19][20], by default, exclude direct measurement of GHG's, limiting innovative commercial applications. In contrast, direct, hourly, in situ measurement of forest greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes, via eddy covariance and soil accumulation chambers are widely used and accepted forest research methods [21,22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Howland Forest, ME, USA: Multi-Gas Flux (CO2, CH4, N2O) Social Cost Product Underscores Limited Carbon Proxies

Marino

Bautista

Rousseaux

2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest carbon sequestration is a widely accepted natural climate solution. However, methods to determine net carbon offsets are based on commercial carbon proxies or CO2 eddy covariance research with limited methodological comparisons. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHG) (e.g., CH4, N2O) receive less attention in the context of forests, in part, due to carbon denominated proxies and to the cost for three-gas eddy covariance platforms. Here we describe and analyze results for direct measurement of CO2, CH4, and N2O by eddy covariance and forest carbon estimation protocols at the Howland Forest, ME, the only site where these methods overlap. Limitations of proxy-based protocols, including the exclusion of sink terms for non-CO2 GHGs, applied to the Howland project preclude multi-gas forest products. In contrast, commercial products based on direct measurement are established by applying molecule-specific social cost factors to emission reductions creating a new forest offset (GHG-SCF), integrating multiple gases into a single value of merit for forest management of global warming. Estimated annual revenue for GHG-SCF products, applicable to the realization of a Green New Deal, range from ~$120,000 USD covering the site area of ~557 acres in 2021 to ~$12,000,000 USD for extrapolation to 40,000 acres in 2040, assuming a 3% discount rate. In contrast, California Air Resources Board compliance carbon offsets determined by the Climate Action Reserve protocol show annual errors of up to 2256% relative to eddy covariance data from two adjacent towers across the project area. Incomplete carbon accounting, offset over-crediting and inadequate independent offset verification are consistent with error results. The GHG-SCF product contributes innovative science-to-commerce applications incentivizing restoration and conservation of forests worldwide to assist in the management of global warming.

show abstract

Overview of the Compliance Offset Protocol for U.S. Forest Projects

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Howland Forest, ME, USA: Multi-Gas Flux Record (CO2, CH4, N2O) Establishes New Forest Products Linked to Social Cost of Emission in Contrast to Carbon Limited Sequestration Proxies

Howland Forest, ME, USA: Multi-Gas Flux (CO2, CH4, N2O) Social Cost Product Underscores Limited Carbon Proxies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About