ReportWire

Tag: carbon market

  • How does Maine’s forest carbon credit market work?

    Forest carbon credits are gaining traction in Maine. Yet as the voluntary carbon market picks up, some in the industry are worried about access for small family forest landowners with fewer resources than corporations who manage bigger plots of land.

    In order to participate in the market where carbon credits are bought and sold, a forest landowner first needs to understand exactly how much carbon their trees are capable of storing. The science behind the forest carbon market is based on the fundamental lesson taught in school: like us, trees “breathe.”

    Unlike us, however, trees take in carbon dioxide and hang on to it over long periods of time in a process called carbon sequestration. When certain climate-friendly management practices are followed, the carbon stored by forests can be counted and sold as credits to companies looking to offset their emissions in a larger marketplace.

    The market hinges on precise carbon sequestration calculations, which are done right down to the individual tree. That value, calculated by determining the amount of carbon a parcel of forestland will absorb and store over a period of time, often five or ten years in Maine, is then used to determine how many carbon credits a landowner can be issued by a carbon registry. Each credit is equivalent to one metric ton of carbon.

    For small-scale forest landowners, who might have a 25- or 50-acre parcel of woodland, this first step can be a barrier. The ground-based surveys traditionally required for calculating carbon storage potential are expensive.

    Though such surveys are typically conducted and paid for by a third-party entity called a forest carbon developer, surveying plots in the thousand-acre range versus dozen-acre range often makes for a more savvy investment. That can leave small landowners without access to the market.

    “When you have tens of thousands of acres to work with, then you have sort of an economy of scale to develop your own project. When you have 150 acres, the cost of developing a project would exceed the revenue you could gain from selling to carbon,” said Andrew Whitman, a climate and carbon specialist with the Maine Forest Service.

    In Maine, there are a handful of forest carbon developers who work with private family woodland owners, defined as those who manage 1,000 acres of forestland or less. One of those firms, a Maine-based startup called Renoster, is using remote sensing technology in an effort to make the surveying process cheaper.

    By using data collected from laser instruments on flyovers done by the state of Maine and the U.S. Geological Survey, Renoster’s team of scientists can create a detailed rendering of individual forest parcels. That rendering is called a LiDAR point cloud, named for the kind of three-dimensional laser scanner imagery created by the Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) technology.

    “By filtering the point cloud with good statistical practices, you can actually see the shape of individual trees,” said Mary Ignatiadis, a forest economist with Renoster. “People have been doing a lot of work to make sure that calculations are really accurate, and that’s the innovation that’s going to allow small Maine landowners to participate.”

    The state is preparing to launch a series of incentives later this year to encourage forest landowners to participate in the carbon market, according to Whitman. Maine received federal funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act to invest in forest carbon and resilience.

    There will be two incentive programs available to forest landowners with parcels under 1,000 acres and under 10,000 acres, respectively. Though Whitman said federal funding is not in a “business as usual situation,” he anticipates that the incentives will move forward.

    Incentives are not the only part of Maine’s forest carbon market counting on federal funding. Forest carbon developers in the state rely on data from the U.S. Forest Service’s ongoing Forest Inventory and Analysis, or FIA. The Forest Service has seen significant budget and personnel cuts under the Trump administration. Remote sensing technology, including instruments on NASA’s satellite programs, could also be impacted by budget cuts.

    “From a carbon standpoint, if the capacity of the programs to keep up with the ongoing inventory work in FIA … if that’s diminished, then we’ll have less capacity to have high quality data,” said Ivan Fernandez, a member of the Maine Climate Council and the Forest Carbon Task Force Gov. Janet Mills convened in 2021. “I say that not as a criticism of what might occur by the scientists doing the work, but if you have less resources to do it, then you have less data, and you have bigger error bars.”

    Source link

  • Around a third of carbon credits fail new benchmark test

    Around a third of carbon credits fail new benchmark test

    By Susanna Twidale

    LONDON (Reuters) – Around third of existing carbon credits have failed to meet criteria for a new standard that aims to serve as the global benchmark for the voluntary carbon market, its board said on Tuesday.

    In the voluntary market, companies can buy credits from projects such as wind farms or reforestation schemes across the world and use them to meet their internal carbon-cutting targets. All the credits that fell short of the benchmark in the latest assesement were linked to renewable energy.

    Demand for offsets stalled last year following widespread doubts that credits served to reduce emissions.

    The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM), an independent governance body, has sought to address integrity concerns by launching Core Carbon Principle (CCP) standards and is assessing the validity of projects.

    The ICVCM said eight renewable power methodologies, which cover around 236 million unretired, or unused carbon credits making up 32% of the market, had failed to meet the requirements of its standard on additionality grounds.

    Additionality is a measure of whether the project needed revenue from carbon credits sales to go ahead. If the project would have gone ahead regardless, then the argument that it has led emissions to be avoided, and should therefore be credited, is undermined.

    Amy Merrill, CEO of the ICVCM said renewable projects could still be part of the voluntary carbon market and that new methodologies can be submitted for consideration.

    “There are still places in the world where barriers to deployment mean projects could be additional,” she said in an interview with Reuters.

    The price of renewable energy offsets fell by 69% last year to an average of $3.88 per metric ton, a report by non-profit Ecosystems Marketplace said in May.

    Analysts have said failure to meet the CCP standard could lead renewable offset prices to fall further this year.

    “We don’t speculate about the price, we are trying to put an integrity threshold into the market. We have consistently said we don’t expect everything to pass,” Merrill said.

