1. C and Greenhouse Gas Accounting, Quantification, and Monitoring in Canadian Agriculture
Bert VandenBygaart1, Brian McConkey2, Henry Janzen3, and many others
Agriculture & Agri-food Canada 1 Ottawa, Ontario
2 Swift Current, Saskatchewan
3 Lethbridge, Alberta

2. Agriculture - 7% of Canadian Land Mass
Canada’s agricultural area about 62 Mha of agricultural land in Canada

3. Canada has 45.9 M ha of Cropland

4. Canada has 15.4 M ha of Natural Grassland for Pasture
To put it in perspective U.S. has about 380 Mha of cropland and grassland for pasture so Canada has about 1/3 of the area of agricultural land than does the U.S.

5. Canada’s Agricultural GHG Inventory (reported under UNFCCC)
Canada’s GHG emissions
Total from U.S. agriculture about 450 Tg CO2 equivalent or about 6.7% of total U.S. emissions
Represents approx. 8-10% of total national emissions

6. ? Spatial Scale? National or Regional Scale Reporting under UNFCCC andKP
Government policies and
environmental assessments ?
Pedon or Animal Scale
Agricultural practices
Plot or animal measurements
Most process models
Canada is a large country so there tends to be a spatial disconnect between what we know about soil C and GHG processes and the scale at which we area we are required to account for.

7. Temporal Scale? 106 to 1010+ h Biogeochemical Cycling 10-1 – 103 h
Biochemical
Cycling
103 to 106 h
Government Policies
Farm Management
National GHG Accounts
Similar within the temporal dimension; much of what we know comes fro the scales of 103 to 106 hours, whereas other biogeochemical and biochemical processes can occur at much shorter and longer time periods.

8. Scale? Which processes and GHG’s? CH4 CO2 N2O nutrients export energy
Ecosystem boundary
Organic
matter
nutrients
N2O
CH4
CO2
export
import
energy
Then we need to ask which specific processes we should be accounting for and to some extent which GHG’s.

9. Scale? Appropriate scale ultimately determined by funding
National GHG accounting to support GHG policy development and UNFCCC and KP reporting that accurately reflects on-farm management
Follow IPCC Good Practice Guidance
Support good farm management that reduces net GHG emissions
Ulitmately though the scale is highly dependent on the amount of money available.

10. Scale – Canadian Approach
Integrative analysis of all GHG’s
Aggregate emissions to produce accounts for international reporting and policy analysis
Increase support of more fundamental GHG research at various scales to improve quantification and reduce uncertainty
Fine scale to improve estimators
Course scale to help verify aggregated estimates

11. Canada has Three Interrelated Agricultural GHG Quantification/Accounting Thrusts
NCGAVS Project
Virtual Farm Project
Various science projects

12. NCGAVS (“en-gavs”) National Soil Carbon and Greenhouse Gas Accounting and Verification System for Agriculture
Objective:
A scientific, transparent, and verifiable accounting system for reporting soil carbon stocks, carbon stock changes, nitrous oxide and methane emissions for Canadian agricultural land
To meet international commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and in support of sustainable agriculture
Research Branch of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

13. NCGAVS - Scope
CH4, N2O, and CO2 emission/removals from management in agriculture
Land-use change (LUC)
Data, C accounts and information transfer with other national C inventories (forest, other land uses)
Take on
accounting
for land
entering
agriculture
CH4
CO2
N2O

14. NCGAVS – Basics Data Intensive Accounting from the bottom up
IPCC Tier-2 methodology
Factors (coefficients) multiplied by amount of an agricultural activity
(Tier-3 to derive some factors)
Completed by March 2006

15. + National Account Soil Landscapes of Canada (SLC)
Polygon Land Database
SLC Polygon Agricultural
Activity Database
Provincial
Account
Estimators for Deriving
GHG Emission/Removal Factors
Regional Account
(Group of SLC Polygons)
NCGAVS schematic
Activities linked to GHG Factors
GHG Account
for SLC Polygon

