Writing Project 2

Part 1

Works Cited

Badgery, Warwick, et al. "Soil carbon market-based instrument pilot – the sequestration of soil organic carbon for the purpose of obtaining carbon credits." Soil Research, vol. 59, no. 1, Jan. 2021, pp. 12-23, doi.org/10.1071/SR19331.

Badgery experiments with increasing soil organic carbon (SOC) of Australian farming to understand the potential to offset greenhouse gas emissions. They developed a pilot scheme to test if a market-based instrument could encourage farmers to change management practices to increase SOC. 10 locations were monitored, resulting in a 60% increase in SOC, demonstrating that carbon monetization markets could result in industries reducing their emissions. This article does not represent international emissions improvement, as many factors influence soil carbon content.

Basu, Paroma. "A green investment: If growing forests in India can generate lucrative carbon credits, then why isn't everyone planting trees?" Nature, vol. 457, no. 7226, 8 Jan. 2009, pp. 24-43.

Paroma explains how carbon monetization from increasing carbon forest stock holds many benefits from economic gains to global sustainability, but many issues are associated with the validation of gained carbon stocks within forests. The article is an overview of all issues faced in the carbon market. These are gathered from the author's personal experiences trying to monetize carbon in India. Validation issues consisted of differences in tree species' carbon stock, carbon uptake, lifespan, and density. This finding was parallel with expert options, showing the reality of generating profits from carbon stocks. Their claims are strong because of the authors' personal experience in India and examples of projects in different regions. The article is from 2009, reflecting the findings might not be relevant to 2023.

Bertazzo, Sophie. "What on Earth is ‘REDD+’?" Conservation International, 28 Mar. 2019, www.conservation.org/blog/what-on-earth-is-redd.

Conservation.org describes the REDD+ system as a UN-backed framework aiming to prevent climate change by preventing deforestation. REDD+ stands for “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation”. This framework helps countries evaluate how forest protection creates financial incentives to increase sustainable management. This is in the form of direct payments or carbon credits. REDD+ is recognized by the Paris Agreement as the system for trading carbon credits, showing its value as a standardized system of carbon monetization. Examples are shown of how countries could use this system effectively to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions.

Chomitz, Kenneth M. Climate Change and the World Bank Group: Phase II - The challenge of low-carbon development. World Bank Publications, 2004, doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-8653-8.

Ghorbani Pashakolaie, Vahid, et al. "Monetization of policy costs and sustainability benefits associated with renewable energy in fossil fuel-rich countries (FFRCs)." Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, vol. 19, Sept. 2023, p. 100271, DOI: 10.1016/j.indic.2023.100271. Accessed 4 Oct. 2023.

Pashakolaie creates a cost-benefit analysis of renewable energy source (RES) policies in comparison to fossil fuel energy production. The region of Iran is used as a case study for comparison. Data from scientific sources show Iran's current emission production, cost, and potential savings from sustainable practices. The authors describe this resulted in a cost-benefit ratio of 20% for fossil fuel policies to renewable energy sources. This is based on the social cost of carbon which changes with human values, creating variances. The author theorizes that an elevated social cost of carbon could offset the expenses of RES, meaning a carbon emission trading system allows sustainable policies to cost the same as fossil fuel policies. This study is only suitable for Iran, not globally.

Hassan, Ather, et al. "Monetization of the environmental damage caused by fossil fuels." Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 28, no. 17, 2021, pp. 21204-21211, DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-12205-w.

Hassan examines the societal costs of fossil fuels, specifically focusing on local CO2 emissions from 2005-2009. He emphasizes the adverse impacts of carbon emissions on human health and agriculture, highlighting respiratory diseases and plant reactions. The purpose is to advocate for clean energy sources like wind, solar, and hydrogen, supported by international data. Pakistan's national data is analyzed in a table and graph, assessing damages from coal, natural gas, and crude oil combustion.

"In Ghana, Sustainable Cocoa-Forest Practices Yield Carbon Credits." The World Bank, 1 June 2023, www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2023/06/01/in-ghana-sustainable-cocoa -forest-practices-yield-carbon-credits. Accessed 4 Oct. 2023.

Islam, M. R., and M. M. Khan. The Science of Climate Change. John Wiley & Sons, 2019.

This text outlines carbon emissions. Chapter 9’s main purpose is to overview the monetization of climate science. The Paris Agreement of 2015 is described as increasing the marketability of renewable energy technologies, phasing out fossil fuel development. The agreement is viewed as beneficial to sustainability. It is a positive policy for this purpose however, many issues are present. The agreement relies on trusting governments and corporations to not falsify renewable technology gains. Showing a lack of science with the agreement policies. This is supported by an in-depth analysis of the policy sections strengthening the claim of the book. However, there are no examples of these concerns occurring.