    (Reporting By Susanna Twidale; editing by Barbara Lewis)

    Source link

  • UN carbon market talks to drag beyond COP27 as deals remain elusive

    UN carbon market talks to drag beyond COP27 as deals remain elusive

    Talks on a deal to allow countries to trade carbon credits to help them hit their climate targets are set to drag on beyond the COP27 summit in Egypt as issues, including how to keep track of the credits, are unresolved, observers and a negotiator said.

    Creating such a market is considered crucial to helping move money from richer, polluting countries to their developing country peers, and was called for in Article 6 of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement.

    Yet it might be years before countries can, on a large scale, offset their emissions with credits based on emissions-reducing projects such as in renewable energy or forestation based elsewhere, after differences emerged on technical detail.

    “The Article 6 texts are all open at the present time,” said Andrea Bonzanni, International policy director at the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA).

    A draft document of around 60 pages, published on Wednesday, outlined how inter-country carbon trading might function, but many sections are up for debate.

    Pedro Barata, carbon markets specialist at the Environmental Defense Fund, said he was impressed by the size of the draft document, but it was clear it was not leading to a decision in Sharm El-Sheikh.

    “(The draft) gives an increased sense of urgency throughout the year to further negotiate and clear this very long – but fundamental – text, so that substantial progress can be locked in at COP28 in Dubai next year,” Barata said.

    Issues to be resolved include the extent to which countries’ registries, or digital ledgers of carbon trades, might be exposed to outside scrutiny, what constitutes a carbon removal project and how to integrate existing credits already traded in private markets.

    DRAFTS FOR SOME ARE A REASON FOR HOPE

    Late on Thursday, another draft text was released dealing with how countries’ registries might interact with the private, so-called voluntary carbon market, and laid out technical steps to be clarified over the course of 2023.

    While companies and others are already trading credits in the voluntary market, agreeing how it will mesh with the country-level system is seen as crucial to unlocking many billions of dollars for carbon projects across the globe.

    Calling the publication of the drafts and a plan for further action in 2023 “a step forward”, a negotiator who declined to be named added: “I don’t know that it’s (the) big jump that was probably needed.”

    Matt Williams from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit said he was worried about transparency and the potential for double-counting the same credit in two countries.

    Slow progress in the carbon market discussions mirrors a struggle to agree on other climate issues ahead of the scheduled end of the COP27 summit on Friday, including that of whether to set up a fund to help poorer countries after climate disasters strike.

    For some that drafts had emerged at all was cause for optimism.

    “After years of negotiations about whether carbon markets under the Paris Agreement would actually exist, now they are at the stage of actually setting them up,” said Jonathan Crook, policy analyst at the non-profit Carbon Market Watch.

    Source link

  • New Research Shows Economic, Psychosocial and Data-Management Barriers Inhibit Farmer Participation in Carbon Markets

    New Research Shows Economic, Psychosocial and Data-Management Barriers Inhibit Farmer Participation in Carbon Markets

    Producer-focused changes in carbon ecosystem services could unlock vast potential to sequester carbon in the heartland

    Press Release


    Oct 27, 2022 08:00 EDT

    Farm Journal’s Trust In Food™ released its inaugural “Ready or Not? Ag Carbon Markets and U.S. Farmers” report, highlighting perspectives from 500 U.S. row crop producers on pathways and barriers to participating in carbon ecosystems. 

    The majority of farmers surveyed report serious concern about overcoming technical and financial roadblocks to success in carbon markets. Producers fear that costs will outweigh benefits; that ongoing compliance will require too high a burden; that existing conservation ag practices will not be compensated fairly; that data will not be handled appropriately or will be difficult to collect; or that upfront investments will be a barrier to entry. 

    “Our initial findings suggest that even the most carbon-curious farmers are signaling that their participation under current market conditions would require prohibitive investments of time, effort and resources without fair financial and market returns,” said Amy Skoczlas Cole, executive vice president of Trust In Food. “Unless the carbon market value chain takes producers’ perspectives seriously, we fear a critical tool for addressing climate change and increasing farm resilience will fall seriously short of its potential.” 

    Key findings from the report include:

    • Farmers are aware of carbon markets but not ready to engage. After several years, 97% of farmers surveyed are not ready to participate in carbon markets, though 93% are aware they exist.
    • Producers want credit for existing practices. Additionality has been a stumbling block for carbon ecosystems; 69% of producers say getting credit for preexisting practices is “very important” for evaluating their participation, second only to annual payment amount per acre (73%).
    • Data capture, management and validation is fragmented. Sixty-two percent of farmers surveyed are not fully digitally integrated for the purpose of managing farm information, and more than 70% do not use any software-based sustainability or conservation tools. Even with digital infrastructure, the methodology for validating results and the carbon-holding capacity of soils has not been standardized and might vary dramatically across geographies, climates and certifying bodies.

    Going forward the carbon market ecosystem must create more transparency and better incentives that align with operations on farms and ranches to foster adoption. Trusted advisors, retailers and extension services play a role in preparing producers to capitalize on carbon market opportunities. This preparation includes more consistent and broader data capture and management so producers can monitor and measure practice changes. 

    The report is part of Trust In Food’s carbon insights platform that analyzes psychosocial, economic and logistical challenges producers face in adopting climate-smart practices. Anchored by its Human Dimensions of Change Toolkit, the carbon insights platform provides:

    • Producer sentiment about carbon and other climate-smart programs
    • Practice adoption triggers
    • Differentiating factors farmers evaluate when choosing a program
    • Co-affinities that align with positive or negative carbon attitudes
    • Producers’ perceived barriers to market participation

    View the full report: TrustInFood.com/carboninsights 

    Source: Farm Journal

    Source link