Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter Sainsbury's avatar

In regards to your point about opportunity costs, estimates by Vertree put the marginal cost of avoiding deforestation at ~$35 per tonne of CO2. Their analysis was based on the cost of producing and selling deforestation linked commodities in over 50 tropical forest countries, including Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Unfortunately, at the moment the value we are placing on forested land is significantly less. And so, either via carbon credits or other financial instrument we are going to have to start paying a much higher price to protect the forest https://carbonrisk.substack.com/p/stopping-deforestation-faces-an-opportunity

Expand full comment
Kevin's avatar

I worry that avoiding deforestation is not cost effective. Imagine turning big parts of England into forest in order to capture carbon. It would be really ineffective, right? The cost of real estate would be better spent elsewhere.

For now, these areas of rural Brazil are really cheap. So it looks plausible to just keep them as forest forever. But over time Brazil will get richer, which makes the land more valuable. But the carbon sequestered stays the same. Once Brazil is just as rich as England, why would this strategy make sense in one place but not in another? This only seems to make sense if we keep Brazil poor forever.

Compare to investment in green technology, which becomes a better strategy as the world gets richer.

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts