The Carbon Cycle - Policy Nexus Robert T. Watson IPCC, Chair

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
National Climate Change Conference Climate Action Now South Africa, October 2005 Climate Change Consultative Conference The CDM and strengthening.
Advertisements

Consideration of LULUCF activities... Thelma Krug Ministry of the Environment.
LULUCF María J. Sanz UNFCCC Secretariat 1-3 April 2008 Bangkok, Thailand AWG-KP 5 In-session workshop on means to reach emission reduction targets.
Carbon Emissions. Increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration Atmospheric increase = Emissions from fossil fuels + Net emissions from changes in land use.
Carbon sequestration potential assessment in India by A/R activities and implementation of pilot studies Indo-Italian Business Seminar on Renewable Energy.
Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report © dreamstime Prof. Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer Co-Chair, IPCC Working Group III WCERE, Istanbul,
IPCC Synthesis Report Part IV Costs of mitigation measures Jayant Sathaye.
IPCC Mitigation Potential and Costs Land-Use Options Daniel Martino (Carbosur, Uruguay) CLA, Chapter 8 (Agriculture), WGIII Bonn, 12 May 2007.
AGEC/FNR 406 LECTURE 22 Carbon Emissions,
Stakeholder consultation on discussion document on GHG mitigation potential within the agriculture and forest sector Portlaoise 15 May 2015 Eugene Hendrick.
IPCC Synthesis Report Part I Overview How to address the issue of “dangerous anthropogenic perturbation” to the climate system The relationship between.
Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol and Civil Engineering Dr Stuart Parkinson
Basic Climate Change Science, Human Response and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Prepared for the National Workshop.
Carbon Trading: The Challenges and Risks John Drexhage Director, Climate Change and Energy International Institute for Sustainable Development Agriculture.
Climate Change and Forestry Allan L. Carroll, Ph.D. Natural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Pacific Forestry Centre Victoria, Canada Senior Research.
Anthropogenic Influences on the Global Carbon Cycle and its Implications for the Future Abstract Carbon makes up approximately 50% of the dry weight of.
UNFCCC Workshops on Synergies and Cooperation with other Conventions Espoo, Finland, 2-4 July 2003 Biological Diversity Perspectives David Cooper, CBD.
Biomass Carbon Neutrality in the Context of Forest-based Fuels and Products Al Lucier, NCASI Reid Miner, NCASI
Brief Overview of Legal Framework: UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol M.J.Mace Climate Change and Energy Programme, FIELD LDC Workshop Nairobi, Kenya 2-3 November.
Global Emissions from the Agriculture and Forest Sectors: Status and Trends Indu K Murthy Indian Institute of Science.
Energy policies and management of carbon balance in Estonia Olga Gavrilova, Tiina Randla, Raivo Vilu Tallinn University of Technology.
Climate change and the carbon cycle David Schimel National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder Colorado.
Relationship between the EU ETS and the Kyoto Protocol Flexible Mechanisms, from the Perspective of Bioenergy and C Sequestration Relationship between.
BioCarbon Fund Harnessing the carbon market to sustain ecosystems and alleviate poverty Basics of biological sequestration.
Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: what does it mean for bioenergy and C sequestration? Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: what does it mean for.
Global Sustainability: The Case for Collaboration Environmental Issues.
Carbon and the Science - Policy Nexus The Kyoto Challenge Robert T. Watson IPCC, Chair Global Change Open Science Conference Netherlands July 10th.
CDM and Forestry Sector in India Carbon Pool of Forestry Sector in India The growing stock of the country has been estimated to be 4,740 million m³.
“STEWARDSHIP IN FORESTRY” Forestry Projects for Terrestrial Sequestration -- Regulatory and Public Acceptance Issues -- Jim Cathcart, Ph.D. Oregon Department.
Johnthescone The IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation UN Climate Change Conference June 2011 Bonn, Germany, 7.
_________________ is the average meteorological conditions— temperature, precipitation, wind, etc.—that prevail in a region.
Newton Paciornik BRAZIL Policy Goals and Common Metrics Implications Bonn, 04 April 2012 Workshop on common metrics to calculate the CO 2 equivalence of.
1 Protection of soil carbon content as a climate change mitigation tool Peter Wehrheim Head of Unit, DG CLIMA Unit A2: Climate finance and deforestation.
Seite 1 Stand: Article 3.4 and CDM outcomes: implications for wood based industries / bioenergy Bernhard Schlamadinger IEA Bioenergy Task 38,
Joint Intersectoral Task Force on Environmental Indicators Fifth session Geneva, 4 – 6 July 2012 Grenhouse Gas Emissions Introductory Overview Vladislav.
1 Environmental Services Training Group LOCAL AUTHORITY ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE 2015 Protecting Our Environment Hodson Bay Hotel, Athlone, May 2015.
Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) European Commission expert group on forest fires Antalya, 26 April 2012 Ernst Schulte, DG ENV on behalf.
REDD+ negotiations and key milestones from Cancun to Durban Geneva, 9 May 2011 Clea Paz-Rivera, UN-REDD Secretariat.
Forest management, forest products & the climate.
Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master subtitle style The Primary Industries Climate Challenges Centre (PICCC) is a joint venture between.
Climate Change and Forestry —Possible Legal and Policy Instruments to Address Potential Effects of Forest Carbon Offsets Ding Zhi (Department of Law of.
1 Questions  Forest related outcomes of the UNFCCC meeting in Cancun (COP16) and EU’s position regarding forest in the ongoing climate change negotiations.
Role of forests in Finnish climate change policy Ministerial conference and workshop on the role of boreal forest in CO 2 balance Dr. Tatu Torniainen.
Climate Change Mitigation and Complexity Agus P Sari Country Director, Indonesia EcoSecurities.
1 PNNL-SA The Role of Technology in a Low- carbon Society Selected Key Findings from the Global Energy Technology Strategy Program Jae Edmonds February.
Anthropogenic Radiative Forcing. Global Mean Surface Air Temperature.
Clean Air for Europe ROLE OF ENERGY BASELINE IN CAFE 28 February 2002 Matti Vainio DG Environment, Air Quality and Noise Unit.
Ministerial workshop on the role of boreal forest in CO 2 balance Tuczno, April 26 – 29, 2016 Land use sector: A fair, cost-effective and affordable deal.
World Energy and Environmental Outlook to 2030
Carbon Sequestration Akilah Martin Fall 2005.
Forestry and the Kyoto Protocol
USG Climate Change Overview Chris Dragisic
Taking Action to Limit Climate Change
Our Changing Atmosphere
Carbon, Energy, and Carbon Credit Markets
The Paris Agreement and CDR/NETs
KYOTO PROTOCOL.
Science-Policy Interface
The Kyoto Protocol is a legally binding international
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Climate Change Mitigation: Research Needs
Kyoto Protocol.
Agreement on Domestic Sinks in the Kyoto Protocol (Bonn Agreement)
Mitigation and Adaptation
Key Messages Human influence on the climate system is clear
TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections
Basics of Climate Change Decision Making
GHG trends and projections for Annex I Parties
GLOBAL EFFECTS.
The Technology Mechanism of the UNFCCC
Presentation transcript:

