Re: “Questions remain about carbon offsets,” March 29.
B.C.’s auditor general recently concluded that “the provincial government has not met its objective of achieving a carbon-neutral public sector.”
From a forest management perspective, the term “carbon neutrality” confuses the issue. What matters is the net amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere emitted (and captured) by various energy sources.
Wood, when burned or when it decays, initially releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. A sustainably well-managed forest, however, also recaptures the carbon released through combustion, and then can store it for a long time in trees, shrubs and soil.
By contrast, with geological sources (gas, oil) of carbon emissions, combustion only adds carbon dioxide to the air.
On well-managed timberland (where growth exceeds removals), practices include longer forest rotations, high initial trees per hectare and frequent light commercial thinnings. Combined with protecting ecological values in streamside areas and other habitats, these practices not only capture and store carbon by green trees, but also grow high-quality wood to generate revenue and jobs.
In 2009, 28 per cent of Sweden’s energy use was based on bioenergy, mostly from well-managed forests. Between 1990 and 2007, Sweden reduced carbon emissions overall by nine per cent, a significant carbon “dividend.” Meanwhile, Sweden’s GDP increased 49 per cent.
B.C. cannot reach this destination overnight, but we can change direction overnight.
Ray Travers
Victoria
