Abstract
Our first submission found that plantation owners can be expected to forgo wood production and preference carbon production at relatively low CO2 prices. Claims have been made that carbon stored in wood products invalidates this finding because the capacity for plantations to mitigate climate change is enhanced by jointly providing wood and carbon benefits (NAFI 2008; Hansard & de Jongh 2008). Whether this is even an issue
depends on the accounting rules ultimately adopted by the IPCC. At this stage, carbon storage in wood products is not counted under the Kyoto Protocol or proposed in the Green Paper to be counted. Our previous findings stand if this remains the case. This addendum to our first submission presents a refinement to our model to test the effect of carbon stored in wood products, should that be included in the future under IPCC rules. We find that storing carbon in wood products does not invalidate our previous finding. The addendum also incorporates the CO2 prices presented in the Garnaut Review’s Supplementary Draft Report, Targets and Trajectories.
depends on the accounting rules ultimately adopted by the IPCC. At this stage, carbon storage in wood products is not counted under the Kyoto Protocol or proposed in the Green Paper to be counted. Our previous findings stand if this remains the case. This addendum to our first submission presents a refinement to our model to test the effect of carbon stored in wood products, should that be included in the future under IPCC rules. We find that storing carbon in wood products does not invalidate our previous finding. The addendum also incorporates the CO2 prices presented in the Garnaut Review’s Supplementary Draft Report, Targets and Trajectories.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Place of Publication | TBA |
Publisher | Unknown |
Number of pages | 7 |
Publication status | Published - 2008 |