-- Campaign For Old Growth | Reference Article --

The stability of planetary climate cycles is in jeopardy. A very large contributing factor to this crisis is the activity of modern human societies. For example, it is a fact that the levels of carbon dioxide, a major atmospheric gas are increasing in the atmosphere. This increase is linked to the destabilization of the climate and it is caused by human activity. Recognition of the problem at a global level is signified by the Kyoto protocol which seeks to set limits and controls on the emission of a range of known atmospheric pollutants responsible for affecting the global climate.

One obvious, yet contentious, tool to address the problem of atmospheric carbon dioxide pollution is the use of photosynthesis. The process that plants use to sequester energy is also a process that sequesters carbon. Through this process, gaseous carbon is extracted from the atmosphere by plants and converted into solid form. Photosynthesis has been hailed as a tool to address the problem of increasing gaseous carbon in the atmosphere. "Plant trees which soak up the carbon dioxide," the reasoning goes, "and you can contribute to reducing the atmospheric burden of that gas."

Out of this reasoning has arisen a political and economic initiative: Carbon Commerce. Economics operates within the context and realities of the market , and thus new space is being created for initiatives that can reduce the carbon load in the atmosphere. However a major set of criticisms is being leveled at the way in which value is set in the economic models being presented.

The "carbon equations" that underpin Carbon Commerce state that, "If you plant enough trees to soak up an amount of carbon equivalent to the emissions that you produce through your activity , then you are carbon neutral (i.e., 1tc/y emitted through agriculture = 1 t carbon absorbed through agriculture and forestry ² carbon neutral)." This equation unfortunately is too simplistic and does not reflect the current state of knowledge on the carbon cycles.

Perhaps because of these shortcomings the current initiatives often move in counterproductive directions.

In our rush to create the new Carbon Economy, certain simple and fundamental facts must not be ignored. "Planetary Carbon" is the total occurrence of carbon known to exist. This Planetary Carbon can then be subdivided along any logical system until the carbon that cycles within the atmospheric system or biosphere can be addressed. The carbon that cycles through living systems represents only a given proportion of the Planetary Carbon. Over geologic time, vast quantities of carbon sequestered by living forms became fossilized and removed from the biotic/atmospheric cycle. Thus the value differential of the two cycles must be recognized.

The carbon that enters the biotic cycle has, in most cases, been a product of photosynthetic activity, though carbon gasses constantly emanate into the atmosphere from tectonic activity. The fixing of these gasses, especially of carbon dioxide is a product of biotic photosynthesis. It is the photosynthetic activity of plants that takes a quantum of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and fixes it in a solid state as organic matter. This act of sequestering carbon provides biomass.

Woody biomass is the first and logical candidate as a potential tool in sequestering atmospheric carbon to meet international and national protocols. The value ascribed to a unit of such woody biomass has to be measured in terms of the time of the sequestration. While all plants sequester carbon, trees and woody plants are most efficient as they produce resistant compounds such as lignin. Consider the fate of two photosynthetically derived objects of similar biomass - a large pile of seaweed and a log lying on a beach. Both are plant products, but one (the tree) is strengthened with lignin. The same biological, chemical and physical forces will impact both. The seaweed will have disappeared within a few weeks the log may remain more or less the same for years. These cycles are essentially those involving the standing biomass of the planet. Even when the relatively slow carbonate cycles are considered the cycling biotic carbon operates on time frames of tens of thousands of years.

The second pool of carbon, found as fossil carbon, is not interactive with the living or biotic cycle and has residence times that are measured in millions of years. It is not interactive with the living or biotic cycle. It too arose once as a product of photosynthesis plants as in coal and marine or lacustrine biota in the case of oil. But, in the geological process of the planet, these products were removed from the biosphere and fossilized. Until the advent of industrial society this pool had no very little input to atmospheric carbon. Allowing this fossil carbon to enter the biotic cycle is the fundamental reason there is an accelerating greenhouse effect. If fact, the growing of trees to compensate for fossil carbon emissions is tantamount to "carbon laundering." There is no way to compare the carbon from oil and coal with the carbon from a forest. One has a home in the biotic cycle, the other does not.

It is the failure to recognize the two significantly different pools of carbon and their functions and values within the biosphere that has led to much of the confusion when considering the utility of biotic systems under JI or the CDM. Carbon from biotic pools can be accommodated under the current trading agreements, as they will help to slow down the turnover rate of carbon in the atmosphere. Carbon from fossil pools can only be considered under the current trading regimes by technologies that curb emissions at the source or by a financial mechanism that accounts for the time differential between the two pools.

What this means is that, if biotic carbon that is released into the atmosphere has one value, fossil carbon must reflect another. Returning to the "Carbon Equation."

1tc/y emitted through agriculture = 1 t carbon absorbed through agriculture and forestry ²carbon neutral

We must restate :

1 tc/y emitted through agriculture = a% biotic carbon + b% fossil carbon

The amount of carbon that can be credited to agriculture or forestry elsewhere = a% x total tonnage emitted.

The value of this carbon to buffering the atmosphere = a% x t (the time for which the carbon stays a solid).

The cost of emitting fossil carbon requires a new round of global negotiations.

Carbon laundering, like money laundering will be a phenomenon of a rapidly moving cash economy. However, reform protective and punitive measures is what is needed, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Harmonization of Forest Terminology for More Effective Management

Forest: a natural tree dominated ecosystems that is identified by and beneficial to its component biodiversity. [Note 1]

Forests are tree-dominated ecosystems displaying the seral dynamics of ecosystem maturity and possessing tree crown cover (stand density) of more than 20% of the area*. The tree species of a forest account for less than 0.5% of the biodiversity of such formations and help in maintaining total biodiversity. In terms of biomass, tree species account for over 95% of a forest. Biodiversity is the expression of the complexity of patterns produced by that biomass. Therefore, the identity of a forest is best expressed by its biodiversity status. [Note 2] This measure of biodiversity status has been much discussed and would seem to be easiest if measured as alpha (numbers of species) biodiversity.

Examined in this manner, two types of forests can be identified. Natural and Anthropogenic. The other type of tree dominated ecosystem is termed plantation, orchard or farm. For this discussion the term plantation will be used to cover all such categories.

Natural forests contain only the original patterns of biodiversity. The native species occurring in established seral patterns. These formations and processes have not been impacted by humans with a frequency or intensity to change established seral patterns. If allowed natural seral succession these forests will mature into Climax or sub-Climax State.

Anthropogenic forests have been impacted by humans with a frequency or intensity to change established seral patterns. Often, they contain elements of exotic species. If allowed natural seral succession these forests will mature into Climax or sub-Climax state.

Plantation: anthropogenic tree dominated ecosystems comprised of natural or exotic species in reduced diversity and inimical to native biodiversity.

Plantations are not forests, Plantations can be categorized as intensively managed stands of woody or non woody species. Plantations of non-woody species such as wheat or corn are presently classed as agriculture. Plantations of woody species such as tea, rubber, oil palm, pines or Eucalyptus also belong in agriculture. However, here is where current use of terminology attempts to create a division between cropping trees that produce wood or fiber ("forestry") and cropping trees that produce fruit or other non-timber products ("agriculture"). Natural seral succession is usually not an option on plantation lands, due to social, economic or ecological conditions.

Forest biodiversity and the dynamics of ecosystem maturity are not taken into account as management considerations for tree plantations with few crop outputs. Plantations with a diversity of crops increase the potential for microhabitat formation and increases in biodiversity.

Forestry: the art and science of managing forests.

Timber extraction: the science or activity of extracting trees from forests or plantations.