The Carbon Cycle - Policy Nexus Robert T. Watson IPCC, Chair COP-6bis Bonn, Germany July 17th 1

Global Carbon Cycle Key Messages Human activities (combustion of fossil fuels and land-use changes) have and are continuing to perturb the carbon cycle -- increasing the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide The terrestrial biosphere has historically been a source of carbon to the atmosphere - it is currently a net sink The current terrestrial carbon sink is caused by land management practices, higher carbon dioxide, nitrogen deposition and possibly recent changes in climate This uptake by the terrestrial biosphere will not continue indefinitely. The question is when will this slow down, stop or even become a source? LULUCF activities will result in the sequestration of carbon in three main pools -- above and below ground biomass and soils for decades to centuries 9

Global Carbon Cycle Key Messages some of the LULUCF sequestered carbon could be released back to the atmosphere due to changes in climate, but unlikely for many decades -- even then there would still be more carbon in the three pools than without the LULUCF activities there may be a few instances, e.g., Boreal forests at high latitudes, when the benefits of carbon sequestration may be partially or fully offset by changes in albedo slowing deforestation has multiple environmental and social benefits monitoring systems can be put in place to monitor all three pools of carbon LULUCF activities buy time to transform energy systems to lower GHG emitting systems, but will allow more fossil carbon to transferred to the more labile biological pools, hence avoiding a tonne of carbon emissions is better than creating a tonne of sinks 9

Indicators of the Human Influence on the Atmosphere during the Industrial Era These figures show that the atmospheric concentrations of the key anthropogenic greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide were constant over hundreds of years until the industrial era. The observed increases in the atmospheric concentrations carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide of 33%, more than a factor of two, and about 15% are attributable to human activities. Similarly, the atmospheric concentration of sulfate aerosols started to increase in the late 1800s due to the combustion of coal.

