Brian C. Murray

Trading Water for Carbon with Biological Carbon Sequestration

Carbon sequestration strategies highlight tree plantations without considering their full environmental consequences. We combined field research, synthesis of more than 600 observations, and climate and economic modeling to document substantial losses in stream flow, and increased soil salinization and acidification, with afforestation. Plantations decreased stream flow by 227 millimeters per year globally (52%), with 13% of streams drying completely for at least 1 year. Regional modeling of U.S. plantation scenarios suggests that climate feedbacks are unlikely to offset such water losses and could exacerbate them. Plantations can help control groundwater recharge and upwelling but reduce stream flow and salinize and acidify some soils.

Estimating Global “Blue Carbon” Emissions from Conversion and Degradation of Vegetated Coastal Ecosystems

Recent attention has focused on the high rates of annual carbon sequestration in vegetated coastal ecosystems—marshes, mangroves, and seagrasses—that may be lost with habitat destruction (‘conversion’). Relatively unappreciated, however, is that conversion of these coastal ecosystems also impacts very large pools of previously-sequestered carbon. Residing mostly in sediments, this ‘blue carbon’ can be released to the atmosphere when these ecosystems are converted or degraded. Here we provide the first global estimates of this impact and evaluate its economic implications. Combining the best available data on global area, land-use conversion rates, and near-surface carbon stocks in each of the three ecosystems, using an uncertainty-propagation approach, we estimate that 0.15–1.02 Pg (billion tons) of carbon dioxide are being released annually, several times higher than previous estimates that account only for lost sequestration. These emissions are equivalent to 3–19% of those from deforestation globally, and result in economic damages of

A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States

US 6–42 billion annually. The largest sources of uncertainty in these estimates stems from limited certitude in global area and rates of land-use conversion, but research is also needed on the fates of ecosystem carbon upon conversion. Currently, carbon emissions from the conversion of vegetated coastal ecosystems are not included in emissions accounting or carbon market protocols, but this analysis suggests they may be disproportionally important to both. Although the relevant science supporting these initial estimates will need to be refined in coming years, it is clear that policies encouraging the sustainable management of coastal ecosystems could significantly reduce carbon emissions from the land-use sector, in addition to sustaining the well-recognized ecosystem services of coastal habitats.

Estimating Leakage from Forest Carbon Sequestration Programs

Using forests to mitigate climate change has gained much interest in science and policy discussions. We examine the evidence for carbon benefits, environmental and monetary costs, risks and trade-offs for a variety of activities in three general strategies: (1) land use change to increase forest area (afforestation) and avoid deforestation; (2) carbon management in existing forests; and (3) the use of wood as biomass energy, in place of other building materials, or in wood products for carbon storage. We found that many strategies can increase forest sector carbon mitigation above the current 162-256 Tg C/yr, and that many strategies have co-benefits such as biodiversity, water, and economic opportunities. Each strategy also has trade-offs, risks, and uncertainties including possible leakage, permanence, disturbances, and climate change effects. Because approximately 60% of the carbon lost through deforestation and harvesting from 1700 to 1935 has not yet been recovered and because some strategies store carbon in forest products or use biomass energy, the biological potential for forest sector carbon mitigation is large. Several studies suggest that using these strategies could offset as much as 10-20% of current U.S. fossil fuel emissions. To obtain such large offsets in the United States would require a combination of afforesting up to one-third of cropland or pastureland, using the equivalent of about one-half of the gross annual forest growth for biomass energy, or implementing more intensive management to increase forest growth on one-third of forestland. Such large offsets would require substantial trade-offs, such as lower agricultural production and non-carbon ecosystem services from forests. The effectiveness of activities could be diluted by negative leakage effects and increasing disturbance regimes. Because forest carbon loss contributes to increasing climate risk and because climate change may impede regeneration following disturbance, avoiding deforestation and promoting regeneration after disturbance should receive high priority as policy considerations. Policies to encourage programs or projects that influence forest carbon sequestration and offset fossil fuel emissions should also consider major items such as leakage, the cyclical nature of forest growth and regrowth, and the extensive demand for and movement of forest products globally, and other greenhouse gas effects, such as methane and nitrous oxide emissions, and recognize other environmental benefits of forests, such as biodiversity, nutrient management, and watershed protection. Activities that contribute to helping forests adapt to the effects of climate change, and which also complement forest carbon storage strategies, would be prudent.

