Ecosystem Services BUCK KLINE AND VIJAY A SATYAL

Similar documents
Funding, Progress, and Other Issues Regarding Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution

Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Maryland s Watershed Implementation Plan. Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. Acting Secretary Maryland Department of the Environment

Use of Market and Voluntary Approaches for Reducing Nonpoint Source Pollution in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Healthy Watersheds Forest/TMDL Project. Chesapeake Bay Maintain Healthy Watersheds GIT Presentation March 29 th, 2016

Riparian Forest Buffer Panel (Bay Area Incentive Programs)

Metropolitan Washington Regional Tree Canopy Workgroup

Water Quality Trading and Offsets in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Beth McGee Chesapeake Bay Foundation

MARYLAND TRADING and OFFSET POLICY and GUIDANCE MANUAL CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERSHED

Statewide Results (Final Target)

Urban Forests and Local Mitigation Measures: Case Study, Baltimore, MD

Chesapeake Bay s Problems

Sector Load Growth Demonstration Technical Memorandum

WORKING PAPER How Baywide Nutrient Trading Could Benefit Virginia Farms

RESTORE CLEAN WATER ACTIONS: Federal Water Quality Two-Year Milestones for

Stormwater Management Tools: Real-Life Solutions for a Resilient Community Riparian Corridor Protection

Crediting Conservation

WORKING PAPER How Baywide Nutrient Trading Could Benefit Maryland Farms

Second Wednesdays 1:00 2:15 pm ET USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Optimization Applied to Strategies for Achieving the Chesapeake Bay TMDL

Maryland s Water Quality Trading Program. Phase II Agricultural Nutrient Trading in Maryland

Climate Change Impacts of Most Concern for CB Agreement Goal & Outcome Attainment

Clean Water Optimization Tool Case Study: Kent County

Jointly developed by C-AGG and Chesapeake Bay Foundation December 2015

How Nutrient Trading Can Help Restore the Chesapeake Bay

Anne Hairston-Strang MD DNR Forest Service September 7, 2017

Potential Markets for Watershed Services

How Nutrient Trading Can Help Restore the Chesapeake Bay

BMP Verification: What is it and How Will it Impact Pennsylvania?

Fact Sheet. Pennsylvania s Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy Goals for Nutrient and Sediment Reduction and Habitat Restoration

Wisconsin Wastewater Operators Association. Protecting Our Water Resources: The Future Bill Hafs - NEW Water 10/2014

CONSERVATION AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS

CONSERVATION RESERVE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (CREP) SUMMARY OF THE WISCONSIN S PROJECT

Julie Mawhorter, US Forest Service Northeast Area State & Private Forestry, Chesapeake Bay Program

Ecosystem Service Tradeoffs in the Implementation of the Bay TMDL

Riparian Forest Buffer (RFB) Management Strategy CBP Work Plan Virginia

The Chesapeake Bay Program

Lag-Times in the Watershed and their Influence on Chesapeake Bay Restoration. STAC Workshop October 16-17, 2012 Annapolis, MD

THINKING LIKE A WATERSHED. Using a Watershed Approach to Improve Wetland and Stream Restoration Outcomes

June 15, 2010 Public Meeting. Byron Petrauskas Blue Ridge Environmental Solutions, Inc.

Maryland Phase II WIP Strategies. MONTGOMERY Agriculture - Annual Practices

Countywide Action Plans

Land Conservation & Chesapeake Restoration

February 24, 2011 Public Webcast

Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans

Countywide Action Plans

May 4, 2010 Public Meeting. Byron Petrauskas Blue Ridge Environmental Solutions, Inc.

Anthony Moore Assistant Secretary for Chesapeake Bay Restoration

Roadmap to Tree Planning and Planting Dallas, TX

Roadmap to Tree Planting

Emerging Market-Based Solutions for Working Forests

Non-Point Source Nutrient Reductions Offset Proposal University Area Joint Authority S E P T E M B E R

Virginia s Chesapeake Bay Strategy

Little River Watershed Restoration Project. Mark Powell, Consultant Natural Resources Management

Chesapeake Bay Program in Pennsylvania. Karl G. Brown Executive Secretary PA State Conservation Commission

Second Wednesdays 1:00 2:15 pm ET USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Stormwater Retrofit Assessments and Developing Policy to Forward our Treatment of the Urban Stormwater Dilemma An NAI Approach

Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems

The USDA. Farm Bill:

Hickory Creek 319 grant project City of Denton

Sustaining Our Water Resources Public Health. April 27, 2011

Chesapeake Bay Program Indicator Analysis and Methods Document Reducing Pollution Indicators Updated May 2018

Setting the Context: Ecosystem Service Analysis

A Brief Overview of U.S. Agricultural Conservation Policy

Ann Smith DEP-WPO

CBP Implementation Plan

Riparian Buffers and Stream Restoration

Protocol for Setting Targets, Planning BMPs and Reporting Progress for Federal Facilities and Lands

The Chesapeake Bay TMDL

Methods and Tools for Quantifying Farm-Scale Greenhouse Gas Fluxes Marlen Eve, USDA Climate Change Program Office ACES 2014 Washington, DC December

Fact Sheet Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

RESTORE CLEAN WATER ACTIONS: Federal Water Quality Two-Year Milestones for

for the Chesapeake Bay

CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL PHASE III WIP NORTHERN VIRGINIA OPENING STAKEHOLDER MEETING AUGUST 17, 2018 NORMAND GOULET NVRC

Riparian Forest Buffer Management Strategy

UTC Assessments. Technology + Planning + Community

The Legal Status of Environmental Credit Stacking. EPRI Public Webcast February 11 th, 2014

WORKING PAPER How Baywide Nutrient Trading Could Benefit Pennsylvania Farms

September 15, 2014 Winston Salem, VA Stormwater Capital Improvement Planning for Total Maximum Daily Load Compliance

FY2016 GIT Funding Process. Chesapeake Bay Program Budget & Finance Workgroup Meeting February 28, 2017

The Relationship of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

The Chesapeake Bay Program Biennial Strategy Review System: A Guide to Your Quarterly Progress Meeting

4. Present Activities and Roles

Center for Nutrient Solutions (CNS) Nutrient Solution Scenarios Concept Paper September 5, 2014 Draft

A Report on the City of Lexington s Existing and Possible Urban Tree Canopy

Stormwater Quality Trades: Virginia Farms and Highways

ACES 2016 December 7, Jacksonville, Florida

CHATHAM PARK EXCEPTIONAL DESIGN EVALUATION

11. Prioritizing Farmlands for Future Protection

EPA Animal Agriculture Program Assessments For More Information Chesapeake Bay Commission Meeting November 5, 2015

Pennsylvania s Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan

Maryland s Programmatic Two-Year Milestones

Chesapeake Bay Updates. Agricultural Advisory Board June 18, 2014 Andy Zemba Interstate Waters Office

Riparian Forest Buffers

Forest Management Planning for Marketing Forest Products

THE LEGAL STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CREDIT STACKING

Mapping Ecosystem Services in Maryland to Inform Decision Making

North Dakota s Nutrient Reduction Strategy. Presented to the 2016 ND Water Quality Monitoring Conference March 4, 2016

NEW Water: Green Bay Metropolitan Sewerage District

The Midpoint Assessment and Phase III WIP

Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Restoration:

Transcription:

Ecosystem Services BUCK KLINE AND VIJAY A SATYAL CO 2

Presented to USDA Economists Group Washington DC May 14, 2008 CO 2

External Costs The loss of many of these ecosystem services is a social cost. It is not a transaction cost when converting to a more intensive land use. (Example: Clearing forests for a development) Regulatory drivers (wetlands legislation, cap& trade legislation) and voluntary drivers (managing the corporate environmental footprint, socially responsible investing strategies, and public relations efforts) can help internalize the social costs. How can regulatory and voluntary drivers help landowners capture a value for ecosystem services and help communities to smartly manage growth?

3 Million More People 1 Million Fewer Forest Acres 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2005 2030 2005 2030 Population Forest Land

Virginia Status FY 2006-2007 saw a net loss of an additional 27,300 acres of forest land How can we enhance landowner participation in existing and emerging ecosystem service markets? What tools can we provide to state and local government to smartly manage growth and mitigate environmental impacts?

