Back to Microsoft Word 11.0.6568;TREASURER'S INTERIM REPORT TO THE MEMBERSHIP

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to SOCIAL MARKETING: MORE THAN JUST ”ADVERTISING” FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

SCB'S INVESTMENT IN CARBON OFFSETS - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BAVIAANSKLOOF MEGARESERVE PROJECT, SOUTH AFRICA

Who owns the land? What kind of land is it?

The areas to be restored originally were thicket. The thickets were converted, mainly from browsing by goats, to livestock pastures. These lands are now part of the Baviaanskloof Megareserve, a UNESCO-designated World Heritage Site located in the Cape Floristic Kingdom. The Eastern Cape Parks Board owns and manages the Megareserve; the Parks Board has acquired many lowland areas (including the areas to be restored) because these areas are critical to protecting the ecological function of rivers and providing high-quality water for human use. No people were involuntarily expropriated from the land where our restoration project is to occur. Most project workers are being recruited from several small villages within the Megareserve with high unemployment rates.

Who is running the restoration project?

The restoration effort is run and funded by the Working for Woodlands Program, a poverty eradication program of the government of South Africa. The program provides employment on projects that improve the ecological integrity of woodlands. Implicit ecological goals include increased resilience to non-native invasive plants and increased water quantity and quality. This particular effort on the Baviaanskloof Megareserve is one of many projects in the Working for Water program, and is being carried out collaboratively with the Eastern Cape Parks Board and other partners.

Will the project really alleviate poverty?

Most unskilled workers are recruited and trained from the impoverished communities in and around the Megareserve. The Megareserve is also engaged in an ambitious riparian wetland restoration project (funded by World Wildlife Fund). Between these two efforts, there is at least a decade of work available in the Megareserve. Although senior staff on the Baviaanskloof project are educated individuals from outside the Megareserve, senior staff are aggressively identifying outstanding local workers and developing the skills of those workers so they will qualify as managers and founders of nurseries and restoration projects elsewhere. In my brief visit to a small portion of the Eastern Cape, I was astounded at the massive invasion of riparian areas, upland flats, and steep slopes by a variety of non-native plant species. South Africa needs to rehabilitate hundred of thousands of hectares. Over the past ten years, South Africa has created many new protected areas, and massively expanded others. One presentation at the 2007 SCB meeting documented substantial economic growth in 19 Eastern Cape communities near new parks, so we can expect continued replacement of marginally profitable farms by nature tourism. Thus, restoration-related industries can expect several decades of economically viable activity.

How much carbon will be stored per hectare?

The estimates of carbon storage are scientifically rigorous and highly conservative. Data are particularly rich for Portulacaria afra (spekboom, elephant bush), which comprises up to 70% of the canopy in some stands of subtropical thicket. Spekboom stores two-thirds of its carbon in soil and litter; both the living tissues and litter are highly fire-resistant. Some local farmers restored areas to spekboom during the past 30 years, and scientists have sampled these sites to estimate directly the trajectory of carbon storage. Although this empirical time series is available only for some aspects and slopes, the data provide a valuable adjunct to estimates based on plant diameter and height. For purposes of the SCB contract, we estimate carbon storage per hectare based solely on spekboom. Thus, we conservatively estimate the actual amount of carbon likely to be stored by multiple species. Basing the estimate on spekboom alone is appropriate because spekboom will be the first species planted, and it is the only species for which detailed multifactorial trials have been conducted to maximize survival of outplanted cuttings.

In a worst-case scenario, spekboom may be the only species to reestablish on some sites. The difference in carbon pools between intact and degraded thicket depends on the thicket type and the magnitude of past conversion. There are 112 recognized thicket types, each with a different percent cover of spekboom. Also, carbon leakage from the soil is positively correlated with lag since conversion. Spekboom should store four tons of carbon per hectare per year, or about 10-15 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per hectare per year. The latter is currently selling at US$5 per ton, so each hectare should yield $50-75 per year.

Total tonnage stored also depends on how many hectares are planted and maintained by our dollars. The planting costs in initial trials have been about R5000 / ha (US$700 / ha) but Mike Powell, chief technical advisor for Working for Water on this project, estimates that the cost will decrease to about R1500 / ha (US$200 / ha).

How do you know this project won't generate a spekboom monoculture instead of restored, diverse thicket?

The 30-year old plots (above) include other native plants that colonized after the spekboom plantings. Because the project would like to sell additional biodiversity benefits for restored subtropical thicket, they are committed to monitoring, learning how to recruit other species, and learning which species need assistance to recolonize a site. In an ongoing experiment, spekboom plants are being inoculated with mistletoe. The mistletoe will attract birds, which in turn should defecate viable seeds of other plants into a spekboom stand. It is hoped that low-cost measures like this can catalyze the process of assembling a fully-restored thicket. Plans and greenhouse experiments are underway to restore some canopy-emergent plants expected to need assistance.