Econometric studies of non-industrial private forest management: a review and synthesis

Leakage from forest carbon sequestration—the amount of a program’s direct carbon benefits undermined by carbon releases else-where—depends critically on demanders’ ability to substitute non-reserved timber for timber targeted by the program. A nalytic, econometric, and sector-level optimization models are combined to estimate leakage from different forest carbon sequestration activities. Empirical estimates for the United States show leakage ranges from minimal (< 10%) to enormous (> 90%), depending on the activity and region. These results suggest that leakage effects should not be ignored in accounting for the net level of greenhouse gas offsets from land use and forestry mitigation activities. (JEL Q25, Q32)

Balancing Cost and Emissions Certainty: An Allowance Reserve for Cap-and-Trade

Abstract Forest policies and management increasingly rely on economic models to explain behaviors of landowners and to project forest outputs, inventories and land use. However, it is unclear whether the existing econometric models offer general conclusions concerning non-industrial private forest (NIPF) management or whether the existing results are case-specific. In this paper, we systematically review the empirical economics literature on NIPF timber harvesting, reforestation, and timber stand improvements (TSI). We confirm four primary categories of management determinants: market drivers, policy variables, owner characteristics and plot/resource conditions. We rely on the most basic form of meta-analysis, vote counting, to combine information from many studies to produce more general knowledge concerning the key determinants of harvesting, reforestation and TSI within these four categories. Despite substantial differences in the variables used across models, the use of meta-analysis enables the systematic identification of the factors that are most important in explaining NIPF management. We conclude with some methodological and policy suggestions.

Reference scenarios for deforestation and forest degradation in support of REDD: a review of data and methods

On efficiency grounds, the economics community has to date tended to emphasize price-based policies to address climate change—such as taxes or a “safety-valve” price ceiling for cap-and-trade—while environmental advocates have sought a more clear quantitative limit on emissions. This article presents a simple modification to the idea of a safety valve: a quantitative limit that we call the allowance reserve. Importantly, this idea may bridge the gap between competing interests and potentially improve efficiency relative to tax or other price-based policies. The last point highlights the deficiencies in several previous studies of price and quantity controls for climate change that do not adequately capture the dynamic opportunities within a cap-and-trade system for allowance banking, borrowing, and intertemporal arbitrage in response to unfolding information.

Federal timber restrictions, interregional spillovers, and the impact on US softwood markets

Global climate policy initiatives are now being proposed to compensate tropical forest nations for reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD). These proposals have the potential to include developing countries more actively in international greenhouse gas mitigation and to address a substantial share of the worlds emissions which come from tropical deforestation. For such a policy to be viable it must have a credible benchmark against which emissions reduction can be calculated. This benchmark, sometimes termed a baseline or reference emissions scenario, can be based directly on historical emissions or can use historical emissions as input for business as usual projections. Here, we review existing data and methods that could be used to measure historical deforestation and forest degradation reference scenarios including FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations) national statistics and various remote sensing sources. The freely available and corrected global Landsat imagery for 1990, 2000 and soon to come for 2005 may be the best primary data source for most developing countries with other coarser resolution high frequency or radar data as a valuable complement for addressing problems with cloud cover and for distinguishing larger scale degradation. While sampling of imagery has been effectively useful for pan-tropical and continental estimates of deforestation, wall-to-wall (or full coverage) allows more detailed assessments for measuring national-level reference emissions. It is possible to measure historical deforestation with sufficient certainty for determining reference emissions, but there must be continued calls at the international level for making high-resolution imagery available, and for financial and technical assistance to help countries determine credible reference scenarios. The data available for past years may not be sufficient for assessing all forms of forest degradation, but new data sources will have greater potential in 2007 and after. This paper focuses only on the methods for measuring changes in forest area, but this information must be coupled with estimates of change in forest carbon stocks in order to quantify emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.

Set-asides can be better climate investment than corn ethanol

Abstract An econometric model of the US softwood lumber and timber markets is estimated and used to simulate the price, trade, and welfare effects of reductions in federal timber sales in the western US commencing in the late 1980s. Results indicate that the timber sale reductions increased lumber prices by roughly 15 percent in the mid-1990s. Lumber consumers were the unambiguous losers from the policy, while lumber and timber producers were net welfare gainers as the quantity-induced losses to western lumber producers were more than offset by price increases and quantity gains to southern US and Canadian lumber producers and timber producers in all regions.

Using and improving the social cost of carbon

Although various studies have shown that corn ethanol reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by displacing fossil fuel use, many of these studies fail to include how land-use history affects the net carbon balance through changes in soil carbon content. We evaluated the effectiveness and economic value of corn and cellulosic ethanol production for reducing net GHG emissions when produced on lands with different land-use histories, comparing these strategies with reductions achieved by set-aside programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Depending on prior land use, our analysis shows that C releases from the soil after planting corn for ethanol may in some cases completely offset C gains attributed to biofuel generation for at least 50 years. More surprisingly, based on our comprehensive analysis of 142 soil studies, soil C sequestered by setting aside former agricultural land was greater than the C credits generated by planting corn for ethanol on the same land for 40 years and had equal or greater economic net present value. Once commercially available, cellulosic ethanol produced in set-aside grasslands should provide the most efficient tool for GHG reduction of any scenario we examined. Our results suggest that conversion of CRP lands or other set-aside programs to corn ethanol production should not be encouraged through greenhouse gas policies.