Kenton, Will. "Carbon Credits and How They Can Offset Your Carbon Footprint." Investopedia, 16 May 2007, www.investopedia.com/terms/c/carbon_credit.asp.

This article explores the idea of what is a carbon credit, its history, purpose, and function for reducing carbon emissions. The use of carbon credits is supported as it creates a monetary incentive for companies to reduce emissions and allows for high-emission productions to accomplish reduction goals without changing industry practices. The argument against this presents concerns for verifying reductions and measurability of carbon sinks. Evidence from government policies is used to understand the carbon system as a whole. This article is in support of the carbon credit market without mentioning the negatives.

Lippke, Bruce, and John Perez-Garcia. "Will either cap and trade or a carbon emissions tax be effective in monetizing carbon as an ecosystem service." Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 256, no. 12, 2008, pp. 2160-2165, doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.08.007.

Mills, David, et al. "Quantifying and monetizing potential climate change policy impacts on terrestrial ecosystem carbon storage and wildfires in the United States." Climatic Change, vol. 131, no. 1, 24 Apr. 2014, pp. 163-178, doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1118-z.

Raduazo, Anthony R. "The CO2 Monetization Gap: Integrading The Social Cost Of Carbon Into Nepa." The Columbia Law Review, vol. 118, no. 2, pp. 605-652, www.jstor.org/stable/2637182h6. Accessed 4 Oct. 2023.

Sadhukhan, Jhuma. "Net zero electricity systems in global economies by life cycle assessment (LCA) considering ecosystem, health, monetization, and soil CO2 sequestration impacts." Renewable Energy, vol. 184, Jan. 2022, pp. 960-974, DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2021.12.024.

Silverstein, Ken. "Not All Carbon Credits Are Created Equal. Here’s What Companies Must Know." Forbes, 22 June 2022, www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2022/06/22/not-all-carbon-credits-are-created-equal-heres-what-companies-must-know/?sh=4c2e04df5328. Accessed 3 Oct. 2023.

"The Ultimate Guide to Understanding Carbon Credits." Carbon Credits, 23 Mar. 2023, carboncredits.com/the-ultimate-guide-to-understanding-carbon-credits/. Accessed 3 Oct. 2023.

This article explains that the carbon market is a system allowing investors and corporations to trade carbon credits and carbon offsets. A description of carbon credits, offsets, the carbon marketplace, credit production, and how to enter the market is given. The purpose of this article is to be a guide explaining carbon credits, outlining the current state of the market. This is accomplished with examples at an international scale, and referencing the Kyoto and Paris Agreement. This article is strong for increasing the reader's knowledge of the carbon market using examples of companies. One weakness is that the article has empty claims without evidence.

"United Nations Carbon Offset Platform." https://unfccc.int/climate-action/united-nations -carbon-offset-platform, United Nations Climate Change, unfccc.int/climate-action /united-nations-carbon-offset-platform.

The UN describes its system of carbon offset as an e-commerce which an organization, company, or citizen can purchase to offset their carbon emissions. Users are shown carbon marketplaces and environmental benefits associated with carbon credits in tonnes of CO2 equivalent. They present verified projects giving examples of where carbon credits are being gained. The article lacks an in-depth description of what is occurring with carbon credit production and verification. Its calculators are simple in the context of the many factors associated with emissions. However, the article gives an example of what carbon monetization could look like in the future.

White, Natasha. "Bogus Carbon Credits a 'Pervasive' Problem, Scientists Warn." Time, Blomberg, 21 Mar. 2023, time.com/6264772/study-most-carbon-credits-are-bogus/. Accessed 4 Oct. 2023.

White analyzed a study consisting of 300 carbon offset projects to find if these studies were viably reporting legitimate gained carbon emissions. These projects combined into 11% of all carbon offsets ever issued with each creating bogus credits. It was found that carbon registries’ methods failed to follow the criteria for additionality. This raises awareness that there are many flaws in the carbon market as offsets are being falsified. The source study which reports this is strong as it looks at a large diversity of carbon projects. These findings however are only based on a singular study/expert.

"Why Large Companies Care About Carbon Credits." ProQuest, Penton Media, 27 Dec. 2021, www.proquest.com/docview/2614129684?accountid=14749&parentSessionId=cXzASEd8%2FlRD%2Bs0M8K7epfSjvOSnwVQ%2BcXxexM0L2YQ%3D&pq-origsite=primo.