Carbon emissions and uptakes since 1800 (Gt C) 6

The Global Carbon Cycle - 1990s Units Gt C and Gt C y-1 Atmosphere …are leading to a build up of CO2 in the atmosphere. 3.2 63 750 6.3 Fossil Deposits About 16,000 1.6 60 Plants Fossil emissions ... 500 Soil 91.7 90 2000 …and land clearing in the tropics... The KP seeks to reduce net carbon emissions by about 0.3 Gt C below 1990 levels from industrial countries Oceans 39,000 5

Current Role of the Terrestrial Biosphere During the 1990s the net global uptake of carbon by the terrestrial biosphere was about 1.4 Gt C per year --- assuming emissions from tropical deforestation in the 1990s were about 1.6 Gt C per year (the same as in the 1980s) --then the gross uptake of carbon by the terrestrial biosphere was about 3 Gt C per year Inverse modeling suggests that about 50% of the global uptake is occurring in the tropics and the other 50% in the mid- and high-latitudes of the northern hemisphere The primary cause of the current uptake (about 1.5 Gt C per year) in N. America, Europe and Asia is, as said earlier, thought to be re-growth due to management practices, with carbon dioxide, nitrogen fertilization and climate change contributing, but to smaller extent

Global Net Ecosystem Productivity Net ecosystem productivity, Gt C yr –1 Sink Source 4 2 – 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100 Predicted effects of changes in climate and atmospheric CO2 on the global net uptake of carbon by terrestrial ecosystems -- this model shows the sink maximizing in about 2050 and declining to zero by 2100 -- other models tend to show constant or less of a decline after 2050

The Kyoto Protocol The Challenge of Mitigation The near-term challenge is to achieve the Kyoto targets The longer-term challenge is to meet the objectives of Article 2 of the UNFCCC, i.e., stabilization of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system food security ecological systems and sustainable economic development

The Long-term Challenge Carbon emissions and stabilization scenarios

The Challenge of Stabilization of Atmospheric Concentrations of Carbon Dioxide If governments decide to stabilize the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide at 550ppm (about twice the pre-industrial level), global emissions would have to peak by about 2025 and fall below current levels by 2040 to 2070. This would mean that all regions would have to deviate from most “business-as-usual”scenarios within a few decades

Key Conclusions of IPCC In the absence of trading, Annex B costs of complying with the Kyoto Protocol, range from $150-600/tC (i.e., 0.2 - 2% loss of GDP), where-as with full Annex B trading the costs are reduced to $15-150/tC (i.e., 0.1 - 1% loss of GDP) These costs could further reduced with use of: the Clean Development Mechanism sinks mixture of greenhouse gases ancillary benefits and efficient tax recycling If all cost reduction activities could be realized then GDP growth rates would only have slow by a few hundreds of a percent per year

Key Issues for the Kyoto Protocol Article 3.3 Which stock changes? All, or only those directly human induced - what is included? Article 3.3 The net changes in greenhouse gas emissions from sources and removals by sinks resulting from direct human-induced land-use change and forestry activities, limited to afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation since 1990, measured as verifiable changes in stocks in each commitment period shall be used to meet the commitments in this Article of each Party included in Annex I. The greenhouse gas emissions from sources and removals by sinks associated with those activities shall be reported in a transparent and verifiable manner and reviewed in accordance with Articles 7 and 8. Can we separate the growth increment due to “normal” forest growth from that due to carbon dioxide, nitrogen fertilization and climate change or year-year climate variability? -- IPCC may be asked to assess this possibility 16

Potential net emissions from forests Art. 3.3 Annex 1 Countries -1 Mt C yr D AR IPCC definitions 26 -90 Note the qualifications about these estimates. Based on assumption that current rates of ARD continue through to 2012 Assumptions about the shape of the growth curve greatly affect the outcome 53

Potential emissions reductions from forests under CDM (using Art. 3 Potential emissions reductions from forests under CDM (using Art. 3.3 rules) in non-Annex 1 Countries Non-Annex 1 Mt C yr -1 AR D IPCC definitions 373 -1600 Avoided deforestation not eligible under current Pronk text - concern about baselines, leakage, permanence - multiple benefits, including biodiversity, water resource management 74

