Loading…
Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota
We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Fo...
Saved in:
Published in: | Forest science 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.470-478 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 478 |
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 470 |
container_title | Forest science |
container_volume | 57 |
creator | Gunn, John S Saah, David S Fernholz, Kathryn Ganz, David J |
description | We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017959708</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1017959708</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkMtOHDEQRS1EJIYJvxAsVtn0YLfbryUa8ZIGIiVBZGe53eXBqLHB7kbi7zEaNmFVm1O3bh2EflCyokSzU58ylKm4ANHBKZcrseok2UMLqplqmGRqHy0IobyRnf53gA5LeSSEKEbaBbpf29yniNcZhjDh8zFsQx_GML3hOQ6Q8VkGi3_Ddh7tFCqYPL6y-bVexBt4hbHgEPFtytMD5IhvQoxQ0mS_o2_ejgWOPucS3V2c_11fNZtfl9frs03jmJJT0ysGXS9b6ZzySivOnZMCWuWkIgMfBtq6lve641JyAOp66YUXXHRicF51bIl-7nKfc3qZayvzFIqDcbQR0lwMJVRqrmV9d4lOvqCPac6xtjOackpaQdoKiR3kciolgzfPOTzZ_FaTzIdu859uw6URpuqui8e7RW-Tsdscirn70xIqqmqthObsHWiWgRg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>915102602</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</title><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Gunn, John S ; Saah, David S ; Fernholz, Kathryn ; Ganz, David J</creator><creatorcontrib>Gunn, John S ; Saah, David S ; Fernholz, Kathryn ; Ganz, David J</creatorcontrib><description>We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-749X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3738</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bethesda: Society of American Foresters</publisher><subject>Biodiversity ; Carbon ; carbon markets ; carbon sinks ; climate ; Environmental protection ; Forest management ; forests ; lakes ; Objectives ; Protocol ; Regulation ; USDA Forest Service</subject><ispartof>Forest science, 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.470-478</ispartof><rights>Copyright Society of American Foresters Dec 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gunn, John S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saah, David S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernholz, Kathryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganz, David J</creatorcontrib><title>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</title><title>Forest science</title><description>We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.</description><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>carbon markets</subject><subject>carbon sinks</subject><subject>climate</subject><subject>Environmental protection</subject><subject>Forest management</subject><subject>forests</subject><subject>lakes</subject><subject>Objectives</subject><subject>Protocol</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>USDA Forest Service</subject><issn>0015-749X</issn><issn>1938-3738</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkMtOHDEQRS1EJIYJvxAsVtn0YLfbryUa8ZIGIiVBZGe53eXBqLHB7kbi7zEaNmFVm1O3bh2EflCyokSzU58ylKm4ANHBKZcrseok2UMLqplqmGRqHy0IobyRnf53gA5LeSSEKEbaBbpf29yniNcZhjDh8zFsQx_GML3hOQ6Q8VkGi3_Ddh7tFCqYPL6y-bVexBt4hbHgEPFtytMD5IhvQoxQ0mS_o2_ejgWOPucS3V2c_11fNZtfl9frs03jmJJT0ysGXS9b6ZzySivOnZMCWuWkIgMfBtq6lve641JyAOp66YUXXHRicF51bIl-7nKfc3qZayvzFIqDcbQR0lwMJVRqrmV9d4lOvqCPac6xtjOackpaQdoKiR3kciolgzfPOTzZ_FaTzIdu859uw6URpuqui8e7RW-Tsdscirn70xIqqmqthObsHWiWgRg</recordid><startdate>20111201</startdate><enddate>20111201</enddate><creator>Gunn, John S</creator><creator>Saah, David S</creator><creator>Fernholz, Kathryn</creator><creator>Ganz, David J</creator><general>Society of American Foresters</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111201</creationdate><title>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</title><author>Gunn, John S ; Saah, David S ; Fernholz, Kathryn ; Ganz, David J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>carbon markets</topic><topic>carbon sinks</topic><topic>climate</topic><topic>Environmental protection</topic><topic>Forest management</topic><topic>forests</topic><topic>lakes</topic><topic>Objectives</topic><topic>Protocol</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>USDA Forest Service</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gunn, John S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saah, David S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernholz, Kathryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganz, David J</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gunn, John S</au><au>Saah, David S</au><au>Fernholz, Kathryn</au><au>Ganz, David J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</atitle><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle><date>2011-12-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>470</spage><epage>478</epage><pages>470-478</pages><issn>0015-749X</issn><eissn>1938-3738</eissn><abstract>We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.</abstract><cop>Bethesda</cop><pub>Society of American Foresters</pub><doi>10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0015-749X |
ispartof | Forest science, 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.470-478 |
issn | 0015-749X 1938-3738 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017959708 |
source | Oxford Journals Online |
subjects | Biodiversity Carbon carbon markets carbon sinks climate Environmental protection Forest management forests lakes Objectives Protocol Regulation USDA Forest Service |
title | Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T00%3A25%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Carbon%20Credit%20Eligibility%20under%20Area%20Regulation%20of%20Harvest%20Levels%20in%20Northern%20Minnesota&rft.jtitle=Forest%20science&rft.au=Gunn,%20John%20S&rft.date=2011-12-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=470&rft.epage=478&rft.pages=470-478&rft.issn=0015-749X&rft.eissn=1938-3738&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1017959708%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=915102602&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |