Land Carbon: Protecting nature and ending fossil fuels are crucial in combating climate change

In order to limit global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement and mitigate catastrophic climate change, there must be rapid and deep cuts to emissions across all sectors of the economy.

In making these cuts, the priorities must be to stop and prevent the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, and to protect forests, bushlands and natural ecosystems—which are some of our best assets in mitigating and adapting to the impacts of climate change.

As landscapes across the continent face compounded threats of industrial-scale destruction and the impacts of climate change, ecosystem resilience and adaptation have never been more important. Enhanced protection, restoration and management of ecosystems—from forests to grasslands—play a critical role in maintaining healthy, intact, functioning landscapes, the carbon cycle, and regulation of the climate [1].

Storing carbon in land is no alternative for reducing fossil fuel emissions. However, it is possible for carbon to be sequestered in land systems. Doing so can help mitigate climate change and protect biodiversity (for example, by avoiding clearing, and restoring, carbon-rich vegetation).

The Wilderness Society believes any use of land carbon projects, especially offsets, must be tightly controlled, in light of well-documented integrity concerns. Some key principles that must be met if integrity is to be ensured are outlined below.
 

Land carbon projects

The primary goals of land carbon projects must be true emissions reductions and avoiding destruction of nature. The projects must be truly ‘additional’ protections—rather than securing existing or proposed initiatives, or protected areas. High integrity land carbon projects should result in real and additional reductions in carbon emissions and biodiversity benefits. These projects should be embedded in a genuine and rapid phase-out of harmful activities—not alongside or perpetuating business as usual.

All land carbon and restoration projects must meet minimum standards for a rights-based approach. They must respect the cultural and self-determination rights of First Nations, as well as First Nations’ responsibilities, duties and obligations, including the requirement to obtain free, prior and informed consent. Land carbon projects must respect community rights in environmental decision-making, as well as securing and generating socio-economic co-benefits.

A baseline requirement for projects must be a commitment to storing and protecting the land carbon for at least 100 years, registered on the project’s title (i.e. 100 year permanence period). Prioritisation and implementation of potential land carbon offset projects must be consistent with national environment plans and other regulatory instruments (e.g. recovery plans) and must not freeze or delay regulatory reform such as strengthening biodiversity and vegetation management legislation. 

Projects must meet minimum standards for biodiversity and resilience outcomes, including:

• Maintaining, securing and generating additional biodiversity co-benefits—such as improved biodiversity and habitat for threatened species, and healthier, more resilient ecosystems
• Excluding monocultures and favouring native biodiverse plantations that restore a functioning ecosystem
• Prioritising rehabilitating degraded and fragmented ecosystems in order to restore connectivity and ecological function, with replanting cleared ecosystems next off the rank
• Fire management or other abatement projects must align with sound ecosystem management practices that minimise disturbance and maximise permanence of carbon storage and biodiversity

Carbon offsets

Carbon offsets must not be used to justify continued extraction, processing and/or use of fossil fuels at an unchanged rate. Governments and proponents must follow a legislated or regulated mitigation hierarchy: where the priority is to first avoid emissions, then reduce them, and offsets are only taken as a matter of last resort and in cases where impacts cannot be fully avoided. Any residual emissions that cannot be eliminated (although should be minimised as much as possible and as quickly as possible) should be offset in full (scopes 1, 2, 3).

Any offsets for unavoidable emissions (e.g. certain types of transport) should be sourced from high quality offsets with biodiversity and socio-economic co-benefits, including those that avoid the burning of fossil fuels, such as–high integrity vegetation-based projects.

Existing obligations to store land carbon such as native vegetation and biodiversity laws, market standards and restoration under land carbon covenants or government grants, must not be used for offsets. Land carbon offset schemes must provide for accountability, transparency and enforceability (including third-party verification) in the delivery of the offset by credible offset specialists inside an independent regulatory body.

Double counting of carbon offsets must be avoided. Only one entity must claim the carbon offset. If an entity sells carbon offsets, it cannot claim these offsets for its own emissions. Carbon offset scheme design must not slow future environmental regulatory reform such as raising the standards in native vegetation laws.

[1] https://iucn.org/news/climate-change/201812/protecting-climate-protecting-nature#:~:text=Moreover%2C%20 restoring%20 degraded%20lands%20and,regulation%20of%20the%20planet%20 climate.