I’m greener than you are?

Wednesday, February 4th, 2009

There is a somewhat disturbing undercurrent in the carbon offsets arena.  Seems that trees and forests don’t rate as viable carbon offset methods.  Excuse me?

For those new to carbon offsets, it involves the valuation of activities which reduce greenhouse gasses which, when verified, are sold to individuals and companies who seek to offset their carbon footprint.

Carbon offsets range from capturing the methane emitted by the decomposition that occurs at landfills (methane is a 20X more harmful greenhouse gas than CO2) to wind farms (the theory that electricity created from wind reduces the need to have it created by, say, coal.)

TerraPass, a San Francisco-based offset company, doesn’t offer any forestry options for its customers seeking offsets.  One reason offered is that it takes too long to recognize the benefit, and they fund offsets that occur now.  Fair enough, if that’s your model.

But they go on to describe an inherent risk, in that eventually trees can die.  Others would argue that  reforestation provides the lowest cost means to achieve  carbon sequestration, and it can be accurately measured.

No one is debating the aesthetic benefit of forests [author smiles…].

Third party verification provides a valuable benefit to sellers and buyers of forestation project credits.  In addition to limiting the duration to perhaps 40 years, after which time the sequestration neutralizes as old trees die and new ones grow, percentages of the project can be set aside as a risk-recognized method for damage or destruction, such as in the case of fire.

A previous blog listed some calculations on carbon sequestration by trees, but Russell Simon, communications manager with Carbonfund.org, said it well when discussing the difference between avoiding greenhouse gas escape as with methane capture at landfills, and removing carbon from the atmosphere:  “Sequestration is the only kind of project out there that takes CO2 that’s already been released and does something with it.”

‘Say it well’ yourself by leaving a comment.

Tags: Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Sequestration, environment, green movement, landfill
Posted in Carbon Offsets, Certification, Forestation | 8 Comments »

Progressive Insurance: this Company ‘Gets It’

Friday, January 30th, 2009

In a recent post by Jennifer Berry at Earth911.com, a couple of important, and under-reported facts were presented:

• Due to fires and other natural causes, over 1 million acres need to be replanted, according to the U.S. Forest Service
• According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, approximately 35 percent of the municipal solid waste stream (MSW) is made up of paper and paperboard products. Paper makes up the largest portion of the municipal waste stream and is also one of the most recovered materials.

Where does Progressive fit into this?  By encouraging their customers to move to paperless statements, tons of paper didn’t need to be printed.  As an incentive, they agreed to plant a tree for each customer who signed up.   How many took them up on the offer?  A million.

That’s a million new trees being planted. A million trees, once mature, will absorb about 48 million pounds of carbon dioxide each year.  And for every ton of paper NOT printed, 15 trees avoid the hatchet, so they can continue to store carbon. We call that win/win, and is something we can all understand.

Good job, Progressive Insurance.

Tags: Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Sequestration, environment, green movement
Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments »

Some interesting facts about carbon dioxide

Tuesday, January 27th, 2009

Consider:

• In 1850, atmospheric carbon dioxide was roughly 280 p.p.m.
• Today it is 385 p.p.m.
• By 2050? Predictions range from 450 to 600 p.p.m.
• CO2 contributes to half of global warming. Gases like chlorofluorocarbons and methane, along with soot and other pollutants, contribute to the rest.
• Carbon Dioxide, because of the way it interacts with the oceans and atmosphere is more persistent than the other causes of global warming, which dissipate more quickly when the sources decline.

What can we conclude? Reductions in emissions is only part of the equation. We must actively pursue methods to remove CO2 from the air. “Carbon capture and storage” (CCS) is a term used for the non-biological method of injecting carbon into storage sites, i.e., geologic formations.

Biological methods center around reducing deforestation and planting trees. On an individual level, planting trees is an activity where you can make a difference, and remains the cheapest way to remove CO2.

“Think Globally, Act Locally.” Healthy trees absorb 48 pounds of carbon each year, and produce enough oxygen to support two people. If a million people each planted a tree, 10,000,000 pounds of carbon would be removed from the atmosphere each year, according to the American Forestry Association.

I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this subject.

Tags: Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Sequestration, environment, green movement
Posted in Forestation | 1 Comment »