Set-up Presentation  Sources of comments  General comments on Transparency  General comments on Conservativeness  Comments on Transparency & Conservativeness.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Objectives and achieved results of BBN project in Lithuania (II) Gintautas Mozgeris et al. Potsdam, 12/12/2007 PLANNING BIOENERGY LANDSCAPES IN THE BALTIC.

Advertisements

Ispra, 22./ | Folie 1 Reporting LUCF to UN-FCCC: The Situation in Austria Workshop: Improving the Quality of Community GHG Inventories and Projections.

Experience and problems encountered in first year of LULUCF reporting under Kyoto Protocol in Slovakia Tibor Priwitzer

Key sources of uncertainty in forest carbon inventories Raisa Mäkipää with Mikko Peltoniemi, Suvi Monni, Taru Palosuo, Aleksi Lehtonen & Ilkka Savolainen.

USAID-CIFOR-ICRAF Project Assessing the Implications of Climate Change for USAID Forestry Programs (2009) 1 Carbon accounting: Field measurements Topic.

EMMER INTERNATIONAAL A/R CDM projects : modalities, implementation and progress Igino M. Emmer EUSTAFOR workshop Forestry & EU ETS Brussels, 26 June 2008.

Option G Ecology and Conservation: G2 Ecosystems and Biomes.

Immediate Changes Carbon Emissions, Tree Mortality Short Term Changes Erosion, Water Quality, Nutrient Availability Long Term Changes Future Flammability,

An Introduction to Carbon Modelling Developing Forestry and Bioenergy Projects within CDM Quito, Ecuador March, 2004.

THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE US FOREST CARBON INVENTORY: RECENT PAST AND NEAR FUTURE Christopher W. Woodall, Research Forester, U.S. Forest Service,

Modeling Biomass and Timber Volume by Using an Allometric Growth Model from Landsat TM Images Qingmin Meng, Chris Cieszewski D. B. Warnell School of Forest.

Method of Evaluating Afforestation/Reforestation CDM Project - An Indonesia Case Study - Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan June 5, 2003 Bonn.

AP Environmental Science Free Response Practice

The status of science to support REDD+ based mitigation policies of Mexico Bernardus de Jong, El Colegio de la Frontera Sur Fernando Paz, Colegio de Postgraduados.

TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE FOREST CARBON INVENTORY OF THE UNITED STATES: RECENT PAST AND NEAR FUTURE Christopher W. Woodall, Research Forester, U.S. Forest.

1 1 Is biomass from boreal forests better or worse than fossil fuels from a climate perspective? A work in progress By Bjart Holtsmark Statistics Norway.

The main tools and functions of the system can be accessed via this side bar Allometric equations editor can be accessed under utilities, and user.

Climate Change Impacts in the United States Third National Climate Assessment [Name] [Date] Forests.

Northwest Advanced Renewables Alliance Douglas-fir biomass and nutrient removal under varying harvest intensities designed for co-production of timber.

Carbon Benefits Project: Measurement of Carbon in Woody Biomass Mike Smalligan, Research Forester Global Observatory for Ecosystem Services Department.

Measuring Forest Carbon Stocks for Carbon Financing Mechanisms MCT, Phase – IV 1 st July, 2013 IGNFA, Dehradun Uttarakhand.

Current and future carbon content of standing biomass in Gishwati Forest Reserve, Rwanda Alex Boland, David Courard-Hauri (mentor), Rebecca Chancellor.

Compton Tucker, GSFC Sassan Satchi, JPL Jeff Masek, GSFC Rama Nemani, ARC Diane Wickland, HQ Terrestrial Biomass Pilot Product: Estimating Biomass and.

Moving on From Experimental Approaches to Advancing National Systems for Measuring and Monitoring Forest Degradation Across Asia Moving on From Experimental.

An introduction to the monitoring of forestry carbon sequestration projects Developing Forestry and Bioenergy Projects within CDM Ecuador March, 2004 Igino.

Baseline Methodology ARNMB0010 Xiaoquan Zhang and Bernhard Schlamadinger.

