Project Evaluation of Sustainable Upland Hardwood Management in the U.S. South with the Monetization of Carbon
Abstract
Many studies have demonstrated that working pine forests can be cost-effectively managed
to enhance carbon sequestration under various, mostly hypothetical compensation frameworks
but none have assessed the creditable carbon potential or financial viability of rarely
employed sustainable forestry practices in upland hardwood forests, the South’s most
abundant, complex and exploited forest type. This study examines the economics of
sustainable forestry in the Southern Appalachian Mountains with and without the monetization
of carbon due to the region’s importance to eastern hardwood timber production and
its overarching ecological significance. The primary constituent of the landscape,
upland oak forests, face a confluence of threats to their continued prevalence in
the region and are declining in the absence of recommended oak-sustaining silviculture,
which will have serious implications on the biota of these forests. This analysis
was therefore conducted to assess the viability of oak-management at the project level
for a hypothetical Appalachian hardwood forest according to the updated Climate Action
Reserve (CAR) forestry protocol to see if this program lends itself to mitigating
both greenhouse gas emissions and the potential ecological calamity associated with
oak decline. A dynamic 100 year model was built with the Forest Vegetation Simulator
to best approximate real world conditions. Even with an appreciable reduction in
harvesting on 20 percent of project area and lower harvest intensities on the rest
of the forest compared to business as usual (BAU), the accrual of creditable carbon
was almost negligible, suggesting the hurdles required of such projects are too high.
Project implementation under all but one tested-variation of the protocol was found
to dramatically worsen its viability relative to the timber-only project scenario;
though none were as cost-effective as the BAU scenario. While CAR employs a standardized
performance benchmark and requires proof of regulatory additionality, its forest management
methodology appears to lend itself primarily to forestland owners that value non-timber
benefits over benefits from sustainable timber harvesting. An alternative baseline
linked to anticipated management was the only variation that rendered CAR participation
more economic than the timber-only scenario. The problems and potential solutions
identified herein certainly need to be examined in future CAR protocol revisions and
studies.
Type
Master's projectPermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/3723Citation
Grinnell, Joseph (2011). Project Evaluation of Sustainable Upland Hardwood Management in the U.S. South with
the Monetization of Carbon. Master's project, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/3723.Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Nicholas School of the Environment
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info