The Bootleg Fire in southern Oregon, which burned over 435,000 acres in 2021, devastated a quarter of the Klamath East Forest Carbon Project. This project, designed to store carbon emissions and help combat climate change, was removed from California’s carbon offset market after failing to meet its promise of capturing carbon dioxide.

Now, the forest’s owner, Green Diamond Resource Company, plans to reintroduce some burned land into the carbon offset market. This move, while groundbreaking, has sparked skepticism and raised questions about the future of carbon credit systems and wildfire-prone forests.

What Happened to the Klamath East Forest?

The Klamath East project was once a cornerstone of California’s carbon offset market, capturing nearly 350,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide over 100 years. The program incentivized Green Diamond to let trees grow longer and harvest less timber, generating nearly 1 million carbon credits worth around $14 million.

However, the Bootleg Fire wiped out a quarter of the forest, forcing the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to remove the project from its offset market. This decision was made to protect the market’s credibility, as burned trees release stored carbon into the atmosphere.

The Plan to Re-Enroll Burned Land

Green Diamond has requested CARB to approve four new carbon offset projects, including 48,000 acres from the burned Klamath East site. This would mark the first time previously scorched land is reintroduced into California’s carbon market.

While CARB officials say re-enrollment is within the rules—provided double counting of carbon storage is avoided—critics argue it could set a risky precedent.

Why Critics Are Concerned

Critics worry that allowing high-risk, wildfire-prone areas into the market undermines its integrity. Grayson Badgley, a researcher at the nonprofit Carbon Plan, expressed doubts about using arid forests like those in southern Oregon to meet long-term climate goals.

“These forests are in regions prone to fires, and re-enrolling them could add liabilities to California’s buffer pool and the program as a whole,” Badgley said.

The buffer pool is a reserve of carbon credits set aside to cover project failures like Klamath East. However, with wildfires becoming more frequent, experts fear the pool could be depleted, jeopardizing California’s cap-and-trade program.

Green Diamond’s Perspective

Dave Walters, Green Diamond’s Vice President of Acquisitions, defends the re-enrollment proposal, emphasizing the financial pressures on the company. Without the revenue from carbon credits, Green Diamond might resort to aggressive timber harvesting or selling the land, both of which would harm the environment.

“We’ll continue planting seedlings in burned areas regardless of market approval,” Walters said. “But the decision will influence how we manage those forests moving forward.”

To address wildfire risks, Walters proposed increasing Green Diamond’s contribution to the buffer pool. This would provide additional “insurance” for the program while enabling the company to meet its environmental and profitability goals.

Balancing Risks and Incentives

The debate highlights the complexities of managing carbon markets in an era of increasing wildfires. On one hand, re-enrolling burned land could provide funds to restore forests and combat climate change. On the other hand, critics argue that it risks incentivizing projects in vulnerable areas with low long-term benefits.

For now, CARB’s decision on Green Diamond’s proposal will set the tone for how similar cases are handled in the future.

Conclusion

The re-enrollment of burned forest land into California’s carbon market is a double-edged sword. While it offers a way to fund restoration efforts, it also raises questions about the viability of offset programs in fire-prone regions.

As California and the world grapple with climate change, finding a balance between environmental stewardship and market integrity will be key.

Disclaimer – Our team has carefully fact-checked this article to make sure it’s accurate and free from any misinformation. We’re dedicated to keeping our content honest and reliable for our readers.