4.8 Article

Using remote sensing to quantify the additional climate benefits of California forest carbon offset projects

Journal

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 22, Pages 6789-6806

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/gcb.16380

Keywords

additionality; carbon offsets; improved forest management; nature-based climate solutions; remote sensing

Funding

  1. Black Rock Forest
  2. California Strategic Growth Council
  3. David and Lucile Packard Foundation
  4. Department of Energy
  5. NASA Carbon Monitoring System
  6. National Science Foundation [1802880, 2003017, 2044937, DGE-1839285]
  7. UCOP National Laboratory Fees Research Program [LFR-18-542511]
  8. USDA NIFA AFRI [2018-67019-27850]
  9. Direct For Biological Sciences
  10. Division Of Environmental Biology [2003017] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  11. Direct For Biological Sciences
  12. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [2044937] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study used remote sensing-based datasets to evaluate the carbon trends and harvest histories of 37 Improved Forest Management (IFM) projects in California. It found that the carbon accumulated in these projects generally did not exceed what might have occurred naturally. Therefore, the current protocol should be improved to better measure and reward additionality.
Nature-based climate solutions are a vital component of many climate mitigation strategies, including California's, which aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Most carbon offsets in California's cap-and-trade program come from improved forest management (IFM) projects. Since 2012, various landowners have set up IFM projects following the California Air Resources Board's IFM protocol. As many of these projects approach their 10th year, we now have the opportunity to assess their effectiveness, identify best practices, and suggest improvements toward future protocol revisions. In this study, we used remote sensing-based datasets to evaluate the carbon trends and harvest histories of 37 IFM projects in California. Despite some current limitations and biases, these datasets can be used to quantify carbon accumulation and harvest rates in offset project lands relative to nearby similar control lands before and after the projects began. Five lines of evidence suggest that the carbon accumulated in offset projects to date has generally not been additional to what might have otherwise occurred: (1) most forests in northwestern California have been accumulating carbon since at least the mid-1980s and continue to accumulate carbon, whether enrolled in offset projects or not; (2) harvest rates were high in large timber company project lands before IFM initiation, suggesting they are earning carbon credits for forests in recovery; (3) projects are often located on lands with higher densities of low-timber-value species; (4) carbon accumulation rates have not yet increased on lands that enroll as offset projects, relative to their pre-enrollment levels; and (5) harvest rates have not decreased on most project lands since offset project initiation. These patterns suggest that the current protocol should be improved to robustly measure and reward additionality. In general, our framework of geospatial analyses offers an important and independent means to evaluate the effectiveness of the carbon offsets program, especially as these data products continue improving and as offsets receive attention as a climate mitigation strategy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available