So SCB is paying for the minimum amount of carbon that will be stored in spekboom over 30 years -- the actual carbon may well be several times this amount. Is SCB able to sell the excess tons of carbon on the world market?

In addition to excess carbon tonnage, our restored hectares will generate increased yields of high-quality water that may be marketable in the future. A market in biodiversity credits that already is emerging may pay for restored subtropical thicket once the project can demonstrate that biodiversity benchmarks have been reached. However, SCB's contract allows Working for Water or Eastern Cape Parks Board to retain rights to these profits. Why? First, the agencies took a gamble when they decided to invest more than 30 times SCB's investment just to advance the project to the point where it was an attractive investment to SCB. We want to reward that sort of risk-taking! Second, we want to given the local agencies an incentive to do more than the minimum. While I have full confidence in the good faith of today's managers, profit would help motivate managers in 2038 to add value to the effort. Finally, as one of the first biodiversity-community-carbon projects likely to show tangible results, this project will be watched by others around the world. We'd like them to become fabulously rich, so that others will follow their example!

How can I learn more about carbon offsets?

Excellent information is available on the internet. As of mid-2007, the most useful source of information about triple-benefit projects is the Climate, Community, & Biodiversity Alliance (www.climate-standards.org).

I've heard that carbon offsets are nothing more than a "license to pollute" -- a meaningless feel-good gesture that allows us to continue our addiction to fossil fuels. Why is SCB dignifying this practice?

There is some merit to this criticism, in that re-storing carbon is far less preferable than reducing use of carbon or replacing carbon. SCB is looking for ways to reduce the amount we emit. Because jet fuel to bring members to our global meeting accounts for about 95% of our impact, the only way to make a large reduction would be to reduce the frequency of our global meetings. The Board is thinking seriously about tradeoffs between building our global community and avoiding emissions. We could reduce our emissions by restricting the location of our global meetings to major airline hubs such as New York, Johannesburg, and Beijing, avoiding the fuel needed for connector flights to more isolated meeting sites. We fully agree that offsets must be part of a more comprehensive effort that ultimately must include a transition away from fossil fuels. This effort will require coordinated action by all nations and industries. Thus it is appropriate that climate change is SCB's number one policy priority. Critics of offsets are correct that offsets should not be used as an excuse to avoid the difficult decisions. But until those difficult decisions are made, we insist that offsets are both real (they really do take carbon out of the atmosphere!) and good (far better than emitting carbon without any offset!)

More importantly, 20-30% of greenhouse gas emissions come from land-use change and deforestation. Changes in the native land cover of nearly a million hectares of subtropical thicket in South Africa released vast amounts of carbon from the landscape's carbon pools. We have an opportunity and an obligation to return this carbon to the landscape.

Does this project mean that I (as an SCB member) can stop worrying about my greenhouse gas emissions?

No! In addition to your travel to SCB meetings, you generate greenhouse gases through your household consumption, the activities of your employer, the activities of every organization to which you belong, and the activities of your local and national governments. On the internet, you can find carbon calculators to estimate your footprint, and suggestions on how to reduce, replace, and restore your personal and household emissions. Each of your organizations has a board that listens to the wishes of its members -- let them know that you expect action. You also can influence your employer -- start with their social responsibility office if they have one. They are more responsive than you think. Finally, elected representatives and their staff respond to votes, letters, telephone calls, and especially personal meetings.

I'm taking responsibility for my carbon footprint. May I make an annual investment in the Baviaanskloof project?

Yes, of course! For now, please donate through SCB. You will soon see a link on SCB's Web site that will allow you to donate to Baviaanskloof.

May I visit the actual site where SCB dollars are restoring subtropical thicket? (Of course, I'll swim and walk there to avoid emitting carbon.)

Please do! The site is at the confluence of the Baviaanskloof and Kouga Rivers. For a truly low-carbon visit, use Google Earth to go to 24 degrees 23' 24.634" E, 33 degrees 40' 10.014" S.

Paul Beier

SCB's carbon offset program received favorable coverage in a 5 October 2007 article in the journal Science (Lester, B. 2007. Greening the meeting. Science 318:36-38. The article notes that 97% of attendees at SCB's 2007 annual meeting voluntarily contributed money to offset their carbon emissions, whereas only 15% of attendees at the Ecological Society of America's 2007 annual meeting contributed. The article also quotes Paul Beier on options for convening meetings while reducing carbon emissions.

Back to Microsoft Word 11.0.6568;TREASURER'S INTERIM REPORT TO THE MEMBERSHIP

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to SOCIAL MARKETING: MORE THAN JUST ”ADVERTISING” FOR THE ENVIRONMENT