Table 5-2 summarizes a representative set of LULUCF projects currently underway that have been reported to provide carbon sequestration or emissions reduction benefits. The projects are divided into six subcategories: (i) reforestation, afforestation, and restoration; (ii) soil carbon management; (iii) forest conservation; (iv) forest management and alternative harvest practices; (v) agroforestry; and (vi) multi-component or community forestry projects that combine several of these activities. The projects listed in Table 5-2 are predominately forestry projects because experience to date has been most influenced by electric utility companies and conservation NGOs seeking projects likely to produce credible GHG benefits at costs that are lower than their emissions reduction options in their home territories, as well as conservation, biodiversity, and community development benefits. Many soil management, bioenergy, and other LULUCF management projects exist, but few have estimated and reported changes in carbon stocks or greenhouse gas emissions, so they are underrepresented in Table 5-2.
Table 5-2: Overview of selected LULUCF AIJ pilot program and other projects, in at least early stages of implementation. | |||||
|
|||||
Project and Host Country |
Dominant Activity
|
Project Informationa
|
Area (ha)
|
Estimated Lifetime CO2
Benefits
(000 t C) |
Estimated CO2 Benefits
per Hectare
(t C ha-1)b |
|
|||||
Carbon Sequestration through Increase in Carbon Stocks: Aforestation, Reforestation, and Restoration Projects | |||||
FACE Foundation Kroknose and Sumava National Parks, Czech Republic |
Reforestation, regeneration
|
99; 1992; The Netherlands
|
14,000
|
2,682
|
191
|
RUSAFOR, Russian Federation |
Afforestation plantation
|
40 (2 sites), 60 (2 sites); 1993; USA
|
900 EPA, AWM
|
80
|
89
|
Klinki Forestry, Costa Rica |
Agroforestry, afforestation
|
46; 1997; USA
|
Phase I: 100 Total: 6,000
|
1,970
|
328
|
INFAPRO: FACE Foundation, Malaysia |
Enrichment planting
|
25 implement, 99 total; 1992; The Netherlands
|
14,000
|
3,000
|
170
|
FACE Netherlands, The Netherlands |
Urban forest afforestation
|
1992; The Netherlands
|
5,000
|
885
|
177
|
FACE Elgon/Kibale, Uganda |
Forest rehabilitation
|
1994; The Netherlands
|
27,000
|
707
|
26
|
Bottomland Hardwood Restoration, UtiliTree, Louisiana, USA |
Reforestation of marginal riparian farmland
|
70; 1996; USA
|
32
|
12.8
|
400
|
Western Oregon Carbon Sequestration Project, UtiliTree, USA |
Afforestation, sequestration in wood products
|
65; 1997; USA
|
127
|
54.5
|
440
|
Salt Lake City Urban Tree, PacifiCorp, USA |
Urban forestry
|
1995; USA
|
NA
|
5
|
NA
|
UNSO Arid Savanna Protection, Benin |
Woody savanna protection, live fences
|
1993; U.N. Sudano-Sahelian Office
|
25,000
|
660-1,000
|
33
|
Subtotal Range (or Average) |
61
|
92,059
|
10,056-10,400
|
26-440
|
|
|
|||||
Carbon Sequestration through Increase in Carbon Stocks: Soil Carbon Management | |||||
Project Salicornia, Mexico |
Halophyte planting, soil carbon
|
59; 1996; USA
|
30 (Phase I)
|
0.89
|
18
|
Saskatchewan Soil Enhancement Project, GEMCO, Canada |
Soil carbon management
|
5; 1995; Canada
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
Subtotal Range (or Average) |
|
32
|
30
|
0.89
|
18
|
|
|||||
Emissions Avoidance through Conservation of Existing Stocks: Forest Management and Alternative Harvest Practices | |||||
ICSB-NEP 1, Malaysia |
Reduced-impact logging
|
40; 1992; USA
|
1,400
|
58
|
41
|
ICSB-NEP 2, UtiliTree, Malaysia |
Reduced-impact logging
|
40; 1997; USA
|
1,012
|
104
|
102
|
Olafo Project-Peten, Guatemala |
Sustainable timber, sustainable agriculture
|
