To achieve the Paris Agreement’s temperature goal, greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced as soon as, and by as much, as possible. By mid-century, CO₂ emissions would need to be cut to zero, and total greenhouse gases would need to be net zero just after mid-century. Achieving carbon neutrality is impossible without carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere through afforestation/reforestation. It is necessary to ensure carbon storage for a period of 100 years or more. The study focuses on the theoretical feasibility of an integrated climate project involving carbon storage, emissions reduction and sequestration through the systemic implementation of plantation forestry of fast-growing eucalyptus species in Brazil, the production of long-life wood building materials and their deposition. The project defines two performance indicators: a) emission reduction units; and b) financial costs. We identified the baseline scenarios for each stage of the potential climate project and developed different trajectory options for the project scenario. Possible negative environmental and reputational effects as well as leakages outside of the project design were considered. Over 7 years of the plantation life cycle, the total CO₂ sequestration is expected to reach 403 tCO₂∙ha⁻¹. As a part of the project, we proposed to recycle or deposit for a long term the most part of the unused wood residues that account for 30% of total phytomass. The full project cycle can ensure that up to 95% of the carbon emissions from the grown wood will be sustainably avoided.

1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Cambridge University Press; 2023. p. 3949.

2. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press; 2023. p. 3056.

3. United Nations Climate Change. Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available online: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement (accessed on 4 November 2024).

4. United Nations Environment Programm (UNEP). Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window—Climate crisis calls for rapid transformation of societies. Available online: https://www.unep.org/emissions-gap-report-2022 (accessed on 4 November 2024).

5. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press; 2023.

6. Cadez S, Czerny A, Letmathe P. Stakeholder pressures and corporate climate change mitigation strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2018; 28(1): 1-14. doi: 10.1002/bse.2070

7. Semmler W, Braga JP, Lichtenberger A, et al. Fiscal Policies for a Low-Carbon Economy. World Bank; 2021.

8. Schwaiger F, Poschenrieder W, Biber P, et al. Ecosystem service trade-offs for adaptive forest management. Ecosystem Services. 2019; 39: 100993. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100993

9. Scottish Forestry. Climate mitigation: woodland creation and management. Information Note—December 2020. Available online: https://forestry.gov.scot/publications/forests-and-the-environment/climate-change/973-information-note-climate-mitigation-woodland-creation-and-management (accessed on 4 November 2024).

10. Zagreev VV, Sukhikh VI, Shvidenko AZ, et al. All-Union norms on forest taxation. Kolos; 1992. p. 495.

11. Shvidenko AZ, Shchepashchenko DG, Nilsson S, Bului YI. Tables and models of the course of growth and productivity of plantations of the main forest-forming species of Northern Eurasia (normative and reference materials), 2nd ed. Federal Forestry Agency and International Institute of Applied System Analysis; 2008.

12. Veraverbeke S, Delcourt CJ, Kukavskaya E, et al. Direct and long-term carbon emissions from arctic-boreal fires: A short review of recent advances. Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health. 2021; 23: 100277.

13. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Phillips OL, et al. The enduring world forest carbon sink. Nature. 2024; 631(8021): 563-569. doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07602-x

14. Guerr SPS, Garcia EA, Lanças KP, et al. Heating value of eucalypt wood grown on SRC for energy production. Fuel. 2014; 137: 360363.

15. van Ewijk S, Stegemann JA, Ekins P. Limited climate benefits of global recycling of pulp and paper. Nature Sustainability. 2021; 4(2): 180–187.

16. Amir A, Ottelin J, Sorvari J, Junnila S. Cities as carbon sinks—classification of wooden buildings. Environmental Research Letters. 2020; 15(9): 094076.

