|
Trees and their
role in carbon management for land and business
INTRODUCTION
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the
most prevalent of the greenhouse gases which are driving climate change.
Humankind is already irrevocably committed to future climate change as a
result of past actions but by reducing the amount of CO2 released into the
atmosphere by human activity, the worst outcome can be avoided.
Trees take up CO2 from the atmosphere and release oxygen. Trees and forests
are critical to the global carbon cycle; indeed over 70% of total
terrestrial carbon is stored in forest soils and biomass. Global
deforestation accounts for 17% of all CO2 emissions.
The Trust believes that mitigation of climate change through reduction of
CO2 emissions should be tackled through a hierarchy of actions, the most
important being reduced energy use, followed by increased energy efficiency,
use of renewable energy resources, product substitution, protection of
carbon stores, carbon sequestration and carbon offsets.1
CARBON BASED LAND MANAGEMENT
Carbon-based land
management is about managing the uptake and release of carbon dioxide from
the land in order to reduce greenhouse gas pollution. Its objective is to
conserve and enhance natural carbon sinks and minimise loss of carbon from
carbon sources so as to store carbon for the long term, as well as
generating renewable products, such as wood, which substitute for fossil
fuel-based products or products whose processing needs large amounts of
fossil fuels.
Given the importance of trees, woods and forests in the carbon cycle and the
decisions made about their management (i.e.deforestation, restocking and
woodland expansion), the Trust believes that carbon-based land management
fits into the hierarchy of action required to reduce carbon emissions into
the atmosphere as a bridge between product substitution and protection of
carbon stores.
Three broad land-cover types are particularly important in carbon management
terms, namely peatlands, farmed land and woodlands. Conservation of peatland
is crucial in preventing release of large amounts of carbon into the
atmosphere, woodland has the greatest role to play in increasing carbon
sequestration but the benefits of differential management of farmland for
carbon management are less well understood. Carbon based land management can
also generate a wealth of other public benefits, such as habitats rich in
wildlife which are adaptable to inevitable climatic changes, healthy places
for recreation, inspiring landscapes, flood management, soil protection and
climatic amelioration in towns.

Carbon management in forestry
The Trust believes that
the following actions to minimise loss of carbon from forests and woods
are critical:
- Forest protection:
the Stern report2 recently identified that deforestation was one of the
most critical global issues driving climate change. While woodland loss
in the UK is low, the Trust remains resolutely opposed to any loss of
ancient woodland and will continue to campaign to prevent such losses in
the future.
- Forest expansion:
current rates of afforestation in the UK (approximately 9000 ha per
annum) contribute 2-3% of the UK’s Kyoto Protocol commitment to reduce
or sequester carbon emissions by 12.5% over 1990 levels. A doubling of
woodland planting would increase this contribution and also provide many
other benefits to society of direct relevance to a changing climate. But
this is a complex area; for example the benefits of forest expansion in
sequestering carbon may be nullified at high latitudes where the impact
of darker land cover in absorbing heat is significant.
- Low intensity
forest management systems: forest soils store more carbon than the
woody biomass of trees and so intensive forest management systems which
damage soils should be avoided. The Trust’s sensitive approach to
restoration of planted ancient woodland sites is therefore vindicated on
both biodiversity and carbon management grounds.3 In addition there are
advantages, in terms of carbon management, in attempting to focus
woodland creation, and the inevitable soil disturbance this brings, on
inorganic mineral soils (which are low in carbon) currently under arable
and improved pasture. Such practice also makes good conservation sense:
by tackling habitat fragmentation and reducing the intensity of land
use, it helps make the countryside more resilient in the face of climate
change.
- Product
substitution: we support sustainable use and harvesting of timber
for the purposes of product substitution e.g. using timber frames in
house construction.
- Wood fuel
production: CO2, is released when wood is burnt, but since trees
absorb carbon from the atmosphere as they grow, wood can be regarded as
a renewable source of energy. Moreover, it can require only small
amounts of fossil fuels to process and transport wood compared with oil,
coal or gas. Since reducing the use of fossil fuels as a source of
energy is crucial, harvesting of wood as a substitute is a legitimate
part of the shift towards a wider use of renewable energy. But the
extraction of wood for biofuel needs to be done sensitively, so that the
woodland can continue to absorb carbon after timber has been removed.
Short rotation coppice and short rotation forestry, i.e. planting of
woody crops for wood fuel can also play a role with suitable
environmental safeguards.
- Low carbon forestry
operations; the Trust is currently looking at how best to reduce its own
carbon footprint; one element is to look critically at woodland
operations including materials used and contractors’ practices.

