Forests and Global Climate Change

Transcription

1 Forests and Global Climate Change Bill Stewart, UC Forestry Specialist Americans and the Global Forest November 2, 2007 Take home points on how to think about the issue Use the lens of being global consumers Politics + Science = Responses Rapid improvement in scientific insights Slower improvement in response insights Hug a tree, any tree is not enough Forest Patterns around the Globe physical realities and cultural realities North America Europe The mega countries India and China Tropical countries Seattle * More Microsoft, Less Forests 1

2 Southern France: Stable Villages, Farms and Forests The USA is the only consistent forest carbon sink Rest of Globe USA IPCC 2001 Tropical deforestation is a major source of CO2 emissions 2

3 Global forest science + politics = confusing responses Kyoto Protocols essentially skipped forests Tropical forests are crucial but no one can agree on how to finance protection Warmer and drier forest soils may have very different climate feedback loops in the tropics and high latitude regions (Fung et. al 2005) Bala and Caldeira (2007) boldly claimed that some deforestation could be good When Fox News cares about Climate Change Research Combined climate and carboncycle effects of largescale deforestation G. Bala, K. Caldeira, and others, PNAS April 17, 2007 Used 3D coupled global carboncycle and climate model to test deforestation impacts Tropical deforestation very bad Boreal deforestation seems good Temperate deforestation questionable Albedo, cloud, & methane relationships IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Working Group I Report "The Physical Science Basis" Working Group II Report "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability" Working Group III Report "Mitigation of Climate Change" 3

4 Comparing Global Mitigation Opportunities as an Economist Look at quantities Look at prices Whether by market or rules Start with the low hanging fruit and move up the tree An International Perspective on Forest s s Role in Climate Mitigation for CO2 prices Harnessing Farms and Forests in the LowCarbon Economy for the Duke Standard for CO2e projects The California Exception The political history of our forests Then Protect Watersheds Build earthquake safe buildings Protect with Parks, Wilderness and Wildlife areas Now Save the Temperate Rain Forest Save the Big Trees Do it with complex regulations MMTCO2 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, The Baseline More Forest Carbon California Timberland Inventory (USFS RPA 2003) Other USFS 4

5 Good Carbon, Bad Carbon Standing Timber Inventory Other Biomass Wood Products Biomass Energy Surface and Ladder Fuels Crown Fuels Dark Green Surfaces Decomposing snags & logs Decomposing roots Offset CO2 emissions Offset CO2 emissions Offset energyintensive building products Offset fossil fuels Increase probability of CO2 and CH4 wildfire emissions Increase probability of CO2 wildfire emissions Increase radiative heating Emit CO2 Emit CO2 Three Related Opportunities for Forests and Forest Products 1. Inforest netnew carbon sequestration via faster growth and less loss to fire, insects, wind, etc. 2. Inproducts increasing the use and lifespan of wood materials in buildings 3. Inrenewable energy forest biomass for steam heat and electricity to meet the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Comparing Timber and CO 2 Stumpage CA Firewood Fir Coast Fir Sierra PineCoast Southeast USA Pulpwood Hardwood Pine chip n saw Pine sawtimber $/ mbf $/ CO 2 ton Similar CO2/ton prices Lowest cost US voluntary offers (unverified) PGE Climate Smart Pgm request at $10/ton Low cost investments (IPCC 2007) Current CO2 Price in Europe for future sales European Union penalty 1/3 inforest, 1/3 inproducts, 1/3 in energy conservation Doug. Fir Coast Doug. Fir, Pine Sierra Redwood Higher cost investments to achieve CO2 reductions Equal to the most expensive options 5

6 Revenue per Acre Revenue per Acre CO 2 icing on the sustainable forestry cake Custodial Management of USA Watershed $4,000 $3,000 $10+$20 $2,000 $10 Timber $1,000 $ Age SPI Mgt of USA Watershed $4,000 $3,000 $10+$20 $2,000 $10 Timber $1,000 $ USFS (Skog et al. 2006) report on fire risk reduction harvest potential California has greatest risk, greatest fuel buildup, and greatest potential biomass yields/ac key area to reduce risk and produce renewable energy Age Wildfire: All burnt acres are not the same in terms of carbon losses Types of Fires Active 10% acres crown Mixed 30% acres Inrenewable energy benefits Renewable Portfolio Standard quota 20% soon and will increase over time offset fossil fuel GHG emissions 1 BDT = 1 CO2 ton of emissions avoided reduce landscapelevel wildfire emission risks (CO2, CH4, NOx) Increase near residential areas fire resiliency (highest value assets in wildlands but who pays?) Surface 60% acres 6

7 Forests and Climate Change Resiliency Mothballing commercial timberlands in CA = more timber imports from OR and BC Thinned forest stands have climate benefits Biomass to electric power known benefits Biomass to liquid biofuels new issues Three concluding ideas Tropical deforestation is an avoidable disaster Forest carbon benefits in the US inforest, inproduct, inrenewable energy Real markets require consumers and companies to pay with real cash AND invest that cash in good initiatives 7