Center for Watershed Protection USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area, State and Private Forestry How to estimate future forest cover in a watershed.

1 Methodologies of Carbon Estimation By Zahabu, E & Malimbwi, R.E Department of Forest Mensuration and Management (SUA)

© John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Exploitation, Conservation, Preservation 4e Cutter and Renwick 2003 Chapter 7: Forests Forests as Multiple-Use Resources –Forests.

F I A Forest Inventory and Analysis Program The Nation’s Forest Census 2010 FIA Biomass Update W. Brad Smith.

Modeling Crown Biomass for Three North Idaho Conifers Ann Abbott Rocky Mountain Research Station, Moscow Forestry Sciences Laboratory and University of.

FORESTRY AND FOREST PRODUCTS Project Level Carbon Accounting Toolkit CSIRO Forestry and Forest Products Department of Forestry, Australian National University.

Measuring Rangelands. Uplands vs Riparian Vs Wetlands  Uplands = Drier areas on landscape that are only wet for short periods after precipitation events.

Guidance on Measurement Elaboration and Examples.

CDM A/R Investors' and Developers' Workshop, Beijing 2010 CDM Afforestation/Reforestation Projects: International workshop for developers and investors.

Challenges in using indicators to quantify ecosystems services for a CBA in the framework of ECLAIRE Wilfried Winiwarter.

Carbon Sequestration in Farm and Forest Ecosystems Sarah Hines April 2009

Carbon Pools in a Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt) Regrowth Forest Managed for Production or Conservation Daniel St Merryn Payne Australian National University.

1Jukka Muukkonen Classification of forests ‘how current definitions, classifications and categories used in the FAO Global Forests Resources Assessment.

Methodologies for Moldova Soil Conservation project ARNM0007 Rama Chandra Reddy July 12, 2005.

Case Study2: Reforestation Project Using Native Species Around AES-Tiete Reservoirs ARNM0002 Comments on Baseline Methodology Fourth Regional Workshop.

AIT Case Study 2: Afforestation & Reforestation Project Sudhir Sharma, AIT.

Remote Sensing of LAI Conghe Song Department of Geography University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC

EMMER INTERNATIONAAL ARWG tools and consolidation of methodologies Igino Emmer.

1 UNFCCC Workshop on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries 30/08-01/9/2006, Rome, Italy Overview of scientific, socio- economic,

THINKING beyond the canopy Removing technical barriers to include tropical peatlands in the REDD+ mechanism Daniel Murdiyarso, Kristell Hergoualc’h and.

Comments on Monitoring Methodologies Winrock International Training Seminar for BioCarbon Fund Projects.

Evaluating uncertainty in the Italian GHG Inventory Workshop on Uncertainties in GHG inventories Helsinki, 5-6 September 2005 Agency for the Protection.

Mortality over Time Population Density Declines through Mortality.

Integrating Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity Conservation Dick Cameron Senior Conservation Planner The Nature Conservancy, California Program 1.

Global Change Group AR-CDM Methodologies Lucio Pedroni Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE)

NATIONAL REDD+ STRATEGY MEXICO GCF task force – Palangka Raya, September 2011 Jorge Mendoza, Ben de Jong, Victor Ku, El Colegio de la Frontera Sur.

Tool for ex-ante estimation of forestry CERs – "TARAM"

Carbon Neutrality – A Competitive Advantage International Congress ‘Environmental and Energy Principles of the Sustainable Development’ Sofia, May 7, 2012.

Solving Linear Equations in Two VariablesProjector Resources Solving Linear Equations in Two Variables Projector Resources.

Indicators of potential environmental performance for three successive iterations of the Brazilian Forest Code (BFC 1989, BFC 1996 and BFC 2012) for the.

Climate neutrality and forests

Habitat, Microhabitat, & Biome

STANDCARB Elissa Chott February 22, 2017.

REDD+ Project Area Juniperus-Podocarpus Acacia-Comiphora woodland.