17. Shvarts EA, Karpachevskiy ML, Shmatkov NM, Baybar AS. Reforming Forest Policies and Management in Russia: Problems and Challenges. Forests. 2023; 14(8): 1524. doi: 10.3390/f14081524

18. Singh AK, Liu W, Zakari S, et al. A global review of rubber plantations: Impacts on ecosystem functions, mitigations, future directions, and policies for sustainable cultivation. The Science of the total environment. 2021; 796: 148948. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148948

19. Winchester N, Reilly JM. The economic and emissions benefits of engineered wood products in a low-carbon future. Energy Economics. 2020; 85: 104596. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104596

20. Quintana-Gallardo A, Schau EM, Niemelä EP, Burnard MD. Comparing the environmental impacts of wooden buildings in Spain, Slovenia, and Germany. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021; 329: 129587. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129587

21. Pierrehumbert R. Plant power: Burning biomass instead of coal can help fight climate change—but only if done right. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 2022; 78(3): 125–127. doi: 10.1080/00963402.2022.2062931

22. Iždinský J, Reinprecht L, Vidholdová Z. Particleboards from recycled pallets. Forests. 2021; 12(11): 1597. doi: 10.3390/f12111597

23. Wu Z, Deng X, Luo Z, et al. Improvements in Fire Resistance, Decay Resistance, Anti-Mold Property and Bonding Performance in Plywood Treated with Manganese Chloride, Phosphoric Acid, Boric Acid and Ammonium Chloride. Coatings. 2021; 11(4): 399. doi: 10.3390/coatings11040399

24. Zeng N, Hausmann H. Wood Vault: remove atmospheric CO2 with trees, store wood for carbon sequestration for now and as biomass, bioenergy and carbon reserve for the future. Carbon Balance and Management. 2022; 17(1). doi: 10.1186/s13021-022-00202-0

25. Guerreiro SF, Sartori AA da C, Teles Barbosa F, et al. Estimating biomass and carbon in planted forest using the Schumacher & Hall model: a case study (Portuguese). Journal of Agribusiness and the Environment. 2021; 14(Supl. 2): 1-9. doi: 10.17765/2176-9168.2021v14supl.2.e8818

26. Verra. Who We Are. Available online: https://verra.org/about/overview/ (accessed on 7 November 2024).

27. Government UK. Greenhouse gas reporting: conversion factors 2021. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2021 (accessed on 4 November 2024).

28. Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. Government Greenhouse Gas Conversion Factors for Company Reporting, 2021. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1049346/2021-ghg-conversion-factors-methodology.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2024).

29. IPCC. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Available online: https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

30. Layard R, Glaister S. Cost-benefit analysis, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; 1994. p. 497.

31. Silva J de O, Monteiro FG, Santos LA dos, et al. Economic Viability in Eucalyptus spp. Clonal Plantation for Production of Pulp. Floresta e Ambiente. 2020; 27(4). doi: 10.1590/2179-8087.012318

32. Florêncio GWL, Martins FB, Fagundes FFA. Climate change on Eucalyptus plantations and adaptive measures for sustainable forestry development across Brazil. Industrial Crops and Products. 2022; 188: 115538. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115538

33. Elli EF, Sentelhas PC, de Freitas CH, et al. Assessing the growth gaps of Eucalyptus plantations in Brazil – Magnitudes, causes and possible mitigation strategies. Forest Ecology and Management. 2019; 451: 117464. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117464

34. Delgado-Matas C, Pukkala T. Comparison of the Growth of Six Eucalyptus Species in Angola. International Journal Forestry Research. 2011; 2011: 980259, doi: 10.1155/2011/980259

35. De Moraes GJL, Alcarde AC, Rioyei HA, et al. Integrating genetic and silvicultural strategies to minimise abiotic and biotic constraints in Brazilian eucalypt plantations. Forest Ecology and Management. 2013; 301: 6–27. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.12.030

36. Viera M, Rodríguez-Soalleiro R. A Comprehensive assessment of carbon stocks in above and belowground biomass components of a hybrid Eucalyptus plantation in Southern Brazil. Forests. 2019; 10(7): 536; doi: 10.3390/f10070536

37. Resquin F, Navarro-Cerrillo RM, Carrasco-Letelier L, Casnati CR. Influence of contrasting stocking densities on the dynamics of above-ground biomass and wood density of Eucalyptus benthamii, Eucalyptus dunnii, and Eucalyptus grandis for bioenergy in Uruguay. Forest Ecology and Management. 2019; 438: 63–74.

