Carbon sinks // Current

UN launches program to cut deforestation emissions

The UN launched a programme that it hopes could be the foundation for a system in which rich countries would pay poor ones to slow climate change by protecting and planting forests.

The new programme, called Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation Program, or UN-REDD, will assist nine developing countries, including Bolivia, Indonesia and Zambia, in establishing systems to monitor, assess and report forest cover.

"Forests are worth more alive than dead... and their ecosystem services and benefits are worth billions if not trillions of dollars if only we capture these in economic models," said Achim Steiner, the executive director of the UN Environment Programme.

Clearing forests for timber and farmland in developing nations emits nearly 20 per cent of the greenhouse gases blamed for climate change, according to the UN's climate science panel. Trees store heat-trapping carbon dioxide as they grow and release it when they rot or are burned.

Tropical countries are pushing to include UN-REDD in the successor to the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Delegates representing countries around the globe are scheduled to meet in Copenhagen at the end of next year in hopes of hammering out a successor to the pact, which expires in 2012.

Under such a plan, the tropical countries would generate tradable carbon credits by saving and planting trees. Indonesia, for example, has the potential to be compensated €682 million a year if its deforestation rate was reduced to one million hectares annually, the UN estimated.

Presumably, rich countries would buy the credits to meet their own emission limits, like the way EU countries have invested in credits representing emissions cuts generated by clean energy projects in poor countries.

Not everyone agrees such a programme would be a good idea. Barry Gardiner, British Prime Minister special envoy for forests, said in an interview earlier this month that the model of avoided deforestation is flawed and risks alienating voters in rich countries.

Mr Gardiner proposed instead that rich countries should simply make payments to tropical nations based on the size of existing forests. If countries continued to log or burn they could be expelled from the scheme.
The UN launched a programme that it hopes could be the foundation for a system in which rich countries would pay poor ones to slow... more

JanforGore
added this

3 responses

1 month ago

Want to capture carbon? Protect old growth forests

Forest scientists have come to a surprising conclusion regarding old growth forests and their majestic, mature trees: They're not just relaxing in their arboreal old age, but are still actively taking in carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The new study suggests that protecting old growth forests may be just as important as planting new trees in efforts to reduce carbon dioxide levels and fight global warming.

Previously, researchers believed that only young, fast-growing trees absorbed enough carbon dioxide to be considered significant carbon sinks. Old, crowded forests don't allow for much new growth: The only new growth occurred in the small spaces that opened up when large old trees died and decomposed, releasing their accumulated carbon. The forests at large were therefore considered to be carbon neutral, and accounted as such in climate models [Nature News]. But the new study shows that the slow but continuous growth of old trees means that they continue to suck up more carbon than they release.

For the study, published in the journal Nature, researchers examined over 500 studies of forests around the world. They calculated that primary forests in Canada, Russia and Alaska alone absorb about 1.3 gigatonnes of carbon per year, about ten percent of the net global carbon exchange between the ecosystem and the atmosphere. These forests need to be protected not just because they help to absorb carbon dioxide, but also because destroying them could release huge stores of greenhouse gases. Old-growth forests accumulate carbon for centuries and contain large quantities of it, [lead researcher Sebastiaan] Luyssaert said. If these pools of CO2 are disturbed, much of this CO2 will move back into the atmosphere, he added [AFP].

The new findings suggest that old forests should be included in any policies intended to mitigate global warming. Study co-author Beverly Law says that the findings argue for including credits for preserving old growth forests in the Kyoto Protocol and cap-and-trade schemes for controlling greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming [AP].
Forest scientists have come to a surprising conclusion regarding old growth forests and their majestic, mature trees: They're... more

JanforGore
added this

26 responses

2 months ago

Climate change could stop corals fixing themselves

Climate change is depriving coral reefs across the globe of the building materials used to make their shells. Current plans to curb greenhouse gas emissions may not be enough to fix the problem, according to new research.

The daily life of corals is a constant battle against erosion. The reef builders patch up holes in their shells, left by nibbling sea creatures, using a mineral called calcium carbonate. To keep up with repairs, corals in the wild usually require three times as much of the mineral as sheltered corals grown in laboratories.

Before the industrial revolution, says Ken Caldeira of Stanford University, 98% of all corals lived in waters above the required calcium carbonate threshold.

But the situation is changing, according to Caldeira, who has built a model to study how greenhouse gas emissions tinker with the chemistry of open water oceans.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oceans are becoming saturated with Co2 and corals are suffering for it. This is important because corals play a very important role in the health of our oceans, which in turn plays a very important role in the health of the web of life in our oceans, which then plays a vital role in our own health. Mitigating carbon emissions is now key: how many times does it have to be said?

The impasse between what politicians in this country want and what this world now needs is vast and bringing dangerous consequences to us. We can no longer afford to ignore scientific warnings regarding the deterioration of our oceans, and we cannot wait until politicians see it as politically expedient to do something or until we have passed the point of no return.

Besides carbon mitigation and freezing emissions, I believe we need a major global tree planting initiative to be undertaken. Planting trees in areas of great deforestation can help to return many of the carbon sinks that have been lost to us from illegal logging practices and overconsumption. This would then hopefully help to balance the amount of Co2 in the atmosphere instead of most of it being soaked up by oceans. This is a human made catastrophe and only humans can reverse it. Hopefully, it is not too late.Climate change is depriving coral reefs across the globe of the building materials used to make their shells. Current plans to... more