40; 1995; Denmark, Norway, Sweden
|
57,800
|
4,920
|
85
|
Pacific Forest Stewardship, Oregon, USA |
Improved forest management, conservation easements
|
1995; USA
|
NA
|
242
|
NA
|
Subtotal Range (or Average) |
|
40
|
60,212
|
5,324
|
41-102
|
|
|||||
Emissions Avoidance through Conservation of Existing Stocks: Forest Conservation-Protection | |||||
Amazon Basin, AES/Oxfam, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru |
Protection, land tenure
|
1992; USA
|
1,500,000
|
15,000
|
10
|
Paraguay Forest Protection, AES, Paraguay |
Protection
|
1992; USA
|
58,000
|
14,600
|
252
|
ECOLAND, Costa Rica |
Protection
|
16; 1995; USA
|
2,500
|
366
|
146
|
Rio Bravo, Belize |
Protection, forest management
|
40; 1994; USA
|
14,000 protection; 46,406 forest management
|
2,400
|
39
|
Noel Kempff, Bolivia |
Protection from logging and deforestation
|
30; 1996; USA
|
~696,000
|
4,000-6,000
|
7
|
Protected Area Project, Costa Rica |
Preservation via purchase and land title enhancement
|
25; 1997; USA
|
530,000
|
4,600-8,900
|
17
|
Virilla Basin Project, Costa Rica |
Protection, reforestation
|
25; 1997; Norway
|
52,000
|
231
|
4
|
Subtotal Range (or Average) |
|
27
|
2,852,500
|
41,200-47,500
|
4-252
|
|
|||||
Multi-Component Community Forest | |||||
FACE Profafor, Ecuador |
Small farmer plantations
|
1993; The Netherlands
|
75,000
|
9,660
|
129
|
Sustainable Energy Management, Burkina Faso |
Community forest management (component II)
|
30; 1997; Norway
|
270,000
|
67
|
0.2
|
Subtotal Range (or Average) |
|
30
|
345,000
|
9,700
|
0.2-129
|
|
|||||
Agroforestry | |||||
AES CARE, Guatemala |
Agroforestry, woodlots
|
35; 1989; USA
|
186,000
|
10,500
|
56
|
Scolel Te, Mexico |
Agroforestry, reforestation, sustainable harvesting
|
30; 1997; UK, France
|
Phase I: 50 Total: 2,000 within 13,000 area
|
Phase I: 15 Total 330
|
26
|
Subtotal Range (or Average) |
|
32
|
186,000-188,000
|
10,500-10,800
|
26-56
|
Grand Total |
|
41
|
3,535,000-3,537,000
|
76,780-83,725
|
23
|
|
|||||
a Project lifetime (in years); date initiated; investor country. b Estimated CO2 benefits per hectare and totals for projects are generally reported by project developers, do not use standardized or consistent GHG accounting methods, generally only report CO2 (not other GHGs), and have not been independently reviewed. The wide range of estimates for conservation/protection projects results from the type of activity (e.g., avoided logging or avoided deforestation) and from a large project area with only a fraction affected by the activity per year (see Section 5.2.2). Major References: Brown et al. (1997), EPA/USIJI (1998), FACE Foundation (1998), Stuart and Moura-Costa (1998), Witthoeft-Muehlmann (1998), Moura-Costa and Stuart (2000). |
|||||
|
The 3.5 Mha of projects currently being implemented could eventually total 6.4 Mha if the projects are fully funded. Most of these 3.5 Mha (2.9 Mha, or 83 percent) are in forest land protection or conservation, potentially avoiding emissions or sequestering about 41-48 Mt C if the projects are fully financed and implemented (Table 5-2). Another 92,000 ha (3 percent) are in projects primarily undertaking afforestation, reforestation, or forest restoration, potentially generating an estimated 10 Mt C. Projects involving forest management and alternative silvicultural or harvesting practices occupy about 60,000 ha (less than 2 percent) and may generate about 5.3 Mt C. Multi-component community forestry or agroforestry system projects cover at least 530,000 ha (15 percent) and may provide about 20 Mt C in benefits. Only a few very small projects currently exist for soil carbon management (see Chapter 4).
