Miško investuotojų medžių diskusija: mediena ar anglies kreditai?

  „Investicijų valdytojai, supirkę miško žemę, eina nuo medžio prie medžio, kad išsiaiškintų, ar juos reikėtų kirsti dėl medienos, ar išlaikyti juos anglies dioksido kreditui generuoti.

 

     Didėjanti kreditų paklausa reiškia, kad investicijos į miškus yra ne tik medienos gamyba, bet gali prireikti daug pastangų, norint nustatyti, kokį vaidmenį kiekvienas medis turėtų atlikti portfelyje, taip pat užtikrinti, kad jis duos žadėtą naudą aplinkai, jei jis bus paliktas stovėti.

 

     „Jei investuojate į mišką, mes užduodame klausimą: „Kaip valdote medienos produktus, palyginti su anglies kiekiu?“ – sakė Brianas Kernohanas, „Manulife Investment Management“ privačių rinkų vyriausiasis tvarumo pareigūnas. „Mums atsakymas yra toks: „Ko nori mūsų klientai?“.

 

     „Manulife“, kurios investicijų portfelyje yra 5,4 mln. akrų miško, apskaičiuoja kiekvieno medžio vertę, kad pamatytų jos kirtimo strategiją. Kiekvienas miško medis turi būti įvertintas pagal rūšies augimo tempus ir produkto vertę. Jei anglies dioksido vertė yra pakankamai didelė, jis išlieka, net jei dar keletą metų. Jei ne, jis iškertamas medienai.

 

     Plačialapiai medžiai geriau sekvestruoja anglies dioksidą, tačiau užauga ilgiau, sukuriant iki 500–600 kreditų vienam hektarui, tačiau prireikia daugiau, nei 100 metų, kol jie subręsta. Spygliuočiai sukuria perpus mažiau kreditų vienam hektarui, tačiau subręsta per 35–40 metų, todėl jie gali būti naudingesni greičiau pasiekti nulinį išmetamųjų teršalų kiekį.

 

     Kernohanas teigė, kad iki šiol miško žemė nebuvo pakankamai vertinga, kad būtų laikoma verta investuoti tik dėl anglies sekvestracijos. „Dabar galime suvokti šią vertę“, – sakė jis.

 

     Remiantis „Boston Consulting Group“ ir „Shell“ ataskaita, savanoriška anglies dioksido kreditų rinka iki 2030 m. gali siekti 40 mlrd. dolerių, palyginti su 2 mlrd. dolerių 2021 m. Tai yra būdas įmonėms padėti panaikinti anglies dvideginio išmetimą, kurį jos gamina veikloje, ir gali būti ypač naudingas sunkiai sumažinamuose sektoriuose, tokiuose, kaip energijos gamyba ir sunkioji pramonė.

 

     Yra įvairių anglies kreditų tipų. Pašalinimo kreditai generuojami pagal tai, kiek anglies dioksido įmonė pašalina iš atmosferos, ir yra vertinami, kaip vertingesni, nes anglies tonažą galima lengviau apskaičiuoti. Vengimo kreditus gali būti sunkiau apskaičiuoti, nes jie gaunami, nevykstant veiklai, pavyzdžiui, nenukertant medžio. Medžių sodinimo iniciatyvos sukuria pašalinimo kreditus, nes jie pašalina anglį fotosintezės būdu.

 

     Dėl potencialios paklausos atsiranda anglies dioksido rinkos kūrėjų, pvz., „Finite Carbon“, įsikūrusi Wayne mieste, Pensilvanijoje. „Finite Carbon“ bendradarbiauja su instituciniais investuotojais, bandančiais nustatyti, kiek žmonės yra pasirengę mokėti už anglies šalinimą, ir žemės savininkais, kurie galėtų nusigręžti nuo tradicinių pajamų šaltinių anglies šalinimui.

 

     „Jūs turite priimti sprendimą“, – sakė Danielis Crawfordas, „Finite Carbon“ komercinių operacijų viceprezidentas. „Jūs įsigijote šį medį, tai kokia jo vertė ir iš kur ji atsiras?

 

     Crawfordas teigė, kad esamų medžių turtų anglies vertė tampa perspektyvi tik tada, kai miško plote yra medienos ir medienos paklausa. Jis sakė, kad jei medis niekada nebus kertamas, tai niekada nebuvo reikalo kaupti anglies dioksidą. Tokiu atveju vengimo kredito neturėtų būti.“ [1]

 

1. Markets & Finance: Forest Investors' Trees Debate: Timber or Carbon Credits? Khan, Yusuf.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 05 Mar 2024: B.9.  