38. Department of Forestry, Fisheries and The Environment. Methodological Guidelines for Quantification of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. South Africa. Government Gazette. 47257. Available online: https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2005/09/NEMAQA-Methodological-Guidelines-for-Quantification-of-Greenhouse-Gas-Emissions.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2024).

39. Colodette JL, Gomes CM, Gomes FJ, et al. The Brazilian wood biomass supply and utilization focusing on eucalypt. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture. 2014; 1(1). doi: 10.1186/s40538-014-0025-x

40. Wood-Prom. Fibria technology reduces water consumption in eucalyptus cultivation. Available online: http://wood-prom.ru/news/14724_tekhnologiya-fibria-pozvolyaet-umenshit-potrebleni (accessed on 4 November 2024).

41. da Silva RML, Hakamada RE, Bazani JH, et al. Fertilisation Response, Light Use, and Growth Efficiency in Eucalyptus Plantations across Soil and Climate Gradients in Brazil. Forests. 2016; 7(6): 117. doi: 10.3390/f7060117

42. Nabuurs GJR, Mrabet A, Abu Hatab M, et al. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press; 2023.

43. Verified Carbon Standard. Programme Guide. Available online: https://verra.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/VCS-Program-Guide_v4.1.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2024).

44. Bid detail Enhancing Business. Brazil Project Notice—Amazon Reflorestamento Consortium (ARC)—The ARC REDD + Project. Available online: https://www.biddetail.com/projects/project-information/38670 (accessed on 4 November 2024).

45. Kashurina YV. Experience of plantation forestry in tropical and temperate zones. Young researchers of the agro-industrial and forestry complexes - to the regions: Collection of scientific papers based on the results of the VI All-Russian scientific and practical conference with international participation. Vologda-Molochnoye. 2021; 3(1): 221–225.

46. Serenini L Jr, De Melo RR, Stangerlin DM, Pimenta AS. Wood quality of six eucalyptus clones planted in northern Mato Grosso State, Brazil. Wood Research. 2020; 65(4): 543-554. doi: 10.37763/wr.1336-4561/65.4.543554

47. Cunha TQG, Santos AC, Novaes E, et al. Eucalyptus expansion in Brazil: Energy yield in new forest frontiers. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2021; 144: 105900. doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105900

48. Silva CAF, Bueno JM, Neves MR. The pulp and paper industry in Brazil. Fornecedores & Fabricantes. 2015; 216: 20–32.

49. Paper First. Valmet delivers key technology for Bracell’s new pulp mill in Brazil. Available online: https://www.paperfirst.info/valmet-delivers-key-technology-for-bracells-new-pulp-mill-in-brazil/# (accessed on 4 November 2024).

50. University of São Paulo. Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture. Available online: https://www.esalq.usp.br/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

51. de Almeida DH, de Almeida TH, Ferro FS, et al. Analysis of Solid Waste Generation in a Wood Processing Machine. International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry. 2017; 7(3): 76-79. doi: 10.5923/j.ijaf.20170703.03

52. Agius MR, Rychert CA, Harmon N, et al. A thin mantle transition zone beneath the equatorial Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Nature. 2021; 589(7843): 562-566. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-03139-x

53. Rafael SM. Investment project in a Brazilian eucalyptus farm. Available online: https://www.politesi.polimi.it/handle/10589/64221 (accessed on 4 November 2024).

