Abstract
Biological activities that sequester carbon create CO2 offset credits that could obviate the need for reductions in fossil fuel use. Credits are earned by storing carbon in terrestrial ecosystems and wood products, although CO2 emissions are also mitigated by delaying deforestation, which accounts for one-quarter of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. However, non-permanent carbon offsets from biological activities are difficult to compare with each other and with emissions reduction because they differ in how long they prevent CO2 from entering the atmosphere. This is the duration problem. It results in uncertainty and makes it hard to determine the legitimacy of biological activities in mitigating climate change. Measuring, verifying and monitoring the carbon sequestered in sinks greatly increases transaction costs and leads to rent seeking by sellers of dubious sink credits. While biological sink activities undoubtedly help mitigate climate change and should not be neglected, it is shown that there are limits to the substitutability between temporary offset credits from these activities and emissions reduction, and that this has implications for carbon trading. A possible solution to inherent incommensurability between temporary and permanent credits is also suggested.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baker JM, Ochsner TE, Venterea RT, Griffis TJ (2007) Tillage and soil carbon sequestration: what do we really know? Commentary. Agric Ecosyst Environ 118(1–4):1–5
Boyland M (2006) The economics of using forests to increase carbon storage. Can J of Forestry Research 36:2223–2234
Dutschke M (2002) Fractions of permanence—squaring the cycle of sink carbon accounting. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 7(4):381–402
FAO (2004) A review of carbon sequestration projects. Land and Plant Nutrition Service, Land and Water Development Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Miscellaneous paper AGL/MISC/37/2004
Government of Canada (2002) Climate change plan for Canada. Government of Canada, Ottawa
Herzog H, Caldeira K, Reilly J (2003) An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage. Clim Change 59(3):293–310
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2000) Land use, land-use change, and forestry. Cambridge University Press, New York
Lal R (2004a) Offsetting China’s CO2 emissions by soil carbon sequestration. Clim Change 65:263–275
Lal R (2004b) Soil carbon sequestration in India. Clim Change 65:277–296
Manley J, van Kooten GC, Moeltner K, Johnson DW (2005) Creating carbon offsets in agriculture through zero tillage: a meta-analysis of costs and carbon benefits. Clim Change 68:41–65
Marland G, Fruit K, Sedjo R (2001) Accounting for sequestered carbon: the question of permanence. Environ Sci Policy 4(6):259–268
Olson KR, Lang JM, Ebelhar SA (2005) Soil organic carbon changes after 12 years of no-tillage and tillage of Grantsburg soils in southern Illinois. Soil Tillage Res 81(2):217–225
Parson EA, Keith DW (1998) Fossil fuels without CO2 emissions. Science 282(5391):1053–1054
Riddel M, Shaw WD (2003) Option wealth and bequest values: the value of protecting future generations from the health risks of nuclear waste storage. Land Econ 79(4):537–548
Sathaye JA, Makundi WR, Andrasko K et al (2001) Carbon mitigation potential and costs of forestry options in Brazil, China, Indonesia, Mexico, the Philippines and Tanzania. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 6:185–211
Sedjo RA, Marland G (2003) Inter-trading permanent emissions credits and rented temporary carbon emissions offsets: some issues and alternatives. Climate Policy 3(4):435–444
Slangen LHG, Loucks LA, Slangen AHL (2008) Institutional economics and economic organisation theory: an integrated approach. Wageningen, Netherlands
Stockfisch N, Forstreuter T, Ehlers W (1999) Ploughing effects on soil organic matter after 20 years of conservation tillage in Lower Saxony, Germany. Soil Tillage Res 52(1):91–101
Subak S (2003) Replacing carbon lost from forests: an assessment of insurance, reserves, and expiring credits. Climate Policy 3:107–122
The Economist (2007) Coal power. Still going strong The Economist 17 Nov pp 71–72
van Kooten GC (2004) Climate change economics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
van Kooten GC, Sohngen B (2007) Economics of forest carbon sinks: a review. Int Rev Environ Res Econ 1(3):237–269
van Kooten GC, Binkley CS, Delcourt G (1995) Effect of carbon taxes and subsidies on optimal forest rotation age and supply of carbon services. Am J Agric Econ 77:365–774
West TO, Marland G (2002) A syntheis of carbon sequestration, carbon emissions, and net carbon flux in agriculture: comparing tillage practices in the United States.Agric, Ecosystems & Environ 91(September):217–232
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
van Kooten, G.C. Biological carbon sequestration and carbon trading re-visited. Climatic Change 95, 449–463 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-009-9572-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-009-9572-8