1. Potential for LULUCF projects under JI Zoltan Somogyi* zoltan.somogyi@jrc.it Bernhard Schlamadinger bernhard.schlamadinger@joanneum.at UNFCCC Technical Workshop on Joint Implementation Bonn, 9-10 March 2006 * “The views expressed are purely those of the author and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission."

2. LULUCF is more than AR: Afforestation (A) Reforestation (R) Deforestation (D) Revegetation (RV) Cropland Management (CM) Grazing Land Management (GM) Forest Management (FM)

3. 1. Some potential types of JI projects CM: Switching to no-till management Avoiding use of fertilizers …

4. GM Restoration of grasslands Reducing CH 4 emissions from livestock …

5. time CP-1 Emissions from till, fertilization (N 2 O)*, from livestock (CH 4 )*… Reduction due to project activity Projects to reduce emissions * KP Annex A

6. CO 2 sequestered time “Sink” projects

7. AR: converting marginal land

8. Improved FM

9. FM: Fire prevention / forest protection

10. Avoiding Deforestation

11. Avoiding “fast out” emissions time CP-1 CO 2 fixed Possible reduction due to project activity

12. 2. List of current LULUCF JI projects

13. Afforestation project / Romania –PCF –6 thousand ha - 3.08 million US$ - 1,6 Mt CO 2 eq Chernobyl Reforestation / Ukraine –BCF –15 thousand ha - 0.44 Mt CO 2 e by 2012 –No project documents yet 2. List of current LULUCF JI projects

14. The AR in Romania „seeks to rehabilitate degraded forests, and to improve soil fertility, soil stabilization, and ecological integrity“ Source: http://carbonfinance.org/

15. „The PCF has signed a long-term Emission Reductions Purchase Agreement (ERPA) for the delivery of nearly 900,000 tonnes of tCO2e by the NFA to the PCF at an agreed price of US$ 3.60 per tCO2e” Source: http://carbonfinance.org/

16. In the Ukraine Project, „the land will not be suitable for the production of crops, milk or meat for human consumption for the next 80-100 years“ Source: http://carbonfinance.org/

17. The Chernobil Reforestation project would - „also provide an important environmental service”, - „help protect biodiversity”, - „also provide social benefits” with - „leakage very unlikely” & - „reduced risk of non-permanence” Source: http://carbonfinance.org/

18. Potentials are - limited Annual CDM potential: –Max: 1% of A-I emissions = ~180 Gt CO 2 –Currently contracted (till 2017) + additional projects: ~ 18 Mt CO 2 = 0.1 % of A-I emissions Hypothetical AR JI projects (during CP-1): 10 * 10 thousand ha * 5 tCO 2 /ha/yr = 0,5 Mt CO 2 /yr Hypothetical JI projects to avoid forest fire 100,000 ha * 50 tCO 2 /ha/yr = 5 Mt CO 2 /yr

19. CO 2 sequestered time CP-1Further CPs? 3. Limits to potentials “slow in”

20. Other biophysical factors shorter time is left than for CDM projects some FM actions may yield few ERUs growth rates are lower in temperate/boreal zones than in the tropics

21. Further notes on AR large areas available demand for wood is likely to increase potential emissions from soil if grassland is converted fast growing species may yield earlier and more ERUs

23. Other forestry issues some forestry project types are long-term by nature: investments today are the biomass fuels of tomorrow combined with energy projects? potentials exist for additional benefits potential conflicts in non-carbon issues (species selection, afforesting protected areas…)

24. Risk of non-permanence Specific to some LULUCF projects The risk itself may rest: –tCERS and lCERs: with the investor –ERUs: with the host country, unless there is a contractual rule that changes this May occur after CP-1

26. Non-biophysical issues Unlike energy-type JI projects, some LULUCF JI projects may not earn the country a lower emission, and are not likely if, in the host country, –activity not elected (all 3.4; due by the end of 2006) –cap applies and removals are higher than cap (FM) –Art 3.3 is a source

27. some FM actions may lead to leakage due to lacking sense of urgency, LULUCF has not been a priority no experience in JI rules AR only tested in CDM, with very few exceptions Non-biophysical issues (ctd.)

29. First focus on likely project types: AR Bottom-up approach? Inquire with potential host countries to see which project types are contemplated? 4. Some suggestions to the JISC

30. Consider allowing approved CDM AR meths Consider amending the small-scale methodology for CDM AR projects Overlap with the CDM WG AR?