Search

Forestry projects participate in carbon markets by sequestering carbon dioxide equivalent (C[O.sub.2]e) and producing carbon offsets. The creation of forest-based offsets is guided by protocols that dictate how sequestered C[O.sub.2]e is converted into marketable offsets. Existing protocol designs aim to produce offsets that meet sustainability requirements, while providing financial incentives for landowner participation. However, limited Canadian uptake implies that current financial incentives are insufficient to encourage the production of carbon offsets via private landowners. Here we consider various design features of four protocols and their financial implications for an illustrative afforestation project in southern Ontario, Canada. We explore the protocols (two tonne-tonne protocols and two tonne-year protocols) under two afforestation project management systems ('no-harvest' and 'harvest' management scenarios). Results indicate that a project that terminates in a harvest is not economically attractive at current C[O.sub.2]e prices under any protocol design at a scale likely to be undertaken in southern Ontario, Canada. Projects that do not conclude in harvest are generally more attractive. Tonne-tonne protocols that pay upfront for sequestered C[O.sub.2]e improve the economic attractiveness of afforestation projects, but the delayed realization of the value of offset credits under tonne-year protocols reduces the economic attractiveness of these projects. We discuss these results in light of the choices facing afforestation project proponents and offset protocol designers (including governments) in general, and provide detailed insights into the financial dynamics of the Canadian case. Key words: forest carbon offset protocol, offset credits, afforestation, economic attractiveness, Ontario, Canada. Les projets forestiers contribuent aux marches du carbone en sequestrant de l'eq. C[O.sub.2] et en produisant des compensations carbone. La creation de compensations basees sur la foret est guidee par des protocoles qui dictent la maniere dont l'eq. C[O.sub.2] sequestre est converti en compensations commercialisables. La conception des protocoles vise a produire des compensations qui repondent aux exigences du developpement durable tout en offrant des incitatifs financiers pour encourager la participation des proprietaires fonciers. Cependant, la sequestration limitee au Canada signifie que les incitatifs financiers sont insuffisants pour encourager la production de compensations carbone par les proprietaires prives. Nous examinons ici differentes caracteristiques de conception en lien avec quatre protocoles et leurs implications financieres pour un projet de boisement dans le sud de l'Ontario au Canada. Nous analysons les protocoles (deux protocoles tonnetonne et deux protocoles tonne-annee) dans le cadre de deux systemes de gestion des projets de boisement (scenarios de gestion << sans recolte >> et << avec recolte >>). Les resultats demontrent qu'un projet qui se termine par une recolte n'est pas economiquement attrayant en fonction du prix actuel de l'eq. C[O.sub.2], quel que soit le protocole a l'echelle a laquelle il serait vraisemblablement entrepris dans le sud de l'Ontario. Les projets qui ne se terminent pas par une recolte sont generalement plus attrayants. Les protocoles tonne-tonne qui retribuent a l'avance l'eq. C[O.sub.2] sequestre ameliorent l'attrait economique des projets de boisement. Par contre, la realisation differee de la valeur des credits compensatoires dans le cadre des protocoles tonne-annee reduit l'attrait economique de ces projets. Nous discutons de ces resultats a la lumiere des choix auxquels sont confrontes les promoteurs de projets de boisement et les concepteurs de protocoles de compensation (incluant les gouvernements) en general et nous fournissons un apercu detaille de la dynamique financiere du cas du Canada. Mots-cles : protocole de compensation du carbone forestier, credits compensatoires, boisement, attrait economique, Ontario, Canada., 1. Introduction In the context of some emission reduction schemes--cap and trade markets, for example--polluters may purchase carbon offsets, a marketable credit representing carbon dioxide equivalent (C[O.sub.2]e) sequestration, to avoid [...]

