Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands

DiRocco, Tara L.; Ramage, Benjamin S.; Evans, Samuel G.; Potts, Matthew D.

doi:10.3390/f5040847

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Exclusion of the soil carbon and ecosystem respiration fluxes impose additional invalidation uncertainty for CARB-CAR protocols by the requirement of a 100-year invariant project baseline to ensure forest carbon storage permanence (California Air Resources Board, 2011; California Air Resources Board, 2014; California Air Resources Board, 2015b; Climate Action Reserve, 2018b). Soil carbon comprises up to three times the magnitude of above ground carbon composition, contributes up to ∼82% of ecosystem carbon exchange (Baldocchi & Penuelas, 2019; Barba et al, 2018; Giasson et al, 2013; Hollinger et al, 2013) and cannot be excluded from a complete, scientifically valid, carbon sequestration value for a forest project (Comeau et al, 2018; DiRocco et al, 2014; Li et al, 2018a; Li et al, 2018b). Soil warming and related soil CO 2 efflux predictions, including feedbacks to the biosphere (Davidson & Janssens, 2006), vary over the coming decades (Bond-Lamberty et al, 2018; Hicks Pries et al, 2017; Melillo et al, 2011; Wang et al, 2014; Yang et al, 2013) but they typically deny the assumption that the soil carbon pool and resulting fluxes will remain invariant over the 100-year required project interval (Bond-Lamberty et al, 2018; Li et al, 2018a; Li et al, 2018b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Marino

Mincheva

Doucett

2019

PeerJ

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, 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 forest carbon offsets, based on forest mensuration and model simulation, are compared to a global database of directly measured forest carbon sequestration, or net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of forest CO2. NEE is a meteorologically based method integrating CO2 fluxes between the atmosphere, forest and soils and is independent of the CARB-CAR methodology. Annual carbon accounting results for CAR681 are compared with NEE for the Ameriflux site, Howland Forest Maine, USA, (Ho-1), the only site where both methods were applied contemporaneously, invalidating CARB-CAR protocol offsets. We then test the null hypothesis that CARB-CAR project population data fall within global NEE population values for natural and managed forests measured in the field; net annual gC m−2yr−1 are compared for both protocols. Irrespective of geography, biome and project type, the CARB-CAR population mean is significantly different from the NEE population mean at the 95% confidence interval, rejecting the null hypothesis. The CARB-CAR population exhibits standard deviation ∼5× that of known interannual NEE ranges, is overcrediting biased, incapable of detecting forest transition to net positive CO2 emissions, and exceeds the 5% CARB compliance limit for invalidation. Exclusion of CO2 efflux via soil and ecosystem respiration precludes a valid net carbon accounting result for CARB-CAR and related protocols, consistent with our findings. Protocol invalidation risk extends to vendors and policy platforms such as the United Nations Program on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) and the Paris Agreement. We suggest that CARB-CAR and related protocols include NEE methodology for commercial forest carbon offsets to standardize methods, ensure in situ molecular specificity, verify claims of carbon emission reduction and harmonize carbon protocols for voluntary and compliance markets worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Marino

Mincheva

Doucett

2019

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is because allometric tree growth relationships are influenced by the environmental conditions occurring in the specific areas in which they were developed. Inappropriate use of allometric relationships could also cause large errors in aboveground biomass carbon pool quantification [37]. In addition, age-specific relationships may be needed for certain species because tree allometry tends to change with stand age [38], a trend that was equally observed in short-rotation plantations [35].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomass and Volume Yield in Mature Hybrid Poplar Plantations on Temperate Abandoned Farmland

Truax

Gagnon

Fortier³

2014

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In this study, we developed clone-specific allometric relationships, with the objective of calculating volume and biomass production after 13 years in 8 poplar plantations, located across an environmental gradient, and composed of 5 unrelated hybrid poplar clones. Allometry was found to be very similar for clones MxB-915311, NxM-3729 and DNxM-915508, all having P. maximoviczii parentage. Clones DxN-3570 and TxD-3230 also had a similar allometry; for a given DBH they have a lower stem volume, stem biomass and branch biomass than P. maximoviczii hybrids. Strong Site × Clone interactions were observed for volume and woody biomass growth, with DxN and TxD hybrids only productive on low elevation fertile sites, whereas P. maximovizcii hybrids were also very productive on higher elevation sites with moderate to high soil fertility. At the site level (5 clones mean), yield reached 27.5 and 22.7 m 3 /ha/yr. on the two best sites (high fertility and low elevation), confirming the great potential of southern Québec (Canada) for poplar culture. The productivity gap between the most and least productive sites has widened from year 8 to year 13, highlighting the need for high quality abandoned OPEN ACCESSForests 2014, 5 3108 farmland site selection in terms of climate and soil fertility. Although clone selection could optimize yield across the studied environmental gradient, it cannot fully compensate for inadequate site selection.

show abstract

“…CARB-CAR projects categorically exclude the soil CO 2 and related carbon pools 55 (e.g., RF-6, IFM-6, AC-6, Methods, Table I), the primary component of ecosystem respiration and determinant of NEE 65,87,88 . Soil carbon content represents up to three times the magnitude of above ground carbon composition and up to ~80% of ecosystem carbon exchange 41,[87][88][89] ; it cannot be excluded from a complete, scientifically valid, net material carbon balance [90][91][92] for a forest project. In the case of CARB-CAR avoided carbon (e.g., AC) projects, specific to wetlands, while sampling of bulk soil carbon is recommended 93 , a corresponding term for soil carbon and CO 2 efflux (e.g., AC-6) is excluded from calculation of net GHG reduction ( Table I).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The anomalies noted for CARB-CAR sites (Table I) document non-standard, shifting protocol operations (e.g., arbitrary model operation to hindcast and forecast annual net forest carbon) and inconsistent reporting for the CARB-CAR and related protocols. Point three, above, is emphasized recognizing the lack of spatial and annual resolution provided by FVS analysis frameworks introducing errors of up to ~55% in calculation of annual changes in standing biomass for above ground carbon stock 90,[114][115][116] such as observed for Howland681. Similar errors likely apply to the population of CARB-CAR projects reporting given that sequential, annual forest mensuration survey is not required or routinely practiced to determine corresponding annual vintage year carbon sequestration differences.…”

Section: Howland Forest Site Methods Comparison the Howland Research mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Accountable Accounting: Carbon-Based Management on Marginal Lands

Cited by 8 publications

References 67 publications

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Biomass and Volume Yield in Mature Hybrid Poplar Plantations on Temperate Abandoned Farmland

California air resources board forest carbon protocol invalidates offsets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About