AccScience Publishing / AJWEP / Volume 16 / Issue 3 / DOI: 10.3233/AJW190027
RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Review of Emission Reduction Potential and Cost  Savings through Forest Carbon Sequestration

Asif Raihan1 Rawshan Ara Begum2* Mohd Nizam Mohd Said1 Sharifah Mastura Syed Abdullah1
Show Less
1 Institute of Climate Change (IPI), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), 43600 Bangi, Selangor D.E., Malaysia
2 Center for Water Cycle, Marine Environment and Disaster Management (CWMD), Kumamoto University, Japan
AJWEP 2019, 16(3), 1–7; https://doi.org/10.3233/AJW190027
Submitted: 16 January 2018 | Revised: 2 December 2018 | Accepted: 2 December 2018 | Published: 19 July 2019
© 2019 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract

ising atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases has been increasing with its negative effects  on climatic system. Forests absorb and store a huge amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide (one of the major  greenhouse gases) as tree biomass. Because of such capacity of forests which is called carbon sequestration, it  has received much attention due to the concerns of global climate change. The research question is whether forest  carbon sequestration could potentially reduce emissions in a cost effective way or not. Therefore, this article reviews  and summarises emission reduction potential and cost savings through forest carbon sequestration. However,  tropical forests have the highest aboveground carbon density and carbon sequestration potential compared to the  subtropical, temperate and boreal forests. Instead, carbon sequestration potential found to be higher in Africa  followed by North America, Asia, South America, Europe and Australia. The cost for one tonne of forest carbon  sink enhancement ranges between 0 to US$ 443 in 2011 prices. Forest carbon sink enhancement cost in tropical  region is found cheaper than any other region in the world. Carbon forestry options i.e. forest management,  afforestation and reforestation can decrease the equilibrium carbon price up to 80% and reduce the emission  reduction costs up to 40% whereas afforestation found to be the most low-cost carbon sequestration option.  Hence, forest carbon sequestration plays an important role in reducing emissions which offers an opportunity for  cost-effective climate change mitigation.

Keywords
Carbon sequestration
carbon price
mitigation
emission reduction
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
References

Abenezer, A. and G. Ing-Marie (2014). Economic incentives  for carbon sequestration: A review of the literature  (Working paper No. 2014: 8). Department Economics,  Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

Anger, N. and J. Sathaye (2008). Reducing deforestation  and trading emissions: Economic implications for the  post-Kyoto carbon market. ZEW-Centre for European  Economic Research Discussion Paper (08-016).

Begum, R.A., Abdullah, S.M.S. and M.S.K. Sarkar (2017).  Time Series Patterns and Relationship of Energy  Consumption and CO2 Emissions in Malaysia. Asian  Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution, 14(2): 41-49.

Bosetti, V., Lubowski, R., Golub, A. and A. Markandya  (2011). Linking reduced deforestation and a global  carbon market: Implications for clean energy technology  and policy flexibility. Environment and Development  Economics, 16: 479-505.

Cairns, M.A., Brown, S., Helmer, E.H. and G.A. Baumgardner  (1997). Root biomass allocation in the world’s upland  forests. Oecologia, 111(1): 1-11.

FRA (2015). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015,  Country report, Malaysia. FAO, Rome.

Generosa, A.D. (2007). Forest area dynamics in Asia. Asian  Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution, 4(1): 85-99.

Gren, I. and K. Elofsson (2014). Economic effects of carbon  sink management for the EU climate policy. Environmental  Economics, 5(1): 27-42.

Ibrahim, M.Y., Ghazali, Z. and H.U. Rahman (2016). The  Feasibility of Carbon Capturing, Storage and Utilization  Projects in Developing Countries: A Case of Malaysia.  International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(3S): 6-11.

IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate  Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth  Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on  Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,  United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

IPCC (2007). Climate change 2007: The physical science  basis: Intergovernmental panel on climate change.

Agenda  (Vol. 6, no. 07). Geneva: United Nations Framework  Convention on Climate Change. IPCC (2006). IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas  Inventories. Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas  Inventories Programme. H.S. Eggleston, L. Buendia, K.  Miwa, T. Ngara, and K. Tanabe (editors). Japan: Institute  for Global Environmental

Strategies. IPCC (2000). Technological and Economic Potential of  Options to Enhance, Maintain, and Manage Biological  Carbon Reservoirs and Geo-engineering, Climate Change  2001: Mitigation. Cambridge University Press, Port  Chester NY.

IPCC (1992). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change  Scientific Assessment of Climate Change. UNEP, UN,  New York.

Ismariah, A. and S. Ahmad Fadli (2007). Valuation of  carbon stock and carbon sequestration in Ayer HItam  Forest Reserve, Puchong. Pertanika Journal of Tropical  Agriculture Science, 30(2): 109-116.