Carbon sequestration or emissions avoidance per unit area over the reported lifetime of the projects varies by project type from an average of about 110 t C ha-1 for afforestation and reforestation projects, to 88 t C ha-1 for forest management projects, to 40 t C ha-1 for community forestry and agroforestry projects, to a low of 16 t C ha-1 for forest protection projects (mainly from avoided logging), with very large ranges within and across project types (Table 5-2). These averages reflect project designs to date and vary across design, site condition, and implementation conditions.
Emissions avoidance per hectare of forest protection projects, in particular, is highly sensitive to the total project area involved and the activity avoided (e.g., avoided deforestation or avoided logging). These projects generally conserve a large area of forest considered under threat of deforestation at rates of about 1-5 percent of total forest area per year. In the Noel Kempff Climate Action Project (NKCAP), for example, areas where deforestation is expected to be avoided are estimated to generate about 143 t C ha-1 over the life of the project and areas where logging is avoided about 12 t C ha-1; the project overall is estimated to generate about 7 t C ha-1 (because the total project area is large) (Brown et al., 2000). For project components designed solely to avoid deforestation, typical emissions avoidance values are likely to range from 28-80 t C ha-1 for boreal forest to about 30-140 t C ha-1 for temperate and 100-175 t C ha-1 for tropical forests (Brown et al., 1996).
Several models for the design and funding of projects are already being used in many of the projects reviewed in Box 5-1 and Table 5-2:
Other models are likely to develop as entities seeking certified emissions
reductions organize their investments to spread liabilities and risks. One potential
trend may be the emergence of flexible derivatives involving brokers, traders,
and insurers who trade various attributes of the potential emissions reductions
of bundles of projects. Experience using the aforementioned models in the early
stages of pilot project implementation has helped produce several advances,
including quantifying and monitoring the GHG benefits of a range of project
types using the Winrock estimation and monitoring methodology (MacDicken, 1997a);
reviewing and refining without-project baseline assumptions in an independent
review of the Protected Areas Project (PAP) in Costa Rica (Busch et al.,
1999); and addressing ways to minimize leakage in the design and implementation
of the NKCAP (Brown et al., 2000).
Several portfolios of projects have been assembled by national, NGO, or private
JI or AIJ pilot programs. For example, the FACE Foundation-founded in 1990 by
the Dutch Electricity Generating Board-has targeted 150,000 ha of new forest
planting in five projects in six countries, to absorb the lifetime CO2 emissions
of a coal-fired 600 MW power station. About 40,000 ha had been planted by 1999.
The projected carbon benefits are 75 Mt C over the lifetime of the projects.
Total estimated, undiscounted costs are $100 million, of which $30 million has
been committed, with an estimated unit cost of $8 per t C (FACE Foundation,
1998; Verweij and Emmer, 1998).
The USIJI began in 1993. It has accepted 14 forestry projects and one soil carbon management project as of February 2000. Estimated total carbon benefits over the lifetimes of eight projects in at least initial implementation stages are about 13 Mt C-rising to 25.5 Mt C if the projects are fully funded and implemented-on 1.27 Mha. Total funding committed to date is about $17 million, at an estimated carbon cost of $3.90 per t C (EPA/USIJI, 1998; Table 5-2).
Some projects have been designed that could expand across whole regions. The Scolel Te project in southern Mexico has initiated agroforestry activities on about 150 small farms. If an incentive rate of $15 per t C were available, it could supply 150-200 Mt C over 40 years (de Jong et al, 1997; Tipper et al., 1998).
Projects offer varying rates of carbon benefits over time. Projects summarized in Table 5-2 have reported project lifetimes ranging from 16 to 99 years, averaging 41 years. Forest conservation projects designed to slow deforestation are highly sensitive to estimated baseline assumptions about non-project forest loss rates (see Section 5.3; Busch et al., 1999). These projects appear to deliver carbon benefits quickly relative to other project types, however, by annually avoiding high losses of carbon stocks per hectare of mature forest. Conversely, soil carbon management and afforestation or reforestation projects in boreal forest deliver carbon benefits slowly because carbon sequestration rates in both systems are generally less than 1 t C ha-1 yr-1.
Other reports in this collection |