Key Issues for the Kyoto Protocol Article 3.4 Contrasts with Article 3.3 refers to “direct human-induced activities Article 3.4 … Such a decision shall apply in the second and subsequent commitment periods. A Party may choose to apply such a decision on these additional human-induced activities for its first commitment period, provided that these activities have taken place since 1990. The key issue is whether these activities must commence after 1990 or whether activities initiated before 1990, but that are continued after 1990, are eligible -- a key issue with respect to the current net terrestrial uptake -- Pronk text finesses this issue by discounting for the first commitment period 21

Interpretations of Article 3.4 Narrow definition Broad definition USA definition Forest Management Cropland Management Grazing land Management

Full carbon accounting All stocks across all carbon pools If applied to all land in all countries then the accounting would produce the “Net terrestrial uptake” of about 1.4 GtC y-1 (IPCC TAR) without any additional effort to reduce emissions or increase sinks Assuming emissions from tropical deforestation are 1.6 GtC y-1, this suggests a global uptake of about 3 GtC y-1 Assuming 50% of the uptake is at mid- and high latitudes, this would allow Annex I Parties to claim an annual credit of between about 1.5 GtC y-1 due to the residual uptake because of improved management practices pre-1990, carbon dioxide and nitrogen fertilization effect and climate change. Current text would limit this credit by discounting by 85%. 27

The current text discounts credits for forest management under Article 3.4 by 85%, and limits the use of sinks to 50% of total reductions The USA will likely seek to reduce the % discount on forest management below the 85% suggested by Pronk (ie allows them to generate more credits internally rather than having to buy them internationally). Also, the more the discount, the less encouragement there is for local action to improve forest management, thus 85% discount is unlikely to be increased. The EU are likely to oppose any increase in the Cap and clearly the USA will oppose any decrease. It almost appears that the thresholds have been set to minimise the potential for internation trading in sinks credit! Accounts for pre-1990 activities, does not separate direct from indirect human activities, and accepts broad definitions

Annual C sequestration potential (GtC/y) improvement of management within cover type - new activities since 1990 I Urban land management Annex 1 Global Rice Paddies Agroforestry Grazing land management Cropland management Forest management 0.1 0.2 0.3 Contains a best estimate of the rate of uptake of these activities by 2010 (varies between 3% to 80%) -- current text would inhibit investment in forest management under Article 3.4 because of the 85% discounting 83

Annual C sequestration potential (GtC/y) - change in cover type - new activities since 1990 84

Can the Direct and Indirect Human-induced sequestration be separated?? “For activities that involve land-use changes (e.g., from grassland/pasture to forest) it may be very difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish with present scientific tools that portion of the observed stock change that is directly human-induced from that portion that is caused by indirect and natural factors.” Emissions and removals from natural causes such as El Niño may be large compared with commitments - year to year natural global carbon uptake varies by as much as 2-4 Gt C per year - terrestrial systems do not sequester efficiently during El-Nino events - the climate is predicted to become more El-Nino-like For activities that involve land-management changes (e.g., tillage to no-till agriculture), it should be feasible to distinguish between the direct and indirect human-induced components through control plots and modeling, but not to separate out natural factors I stuck very closely to the text heresince I thought was was important to do so. 70

Permanence “Sinks” are potentially reversible through human activities, disturbances, or environmental change, including climate change. This is a more critical issue than for activities in other sectors, e.g., the energy sector. A pragmatic solution … ensure that any credit for enhanced carbon stocks is balanced by accounting for any subsequent reductions in those carbon stocks, regardless of the cause. 63

Monitoring Carbon Technical methods sufficient to serve the requirements of the Protocol exist for above ground stocks and most likely for below ground stocks. Annex 1 Parties generally have the technologies available, but few currently apply them routinely for monitoring Non Annex 1 Parties may require assistance to develop the necessary capacities and cover costs Methods and research results are highly transferable between Parties, and rapid improvement should be expected 71

Conclusion LULUCF activities can play a critical role in limiting the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, especially in the near-term, but to stabilize the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (Article 2 of the Convention) will require significant emissions reductions globally, which can only be achieved by either reducing energy emissions or by capture and storage of energy emissions 71