Agriculture GHG/Climate Change Workshop Saskatoon, Sask., Dec. 11-12, 2000 1 International...

Agriculture GHG/Climate Change Workshop

Saskatoon, Sask., Dec. 11-12, 2000 1

International NegotiationsWhere are we now? Issues for Agriculture

Dr. Wayne Lindwall Dr. Wayne Lindwall

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Semiarid Prairie Agricultural Research Centre (SPARC)

Swift Current, Saskatchewan


Saskatoon, Sask., Dec. 11-12, 2000 2

Globally Agriculture is a Globally Agriculture is a Major Source of GHG’sMajor Source of GHG’s> 25% of the Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

> 50% of the Methane (CH4)

> 70% of the Nitrous Oxide (N2O)


Saskatoon, Dec. 11-12, 2000 3

Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions By Sector - 1996________________________________

Transportation 11.4% Manufacturing18.9%

Energy 17.1%

Electric Utilities 18.9%

Other 2.9%

Institutional 12.3%Mining 3.8%

Pulp & Paper4.7%

Agriculture 10%

Context/CertaintyContext/Certainty



Kyoto target:563 Tg

671

748Business-As-Usual Range

450

550

600

750

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

500

650

700

800

GH

G E

mis

sio

ns

(Tg

of

CO

2 e

qu

iva

len

t)

1990 Baseline:599 Tg

703

140-185 Tg (20-25%)

Greenhouse gas emissions in Canada and the projected gap by 2010 to meet the Kyoto commitment

Gap increasing, implications for Ag sector

If we have to reduce GHGs by 25%



Intent of the U.N. Climate Intent of the U.N. Climate Change ConventionChange Convention

• “to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human-induced) interference with the climate system”

• Countries are to take measures to reduce emissions from sources and enhance removals by sinks.



Climate Change Definitions

• Sink - “Any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere” (eg. Photosynthesis, growing trees & crops)

• Source - “Any process or activity which adds a greenhouse gas to the atmosphere” (eg. fossil fuels, burn biomass, N2O, CH4)



Objective:Objective: Decision framework for inclusion of Ag. Soil Sinks at COP6 at the The Hague

• Decisions on additional sink activities …..should be based on sound science

• …..promote other social and environmental benefits (conservation, soil & water quality, biodiversity)

• …..should be consistent with principles of SLM and objectives of Climate Convent.



Promote Principle of Full Promote Principle of Full Carbon/GHG AccountingCarbon/GHG Accounting

• Enhancement of sinks and reduction of sources (all greenhouse gases)

• Including GHG sources from agriculture and NOT including sinks is inconsistent with intent of CC Convention and objectives of Kyoto

• Acknowledge uncertainties and challenges associated with measurement, verification, permanence, natural vs. human induced



Science Focus of “Sinks”Sinks” Seminars (and informal hallway discussions over last 2+ years)

• C-sequestration consistent with universal principles of soil and water conservation– Soil Quality/Productivity relationship

– Linkages to Biodiversity,Desertification, & Wetlands Conventions, global principles of sustainable develop

– Other environmental benefits, water quality, habitat• Address concerns/questions (herbicides, nutrients,etc)

– Acknowledge other GHG and quantify relationship

– Describe sink activities and estimated C gains, risks



Focus of Sinks Seminars• Measurement and Verification Issues

– Small sink in relation to large C pool

– Variability high but manageable with appropriate methodology

– Scaling up requires integration of technologies and use of process models

– Uncertainties often less than those associated with sources (double standard?)



IPCC Special Report and Policy Implications• Recommendations from Special Report should

be basis for Decision on inclusion of additional sink activities in Kyoto Protocol

• Report confirmed that sinks are real and land use changes - legitimate means to reduce GHG

• Full C accounting would lead to significant carbon credits for many countries

• Options exist to deal with uncertainties, measurement and verification, etc. (cost?)

• Also, positive environ, social, economic impacts



Significant Progress over last 8 months

Impact of IPCC Science Special Report

Framework for countries’ sink submissions

Sinks Workshop in Poland to discuss SR and countries different issues/perspectives

August 1 submissions clarified sink numbers and countries expectations

Lyon, Viterbo mtgs. resulted in draft sinks text



Observations• Growing acceptance of Ag. Soil Sinks and

recognition of multiple secondary benefits and linkages to int’l sustainable development

• Size of potential (forest) sink is a major concern of many countries (EU, China/G77, OASIS, NGOs) and possibly their most N.B. criteria for inclusion rather than science or other criteria

• International awareness of GEMCo PSCB Project, farmer/industry (SSCA) support and science leadership, U.S. farm lobby support



