Baseline Methodology ARNMB0010 Xiaoquan Zhang and Bernhard Schlamadinger.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
On-line resource materials for policy making Ex-Ante Carbon-balance Tool Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO Learning how using.
Advertisements

Proposals for Verification of A/R Projects Alvaro Vallejo Rama Chandra Reddy Roundtable on Validation and Verification Issues in LULUCF projects Carbon.
EMMER INTERNATIONAAL A/R CDM projects : modalities, implementation and progress Igino M. Emmer EUSTAFOR workshop Forestry & EU ETS Brussels, 26 June 2008.
CDM – LULUCF Project Cycle Winrock International Sandra Brown Training Seminar for BioCarbon Fund Projects.
Carbon sequestration potential assessment in India by A/R activities and implementation of pilot studies Indo-Italian Business Seminar on Renewable Energy.
The International Small Group and Tree Planting Program (TIST) Training Seminar for Projects July, 2005 Part 1: TIST Project Background.
1 On-line resource materials for policy making Ex-Ante Carbon-balance Tool Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO Learning how using.
Method of Evaluating Afforestation/Reforestation CDM Project - An Indonesia Case Study - Sumitomo Forestry Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan June 5, 2003 Bonn.
Glenn S. Hodes UNEP Risø Center CDM Project Screening & PIN Development.
Forest Project Protocol v3.1 Use of FIA Data John Nickerson FIA Conference February 2010.
Baselines and Additionality Executive Board decisions so far Steve Thorne SouthSouthNorth COP 9 5 th December 2003.
Base Line Methods Developing Forestry and Bioenergy Projects with CDM Quito, Ecuador March, 2004.
Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land-Use: Combining two sectors of the IPCC 1996 Guidelines Leandro Buendia Technical Support Unit – IPCC NGGIP.
FOREST SERVICE GHG ISSUES AND INFORMATION NEEDS Elizabeth Reinhardt, FS Climate Change Office.
The Carbon Benefits Project: Modelling, Measurement and Monitoring Approximately 30% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions come from land use and land use.
Module 2.5 Estimation of carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation REDD+ training materials by GOFC-GOLD, Wageningen University, World.
I N T E G R A T E D S I N K E N H A N C E M E N T A S S E S S M E N T INSEA PARTNERS INSEA and the AFOLU sector Review of AFOLU policies under the Kyoto.
On-line resource materials for policy making Ex-Ante Carbon-balance Tool Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO Learning how using.
An introduction to the monitoring of forestry carbon sequestration projects Developing Forestry and Bioenergy Projects within CDM Ecuador March, 2004 Igino.
Discussion of Draft CEQ Guidelines for Addressing Climate Change in NEPA Projects Tim Stroope, NEPA Coordinator, GMUG National Forest
Limitations in sequestering carbon in forests By Promode Kant Indian Forest Service.
UNFCCC and IPCC guidance on measuring and monitoring forest degradation “Moving on From Experimental Approaches to Advancing National Systems for Measuring.
1 Methodologies of Carbon Estimation By Zahabu, E & Malimbwi, R.E Department of Forest Mensuration and Management (SUA)
Methods for Developing Baseline Scenario and Estimating Carbon Stocks Indu K. Murthy.
LULUCF Concepts Training Seminar for BioCarbon Fund Projects February 8 th 2008 Timothy Pearson and Sarah Walker Winrock International.
Baseline Methodologies for LULUCF: Overview B. Schlamadinger * Joanneum Research, Austria Training Seminar for BioCarbon.
InVEST Tier 1 Carbon Model. In the Tier 1 model we estimate carbon stock as a function of land use / land cover. Storage indicates the mass of carbon.
Harnessing the carbon market to sustain ecosystems and alleviate poverty Project Cycle and Project Design Document Project Cycle and Project Design Document.
Perspectives on Validation in LULUCF projects. Established on July, 1, 2004 JACO CDM Japanese Major Companies of Which business fields are finance, construction,
Methodologies Workshop BioCF Training Seminar Washington Sept 2005.
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.