Jung, M. (2005). The role of forestry projects in the clean  development mechanism. Environmental Science & Policy,  8: 87-104.

Kindermann, G., Obersteiner, M., Sohngen, B., Sathaye,  J., Anadarko, K., Rametsteiner, E., Schlamadinger, B.,  Wunder, S. and R. Beach (2008). Global cost estimates of  reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,  105(30): 10302-10307

Michetti, M. and R.N. Rosa (2011). Afforestation and timber  management compliance strategies in climate policy. A  computable general equilibrium analysis. Nota di Lavoro  04.2011. Sustainable Development Series. Fondazione  Eni Enrico Mattei.

Mishra, P.C., Behera, N., Mishra, S.P. and K. Meher (2011).  Ecological Enumeration of Tree Vegetation and Their  Contribution in Removal of Atmospheric Pollution Load:  A Case Study in an Industrial Complex of Western Orissa,  India. Asian Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution,  8(3): 19-28.

MNRE (2018). Total Forested Areas in Malaysia (1990- 2014). Official Portal Ministry of Natural Resources  and Environment (MNRE), Malaysia. Accessed on 29th  January, 2018. http://www.nre.gov.my/en-my/Forestry/ Pages/Statistics-Forest.aspx.

MNRE (2011). Malaysia’s Second National Communication  (NC2) submitted to the United Nations Framework  Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Conservation  and Environmental Management Division (CEMD),Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE),  Malaysia. Available at http://nc2.nre.gov.my/

Moura-Costa, P. (1996). Tropical forestry practices for  carbon sequestration. In: Dipterocarp Forest Eco Systems  – Towards Sustainable Management. Schulte, A. and  Schone, D. (Eds.). World Scientific, Singapore.

Murray, B.C. (2013). Economics of Forest Carbon  Sequestration as a Climate Change Mitigation Strategy.  Encyclopedia of Energy, Natural Resource and  Environmental Economics, 1: 41-47.

Richards, K.R. and C. Stokes (2004). A review of forest  carbon sequestration cost studies: A dozen years of  research. Climatic Change, 63: 1-48.

Saatchi, S.S., Harris, N.L., Brown, S., Lefsky, M., Mitchard,  E.T., Salas, W and S. Petrova (2011). Benchmark map  of forest carbon stocks in tropical regions across three  continents. Proceedings of the National Academy of  Sciences, 108(24): 9899-9904.

Schlamadinger, B., Karjalainen, T., Birdsey, R., Cannell,  M., Galinski, W., Gintings, A., Hamburg, S., Jallow, B.,  Kirschbaum, M., Krug, T., Kurz, W., Prisley, S., Schulze,  D., Singh, K.D., Singh, T.P., Solomon, A.M., Villers,  L. and Y. Yamagata (2000). Afforestation, reforestation,  and deforestation (ARD) activities. In: Watson, R.T.,  Noble, I.R., Bolin, B., Ravindranath, N.H., Verardo, D.J.  and Dokken, D.J. (Eds.), Land use, Land-Use Change  and Forestry. A Special Report of the Intergovernmental  Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge

University Press,  Cambridge.Sedjo, R.A., Wisniewski, J., Sample, A.V. and J.D. Kinsman  (1995). The economics of managing carbon via forestry:  Assessment of existing studies. Environmental and  Resource Economics, 6(2): 139-165.

Sohngen, B. (2009). An analysis of forestry carbon  sequestration as a response to climate change. Copenhagen  Consesus Center, Fredriksberg, Dinamarca. 

Tavoni, M., Sohngen, B. and V. Bosetti (2007). Forestry and  the carbon market response to stabilize climate. Energy  Policy, 35: 5346-5353.

US Environmental Protection Agency (2010). Forests function  as carbon sinks, absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere  and sequestering it in tree biomass and forest soils. U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/

van der Werf, G.R., Morton, D.C. and R.S. Defries (2009).  CO2 emissions from forest loss. Nature Geoscience, 2:  737-738.

van Kooten, G.C. and B. Sohngen (2007). Economics of  forest ecosystem carbon sinks: A review.

van Kooten, G.C., Laaksonen-Craig, S. and Y. Wang (2009).  A meta-regression analysis of forest carbon offset costs.  Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 39(11): 2153-2167.

Vass, M.M., Elofsson, K. and M. Gren (2013). An equity  assessment of introducing uncertain forest carbon  sequestration in EU climate policy. Energy Policy, 61: 1432-1442.

Share
Back to top
Asian Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution, Electronic ISSN: 1875-8568 Print ISSN: 0972-9860, Published by AccScience Publishing