Tree Carbon

j0185133

“In NZ, it is important to get the existing Kyoto Protocol rules changed so this country is not overly penalised when forests are felled and replaced by trees planted elsewhere or when trees are converted to wood products such as timber and fibre board. The draft negotiating agreement contains clauses which give effect to the rules NZ wants. But they are not cast in concrete. The draft text has plenty of “square brackets” which indicate particular clauses are still disputed. Groser and his fellow Cabinet Minister Nick Smith seem to have made the best out of the hand that was dealt to them at Copenhagen.” says Fran O’Sullivan. That’s a good start.

In New Zealand we farm pine trees, like wheat or corn. Of great weight now is the carbon-offsetting value of New Zealand’s plantation forests. Pine trees are like giant self-expanding straws that we poke vertically into the ground and they merrily suck CO2 out of the atmosphere for 30 years. They literally suck it straight into their trunks which end up towering sky-wards as space-efficient storage vessels for that nasty carbon. Even Discovery Channel would be challenged to come up with a better engineering solution for global warming.

New Zealand has been planting trees on a large scale for a century already and is a world leader in the technology.

The planted forest technology for radiata pine is probably the most advanced of any potential tree species. The evolution and success of radiata pine in New Zealand has major implications and lessons for the rest of the world.

says plantation pine expert Winkie Sutton. For example, New Zealand’s plantation forests enable us to be one of the few OECD nations able to provide significant offsets for carbon emission increases.

The offset of our emissions increases was reconfirmed by satellite mapping of recent tree plantings. Climate Change Minister Nick Smith said

the Government has been cautious over New Zealand’s Kyoto balance and future targets because of the billion dollar plus variations each year in the estimates of forest areas. This satellite data is good news in that it accurately confirms the area of post-1989 forests as sufficient to offset New Zealand’s increase in emissions and meet our Kyoto obligations in the first commitment period from 2008-2012.

But then there are the inevitable critics. Usually those who are jealous that they haven’t, or can’t, deploy New Zealand’s leading solutions to environmental management. For example

but many think this <afforestation carbon offset> is a bit of a cheat that is not sustainable in the long term – especially because much of our pine plantations are due for harvest around 2020. (New Zealand Herald)

Excuse me, when we harvest them, we can replant them. New Zealand foresters have been doing this in scale for a century already. Just because we’re leading, don’t accuse us of cheating.

Some people are concerned that planting trees is not a sustainable answer to climate change because, whilst we have a lot of land, it is finite. But for this same reason, growth in dairying, our main source of green house gas emissions, can’t continue indefinitely either. As long as we balance growth in agriculture with growth in forestry, and manage our population, we should be able to hold our carbon balance. And we have about one million hectares of erosion prone land available for new tree planting. Of course, by concurrently making emissions reductions through improved transport and energy use, we can be an active contributor to global net reductions in green house gases.

The critical issue here though is economic. Our economy is dependent on land-based industries. Our supply of land is a finite. Therefore our long-term economic growth has to be based on higher value products.

15 years ago my wife and I paid to have Kyoto-qualifying pine trees planted on about 10 hectares of hilly, marginal, unproductive, and largely naked farm land in back-country Hawkes Bay. This is our family’s contribution to New Zealand’s 556,000 hectares of Kyoto Forests – those newly planted since 1990. The 3,000 trees left on our 10 hectares after some thinning and tending have already sucked in and locked up about 5,000 tonnes of atmospheric carbon dioxide. That will double over the remaining 15 years or so until we have them harvested, and replant so the whole thing goes around again for our kids and their families. Our family is well and truly in carbon credit. Is yours? It’s easy to invest in a tree planting scheme like Roger Dickie’s latest offer for the Onlow Carbon Forest:

For the first time forest owners have an option to either sell carbon or sell timber or a combination of both. Forecast to sequester 859,619 tonnes of CO2 over the life of the project.

When we harvest, the extracted timber, which is 50% solid carbon, will be treated and used in building, furniture, etc – locking up what otherwise would have been atmospheric carbon for a long time. But this locking up in processed timber is yet to be formally recognised in global treaties. The New Zealand team to the Copenhagen negotiations, with support from the EU amoungst others, have taken the world a step closer to correcting this oversight and therefore encouraging the planting of trees.

Post to Twitter

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

6 Responses to “Tree Carbon”

  1. [...] the rest here:  Tree Carbon « CLEAN & GREEN? Share [...]

  2. [...] rest is here:  Tree Carbon « CLEAN & GREEN? By admin | category: pine tree, tree | tags: cramped-city, giant-self-expanding, [...]

  3. [...] more here: Tree Carbon « CLEAN & GREEN? Share and [...]

  4. How Are You?

    Just arrived on your site while looking on concrete and construction. It’s a horrible situation, this economy that we all seem to sink with it with.

    Anyhow, I just installed this new browser, Opera, Firefox, Mozzila, Safari and I have to figure a way to subscribe to your site here, but I get some weird message when I hit the feed button. Any Ideas?

    Bye

Leave a Reply