54. Baltpool. Prices of timber products. Available online: https://www.baltpool.eu/en/timber-exchange/prices-of-timber-products/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

55. CEPEA. CEPEA—Setor Florestal. Available online: https://www.cepea.esalq.usp.br/br/categoria/florestal.aspx (accessed on 4 November 2024).

56. CEPEA. Informativo CEPEA—Setor Florestal. Available online: https://www.cepea.esalq.usp.br/upload/revista/pdf/0075850001655474570.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2024).

57. Resource Wise. Wood Market Prices. Available online: https://woodprices.com/sawlogs-price-indices/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

58. UNECE. Forest Products Annual Market Review 2020–2021. Available online: https://unece.org/forests/publications/forest-products-annual-market-review-2020-2021 (accessed on 4 November 2024).

59. Virgens AP, Freitas LC, Leite ÂMP. Economic and Sensitivity Analysis in a Settlement Stablished in Southwestern Bahia (Portuguese). FLORAM. 2016; 23(2): 211–219. doi: 10.1590/2179-8087.104914

60. Global Petrol Prices. Brazil Diesel prices. Available online: https://www.globalpetrolprices.com/Brazil/diesel_prices/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

61. FRED. Interest Rates, Discount Rate for Brazil. Available online: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/INTDSRBRM193N (accessed on 4 November 2024).

62. Opanda S. Carbon Credit Pricing Chart: Updated 2023. Available online: https://8billiontrees.com/carbon-offsets-credits/new-buyers-market-guide/carbon-credit-pricing/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

63. Turner G, Helmke E, Tetteh-Wright TA, et al. Future Demand, Supply and Prices for Voluntary Carbon Credits—Keeping the Balance. Trove Research. 2021: 51.

64. Qin Y, Xiao X, Wigneron JP, et al. Carbon loss from forest degradation exceeds that from deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2021; 11: 442–448.

65. Global forest coalition. Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendants, and peasant farmers resist ‘green deserts’ in Brazil, 2018. Available online: https://globalforestcoalition.org/resisting-green-deserts-in-brazil/ (accessed on 4 November 2024).

66. Rainforest Rescue. Brazil: trading nature for eucalyptus? Available online: https://www.rainforest-rescue.org/petitions/940/brazil-trading-nature-for-eucalyptus (accessed on 4 November 2024).

67. Ferraz SF de B, Rodrigues CB, Garcia LG, et al. Effects of Eucalyptus plantations on streamflow in Brazil: Moving beyond the water use debate. Forest Ecology and Management. 2019; 453: 117571. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117571

68. Schneider WDH, Bolaño Losada C, Moldes D, et al. A Sustainable Approach of Enzymatic Grafting on Eucalyptus globulus Wood by Laccase from the Newly Isolated White-Rot Basidiomycete Marasmiellus palmivorus VE111. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering. 2019; 7(15): 13418-13424. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b02770

69. Federative Republic of Brazil. Brazil’s submission of a Forest Reference Emission Level (FREL) for reducing emissions from deforestation in the Amazonia biome for REDD+ results-based payments under the UNFCCC from 2016 to 2020. Federative Republic of Brazil. 2018.

70. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). REDD+ results-based payments for results achieved by Brazil in the Amazon biome in 2014 and 2015. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2019.

71. Green Climate Fund. Heritage Colombia (HECO): Maximizing the Contributions of Sustainably Managed Landscapes in Colombia for Achievement of Climate Goals. Green Climate Fund. 2019.

72. Green Climate Fund. Peruvian Amazon Eco Bio Business Facility (Amazon EBBF). Green Climate Fund. 2022.

73. Green Climate Fund. The Amazon Bioeconomy Fund: Unlocking private capital by valuing bioeconomy products and services with climate mitigation and adaptation results in the Amazon. Green Climate Fund. 2021.

74. Green Climate Fund. &Green Fund: Investing in Inclusive Agriculture and Protecting Forests. Green Climate Fund. 2023.