Making Copenhagen count

Beyond Counting Carbon

How can the carbon stored in habitats be calculated? And just how do REDD project developers prove they have prevented greenhouse gas emissions from happening?

Zoe Harkin, Carbon Specialist with the FFI-Macquarie Carbon Forests Taskforce, explains some of the technical challenges presented by this emerging field of work and suggests how they can be overcome.

In my role as Forest Carbon Specialist, I am often asked to explain how I measure the amount of carbon stored in a forest, and how much CO2 would be emitted if the same area were to be deforested.

In an effort not to confuse the audience with a barrage of acronyms and technical speak, I often find myself resorting to clichés….

Forecasting forest emissions: smoke and mirrors, or clear as day?

To estimate the amount of emissions successfully prevented by a Reduced Emissions for Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) project one has to estimate what might have happened if the project hadn’t been implemented in the first place.  This is known as the ‘baseline scenario’. 

This estimate could be based on the current rate of deforestation activities already occurring in the area; or it could involve an activity that is predicted to occur in future.

During the very early stages of REDD market development, the forecasting methods were little more than ‘smoke and mirrors’. 

Today’s methods for calculating the baseline scenario now make use of complex remote sensing technologies and GIS analysis, and are tailored depending on the key drivers of deforestation. 

For example, the probability of unplanned (or unlawful) deforestation can be forecast by analysing factors such as distance to roads, population centres and sawmills, etc.

Additionality is a double-edged sword

To generate carbon credits, REDD projects must be able to prove that the emissions they have prevented are ‘additional’. The carbon stored in the habitat in question must be under threat from being released into the atmosphere by deforestation or degradation.

This additionality rule attracts REDD investment to the forests that are most at threat, which are often those that are hardest to save.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul: the leakage problem

One of the major criticisms of REDD has been its potential to cause ‘leakage’ issues.  This criticism is born from the concern that reducing deforestation in one forested area may simply shift some of the problem to another forested area.

There are two main solutions to the leakage problem.  The first is to conduct carbon accounting on a national basis, thereby capturing all leakage effects within a single national reporting system.

The second is to address the fundamental drivers of deforestation, rather than simply addressing the symptoms. 

Light at the end of the tunnel…

Implementing REDD can be challenging.   However, a quick ‘back of the envelope’ calculation reveals the monumental quantity of avoided emissions that might be expected from well designed and managed REDD projects.

Read more about FFI’s various REDD initiatives.

Learn more about the FFI-Macquarie Taskforce.