Our $25 billion Industry Needs Support to Conserve Forest Land! We can t get our water quality offshore We can t get our wildlife habitat offshore We can t get our viewsheds offshore We can t get our air quality offshore

A Climate Change Atlas for 80 Forest Tree Species of the Eastern United States Anantha M. Prasad and Louis R. Iverson USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, http://www nrs fs fed http://www.nrs.fs.fed. us/atlas/

5 Models of Global Climate Change at 2X CO 2 All five models show an increase in importance for southern yellow pines and the xeric oaks *NOTE: These predictions demonstrate potential changes in suitable habitat conducive to a particular species establishment

Summary of DOF Effort Ecosystem Service Workgroup Identify front-burner services Identify metrics for credit calculation Explore opportunities for markets and ecosystem-based mitigation Any effort must compliment existing state programs and regulatory drivers

Current Efforts Carbon Sequestration Water Quality Nutrient load reduction Sediment loading/infiltration Air Quality Wildlife/Biodiversity Increasing degree of difficulty

Credit Calculation The Foundation of the Effort Good metrics are important Must tbe backed by science Must meet existing regulatory criteria QUALITY CREDIT (Quantity for market or mitigation)

Additionality Test To be considered for an offset credit: New forest management projects provide for ecosystem services above and beyond what currently is provided by existing forest lands. It is a choice between a technological lsolution and an environmental solution. It is not paying to pollute. Examples: Cropland conversion for water quality nutrient load reduction, Afforestation for carbon sequestration

Environmental or Technological Solution? AND/ OR CAP

Why Favor Environmental Solutions? WWTP Upgrade Forestry Practice Pollutant of Concern YES YES Other Pollutants NO YES Wildlife Habitat NO YES Carbon Sequestration NO YES Stormwater Management NO YES Recreation NO YES

Water Quality Efforts (Sediment Load & Nutrient t Load Reduction) Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Credit Trading DEQ/DCR have developed the regulations Practices Crop, hay, and pastureland conversion to forests Ag BMPs that reduce Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loading Must meet baseline requirements Waste Water Treatment Plant

Water Quality Efforts Sediment Load Reduction Infiltration Practices Ag land conversion to Forest Stream restoration work Potential Applications Municipal water supplies (reservoir life, treatment costs) Stormwater t management TMDLs

How Does Forest Cover Influence Air Quality? Pollutants (ozone, PM, SOx, NOx) Objectives Determine a science based physical measure for air quality credits Explore voluntary mitigation opportunities or market-based solutions

Air Quality Dr. David Nowak, USFS Trees and Air Pollution Physiological take in through stomata during gp photosynthesis Physical aerodynamic drag and surface conductance causes surface deposition Flux Equation (F=VdC) F F is downward flux of air pollution Vd is velocity of deposition C C is concentration of air pollutant Basis for EPA allowing forest cover/tree canopy as a voluntary measure in State Implementation Plans (SIPs)

Developing the Tools (Virginia Tech Effort) Are creating a pilot GIS-enabled tract- based ecosystem service credit calculator tool that will provide spatially-referenced information Tool will incorporate existing GIS data and inventoried inputs (species, age, stocking) Starting with carbon (aboveground biomass) and water quality (sediment/nutrients)

Developing the Tools (Carbon) User can select tract t via spatial or database query, then calculate potential carbon storage for desired period Alternative land use and management options available for what-if scenarios (growth and yield model)

Automated Credit Calculation Tool (WQ, C02) Landowners Cost Share Programs County Government Incorporate tool Into GIS Resource Managers State Agencies Quality Credit Easement Programs Registry/Exchange

Carbon Sequestration Project 18 acres afforested Nutrient Credit Trading Project Virginia i i Landowner 8 acres 87 acres total forested acres in municipal watershed Wetlands Mitigation Project 11 acres Riparian Buffer to be planted 12 acres

Federal Cap & Trade Regulated Entities (3 choices) Trade Allowances Reduce Emissions Offsets Spatial Registry GIS Tool Verification Exchange $ Aggregator/Banker/ Consultant Landowner

Needs 1. Resource Managers trained in developing ecosystem service portfolios and marketing those services 2. Landowner Education 3. Cost analyses to enhance the landowner and community based decision making process 4. Development process must be dynamic to reflect legislation, existing i agency programs, and regulatory drivers. Collaboration is needed. 5. Create a multiple-use product (markets, voluntary mitigation, land-use planning, g,program prioritization) 6. Marketing strategy for voluntary credit purchases (Corporate stewardship, socially responsible investing (SRI), public relations, etc.) 7. Progress forward is dependent on funding opportunities and bullet #4

SAVE THE DATE Ecosystem Services: Marketing Environmental Solutions March 12-13, 2009

Questions?