16. Agriculture Activity Data Sources
Census of Agriculture
Every 5 yr from 1951 (10 yr )
Enumerates all farms
Information on crops, livestock, costs and returns, farming practices
Concurrent with general population census
Annual agricultural production and inputs statistics
Industry associations
Regular surveying of crop areas and production
Sporadic farm surveys on farming practices
Expert knowledge
Remote Sensing

17. Ecostratification

18. Full array of attributes within Soil Landscapes of Canada (SLC)
polygons including:
Soil components
Typical C contents under native and dominant agricultural use
Toposequences, surface form
Texture, pH
Each SLC polygon has landscapes made up of specific soils

19. + National Account Soil Landscapes of Canada (SLC)
Polygon Land Database
Agricultural Activity Database at SLC Polygon Level
Provincial
Account
Estimators for Deriving
GHG Emission/Removal Factors
Regional Account
(Group of SLC Polygons)
NCGAVS schematic
Activities linked to GHG Factors
GHG Account
for SLC Polygon

20. + National Account Soil Landscapes of Canada (SLC)
Polygon Land Database
SLC Polygon Agricultural
Activity Database
Provincial
Account
Estimators for Deriving
GHG Emission/Removal Factors
Regional Account
(Group of SLC Polygons)
NCGAVS schematic
Activities linked to GHG Factors
GHG Account
for SLC Polygon

21. Estimators Estimator can be: Empirical relationship
Canada-specific data and methods
Mechanistic models
DAYCENT for C change and N2O
Canada-specific application
Agricultural activity data
ESTIMATOR
CO2, N2O, and CH4 emissions
and removals

22. Reporting Unit or Provincial Agricultural Activity
NCGAVS Uncertainty through Monte Carlo Analysis
National Account
Uncertainty
Reporting Unit or Provincial
Account Uncertainty
Uncertainties in
Agricultural Activity
Land Information
Factors +
Uncertainty

23. Verification - Transparency - Consistency, Comprehensiveness, Comparability - Quality Assurance/Quality Control - Validation of estimators, continual accuracy assessment against ongoing measurements

24. Canada has Three Interrelated Agricultural GHG Quantification/Accounting Thrusts
NCGAVS Project
Virtual Farm Project
Various science projects

25. Virtual Farm Project The Model Farm Virtual Farm:
What is it?
What will it look like?
How do we hope to build it?
‘Model Farm’ program:
Large network (~30 scientists)
To be completed by March 2006

26. The Virtual Farm: What is it, exactly?
A mathematical description of biophysical processes on a farm, predicting GHG fluxes as a function of practices imposed
Virtual Farm
Practices,
conditions
GHG
emissions
understanding
… a way to describe and apply – quantitatively – what we know about GHG’s from farms.

27. The Virtual Farm: Why build it?
CH4
N2O
CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2
Estimate ‘whole-farm’ emissions
Find practices that reduce emissions, with emphasis on:
Future (what if?)
Local conditions
Systems (packages)
Virtual Farm
Practices,
conditions
GHG
emissions
understanding

28. The Virtual Farm: What might it look like?
Descriptors
Algorithms
Integrator
Conditions
climate
landscape
soil
Practices
cropping
livestock
manure
Net GHG
Emission
(CO2 equiv.)
Energy use
∆Soil C
Soil N2O
Offsite N2O
manure N2O
Livestock CH4
Manure CH4
Soil CH4

29. Cumulative GHG emission
What might it look like?
time
Cumulative GHG emission
Option A
Option B
Option C
Features:
‘Sees’ into the future (and the past)
scenarios

30. How do you build Virtual Farm?
Measure
fluxes
Build VF
Apply
Test
Output
Virtual Farm
web-based calculator
Modelling
Virtual Farm
Measuring

31. Understanding, expertise Estimators GHG calculator Virtual Farm
The Virtual Farm: deliverables
Virtual Farm
Practices,
conditions
GHG
emissions
understanding
Output
Understanding, expertise
Estimators
GHG calculator
Virtual Farm
Communications
static
 practitioners
Dynamic
 Science, policy

32. Canada has Three Interrelated Agricultural GHG Quantification/Accounting Thrusts
NCGAVS Project
Virtual Farm Project
Various science projects

33. Various GHG Research in Support of Quantification
Such research major part of Virtual Farm
Standard Methodologies
NCGAVS funded soil C change and direct N2O emissions
PERD, CFIA, BGSS (NCGAVS-funded)
BIOCAP
Consortium of Universities, Government, and Industry
Etc.