CARBON MANAGEMENT BY BUSINESSES AND INDIVIDUALS
One of a range of carbon
management tools for businesses and individuals seeking to address their
carbon emissions or make themselves carbon-neutral is the carbon offset.
Offsets in themselves do not reduce emissions; instead they secure a
corresponding saving in carbon emissions. Thus carbon offsets seek to
neutralise the release of CO2 in one place by avoiding the release of or
removing from the atmosphere the same amount of CO2 somewhere else. This can
be achieved by investment in energy efficiency programmes, sustainable
development projects or tree planting. A number of organisations offer
carbon offsets for purchase by individuals or companies.
Overview of Trust position
The Trust believes carbon offsets should come last in a carbon reduction
strategy. Thus carbon offsets should be used to compensate for residual
emissions, i.e. those which will inevitably occur even after reasonable
steps have been taken to reduce emissions. The Trust believes that offsets
can be important in
- raising public and
business awareness of climate change
- prompting examination
of how reductions can be made
- making a small but
genuine saving in CO2 emissions
Tree planting as a form
of carbon offset
Tree planting is one of many types of carbon offset.4 There has been
criticism of some tree planting schemes as a form of carbon offsetting in
the media in recent times and tree planting has been excluded for some time
from one of best known voluntary benchmarks for high quality carbon offset
projects5. A recent statement from a group of environmental NGOs identified
four reasons why they do not support tree planting as carbon offsets6:
- it cannot be
guaranteed that a new forest will be permanent
- amounts of CO2 which
forests can absorb vary enormously
- the environmentally
negative impacts of plantation monocultures undermine benefits derived
from carbon sequestration
- buying forestry
offsets does not lessen dependence on fossil fuels.
UK forestry has one of the
most highly regulated and most comprehensive policy frameworks in the world.
In a UK context permanence and negative impacts of plantation monocultures
are not substantive reasons. So the Trust believes UK forestry offset
projects are valid and should be supported if:
- the activity is
additional to that which would otherwise occur with the funds raised
being used directly in the offset project
- the woodland is
permanent; for instance, it is maintained as woodland under a continuous
cover forestry regime
- the carbon captured
above ground and in forest soils is verifiable, i.e. estimated according
to a recognised calculation methodology
- the woodland is
planted on mineral soils that have a low carbon content
- the total amount of
carbon which is offset during the life of the new woodland is sold at
the outset of the project life (assumed to be 100 years) in year 1 to
avoid any possibility of resale of offsets and double counting
Over the past few years we
have developed our own carbon offset product, Carbonplus+, which also
provides additional and substantial environmental benefits not guaranteed by
other tree planting offset products. The income from this sale of product is
directly invested into our woodland creation programme. Because this is an
offset product we place great emphasis on understanding a company’s approach
to reducing its emissions as well as providing the ability to offset
residual emissions. So to ensure that our product is sold as part of a
package of measures to reduce company emissions we:
- insist that companies
have audited their carbon emissions before buying Carbonplus+
- encourage them to take
steps to reduce their emissions based on the results of the audit
- encourage them to
develop employee buy-in to programmes and to engage stakeholders to
reduce emissions too.
Current & future
developments
In the public mind, trees are closely associated with their ability to take
and store carbon. However Defra’s proposal7 to confine voluntary
accreditation of carbon offset products to overseas activities excluding
forestry is hard to understand. It denies the desire of many in the UK who
wish to offset their carbon within this country and of course tree planting
in the UK can be just as valid and just as verifiable as offsetting projects
overseas. Indeed the Government already uses carbon captured by current
woodland expansion as part of compliance towards its Kyoto Protocol
emissions reduction targets.
But even if, as the Trust hopes, tree planting in the UK is recognised as a
contribution to a carbon emission reductions strategy, it is clear that
there are some testing issues related to the provision of any offset
programmes to companies and individuals. For example what is the definition
of residual emissions, i.e. how does one establish that a particular journey
or product which creates carbon emissions is “necessary”, and thereby
justifies an offset? Most emissions are avoidable by drastic changes to the
way we live but public acceptance of the changes that need to be made to
reach a low carbon economy is currently some way off.
Of course emissions that are regarded as unavoidable today may become
recognised as avoidable tomorrow as technology develops further, as social
norms change and as companies and individuals become prepared to move the
bar higher in relation to their own practices. The important principle is
that we believe that offsetting should be seen as part of a package of
actions by both individuals and companies to reduce their carbon footprints
rather than as a way of salving the conscience by paying to continue
environmentally damaging activity.
But however important individual and business actions are, climate change is
such a complex and challenging issue that it is right to look to Government
to take the lead in pushing through emissions reductions legislation, policy
and incentives.

References:
- Woodland Trust (2005)
Position statement on climate change
woodlandtrust.org.uk/campaigns
- Stern (2006) The
economics of climate change HM Treasury
- Woodland Trust
Position statement on planted ancient woodland sites
woodlandtrust.org.uk/campaigns
- A comprehensive list
of offset types is contained within The Carbon Trust (2006) The
Carbon Trust three stage approach to developing a robust offsetting
strategy.
-
www.cdmgoldstandard.org
- WWF, FoE, Greenpeace
- Defra (2007)
Consultation on establishing a voluntary code of best practice for the
provision of carbon offsetting to UK customers

|