CarboInvent: Methods for quantifying forest carbon budgets B. Schlamadinger & W. Galinski

3. USDA Symposium on GHGs in Agric. and ForestryBaltimore, 21-22 March, 2005

www.joanneum.at/CarboInvent

Forests in the Kyoto Protocol

Afforestation, Reforestation, Deforestation Forest Management

IPCC Good Practice Guidance LULUCFA) Detect lands subject to these activitiesB) Estimate C stock changes and GHG emissions

on these lands

Projects (JI, CDM)

CarboInventMulti-source inventory methods for quantifying carbon stocks and stock changes in European Forests

14 participants, 10 countries November 2002 - October 2005

Joanneum Research Austria (coordination)EFI FinlandJRC European CommunityUniversity College Dublin IrelandMETLA FinlandInst Forest Ecosystem Res Czech RepublicPIK GermanyHung. Forest Res Inst HungaryGhent Univ BelgiumFed Forest Res Inst AustriaSwed Univ of Agr Sci SwedenUniv of Hamburg GermanyCREAF SpainUniv of Padua Italy

Objectives Identify / develop / test methods for improved estimates of C stock changes for

UNFCCC and KP reporting

establish database of BEFs and biomass equations for major EU forest types

develop methods for soil C assessment to be combined with forest inventories over large spatial scales

develop multi-source (RS, soils, forest inventory) methods for assessing C stock changes including their regional distribution and uncertainties

apply in test sites and suggest upscaling methods to national level

Biomass expansion factors at stand levelDatabase: in preparation

BEFStand mean tree diameter (cm)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Abo

ve-g

roun

d bi

omas

s ex

pans

ion

fact

or (

-)

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

SprucePineBeechOak

Results – biomass estimationwww.metla.fi/hanke/3306/tietokanta.htm

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 10 20 30 40 50

DBH (cm)

Bio

ma

ss

(k

g)

Carbon stocks in Swedish forest soils and its relation to site factors

Brussels, February 23 2005. Erlandsson, M., Olsson, M., Van Ranst, E and Lundin, L.

Test country Sweden: Purpose

Increase in soil C from north to south

Remote sensing applications

Stratification

K Nearest Neighbours (kNN) Method

Interpolation / extrapolation of forest inventories with time

Mapping aerial extent of severe damages

Monitoring Afforestation / Reforestation / Deforestation

(Direct estimation of biomass carbon stocks)

Classification of Remote Sensing ImageryExample: Forest Area

Disturbances (feed into both bottom-up and top-down approaches)

Windthrow

Ground view

Disturbances (feed into both bottom-up and top-down approaches)

RS view

„Bottom up“ approach „Top-down“ approach

Forest information (stemwood volume,species composition, soil types, land-use,etc.) aggregated at regional or national level

C budget integrated at regional and nationallevel (currently done for natl reporting)

C budget aggregated atlocal level

Raw data from soil and fieldassessment

Upscaling of methods toregional and national levels

Errors of source data and models

Errors of living biomasses by component

Errors of biomass turnover rates

Errors in the amounts of litter for three differentlitter types (input to soil model)

Errors related to the parameters in the soil model

Inventory data

Dry wood density

Biomass allocation

Carbon content

Drain from EFISCEN

Errors of drain biomass (harvest residues)

Result distributions for the amount of soil

carbon, changes in carbon, soil respirationResult distribution for

biomass carbon

Results – Top-down approachUncertainty analysis

Uncertainty of 1990 biomass carbon stock

Uncertainty of biomass carbon sink 2010-1990

Uncertainty of carbon stock and stock change estimates for Finland.

CV%=2.12

CV%=25.1

Vilén, T, Peltoniemi, M. & Meyer, J. Comparable uncertainty estimates of stocks and long-term sinks of biomass and soil carbon in an inventory based method combining a soil model for some European countries. Manuscript in preparation.

Results – Top-down approach

640 MtC 720 MtC

50 MtC 150 MtC

“Bottom-up” Integration

Plot data

Soil data

BEF (field and default)

Carbon estimates (without soil) per plot

Remote Sensing

Carbon Budget

Test sites

Joint Implementation projects

Results – CDM: Keep it simple!

Linking temporary credits to emissions trading

CDM projects result in temporary credits

Not exchangeable with other emissions allowances

Separate the liability from credit

Combine with the later part of credit stream from “energy projects”

Objective: facilitate linking of sinks offset projects with EU Emissions Trading System

Workshop, May 2-4Graz / Austria

Land-use Related Choices under the Kyoto Protocol

Obligations, Options and Methodologies for Defining “Forest” and

for Selecting Activities under Kyoto Protocol Article 3.4

Options for Including LULUCF Activities in a Post-2012 International Climate Agreement An Expert Meeting to Brainstorm on Objectives of LULUCF, Options for

Inclusion of LULUCF in a Climate Agreement, and Implications of these Options

Graz / Austria, 5-6 May 2005

Organized by:

With Additional Support from: