The opportunity cost of delaying climate action: Peatland restoration and resilience to climate change

[Geoeng Info]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378021001023

The opportunity cost of delaying climate action: Peatland restoration and resilience to climate change

Klaus Glenk, Michela Faccioli, Julia Martin-Ortega, Christoph Schulze, Jacqueline Potts

Abstract

Ecosystem restoration and, in particular, peatland restoration, are considered a promising greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategy to move towards net zero emissions. To remain within acceptable limits for projected warming scenarios, inaction with respect to GHG mitigation in the short term implies a need for even larger removals of GHGs in the longer term, which can be conceptualized as a ‘mitigation debt’. This paper explores the economic implications of delaying GHG mitigation through ecosystem restoration using data of a large survey (N = 1377) that included a choice experiment to elicit the public’s willingness to pay (WTP) for peatland restoration in Scotland, UK. The valuation specifically considers the interaction between the timing of restoration action and long-term ecosystem resilience. We find that respondents have a substantial WTP for peatland restoration. Importantly, we find considerable benefits for early restoration action (up to £191 million annually in our case study), which is linked to an increased resilience of peatlands under future climate change. This demonstrates that delaying restoration and thus accumulating a mitigation debt has an important opportunity cost that substantially decreases the related economic benefits. Attitudes towards climate change and climate change beliefs are found to explain variation in the public’s WTP. Our research strengthens the economic argument for not delaying climate change mitigation through ecosystem restoration, demonstrating that the mitigation debt also translates into a welfare loss. To fully realise the potential benefits associated with immediate mitigation using peatland restoration, however, more needs to be understood about the mechanisms that facilitate large-scale implementation in practice.

[Ronal Larson]

Lists (adding biochar.io):

This non-fee article has little to do with CDR.

But I highly recommend it.  Thanks for the alert.   The title doesn’t show that this is mostly about a public opinion survey (in Scotland) on local expenditures for peatland recovery.  The survey methodology looks excellent,  And should be transferrable to CDR issues.

The same recent issue of Global Environmental Change has almost 30 articles - all but one is non-fee.  Should be more with a CDR flavor.

Biochar seems to be winning out uniformly over using peat in potting mixes (no mention of biochar in the article).  The article has nothing to do with potting mix formulations - about which there are hundreds of articles mentioning biochar..

I’ve searched for a half-hour for any article that might say that peatland restoration (this article’s topic) might go faster and better with some added biochar.  None. This would be in part for this list’s CDR purposes.  Anyone know?

Ron

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Carbon Dioxide Removal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to CarbonDioxideRem...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/CarbonDioxideRemoval/CAKSzgpZW7O%3D-koLHfR6gDF-%2Byb3v8FX3oFFODVXa5WOEkEjpZA%40mail.gmail.com.