Canada’s Agr. Soil Sinks Canada’s Agr. Soil Sinks Submission (Position)Submission (Position)Broad land-based inclusion to ensure

balanced & comprehensive accounting of sources and sinks

Cropland and grazing land management and shelterbelts (in addition to forest management)

Potential C-sink of 4 to 20 Mt of CO2/yr

over the 1st commitment period (2008-12)



Sinks Submissions to U.N. Secretariat in August, 2000

Assigned Amount (Mt CO2/y)

GAP

(Mt CO2/y)

Forest Managemt (Mt CO2/y)

Cropland & Grazing (Mt CO2/y)

U.S. 5,645 2,200 1,057 87.5

CANADA 563 200 35 4 to 20



Canada’s Position (con’t)

Symmetrical and balanced treatment of sources and sinks

Balanced approach consistent with principles of sustainable development and transparency of GHG accounting

Uncertainties of non-CO2 gases are greater than for C/CO2



Summary from Lyon meetings Good progress on the Sinks – Parties Aug. 1

submissions lead to 10-page draft text

Size of US sinks lead to discounting proposal

EU concerns about scale, verification, natural

EU/G77 concerns about sinks in CDM

Canada presentations to African countries and Special Ag Soil Sinks awareness seminar

Canada’s position- including Sinks is a condition of ratification of Kyoto Protocol



CoP6 Phase-In of Sinks (U.S/Canada/Japan proposal)

• Phase-in: movement toward fuller carbon accounting which better reflects what the atmosphere sees.

• allowing cost effective and environmentally beneficial activities to receive credit.

• addressing concerns of Parties about 3.4 activities in the first commitment period.

• Including C-sequestration activities– as monitoring and measurement techniques are

implemented; future commitment periods.



What did we Want to Achieve with the Phase-In of Sinks?

• Address the issue of scale (which can include the possible influence of natural and indirect human effects)

• Be simple and transparent

• Preserve full incentives for additional action to enhance and protect sinks and reservoirs

• Needs of Parties and consistent with Parties’ understanding of what was agreed to at Kyoto



The Issue of Scale:Where should we focus?

0% 50% 100%

Canada

U.S.A.

Forest Mgmt

Grazing Land

Crop Land



The Issue of Scale:What is the concern?

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

A Can. E G U.S.ACountry

ForestManagement

and Base Year Emissions

(MtonnesCarbon

Per Year)



The Issue of Scale:What is the concern?

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

A B C D E F G H I

Country

ForestManagement

MtonnesCarbon

Per Year

Allowance



Defining the Initial Threshold• The initial interval (threshold) is the point at

which the scale issue becomes a concern.

• This was a judgement call – there is no scientific answer,

• There were several approaches to defining this initial threshold:

– An absolute number

– In relation to base year emissions, AA, or gap?

– A combination of the 2 (e.g., the lesser of …)



So What Happened?• EU initially receptive to Phase-In Proposal

• EU Media found out they were receptive

• EU rejected Phase-In idea as a non starter

• Counter proposals involved caps on sinks

• Little or no movement by Parties, impass?

• Pres. Of CoP developed compromise proposal that Parties could work hopefully from



President Pronk’s Proposal• Additional forest and agriculture activities

in 1st Commitment Period, but…

• Significant 85% discount on forest mgte.

- address scale, uncertainty, BAU

• Discount of 30% on agriculture sinks

- address uncertainty, permanence,



A E S A G H G F o rum , N is k u , M a rc h 1 3 -1 4 , 2 0 00 1 8

Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Primary A griculture (potential emissions/sinks for 2010)

9

22

32

3

23

41

-1

23

43

-16

25

48

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50M

t of

CO

2 eq

uiv

alen

ts

1991 1996 2000 2010

CO2

CH4

N2O

Annual Ag. Sources & Sinks

Assumptions 2010: 20% increase in livestock and 50%Adoption (optimistic?) of Best management practices



Future Implications/Needs • If Ag Soil Sinks not included, greater burden on

sector to reduce emissions (difficult & costly)

• Livestock sector will be major target (largely because of growing emissions)

• If Sinks are included, require national inventory system for C stock (& GHGs)

• More research on N2O and CH4, and C cycle process studies with alternative cropping systems; alternative uses of ag bi-products

Agriculture GHG/Climate Change Workshop Saskatoon, Sask., Dec. 11-12, 2000 1 International...

Documents

Transcript of Agriculture GHG/Climate Change Workshop Saskatoon, Sask., Dec. 11-12, 2000 1 International...