Preserving Blue Carbon: Global Options for Reducing Emissions from

Coastal Ecosystems

RFF Briefing New York, June 2, 2011

Juha Siikamäki (RFF)

Sunny Jardine and Jim Sanchirico (UC Davis)

Dave McLaughlin and Danny Morris (RFF)

Funding provided by

Linden Trust for Conservation, Victoria and Roger Sant, and Resources for the Future

Motivation

Coastal ecosystems constitute significant carbon storage

Coastal development Agriculture, aquaculture, residential, tourism, industrial

Reduces mangrove area by 0.7-2% annually (estimates vary)

Releases carbon stored in biomass and soils, prevents further accumulation

Forests and REDD Potential for low-cost emission reductions

Integral part of climate policy considerations

Is there potential for “blue REDD”?

1

2

Typical Mangroves

3

Mangroves Are Especially Carbon

Rich Forests

Source: Donato et al. 2011, Nature Geoscience April 3, 2011

Information Needs in Evaluating

Economic Potential of Blue REDD

Location of carbon rich coastal ecosystems

Volume carbon stored

Volume of carbon is accumulated

Rate of development for alternative uses

Volume of carbon released as a result of development

Current protection areas

Cost of additional protections

All of the above may vary by location; collect information on different locations

Predict the cost of blue carbon emissions avoided (per ton C, CO2)

Evaluate whether blue carbon presents cost-effective emission reduction

possibilities (relative to other opportunities such as other offsets, direct

reductions)

4

5

Mangroves Areas Globally

Map drawn in ArcGIS using data from Giri, C. et al;. (2011), Status and distribution of mangrove forests of the world using

earth observation satellite data. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 20: 154–159.

Americas

6

7

Bahamas, Cuba

8

Bahamas Close-up

Mangrove Areas in Bahamas

9

Bahamas Close-up II

Comparison to UNEP data

10

Comparison to Earlier Data (UNEP)

South Florida

11

SE Asia, Oceania

12

13

Borneo

14

Borneo: Protected Areas

15

Mangroves, Global Distribution

(% share of total)

16

Carbon Storage (% share of total)

Mangrove Centers

Total area globally about 139,000 km2 (13.9

million hectares, 35 million acres)

Indonesia alone accounts for roughly one fifth

Six countries account for more than 50%:

Indonesia, Brazil, Australia, Mexico, Nigeria,

Malaysia

Regionally, Southeast Asia contains almost

half of all global mangroves

17

18

Globally Countries with

Current Losses

Annual Losses

Mangroves, km2 139,170 128,213 1,023

Total C, millions tons 3,448 3,214 30.1

Total C, tons per hectare

on average 247 251 294

Protections, ha 560,461 541,959 4,000 (avoided)

Protections, mt C 400.5 388.3 1.1 (avoided)

Mangrove Area, Carbon, and

Current Protections (Preliminary)

19

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

$14

$16

$18

$20

- 14 29 43 57 71 86 100 114

$/ton CO2

CO2, millions of tons annually

Marginal Cost of Preserving Mangrove

Blue Carbon (Preliminary)

20

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

$14

$16

$18

$20

- 14 29 43 57 71 86 100 114

$/ton CO2

CO2, millions of tons annually

Marginal Cost of Preserving Mangrove

Blue Carbon (Preliminary)

EU ETS: CER CLOSE

May 31, 2011 12.94 €

($18.61)

21 Note: The above estimates are in C, not in CO2 (one ton C = 3.67 tons CO2)

Americas and Caribbean

Global and Regional Supply Curves

(Preliminary)

Governance Considerations

(Preliminary)

22

Americas and Caribbean

Summary Mangroves

store large amounts of carbon

are subject to considerable development threats

have high emissions per hectare lost relative to tropical forests

Preliminary results

Potential for considerable and cost-effective emission reductions

Southeast Asia emerges as a central region

Governance issues may restrict volume of low-cost emission reductions

Knowledge accumulating, but lot more to learn

23

Future Research Needs

Regional and local assessment

Regional and country level assessments

Reduce uncertainties, unknowns

Better targeting of conservation investments

Salt marshes and sea grasses

Serious lack of information

Systematic assessments limited by data

Carbon is not the only benefit from coastal ecosystems

Potential co-benefits to other ecosystem services may be

considerable, surely worthy of systematic assessments

24

25

Birds

Fish

26

Other species

27

People

28

For more information, please contact

Juha Siikamäki

Resources for the Future

juha@rff.org

Tel. 202-328-517

29