CDM Projects: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Projects Project cycles and Technical Issues.
Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: what does it mean for bioenergy and C sequestration? Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: what does it mean for.
Harnessing the carbon market to sustain ecosystems and alleviate poverty Monitoring of AR Projects Monitoring of AR Projects BioCarbon Fund Training Seminar,
Methodologies for Moldova Soil Conservation project ARNM0007 Rama Chandra Reddy July 12, 2005.
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.
1Jukka Muukkonen Carbon binding and forest asset accounts Forest related issues in greenhouse gas inventory Connections between SEEA2003 forest asset accounts.
Baselines and Additionality Lucio Pedroni - STC World Bank Carbon Finance Business This presentation is based on materials prepared by Lasse Ringius Training.
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.
EMMER INTERNATIONAAL ARWG tools and consolidation of methodologies Igino Emmer.
FOREST SECTOR MITIGATION IN INDIA Ravindranath, Sudha & Sandhya Indian Institute of Science Bangalore.
“STEWARDSHIP IN FORESTRY” Forestry Projects for Terrestrial Sequestration -- Regulatory and Public Acceptance Issues -- Jim Cathcart, Ph.D. Oregon Department.
Harnessing the carbon market to sustain ecosystems and alleviate poverty Draft REDD Methodology BioCarbon Fund Workshop, February 5 – 8, 2008.
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND TECHNIQUES.
Comments on Monitoring Methodologies Winrock International Training Seminar for BioCarbon Fund Projects.
Options to Foster the Development Dividend Meeting of the Expert Task Force of the IISD Development Dividend Project October 19-20, 2006 Copenhagen Deborah.
Verification from PPs perspective Round table on A/R CDM projects Carbon Finance Unit – World Bank August 24&25, 2009 Walter Oyhantçabal A/R WG.
EMMER INTERNATIONAAL LULUCF and insights into the ARWG Igino Emmer.
Baseline Methodologies for LULUCF: Overview B. Schlamadinger * Joanneum Research, Austria Training Seminar for BioCarbon.
Opportunities for Research and Collaboration Relevant to Climate Change and Forests Overview of Opportunities for Research and Collaboration Relevant to.
Baselines and Additionality Executive Board decisions so far Steve Thorne SouthSouthNorth Accra, Ghana 7 th and 8 th November 2005.
Case Study 1: Comments on Transparency and Conservativeness Alan Silayan klima-Climate Change Center.
El Gallo Hydroelectricity Project PDD Analysis
1 PDD and PIN preparation Technical Workshop on CDM Paramaribo, 18 June 2008 Adriaan Korthuis.
Tatsushi HEMMI Institute for Global Environmental Strategies COP 9 Decisions related to CDM in forestry sector – An update on implications for Asia IGES-URC.
Kai-Uwe B. Schmidt Maria Netto Cooperative Mechanisms UNFCCC secretariat Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol.
Global Change Group AR-CDM Methodologies Lucio Pedroni Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE)
CD for CDM - Second National Workshop on Baselines (Phase II) Cairo, March 31 & April 1, Capacity Development for CDM Cairo, March 31 & April 1,
Overview of existing approved AR-CDM methodologies Pablo Rodríguez.
© dreamstime CLIMATE CHANGE 2014 Mitigation of Climate Change Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report.
Monitoring and MRV context of the Country National Forest Inventory (NFI): the previous NFI has not covered some forest type (the sampling strategy did.
FORESTRY MITIGATION PROJECTS & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Prof. N. H. Ravindranath Indian Institute of Science.
Determinations / verifications under JI – Experience to date UNFCCC Technical Workshop on Joint Implementation Bonn, February 13 th, 2007 For the benefit.
Forest Carbon Calculator Forest Carbon Reporting Initiative of USAID’s Global Climate Change Program Nancy Harris, Winrock International Sandra Brown,
Forest Carbon Calculator Forest Carbon Reporting Initiative of USAID’s Global Climate Change Program.
ARNM0002 REFORESTATION OF GRASSLANDS WITH NATIVE SPECIES
Science-Policy Interface
The International Small Group and Tree Planting Program (TIST)
Presentation transcript:

Baseline Methodology ARNMB0010 Xiaoquan Zhang and Bernhard Schlamadinger

Reforestation of degraded land Scope: Restoration of natural forest and plantation (with harvesting) on (tropical) degraded and degrading land by tree planting. Aboveground and belowground biomass are the only carbon pools considered.

Conditions Lands will be reforested by direct planting and/or seeding in a proposed A/R CDM project activity. Lands to be reforested are severely degraded with the vegetation indicators below thresholds for defining forests, and the lands are still degrading. A few pieces of lands may have trees growing on them. The baseline land uses are economically unattractive, because social demand for the land is low. Both national and local government may be enthusiastic to restore forests, but apparent financial and other barriers can be identified. Environmental conditions and human-caused degradation do not permit the encroachment of natural forest vegetation. The project can justify that baseline approach 22(a) (existing or historical changes in carbon stocks in the carbon pools with the project boundary) is the most appropriate choice for determination of the baseline scenario, and uses this approach.

Other features Carbon pools: above-ground and below-ground biomass Uses conservative assumptions in several places Allows for individual trees on the site at start of project Stratification Preferably land use / cover maps; or satellite images Baseline approach (a): Existing or historical, as applicable, changes in carbon stocks in the carbon pools within the project boundary Standard additionality tool is used

Justification of Baseline approach (a) degraded, abandoned barren land resulting from human degradation and unfavorable environment. Without significant change of social-economic and environmental regimes, their status will not change. Agricultural land use, commercial timber plantations and other land uses are economically unattractive. Financial barriers (no funds, commercial loans available), technical barriers (e.g., lack of capacity of successful planting and management), inadequate institutional arrangement, and/or market risks also prevent use of land for economic revenue.

(b), (c) were not used because status of degraded land is economically unattractive No economically attractive alternative exists (… except for reforestation with CDM funding) (c) is similar to (a) and could have been used

Baseline scenario: steps Demonstrate that project site meets conditions of methodology, and conditions of baseline method (a) Stratify the project area  Soil  Climate  previous land use  existing vegetation  tree species to be planted  year to be planted  anthropogenic influence, etc. Determine baseline scenario (focus on possible encroachment) Determine baseline carbon stock changes  Sites with trees: yield data, allometric equations …

Land eligibility Historical land use / cover maps Or Satellite images Plus Interviews with landowners Around before the project starts Specific focus on bare lands that could reach thresholds under continuation of current land use

Additionality test Step 1: Alternatives to the project scenario  Modification: only continuation of degraded status is considered Step 2: Investment analysis  Modification: Investment comparison analysis (option II) not applicable, as baseline has no economic use.  China project uses benchmark (III), but simple cost (I) also possible  WB financial analysis tool is recommended Step 3: Barrier analysis  China specific: Remote area, timber markets uncertain, ERs create certainty of income Step 4: Common practice test (not in AR add. tool) Step 5: Impact of CDM registration

Baseline / project GHG estimation Standard IPCC GPG methodologies Local data for biomass, GPG or national default data for GHG emissions Carbon in biomass (baseline and project):  Method 1: Gains – losses  Method 2: Stock-change method GHG emissions (project):  Fossil fuel use  GHGs from site prep (e.g., burning)  GHGs from fertilizer Leakage:  Fossil fuels outside project boundary  No other leakage: degraded lands not used

Uncertainties List sources of uncertainty and risks Conduct sensitivity analysis Identify key parameters and use local values for those as much as possible Reduce uncertainties through:  Stratification  Appropriate sampling framework  Omitting pools with high spatial variability (e.g., soil carbon)  Conservative assumptions

Feedback from desk reviewers / AR WG Generally positive NMM: hardly any changes NMB:  Improve demonstration of state of degradation, and “no natural regeneration”  Stratification: describe procedures for combining maps, satellite images for describing variables that affect C stock changes (cook-book type approach)  Ensure internal homogeneity of strata  Improve consideration of data uncertainties  Demand to add other carbon pools does not have to be addressed

Main comment: degraded lands Zero baseline should only apply to biomass  omission of soil/litter/dead wood must not inflate credits. Purpose of arguing “degraded lands”:  Omission of pools  No natural regeneration  No activity displacement Demonstrate that (bold: italics to term degradation): 1.the land was forest at some point in time 2.no conversion to the natural forest state of the land would happen 3.no productive state of the land would be reached 4.any other kind of natural forest establishment would not occur (as demonstrated by our air seeding example). 5.There is no intensive site prep (would release of carbon from soils). Propose indicators for vegetation and soils degradation

Outlook: this project Draft B rating Resubmit by 20 September If AR WG accepts  generalized by consultant Accepted by CDM EB Amend PDD and submit for validation Planting in spring 2006

Outlook: other projects that want to use this methodology wait for revised version (20 Sept) could then use as is if “conditions” are met, or could expand scope by adding further “modules” such as:  Soil, dead wood, and/or litter  Emissions from grazing within the project boundary  Activity displacement (leakage) if minor land uses occur in the baseline  Decision tree (different scenarios of data availability