The Future of Blue Carbon with Jennifer Howard of Conservation International
March 24, 2023
As companies, governments, and nonprofits alike look for ways to reduce their carbon footprints, many are turning to carbon offset projects, specifically nature-based solutions. Blue carbon projects are widely considered to be some of the most promising, and we are hosting a series of panels discussing these marine restoration projects and associated voluntary carbon markets at this year’s UNC Cleantech Summit.
One of our primary speakers on this topic is Dr. Jennifer Howard, Vice President and Senior Director of the Blue Carbon Program at Conservation International. I had the wonderful opportunity to interview her for this article ahead of the upcoming Summit. She provided a multitude of insights into the world of blue carbon, carbon markets, and the optimism she feels looking towards the future of this climate change mitigation strategy.
Before beginning to discuss the specific blue carbon projects she has worked on and what companies and nonprofits can do to make more effective progress toward climate goals, Dr. Howard defined blue carbon as she and Conservation International see it. Conservation International, she said, may have a more specific definition than the general public because they try to reserve their definition to what is substantially supported by scientific research.
While certain solutions such as the reduction of ocean floor trawling and sediment disturbance or the farming of kelp have been proposed, Dr. Howard stated that Conservation International focuses solely on the blue carbon solutions that are the most justified by robust scientific research. This differentiation is important, according to Dr. Howard, as it is vital that funds are not diverted from the most impactful blue carbon projects. The organization defines blue carbon as the carbon that is sequestered, stored, and, in the case of their destruction, emitted by mangroves, salt marshes, and seagrasses. This carbon can be found both in the biomass of these marine ecosystems along with their soil.
Building on the importance of soil as a carbon sink in marine ecosystems, Dr. Howard emphasized that the ideal blue carbon solution is one that focuses on the conservation of existing ecosystems. Destruction of ecosystems like mangroves and marshes emits carbon from the soil that cannot be recovered on “any climate relevant time scale,” meaning that preventing their destruction is paramount. However, Dr. Howard acknowledged that restoration efforts are vital as well, not only as a means to restore ecosystem functions like coastal protection, but also because unrestored marine ecosystems may continue to actively emit carbon from their soil depending on how the land is managed.
Beyond the carbon emissions benefits of blue carbon projects, Dr. Howard described how she and Conservation International believe it is vital that restoration and conservation projects of all types must be designed to benefit people. If these projects are not designed with local communities and their needs in mind, the interventions a project may implement may not last long enough to make a tangible impact. Without human-focused benefits, climate benefits can often seem abstract to the communities involved, and without emissions benefits, members of industry often see little incentive to invest, so this interconnection of people and climate is key.
Blue carbon projects, and mangrove restoration projects specifically, offer a chance to truly capitalize on these intersectional benefits. Restoring ecosystems such as mangroves not only reduces carbon emissions and sequesters CO2 from the atmosphere; it also benefits local, often underserved communities with stronger coastal protection, increased fisheries productivity, more job opportunities, and a higher quality of life.
Dr. Howard emphasized this intersection as she recounted the project she led in Cispatá, Colombia that Conservation International, Apple, and various partners put together. This project was a first of its kind in the coastal marine space in that the management strategy was designed to quantify the carbon benefits generated from the conservation and restoration generated from of all aspects of the ecosystem, from the plant matter to the soil, and included sea level rise in the assessment of the permanence of the carbon benefits. Because of this quantification and monitoring, the project’s connection to industry through the sale of verified carbon units is much more substantial, allowing for the project to last longer with more stable funding.
From this project, Dr. Howard said that she learned a plethora of lessons about the challenges that blue carbon projects can face and how they could potentially be overcome. One of the biggest challenges they faced was that projects like the one in Cispatá take a lot of work and time to create actual carbon credits for carbon markets. Because nature is wild and effectively impossible to control, it can sometimes feel discouraging to build these projects, and the private sector often becomes impatient with the slow pace of the work. It is vital that projects are developed at the speed of local communities, but companies often want carbon credits as an immediate payout.
To counter these challenges, Dr. Howard offered that improved public understanding of what goes into blue carbon projects is necessary. By ensuring that investors understand the long-term commitment required by blue carbon projects, companies may feel safer investing in projects that they otherwise would avoid. Another step forward she mentioned is in showing blue carbon projects grace as they grow and change. These are nature-based solutions, after all. They are trees and seagrasses not “carbon scrubbers and windmills” with easily quantifiable emissions benefits. Thus, the public needs to show these projects grace while rightfully calling out actual fraudulence.