Forest Investors' Trees Debate: Timber or Carbon Credits?

"Investment managers who bought up forestland are going tree by tree to figure out whether they should be felled for timber or kept up for carbon-credit generation.

Growing demand for credits means investing in forests isn't just about producing timber, but it can take a lot of legwork to determine what role each tree should play in a portfolio, as well as ensure it is delivering its promised environmental benefit if left standing.

"If you invest in a forest, the question we ask is, 'How do you manage wood products versus carbon?'" said Brian Kernohan, chief sustainability officer, private markets, at Manulife Investment Management. "The answer to us is, 'What do our clients want?'"

Manulife, which has 5.4 million acres of forest in its investment portfolio, calculates the value of each tree to inform its harvest strategy. Every tree in a forest has to be evaluated based on species growth rates and product value. If the carbon-credit value is high enough, it stays up even if for just a few more years. If not, it's cut down for timber.

Broad-leaf trees are better for carbon sequestration but take longer to grow, creating up to 500 to 600 credits per hectare but taking over 100 years to reach maturity. Conifer trees create half the number of credits per hectare, but take 35 to 40 years to mature, which can make them more useful in getting to net-zero emissions faster.

Kernohan said that until recently, forest land wasn't valuable enough to be considered worth investing in solely for carbon sequestration. "We're now able to realize that value," he said.

The voluntary carbon credit market could be worth as much as $40 billion by 2030, up from $2 billion in 2021, according to a report from Boston Consulting Group and Shell. It offers a way for companies to help negate the carbon emissions they produce from operations, and can be especially useful for those in hard-to-abate sectors such as energy generation and heavy industry.

There are different types of carbon credits. Removal credits are generated by how much carbon dioxide a company removes from the atmosphere, and are seen as more valuable because the carbon tonnage can be more easily calculated. Avoidance credits can be more difficult to calculate as they are generated through an activity not happening -- for example, not cutting down a tree. Tree-planting initiatives generate removal credits because they remove carbon through photosynthesis.

The potential demand is giving rise to carbon developers such as Finite Carbon based in Wayne, Pa. Finite Carbon works with institutional investors trying to establish how much people are willing to pay for carbon removal, and landowners who might be able to turn away from traditional income sources in favor of carbon removal.

"You have a decision to make," Daniel Crawford, vice president of commercial operations at Finite Carbon, said. "You have acquired this tree, so what is the value and where will the value come from?"

Crawford said the carbon value for existing tree assets only becomes viable if there is demand for lumber and timber within the area of the forest. If the tree was never going to be cut down, then there was never a case for carbon saving, he said. In that case, there should be no avoidance credit." [1]

1. Markets & Finance: Forest Investors' Trees Debate: Timber or Carbon Credits? Khan, Yusuf.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 05 Mar 2024: B.9.  

 

News from Landsbergisland

 Gabrielius Landbergis is ready to send our children to Ukraine to fight, while he himself is ready to hide from nuclear war in New Zealand.

Naujienos iš Landsbergijos

Gabrielius Landbergis yra pasiruošęs siųsti mūsų  vaikus į Ukrainą kovai, o pats slėptis nuo branduolinio karo Naujojoje Zelandijoje.

Why is the Lithuanian elite are defecating with the flour again?

 Western elites avoid even higher food prices in the West and starvation in the rest of the world, so they refrain from disrupting the food trade of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, the main suppliers of food and fertilizers to the rest of the world. The Lithuanian government, like an angry puppy, is trying to bite Russia, it growls in the direction of Russian food, ignoring even the possibility of causing political turmoil in the West that defends the Lithuanian government. European Union bureaucrats have come up with a less dangerous way to sting Russia: they let Ukrainian food in duty-free. Cheap and dirty Ukrainian food has driven down food prices in the EU and is ending up destroying food production in the European Union. Polish farmers are fighting it with the help of their government. And the Lithuanian elite is defecating with the flour and hoping that pretzels will become cheaper.

Kodėl Lietuvos elitas vėl šika miltais?

Vakarų šalių elitas vengia dar didesnių maisto kainų Vakaruose ir bado likusiame pasaulyje, todėl susilaiko nuo Ukrainos, Baltarusijos ir Rusijos, pagrindinių maisto ir trąšų tiekėjų likusiam pasauliui, prekybos maistu trukdymo. Lietuvos valdžia, kaip piktas šuniukas, stengiasi įkąsti Rusijai, tai urzgia į rusiško maisto pusę, nepaisydama net galimybės sukelti politinę suirutę ją ginančiuose Vakaruose. 