34. Outstanding Research Questions
Monitoring for verification: feasible?
Permanence of management practice
“Representability” of plot level to aggregation and scaling-up

35. Canada’s Approach to Monitoring
For C: The Canadian Information and Measurement System for Verifying Soil Carbon Stock Change
Database development and continuation of measurement of existing long-term research sites across Canada
Continuation of measurement of Prairie Soil Carbon Balance sites
13C labelling experiments

36. Permanance? : Sandy Loam NT Plowed Once
SOC (%)
0.3
0.6
0.8
1.1
1.3 5 10
Soil Depth (cm)
*** 15
***
*** p <0.001 (relative to Post-plow 3 days) 20
22 Years No-till Pre-plow (4 X 9 m plot; n=30) 25
Post-plow 3 days
Post-plow 7 months 30
Post-plow 18 months
VandenBygaart and Kay 2004 SSSAJ

37. Permanance? : Clay Loam NT Plowed Once
SOC (%)
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0 5 10
Soil Depth (cm) 15
*** p <0.001 (relative to Post-plow 3 days)
22 Years No-till Pre-plow (4 X 9 m plot; n=30) 20
Post-plow 3 days 25
Post-plow 7 months
Post-plow 18 months 30
VandenBygaart and Kay 2004 SSSAJ

38. Long-term Research Plots

39. Landscape Reality
Sources and sinks of GHG’s dependant on landscape position X Y W Z
Soil Component

40. SOC loss
SOC gain
Four fields converted to NT 1985 sampled at variable landscape positions; sampled again 2000
Net changes in SOC stock showed general increase in top 15 cm but concomitant loss from 15 to 30 cm 14 13
~0-15 cm 12 10 8 8 8
Frequency 6 4 4 2 2 1 1 1
<-20
-20,-
-15,-
-10,-5
-5, 0
0, 5
5, 10
10,
15,
20,
>25 15 10 15 20 25
DSOC (Mg/ha) 16 15
~15-30 cm 14 12 11 10 8
Frequency 8 6 4 2 2 1 1
VandenBygaart et al Soil & Tillage Research
<-20
-20,-
-15,-
-10,-5
-5, 0
0, 5
5, 10
10,
15,
20,
>25 15 10 15 20 25
DSOC (Mg/ha)

41. Summary
Canada committed to provide rigid, transparent and verifiable accounting system for GHG’s (NCGAVS)
Process and modeling work continues – filling gaps of knowledge and reducing uncertainties (Model Farms and others)
Still many pertinent and challenging research questions

43. Boundaries of land for which Canada proposes to report C change
KP Article 3.3 (deforestation, reforestation, and afforestion)
KP Article 3.4 (Cropland management, grazing land management, forest management)
Reporting units

44. Scale – Canadian Approach
Use estimators to quantify emissions and removals at scale of specific agricultural activities
Flexibility to use different estimators
Comparative purposes
Incorporate better estimators as available
Best estimator can change with spatial scale
Apply estimators for purposes other than GHG such as water quality, sustainability
Field to herd-scale at medium temporal scales

45. Livestock
Rearing facilities and manure storage only allocated to SLC polygon
Animal grazing allocated to cropland (improved pasture) and grassland (“unimproved pasture”)
Manure application is allocated to toposequences of soil components as part of cropland management

46. NCGAVS
Incremental funding from Environment Canada who has national mandate for GHG accounting
Part of national GHG accounts
Close coordination essential with many government agencies for C accounting aspects
Land use classification, land-use change identification, data exchange