With the perceived lack of trust from the media and environmentalists towards carbon offset projects, Dr. Howard feels that it is critical to remind people that protections are in place for nature-based projects to prevent people from claiming benefits they didn’t earn. In addition, it is important to remember the community benefits of blue carbon projects; the benefits go far beyond simple emissions reduction, and these are often ignored when projects are criticized for “greenwashing.”
Companies also do not want to be labeled as unsustainable or deceiving, so they have as much of an incentive as the project developers to purchase scientifically sound carbon offsets. As Dr. Howard quipped, “nobody wants to be the headline of a bad news article.” This is where projects like the High Quality Blue Carbon Principles and Guidance that she co-authored and launched at last year’s COP in Egypt can come in. This project provides a set of guidelines and advice for project developers, governments, buyers, and investors on how to create effective blue carbon projects and outlines key questions companies should ask before investing in carbon offset purchases. Publications like Howard’s can help prevent potential misunderstandings by giving clear guidance to the parties involved.
Even with these worries, Dr. Howard emphasized the massive potential blue carbon projects have due to their role as voluntary solutions. Many polluting companies are not heavily regulated or included under the Paris agreement as their sectors are ignored by national regulation or they are international. Thus, voluntary carbon market solutions like blue carbon projects are one of the few ways these companies can get credit for emissions reduction.
Looking back to the intersectional benefits of blue carbon projects, a few challenges also arise. Blue carbon projects are considered to meet many of the UN’s sustainable development goals and offer many economic benefits such as fisheries improvement and protection of infrastructure. However, it’s relatively hard to observe this progress (especially regarding job and income numbers) as the progress is actually in preventing losses rather than actual growth. This disconnect can be hard for people to understand. However, by increasing the funding of blue carbon projects through carbon markets, these economic benefits can be increased and eventual community economic growth could be possible.
One of the most exciting opportunities Dr. Howard mentioned is in connecting blue carbon to sustainable production. Blue carbon projects that look for innovative ways to combine protection and restoration with sustainable production are going to be key to scaling these solutions. In addition, Dr. Howard mentioned how voluntary carbon markets provide a critical benefit as “long-term injections of reliable funding, allowing stakeholders to plan into the future in a way that jumping from grant to grant doesn’t allow,” and increasing their beneficial impacts.
When considering how blue carbon projects are funded, one of the most prevalent debates is over the stacking of nature-based credits. Some argue that projects should be able to receive credits related to more than one thing. For example, a mangrove restoration project could receive a carbon credit, a coastal protection credit, and a conservation credit even though it is just one project.
Dr. Howard sees both benefits and drawbacks in this approach. On the one hand, she finds it encouraging as it would allow projects to be recognized for their more diverse benefits, increasing their funding. However, she also sees concerns in terms of accessibility. In order to receive more of these stacked credits, projects will require more live data collection and monitoring which requires a large amount of technology and manpower. This could end up restricting projects to richer countries like the US rather than communities like Cispatá where the benefits may be felt more acutely.
Beyond the Cispatá project, Dr. Howard mentioned a few future projects and policy goals she hopes to see in the future. Currently, she is working at Conservation International on a project in the Philippines with a goal of combining terrestrial carbon sequestration efforts with blue carbon strategies into one cohesive management strategy of a broader biome. Similarly, she sees potential for future projects that sequester carbon across entire seascapes, which is important for jurisdictional approaches and for addressing landscape scale threats.
In the policy space, Dr. Howard hopes to see blue carbon become so accepted as a climate mitigation strategy that it can be included as part of wider sustainable development programs rather than solely being funded for its climate change mitigation value. She sees this happening with blue carbon projects playing roles in local agricultural production and as sources of community funds. One example she provided would be a farmer who helped to repair the coastline by adjusting fishing practices having access to newfound funds from the carbon market to repair equipment and improve operations. In connecting blue carbon to sustainable development, these projects can have positive impacts far beyond helping companies meet climate goals, and they can help local communities feel more tangible benefits.
Put best in Dr. Howard’s own words, “if you really wanna have an impact on a per hectare basis, you really can’t do better or have more impact than working on the coast.” While there will be growing pains and setbacks, the restoration of blue carbon ecosystems is a gold mine in terms of environmental, economic, and community benefits that will only continue to improve in the coming years.
About the Author
This article was written by Colin O’Hagerty, a first-year at UNC-Chapel Hill majoring in Environmental Science. He is currently an IE Cleantech Corner Initiative intern involved with the development of the 2023 Cleantech Summit. Connect with him on LinkedIn.