ERA Ecosystem Restoration Associates Inc. (ERA) April 4, 2007

A number of parties have requested an ERA commentary with respect to an Op-Ed piece prepared by Ken Caldeira, published January 16th 2007 in the New York Times, and alluded to in subsequent articles, e.g. the April 9, 2007 issue of Time Magazine.

We premise our comments by noting that climate change is an extraordinarily complex problem, for which people are looking for simple solutions. Unfortunately, there are no simple solutions, at least not viable ones. Consequently we must address the climate change challenge with an unmitigated commitment, and with open minds. Within this context, we compliment Caldeira for broadening the discussion.

Caldeira’s postion is largely captured in his owns words, as follows: (emphasis added) “Trees don’t just absorb carbon dioxide — they soak up the sun’s heating rays, too. Forests tend to be darker than farms and pastures and therefore tend to absorb more sunlight. This has a warming influence that appears to cancel, on average, the cooling influence of the forest’s carbon storage. This effect is most pronounced in snowy areas — snow on bare ground reflects far more sunlight back to space than does a snowed-in forest — so forests in areas with seasonal snow cover can be strongly warming.

“In contrast, tropical forests appear to be doubly valuable to the earth’s climate system. Not only do they store copious amounts of carbon, the roots of tropical trees reach down deep, drawing up water that they evaporate through their leaves. In the atmosphere, this water may form clouds that reflect sunlight back to space, helping to cool the earth.”

Caldeira’s comments are qualitative and hardly definitive. For example the suggestion that evapotranspiration and cloud cover are unique to tropical forests suggests he has not experienced the rainforests of North America’s west coast. To his credit, Caldeira’s interests are broader than climate change policy – in fact reducing CO2 emissions appears to be a secondary priority to preserving a “natural balance”: (emphasis added) “The broadest goal is neither to slow the growth of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere nor to slow climate change, but rather to preserve the irreplaceable natural balance that sustains life as we know it on this planet.”

In terms of climate change solutions, Caldeira offers his proposed approach shortly before he concludes: (emphasis added)

“We cannot afford to indulge ourselves with well-intentioned activities that do little to solve the underlying problem. Instead, we must demand that our political leaders do more to revolutionize our energy system and preserve our environmental inheritance for future generation.

And then we can plant a tree.”

With due respect, waiting for political leaders to “revolutionize our energy system”, before taking other actions, such as those directed to land use (which is responsible for 500 billion tonnes of CO2 released since 1850, representing over 30% of total emissions), is ill advised.

On the contrary, we must begin implementing a range of actions, including but not limited to energy solutions, that generate benefits now, and for future generations.

---

We offer the following general comments regarding temperate forests, albedo, and climate change:

1. It is generally accepted that the seasonal turning “on and off” of the planet’s temperate forests is directly responsible for the large annual oscillation demonstrated in atmospheric CO2 concentrations – clearly, temperate forests represent a significant part of the greenhouse equation, and their recovered and sustained vitality are critical to a stable atmosphere.
2. Rightly or wrongly, the issue of albedo is not addressed in the United Nations “Framework Convention on Climate Change” (FCCC, 1992), which is the overarching, ratified, international policy driving climate change action. Surely, managing national albedos represents an unthinkable policy challenge.
3. The logical action arising from Caldeira’s comments regarding albedo, would be that temperate forests be cut down and the land covered in a highly reflective surface – again, hardly a viable policy option.
4. Looking to Caldeira’s self-stated priorities regarding biodiversity and the “natural balance”, the notion of destroying temperate forests &/or allowing them to degrade, is neither practical nor acceptable as a climate mitigation “solution.”

With respect to ERA’s Community Ecosystem Restoration Initiative, and offsets arising therefrom, we offer the following:

1. CERI programming is directed to coastal rainforests, where albedo issues associated with snowcover are hardly relevant. Annually, the subject lands have snowcover from zero days to perhaps 2 weeks at most.
2. CERI programming involves the conversion of degraded forest lands into healthy forest ecosystems – it does not replace “farms and pastures” with forests. Albedo changes are arguably negligible.