Climate change, carbon market instruments, and biodiversity: focusing on synergies and avoiding pitfalls

Abstract

Fundamental economic and societal transformations are necessary to avoid dangerous climate change. One broad policy approach that addresses the close relationship between conservation and climate change mitigation is based on correcting a market failure, that is, to establish a price signal for carbon, or more generally, greenhouse gas emissions. While many synergies between climate policy instruments and biodiversity conservation do exist, current policies often fall short of harvesting this potential. Here, we present six key challenges: (1) establishing a strong price signal for greenhouse gas emissions from all emission sources (including land-use and the terrestrial biosphere) that takes into account long-term societal and ecological costs; (2) expand carbon market instruments to cover the full range of greenhouse gases; (3) develop an ambitious, yet accountable architecture for rising emission prices; (4) develop guidelines and ensure enforcement to avoid greenhouse gas leakage; (5) improve greenhouse gas emission measurements from land-use and the biosphere; and (6) integrate emission reduction as a priority into relevant policies. Substantial synergies, but also trade-offs between climate policy and conservation exist, and we identify key risks and challenges. We call for (1) evidence-based evaluations of policy options; (2) avoiding too narrow framings of contested issues such as forest plantations, biofuels, or land-use decisions that exclude (or downplay) indirect effects (e.g., indirect land-use changes or creating carbon debts); and (3) strengthening integrated analyzes beyond sector policy goals. We conclude that avoiding bio-perverse impacts of climate policies on biodiversity will be crucial for the success of global climate change mitigation.

Differences in the Nature of Reaction Process for Thermochemical CO2 Splitting over NiFe2O4‐Based Materials

“…[36] The internal reaction is defined as a chemical process that occurs in an isothermal redox system when the reaction product forms internally after the oxygen chemical potential of its surface has been changed. [36] The internal reaction of the oxide solid solution includes internal reduction and internal oxidation, which can be found in the (A, B) 3…”

“…The burning of fossil fuels has produced substantial greenhouse gas emissions that might become one of the most destructive factors for global climate change in recent years, which may do a great harm to the sustainable development of human societies. [1][2][3] Concerning the infinite magnitude of solar power, one of the most promising alternatives is to convert greenhouse gases, especially CO 2 , into value-added products via a solar thermochemical process. Among these solar chemical approaches, the solar-driven thermochemical reaction has received more attention for its capability of using the entire solar spectrum and offering a higher solar-to-fuel conversion efficiency.…”

“…Thus, much research has been devoted to modifying the redox materials, among which the partial substitution and the addition of dopants were proved to be the effective methods to decrease the reduction temperature and to improve the reduction extent. [18] A lot of studies have been conducted regarding M-doped Fe 3 O 4 (M denotes Mg, Cu, Mn, Ni, Co, or Zn) to form mixed metal oxides or spinel ferrites (M x Fe 1-x ) 3 O 4 , which can be reduced at a lower temperature than pure Fe 3 O 4 . [19][20][21] In this regard, Ni-substituted Fe 3 O 4 has been singled out as the candidate of considerable scientific and practical interest for its high reactivity, thermal stability, and prospect toward solar thermochemical fuel production.…”

Climate policy co-benefits: a review

“…Several studies thus call for careful policy design in order to realize co-benefits efficiently (Beaudrot et al, 2016;Bryan et al, 2016;De Beenhouwer et al, 2016;Greve et al, 2013;Panfil & Harvey, 2016;Pichancourt et al, 2014;Stickler et al, 2009;Strassburg et al, 2010;Wüstemann et al, 2017). Essl, Erb, Glatzel, and Pauchard (2018) even claim that recognizing the risk for 'bio-perverse impacts of climate policies on biodiversity' is crucial for the success of climate change mitigation. Anderson, Field, and Mach (2017) evaluate California's forest offset programme and find that it provides additional emission reductions and additional conservation co-benefits in terms of water quality, recreation and wildlife.…”

Development of a carbon calculator tool for riparian forest restoration

“…A common critique of PES systems focused on a single ecosystem service, such as carbon, is that they may bring about perverse conservation outcomes by relying on monocultures, non‐native species or on artificial, engineered systems (Lindenmayer et al., ). Many have argued that PES systems, which are still in their infancy, can be effective for conservation if properly designed (Essl, Erb, Glatzel, & Pauchard, ; Reed et al., ; Wunder, ). Systematic reviews of PES effectiveness (Hejnowicz, Raffaelli, Rudd, & White, ) are emerging in the literature, contributing to development of a more robust theoretical approach (Börner et al., ) to the design and implementation of PES mechanisms.…”