USGS contribution to assessing mangrove conditions using a multidisciplinary approach Elitsa Peneva-Reed 24 October, 2017.

Measuring Rangelands.

OROMIA Forest Reference Level

دانشگاه شهیدرجایی تهران

Which forest type sequesters higher carbon in biomass – Pinus roxburghii or Quercus glauca Aditya Acharya School of forest sciences, UEF

تعهدات مشتری در کنوانسیون بیع بین المللی

The carbon cycle in the Amazon.

(a, b) Hypothetical scenario where 2 samples of 2 proportions may explain two different scenarios in the environment. (a, b) Hypothetical scenario where.

Reduction of strength loss after intervention described as averaged differences (visit 4 compared with visit 1) of the baseline corrected time points 0hours.

Presentation transcript:

Set-up Presentation  Sources of comments  General comments on Transparency  General comments on Conservativeness  Comments on Transparency & Conservativeness in calculations

Sources of Comments  Lucio Pedroni, Cati  Bernhard Shclamadinger  Robert Seaton, Brinkman & Associates reforestation Ltd.  Federal University of Paraná & Instituto Ecoplan (Brasil)

General comments on Transparency There is no scenario of possible land-cover sketched; SO NO SOUND ARGUMENTATION FOR THE BASELINE SCENARIO CHOSEN Policy, social, economic and environmental issues are considered fixed; IT IS NOT EXPLAINED WHY THIS IS LIKELY Project boundary NOT CLEARLY DEFINED

General comments on Conservativeness DIFFICULT TO ASSESS, because re-calculation of the derived figures is difficult THROUGH LACK OF TRANSPARANCY

Calculation total vegetative biomass Biomass live trees Biomass dead standing trees Biomass of dead fallen trees Shrub and herb biomass Biomass of roots Biomass of forest fuels (litter) + TOTAL VEGETATIVE BIOMASS

Calculation total vegetative biomass Biomass live trees Biomass dead standing trees Biomass of dead fallen trees Shrub and herb biomass Biomass of roots Biomass of forest fuels (litter) + TOTAL VEGETATIVE BIOMASS

Biomass live trees = 0, 1184 DAP 2,53 (later replaced by allometric destructive sampling) COMMENTS ON TRANSPARANCY: Source of equation is missing Point of time of replacing this equation with allometric destructive sampling is missing

Calculation total vegetative biomass Biomass live trees Biomass dead standing trees Biomass of dead fallen trees Shrub and herb biomass Biomass of roots Biomass of forest fuels (litter) + TOTAL VEGETATIVE BIOMASS

Biomass dead standing trees = Biomass living trees = 0,1184 DAP 2,53 COMMENTS ON CONSERVATIVENESS: Biomass dead standing trees should be corrected for density loss, for instance using “Machete test”

Calculation total vegetative biomass Biomass live trees Biomass dead standing trees Biomass of dead fallen trees Shrub and herb biomass Biomass of roots Biomass of forest fuels (litter) + TOTAL VEGETATIVE BIOMASS

Biomass dead fallen trees = 0,4 DAP 2 L0,25 COMMENTS ON CONSERVATIVENESS: 0,4 Should be adjusted for density class doing “Machete test”

Calculation total vegetative biomass Biomass live trees Biomass dead standing trees Biomass of dead fallen trees Shrub and herb biomass Biomass of roots Biomass of forest fuels (litter) + TOTAL VEGETATIVE BIOMASS

Biomass of roots = exp[-1, ,926 ln(total biomass of trees and shrubs)] * * Caims et al, 1997 COMMENTS ON CONSERVATIVENESS: Only biomass of roots of living trees should be calculated COMMENTS ON TRANSPARENCY: The source of this equation is not stated correctly, it should be: Cairns et al, 1997

Calculation of carbon total vegetative biomass = total vegetative biomass * 0.45 COMMENTS ON CONSERVATIVENESS: Conservative; IPCC-guidelines default value is 0.5

Contact data: Claudia Doets T ++84(0) F ++84(0) Thank you for your attention!