Importance of Seaweed in the Climate Change—Seaweed Solution 31
• It was not possible to consider this project activity as an attractive investment factor. No other source
of income existed here other than that from certified emission reduction (CER) credits because, based
on an economic analysis, the carbon sink produced by the pilot seaweed plantation was expected
to be a deficit. In terms of that analysis, the Internal Return Rate (IRR) would be very small and
meaningless if this project did not exist.
• Even though state and local governments set the purpose for this project area as the construction
and growth of seaweed forests that use algae, barriers arose in methods of financing, the design of
key technologies for reducing GHG emissions with seaweed, and various institutional aspects of
technology development. These interfered with our ability to achieve the objectives described in this
report.
• When carbon contents sequestered within the biomass, above- or belowground, fluctuated in the
marine substrate, the reservoir (pool) was to be considered within the guidelines for this project.
• If no other existing business activities were comparable to this project, certain aspects had to be
considered when predicting its success. That is, under current circumstances, the marine substrate
needed for the construction of seaweed forests was more likely to be devastated within the next
several decades if its quality continued to be degraded, economic analyses revealed unattractive
results, barriers were presented that hindered investments (e.g., the loan fund proved impossible to
use, bank loan financing encountered many obstacles, operators were unable to achieve successful
seaweed plantation or manage those new forests, the support system was inactive in these construction
efforts), or risks were shown in the CER credit market.
B.3 Description of how the methodology was applied to this project
It was previously difficult to establish a natural seaweed community within the project area discussed
here. Habitats for several benthic invertebrate animals and surfaces sufficient to support plant growth
had long been devastated and reduced to barren ground. Thus, we suggested the use of a new, artificial
substrate for forest construction. The history of project activities is listed in Table 4.
Table 4. History of project activities.
Period
Conditions/activity
Past ~ Oct 2007
No seaweed vegetation
Oct 2007 ~ Nov 2007
RIST/POSCO installed an artificial reef facility with Triton for seaweed forests (0.5 ha)
Dec 2007 ~ Jun 2009
The NIFS, South (West) Branch, RIST/POSCO, and local Co-op co-managed the facility
Jul 2009 ~ present
Construction of a pilot seaweed A/R CDM farm
B.4 Description of how actual removal of net GHG by carbon sinks can be increased above levels
that would have occurred in the absence of this registered project
We considered two factors—substrate eligibility and additionality—when implementing this project.
Ocean (marine) substrate eligibility is equivalent to Land eligibility in terms of A/R. The marine area
(substrate) used in this project had not shown any sign of recent seaweed growth and did not satisfy the
standards for defining natural growth of seaweeds or seaweed forests. We determined its eligibility based
on marine substrate utilization and a soil coverage map. As our second factor, the fact that a generally
explained method could be adopted as an additive means proved that this project was additive and did
not depict a baseline scenario.
An overview and the assessment procedures for additive approval are outlined below:
Step 0: Preliminary screening based on the starting date of A/R project activities
In the case of new afforestation, evidence should be presented that the coastal area is degraded and that no
seaweed vegetation has been promoted by artificial substrates over the past 30 years. Seaweed vegetation
and the project area had been gradually devastated by cultivation, harvesting of crops, and ranching.
• It was not possible to consider this project activity as an attractive investment factor. No other source
of income existed here other than that from certified emission reduction (CER) credits because, based
on an economic analysis, the carbon sink produced by the pilot seaweed plantation was expected
to be a deficit. In terms of that analysis, the Internal Return Rate (IRR) would be very small and
meaningless if this project did not exist.
• Even though state and local governments set the purpose for this project area as the construction
and growth of seaweed forests that use algae, barriers arose in methods of financing, the design of
key technologies for reducing GHG emissions with seaweed, and various institutional aspects of
technology development. These interfered with our ability to achieve the objectives described in this
report.
• When carbon contents sequestered within the biomass, above- or belowground, fluctuated in the
marine substrate, the reservoir (pool) was to be considered within the guidelines for this project.
• If no other existing business activities were comparable to this project, certain aspects had to be
considered when predicting its success. That is, under current circumstances, the marine substrate
needed for the construction of seaweed forests was more likely to be devastated within the next
several decades if its quality continued to be degraded, economic analyses revealed unattractive
results, barriers were presented that hindered investments (e.g., the loan fund proved impossible to
use, bank loan financing encountered many obstacles, operators were unable to achieve successful
seaweed plantation or manage those new forests, the support system was inactive in these construction
efforts), or risks were shown in the CER credit market.
B.3 Description of how the methodology was applied to this project
It was previously difficult to establish a natural seaweed community within the project area discussed
here. Habitats for several benthic invertebrate animals and surfaces sufficient to support plant growth
had long been devastated and reduced to barren ground. Thus, we suggested the use of a new, artificial
substrate for forest construction. The history of project activities is listed in Table 4.
Table 4. History of project activities.
Period
Conditions/activity
Past ~ Oct 2007
No seaweed vegetation
Oct 2007 ~ Nov 2007
RIST/POSCO installed an artificial reef facility with Triton for seaweed forests (0.5 ha)
Dec 2007 ~ Jun 2009
The NIFS, South (West) Branch, RIST/POSCO, and local Co-op co-managed the facility
Jul 2009 ~ present
Construction of a pilot seaweed A/R CDM farm
B.4 Description of how actual removal of net GHG by carbon sinks can be increased above levels
that would have occurred in the absence of this registered project
We considered two factors—substrate eligibility and additionality—when implementing this project.
Ocean (marine) substrate eligibility is equivalent to Land eligibility in terms of A/R. The marine area
(substrate) used in this project had not shown any sign of recent seaweed growth and did not satisfy the
standards for defining natural growth of seaweeds or seaweed forests. We determined its eligibility based
on marine substrate utilization and a soil coverage map. As our second factor, the fact that a generally
explained method could be adopted as an additive means proved that this project was additive and did
not depict a baseline scenario.
An overview and the assessment procedures for additive approval are outlined below:
Step 0: Preliminary screening based on the starting date of A/R project activities
In the case of new afforestation, evidence should be presented that the coastal area is degraded and that no
seaweed vegetation has been promoted by artificial substrates over the past 30 years. Seaweed vegetation
and the project area had been gradually devastated by cultivation, harvesting of crops, and ranching.