The burning of wood for bioenergy produces significant amounts of ash residue that requires disposal. We constructed a cost model to evaluate the unit costs of three ash disposal methods in the Canadian context: landfills owned and operated by the bioenergy facility, municipal landfills, and forest site application. The model accounts for costs related to the pretreatment, transportation, and disposal of ash at a landfill or forest site. Model parameter values were assigned appropriate distributions (based on published literature and industry surveys), and Monte Carlo simulations were employed to produce a range of model outputs for each disposal option. Results indicate that existing landfills (if available for ash disposal) are likely the most cost-effective option (median value of $77 per tonne), although applying ash to a forest site is only ~15%-20% more costly (median value of $92 per tonne). Indeed, the unit cost estimates across disposal options have considerable overlap. This suggests that close examination of firm-specific circumstances is highly warranted when choosing a disposal approach, even in the absence of accounting for potential environmental benefits associated with forest site disposal of ash. Key words: wood ash disposal, cost comparison, landfill disposal, forest application, Canada. La combustion du bois pour la bioenergie produit une quantite importante de cendre qui doit etre eliminee. Nous avons construit un modele de cout pour evaluer le cout unitaire de trois methodes d'elimination des cendres dans un contexte canadien, soit les sites d'enfouissement detenus et operes par l'industrie de la bioenergie, les sites d'enfouissement municipaux et l'epandage sur des sites forestiers. Le modele considere les couts lies au pretraitement, au transport et a l'elimination des cendres dans un site d'enfouissement ou un site forestier. Des distributions appropriees (selon la litterature et des enquetes aupres des industries) ont ete attribuees aux valeurs des parametres du modele et des simulations de Monte Carlo ont ete utilisees pour produire un eventail de resultats pour chaque option d'elimination. Les resultats indiquent que les sites d'enfouissement existants (a condition d'etre accessibles pour l'elimination des cendres) constituent vraisemblablement l'option la plus rentable (valeur mediane de 77 $ par tonne), bien que l'epandage des cendres sur un site forestier soit seulement environ 15 a 20 % plus couteux (valeur mediane de 92 $ par tonne). En fait, les couts unitaires estimes pour les diverses options d'elimination se chevauchent considerablement. Ceci porte a croire qu'un examen approfondi de la situation propre a chaque entreprise est plus que justifie pour choisir l'approche adequate d'elimination des residus, et ce meme sans tenir compte des benefices environnementaux potentiels associes a l'epandage des cendres sur un site forestier. [Traduit par la Redaction] Mots-cles: elimination de la cendre de bois, comparaison des couts, site d'enfouissement, epandage en foret, Canada., Introduction The use of forest biomass to generate energy is expected to increase as governments aspire to phase out traditional fossil fuels and the demand for renewably sourced energy grows. [...]

The Asian longhorned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis Motschulsky) continues to pose a significant risk to deciduous forests around the world. We assess Asian longhorned beetle-related risks in eastern Canada by generating current and future climate suitability maps, import-based likelihood of introduction estimates for each urban center in our study area, and potential economic impacts in both urban and natural settings. For the current period, climatic suitability for Asian longhorned beetle was highest in southern Ontario, but was projected to expand significantly northward and eastward by midcentury. High likelihood of Asian longhorned beetle introduction was associated with large urban centers, but also smaller centers with high levels of pest-associated imports. Potential costs for the removal and replacement of Asian longhorned beetle-impacted street trees ranged from CDN$8.6 to $12.2 billion, with the exact amount and city-level ranking depending on the method used to calculate risk. Potential losses of merchantable maple (Acer) timber were estimated at CDN$1.6 billion using provincial stumpage fees and CDN$431 million annually when calculated using a combination of economic and forestry product statistics. The gross value of edible maple products, which could potentially be affected by Asian longhorned beetle, was estimated at CDN$358 million annually. These values can help inform the scale of early detection surveys, potential eradication efforts, and research budgets in the event of future Asian longhorned beetle introductions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Forestry Chronicle is the property of Canadian Institute of Forestry and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Recent advances in extraction have increased the supply of natural gas and increased the relative price difference between it and alternative fuels. However, natural gas is not available in many rural areas forcing poultry producers unable to access natural gas to use more expensive fuels. This paper determines the least cost appliance system and fuel source for heating a broiler chicken barn in Ontario, Canada. The empirical model estimates the amount of heat required for poultry production, selects appropriate heating appliances and fuel types, and calculates the final present value of costs over a 20-year period. Appliances examined include box heaters, radiant tube heaters and biomass boilers; fuels examined include natural gas, propane, heating oil and biomass. Natural gas is the least cost fuel for both box heaters and radiant tube heaters assuming there is an existing connection to a gas pipeline. However, natural gas heating systems become the most expensive approach if the poultry operator has to pay for a pipeline connection to the gas source. With no direct connection for natural gas, biomass boilers are the most cost efficient heating system, followed closely by radiant tube heaters fuelled by propane. Heating oil is the most expensive fuel examined and its costs are nearly double that for comparable box heaters and radiant tube heaters using propane. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]