Penton Media explores why businesses are starting to adopt carbon credits and monetization to produce profits. They explain how this started in the agriculture industry but is moving towards businesses with a model of sequestering carbon, generating credits, and selling for profit. They explore how this movement towards company sustainability stems from investors wanting to be a part of a carbon-neutral organization. This serves as an overview of where the industry is moving today toward a carbon market. These claims are backed by sourcing industry expert, Amanda Bahn-Ziegler. This is a strong source but the article lacks others to back up its claims, decreasing credibility.

Wintergreen, Jay, et al. "ISO 14064, International Standard for GHG Emissions Inventories and Verification." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, First Environment, www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei16/session13/wintergreen.pdf. Accessed 3 Oct. 2023.

ISO 14064, an international GHG inventory and verification standard, was developed by 175 experts from 45 countries to establish minimum requirements for credible auditing and consistent standards. It forms the basis for best practices in GHG reduction. The standard comprises of three main sections: GHG emission inventories, verification processes, and emission reduction reporting. It fosters sustainable practices and benefits from a diverse group of specialists worldwide. Created in 2006, its relevance in today's rapidly evolving sustainability landscape is worth questioning.

Zarate-Barrera, Tatiana G., and Jorge H. Maldonado. "Valuing Blue Carbon: Carbon Sequestration Benefits Provided by the Marine Protected Areas in Colombia." PLOS ONE, vol. 10, no. 5, 27 May 2015, p. e0126627, doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126627.

Part 2

Before writing about the subject of Carbon Monetization, I did not have much knowledge of the subject. I only had a slight idea of the goals founded in the creation of this market and barely understood the concept of carbon credit. I had known about carbon sequestration and its environmental impacts from other classes. However, I had little knowledge of how it is used for monetary gain. I viewed it as expensive and only a long-term economic decision for when the investment would pay off. Research into carbon monetization has changed my outlook as I found that it could be a way to be sustainable while producing immediate value in a trade and purchase system. One of the first big learnings for me is that because the market is labeled as a “carbon” one I originally thought that this only involved the carbon gas emission from fuel burning, negative farming practices, and burning of forests. But, the carbon market involves all types of gasses associated with these processes with each gas having a carbon equivalent. So carbon in this market becomes the unit of sale, not an emission gas quantity. Another aspect of this market that I found surprising is that there is no one system of purchase and trade, there are standards in place and multiple platforms trying to succeed in the creation of a trustworthy carbon market. This made me think that carbon credits could be more of a system for companies and countries to trade with each other rather than something the individual can be involved in. This is for the better as the industry is founded through those large organizations and they are the biggest scale producers of greenhouse gas emissions. Those companies also have the most resources at their disposal to properly validate the carbon they sequester. I then learned about the issues in verification and reporting the additionality gained from carbon-saving projects. Many run into the issue that carbon sequestration reported as gains by the companies or countries would have occurred anyway without their interference. This then causes scandals within the system as falsified carbon credits are sold, something that cannot happen in exchange for large amounts of money. Another issue reported was the complexities of finding the carbon sinks/ sequestration found within plants and forests. Forest soil carbon content varies significantly by region, forest location, soil composition, moisture, and plants present in the forest. This made it very hard to reliably report on the carbon sequestration of forests, one of the biggest causes of false reports of carbon credits being generated by projects. This made me think about whether there will be a way to cheaply and reliably assess forests to understand the amount of carbon present there. Another aspect of carbon monetization that was present in my research is the increase in the push for a system to be created. This seems to stem from the increasing societal value placed on being green and investing in sustainable technologies. I noticed this, especially in companies as over the recent years they have become much more interested in being viewed as a green company. Most likely this is for a marketing purpose as people now are more excited to be a part of a company that is carbon neutral. This also aligns with the push of governments to become carbon neutral over recent years, California is an example of this hoping to be carbon neutral by 2045. Hopefully, this push towards sustainability will lead to a carbon market that is both reliable and standardized throughout the world in order to allow countries and businesses to capitalize on the reduction of greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere. This leads to the subject I will write on being, what developing countries could benefit most from carbon monetization. I would answer this question by looking at the methods to produce carbon additionality and conducting research on which countries could be most suitable to produce substantial economic gains from sustainable practices. This research could then be used to find out where a company seeking to monetize carbon should look. I would also like to incorporate a high level of understanding of the carbon monetization policies in order to make sure that my study sites are feasibly reliable for creating carbon additionality. To accomplish this I also will have to overview forest ecosystems to understand how carbon is stored and realized into the atmosphere. This will consist of heavy research as the system is so complex with many variables.