| Sourced From |
The Aitkin County Land Department, a forerunner in Forest Certification, is now pursing the potential for carbon credit sales by enrolling in the Voluntary Carbon Standard program which presently does about $258 million in business a year. The department now has the authority to seek an audit to verify its sequestered carbon. The audit could cost about $10,000. Aitkin County managed forest lands store more than five million tons of carbon. Mark Jacobs, Aitkin County Land Commissioner, estimates that at least $250,000 per year could be raised by selling carbon credits. Other forested counties in northern Minnesota are also seriously considering carbon credit sales and are closely monitoring the actions of Aitkin County. A study of Cass and Aitkin County forest lands found that the counties would gain only about $100,000 annually by selling carbon credits at present prices.
The County is not alone in seeking carbon credits. Private land owners like John Rajala, who owns 28,000 acres, are trying to get ready for this program. A private land owner in Wadena County is now receiving an annual check of $35 for planting trees on seven of his 60 acres. Carbon credits are now selling for about $2 a ton through the Chicago Carbon Credit Exchange. When mandatory carbon dioxide caps are in place, prices for carbon credits could increase from $20 to $40 a ton.
Farmers already are enrolling idle rangelands or grasslands in the carbon credit program. National Farmers Union officials said members have received more than $8 million for carbon credits since 2006. (Wadena Pioneer Journal)
Duke Energy, based in Charlotte, N.C., will invest in planting one million acres of trees in seven states to receive carbon credits. These carbon credits will be purchased by utilities and other industries such as steel, cement, paper and aluminum. (The e- Forester)
Will the Cap and TradeBill Cost Industry Billions of Dollars?
It seems likely that energy costs could skyrocket, as a Congressional Budget Office analysis of the cost of global warming legislation estimates that low-income families could receive $161 to $359 in credits or rebates to cover the costs of higher energy bills. (The article did not state if those would be monthly or yearly credits.)
The House passed a landmark Climate Energy Bill, 219-212, in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas by 17 percent from 2005 levels by the year 2020 and 83 percent by 2050 through the cap and trade program. The bill would limit CO-2 emissions from major U.S. industrial sources including power plants, refineries, and impose tighter performance standards on new coal-fired power plants. The bill will also protect customers from rising energy costs by giving rebates to low income households. Opponents said the bill places a new tax on energy that will stunt economic growth and do little to affect climate change globally. (Chicago Tribune & Seattle Times)
Ten Senate Democrats warned President Obama that they would not support any climate change bill that takes strong actions to limit emissions of Carbon Dioxide and would add to the costs of goods like steel, cement, paper & aluminum. Jobs could migrate overseas and foreign manufacturers would have a decided cost advantage.
At a carbon credit meeting at the Long Lake Conservation Center on May 19, Mike Saer of Great River Energy said he hopes that offsetting emissions will only cost rate payers an additional $1.70 a month. It makes me wonder just how much more will the cost be for large users of electricity such as schools, hospitals and small factories?
Kern Ridlington, a member of the Society of American Foresters, is a media relations volunteer for the SAF. He was IRRRC Forester in Aitkin County from l957 to l980, and District Forester in Park Rapids for seven years.
