Forest Carbon and Land Conversion

Background

ENE was among the first advocates to highlight the importance of considering the carbon-related impacts of land use and development decisions through its assessment of the proposed Plum Creek development...
[Read full background]

In order to protect the Northeast's environment and the economy, the region must consider the carbon-related impacts of land use and development decisions. ENE is pursuing opportunities to institutionalize climate and energy considerations as part of development planning at the state level. Although buildings and transportation networks that we construct today will help determine our emissions future for decades, many state agencies do not consider the reasonably foreseeable, long-term climate impacts of these decisions, which in turn affects the states’ ability to make progress toward their greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. It is essential that the region move toward “carbon-efficient” planning that minimizes energy use, transportation impacts, and loss of forest carbon. How we choose to conserve forests – or lose them to development over time – will make a significant difference to the region’s carbon footprint of the

Plum Creek: ENE took a leadership role in redefining development as a climate issue through its assessment of the proposed Plum Creek development in Maine. ENE testified as an expert witness in front of Maine’s Land Use Regulation Commission (LURC) regarding Plum Creek’s proposal to develop two resorts and over 1000 housing units around Moosehead Lake.  ENE's analysis of the “carbon footprint” of the Plum Creek development proposal assessed impacts in terms of building emissions, increased emissions from cars/travel, and emissions from lot clearing and lost forest sequestration capacity. ENE found that the development would have significant carbon impacts from key sectors:

• Forest Land Conversion -- between 387,378 and 501,081 metric tons CO2, of which roughly half is emitted to the atmosphere immediately (during development) and the other half is lost carbon storage potential over a 50 year period;
• Transportation -- emissions of approximately 9,566 metric tons CO2 each year, equal to approximately 1850 vehicles;
• Building energy -- emissions of at least 13,018 metric tons CO2 each year.

ENE's study also included information on how these emissions could be reduced more than 40% through clustered development and other mitigation measures, and quantified the benefits of doing so.  This unprecedented assessment is an example of how development proposals can be evaluated and amended to take into account factors related to climate change, and garnered significant media and public attention at the time. During the hearings, it became clear that there was lack of clarity on the part of the LURC Board as to whether they had the authority to consider climate impacts in their decision-making, and that additional legislation would be required. 

Maine Legislation: During the Spring 2009 legislative session, ENE and allies crafted legislation in Maine, referred to as the Climate and Energy Planning Act ("CEPA," or LD 1333), that would have required state agencies to quantify and minimize greenhouse gas in their long-term planning, infrastructure decisions, as well as in permitting of private development. ENE Testimony on LD 1333. Ultimately, the requirement to quantify emissions was dropped, and the bill focused on two key issues: 1) building energy use; and 2) mitigation of forest loss.

LD 1333 ultimately passed the Maine Legislature with only provisions related to fish passage included. Another bill, LD 891, has been held over as a potential vehicle to pursue key provisions, including a requirement to mitigate for forest carbon loss from development. 

Other state initiatives and opportunities: While many agencies are beginning to consider long-term climate change in their planning, this needs to be done consistently and systematically, as changes that happen today may have impacts that last 50 years or more.  In order to protect and enhance forest carbon in a long-term and meaningful way, states should adopt a “no net loss of forest carbon” policy, measure and monitor forest carbon trends, and implement an array of strategies to protect this valuable climate mitigation resource that provides so many other community and societal benefits.

In addition to traditional mechanisms such as conservation easements, forest loss from land use can be minimized through several innovative policy approaches: 1) minimizing sprawl by focusing growth within designated corridors; 2) transfer of development rights from forested, rural areas to areas designated as growth zones; 4) mitigating forest loss through reforestation and conservation offsite; 3) modifying subdivision designs to cluster housing, thus reducing land clearing associated with new housing units.

Outside of Maine, there are states that have begun incorporating greenhouse gases into their environmental impact assessments.  This includes Massachusetts (MEPA), New York (SEQR), California (CEQA), and King County, WA.  These states are developing methodologies to quantify emissions, although only the western states are initially including an emphasis on forest carbon and forest loss mitigation.
future.