Europos Sąjungos biurokratai sugalvojo mažiau pavojingą būdą įgelti Rusijai: be muitų įsileido Ukrainos maistą. Pigus ir nešvarus ukrainiečių maistas numušė maisto kainas ES ir baigia sunaikinti maisto gamybą Europos Sąjungoje. Lenkų žemdirbiai su tuo kovoja, padedami jų vyriausybės. O Lietuvos elitas šika miltais ir tikisi, kad riestainiai atpigs.

Ukraine is at war with the EU, destroying the EU's agriculture, and Lithuanian politicians are helping Ukraine here: they call for speaking openly - Lithuanian farmers will have to share the pie with Ukraine, but it is important to remember what they get in return

  

 

 This is what the French elite said before the revolution: if the people don't have bread, let them eat cake.

 

     "On Friday, Polish farmers began to block the road between Kalvarija and the village of Budzisko in Suwalki County, Poland - during this action, they want to check the amount of transported Ukrainian grain.    

 

     Žygymantas Pavilionis, chairman of the Seimas Foreign Affairs Committee, is convinced that the task of politicians is to explain to farmers that they will have to share their pie with Ukraine, and that the entire agricultural policy will have to be rethought when Ukraine is admitted to the European Union.

 

     However, it is important to keep context in mind and what other scenarios would be possible.

 

     It encourages us to keep the overall context in mind

 

     "Support for you will decrease - you have to say it boldly. But think about what you get and buy for it. We have a safety buffer so that Russian tanks will not destroy your tractors here. Your children will not be taken to Siberia, your children will not be raped, and you will simply not be killed (Conservatives promise such a welfare state for Lithuania here (K.)). We will stay alive. Maybe we can pay for those three bottles of wine, donate one more tractor to the Ukrainians, so that we don't die - this is the price of any preparation in this sense, much lower than the cost of war, and there will be a war if Ukraine is defeated", - in the program "Business Approach" spoke Ž. Pavilionis.

 

     Vidmantas Janulevičius, president of the Confederation of Lithuanian Industrialists, explained that it is important to think not only about losses, but also about opportunities - and to think more broadly, not limited to one sector.

 

     "I would also like to say what kind of market is opening up for Western countries. To export, to build, to renovate, to rebuild after the conflict - here, too, there is such economic leverage," he noted.

 

     According to him, although it is very important to support and appreciate agriculture, it is necessary to be assured of food supply, to try to become one of the most productive agricultural countries in the world, but it is necessary to think about other sectors as well. "What about others? Should the factory machines be taken away and placed near the Seimas or somewhere else, for us as industrialists? We need to look for consensus and the fact that there are more opportunities than losses. And if we only look at one sector, we will always fight," said V. Janulevičius.

 

     There is a need to hurry up with the defense industry

 

     Regarding the defense industry, V. Janulevičius taught that industrialists are very limited by structural funds and it is necessary to be more active here. Also challenging is the complex legal regulation, which makes processes take too long.

 

     "We really need to invest as much as possible in local manufacturing so that, God forbid, if that potential collision happened on our border and not somewhere else, we would have many of the means of production right here with us so that we could respond very quickly so that we wouldn't be dependent on supply chains", he said.

 

     "Let's say with the same artillery shells. Today, four companies in Lithuania could produce them, two refused, because they are companies with foreign capital and simply produce products that could be easily changed in shape and produce projectiles. So I see a huge potential here and opportunities to collect as much tax as possible. It has been proven that the more you spend, the more you get back through taxes - you should not be afraid to spend money, of course, with care and proper investment. Now, the main prerogative of the state is to release money to the defense sector as soon as possible, so that it can be used and help us to feel a little safer," said V. Janulevičius. (I would also feel a little safer if one more of my Porsches was parked on the streets of Vilnius (K.)).

 

     He pointed out that while there are certain things we don't make, technology like airplanes or tanks, there are many additional things around the military, from clothing, ammunition, drones, anti-drones: "That lighter industry can be, but what the politicians have to do is to integrate the defense industry into that vertical of the big defense industry so that we are there."

 

     According to him, practically all business is covered by the defense tax, although they themselves will have to pay it both as business representatives and through VAT as consumers. "Again, the numbers show very simply - 75 percent. entrepreneurs would defend their homeland with a gun in their hands, when, by comparison, the vast majority is about 20 percent. Let's not push business against people," V. Janulevičius said."

 

You stole it, now you want to defend it against something. Paranoia of the rich. All of you should be imprisoned together with that idiot who stole 40 million euros from pension funds.