Comments mongabay has made

McKinsey's methodology on AD is not stated

Jonas, although under a fake name, posted the same comment on mongabay.  This was my response.

The McKinsey cost estimate for avoided deforestation ($60) is far higher than any I've seen. What are the other reports where you've seen AD costs anywhere near $60 per ton of carbon?

The Quarterly from December 2007 is quite vague on AD - their methodology is not stated. What did they use as the basis for the opportunity costs? Did they look at peat soils? Did they use tropical forests or temperate forests? The Woods Hole Research Institute, Stern Report, World Bank, and E.U have estimated GHG abatement via AD at a fraction of the cost of things like CCS and corn ethanol.On Biofuels: not cost-effective or lucrative for climate change or business posted 1 year, 2 months ago 17 Responses

Had Yahoo been a leader

Indonesia is one of the most populous countries on Earth.  Its population is young and Internet use is growing.  Censorship of media and the Internet is not a significant concern.

Through successful pioneering of a carbon finance program (an initiative that could eventually bring billions of dollars a year to the country), Yahoo could be known as the mover who made the concept a reality, establishing a solid basis for its brand, possibly translating to increased recognition and usage of its Web properties.  Importantly, with a relatively small commitment, financial or technical, Yahoo could trigger a movement that helps alleviate poverty, improve health, fight climate change, end "haze" pollution, and conserve resources and biological diversity.  

Other potential benefits to Yahoo

• Yahoo establishes itself as a leader in carbon finance tied to poverty alleviation
  
• Yahoo diversified its carbon offset portfolio at a relatively low cost (perhaps offset a small office or data center)
  
• Tie-ins with rural health (malaria, dengue, dysentery all major problems in Borneo) and biodiversity conservation (orangutan, Sumatran rhino, proboscis monkey)

Compensated reforestation

There is a lot of debate going on right now regarding these types of proposals, which do sequester carbon.  Brazil is also a big proponent of carbon credits for reforestation. Hopefully these sorts of schemes will not come at the expense of biodiverse natural forests -- that would defeat the purpose.

There are also real concerns about land rights issue.  If otherwise "low value" forest land -- at least as perceived by politicians and developers -- suddenly have value through carbon finance, it could be indigenous and rural populations who are evicted from their lands.On Just when you thought it was over posted 2 years, 4 months ago 15 Responses

Comparisons to the Amazon

Most of the carbon in Amazonia is in vegetation, most of the carbon in the peatlands of Indonesia is in the soil.  The end result is that peat forest in Indonesia locks up more carbon than the typical tropical forest in the Amazon.

Because oil palm plantations are driving peat lands conversion in Indonesia, the purpose of the model was to show that there are other viable options when it comes to land use in Indonesia.  

As the article states,

"Carbon finance is not limited to peatlands or Indonesia. Compensation for forest preservation is at least applicable to any tropical country where forest is being cleared, resulting in greenhouse gas emissions. With more than 13 million hectares of forest per year being cleared, releasing around 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, the opportunity is tremendous. Indonesia alone lost 1.9 million hectares of forest per year between 2000 and 2005, but even a small country like the Solomon Islands could see immediate benefits under the establishment of a global framework on 'avoided deforestation.'" On Just when you thought it was over posted 2 years, 4 months ago 15 Responses

USA species data

Thanks for the mongabay mention as well as the comments.  The U.S. is well represented in the charts because it is the best studied.  If rigorous surveys were done in other parts of the world, especially Ecuador, West Africa, and Indomalaya you would see much higher numbers of threatened and extinct invertebrates, mollusks, and other less conspicuous species.  In essence, the data is skewed toward the best known parts of the planet.  Very little is known about the bulk of biodiversity on Earth.

Cheers,

RhettOn Biodiversity loss accelerating posted 2 years, 8 months ago 8 Responses