F7 and FORCLIMIT PROJECTS:
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 32

F7 and FORCLIMIT PROJECTS: The Tropical Forestry and Global Climate Change Research Network PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 91 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

F7 and FORCLIMIT PROJECTS: The Tropical Forestry and Global Climate Change Research Network Forestry Mitigation Carbon Potential and Costs: Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, the Philippines, and Tanzania Jayant Sathaye and Willy Makundi Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Download Presentation

F7 and FORCLIMIT PROJECTS: The Tropical Forestry and Global Climate Change Research Network

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

F7 and FORCLIMIT PROJECTS:

The Tropical Forestry and Global Climate Change Research Network

Forestry Mitigation Carbon Potential and Costs:

Brazil, China, India, Indonesia,

Mexico, the Philippines, and Tanzania

Jayant Sathaye and Willy Makundi

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Ken Andrasko

US Environmental Protection Agency

September 2002


Mitigation analysis

Mitigation Analysis

  • Goal:

    • Estimate the carbon mitigation potential and costs of forestry options

  • Scale:

    • National or regional level analysis

    • Project-specific analysis

      • Confined to a specific geographic location, time period and institutional framework so as to allow changes in GHG emissions attributable to the project to be monitored and verified


F7 project description

F7 Project Description

  • National and regional level mitigation analysis

  • Studies conducted by country-specific modeling teams

    • LBNL provides technical support, training and outreach

  • All analyses use the same model

    • COMAP accounting approach

  • Data:National statistics on land use patterns, carbon benefits and costs of mitigation options, timber and non-timber prices, etc.


F7 and forclimit participating research groups f7 since 1990

F7 and FORCLIMIT Participating Research Groups (F7 since 1990)

  • ASIA:

    • CHINA -- Xu, Deying (IPCC Lead Author, LULUCF Report), Forest Ecology and Environment Institute, Beijing

    • INDIA -- Dr. N.H. Ravindranath (IPCC Coordinator, LULUCF Report, CLA for Tech Transfer, and LA for WGIII Report, Consultant to UNFCCC), Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore

    • INDONESIA -- Prof. Rizaldi Boer (UNFCCC Consultant), Bogor Agriculture University, Bogor (co-funding with EAP)

    • MALAYSIA -- Dr. Roslan Ismail (ITTO Board, IPCC LA), SustechAsia.com Sdn Bhd., and Prof. Azman Abidin, UPM, Malaysia (via EAP funding)

    • PHILIPPINES -- Prof. Rodel Lasco (IPCC Lead Author, LULUCF Report), University of the Philippines, Los Banos (via EAP funding)

  • AFRICA:

    • TANZANIA -- (Yonika Ngaga, CEEST, Dar es Salam, and Dr.Willy Makundi, LBNL, LULUCF and WGIII Lead Author)

  • LATIN AMERICA:

    • MEXICO -- Prof. Omar Masera, IPCC CLA LULUCF and LA Tech Transfer and WG III reports, National University of Mexico

    • BRAZIL -- Dr. Philip Fearnside, IPCC, CLA LULUCF and LA WGII, National Institute for Research in the Amazon (INPA), Manaus


Mitigation analysis steps

Mitigation Analysis -- Steps

  • Identify and characterize mitigation options

  • For national or regional level analysis

    • Project land-use change scenario(s)

  • Estimate annual carbon flows and equilibrium carbon

    • Vegetation, soils, products

  • Estimate annual monetary flows

    • Costs – establishment, siliviculture, maintenance, etc.

    • Benefits – timber and non-timber products

  • Compare costs and carbon flows to estimate $ / tC


F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

Comprehensive Mitigation Analysis Process (COMAP)

5. Estimate Net Carbon

Sequestration Per Ha by Mitigation Options

(Vegetation, Soils,

Understory, Litter &

Wood Product)

1. Identify and Screen

Potential Mitigation

Options

9. Discuss Barriers to and Policies Needed for Implementation

10. Assess Macro-Economic Effects of Scenarios (Jobs, Capital, Exports, GDP, etc.)-India

4. Determine Land

Area and Wood

Production

Scenarios by

Option

7. Develop Scenarios of Total Cost and

Carbon Seques-tration by Mitigation Option

2. Assess Current and Future Forest and Agriculture Land Use

Patterns

8. Evaluate Cost-

Effectiveness Indicators for Ranking

Mitigation Options

6. Estimate Unit Costs

and Benefits by Mitigation Option

3. Assess Current and

Future Wood

Product Demand


1 selection and characterization of options

1. Selection and Characterization of Options

Mitigation Options

  • Regeneration – Natural and Enhanced

  • Short and Long-rotation Plantations

  • Agroforestry

  • Forest Protection

  • Forest management

  • Bioenergy


1 1 forestry mitigation options in study countries key assumptions

Option

Initial Cost

($/ha)

Rotation Period

(yrs)

Mean Annual Increment

(t C/ha/yr)

1. Short-rotation

2. Long-rotation

3. Regeneration/ Management

4.Protection/ Conservation

150 – 450

450 – 700

18 – 40

5 – 10*

7 –8

25 – 40

40 – 80

3.8 – 19.2

1.6 – 11.1

0.8 – 3

1.1 Forestry Mitigation Options In Study Countries: Key Assumptions

* Excludes opportunity costs of land, which vary substantially across countries. These are accounted for in the estimates for each study country.


F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

Country

Total land area

(‘000 ha)

Forested Area

(‘000 ha)

Defrstion Rate Study Area

(‘000 ha/yr)

Potential This Study

(000’s ha)

Potential Trexler/Haugen

(000’s ha)

Brazil

845,700

390,000

1113 – 2906

85,000

85,000

China (3 regions)

963,296

115,600

60

31,953

India

328,760

63,300

274

53,200

35,000

Indo-nesia

192,401

104,500

750-1,500

31,000

13,600

Mexico

196,700

115,652

720

21,000

35,500

Phili-ppines

30,000

5,200

99

4,400

8,000

Tanzania

89,161

41,857

750

7,500

11,100

Total

2,556,857

837,593

Not Applicable

234,053

188,200

2.Historical land-use characteristics


F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

2.1 Land-use categories


2 2 land use scenarios

2.2. Land-use Scenarios

  • Brazil -- Scenarios based on potential identified in literature

  • China -- Two scenarios based on government plans

    • Forestation of 80% and 60% of suitable land area in 30 years in three regions -- South West, South East, and North East.

  • India -- Sustainable and commercial forestry scenarios analyzed

  • Indonesia -- Government plansscenario, and a mitigation scenario were analyzed. The latter meets all wood demand by 2010.

  • Philippines -- Forestation rates of 100% and 50% ofgovernment plansin two scenarios.

  • Mexico -- Baseline (likely trends) and mitigationscenario analyzed

    • Mitigation consists of reduced deforestation rates, better forest management, and plantations meet commercial wood demand

  • Tanzania - The Tropical Forest Action Plan (TFAP) scenario, assuming that 3.5 Mha and 1.7 Mha land area is converted are analyzed.


  • F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    Comprehensive Mitigation Analysis Process (COMAP)

    5. Estimate Net Carbon

    Sequestration Per Ha by Mitigation Options

    (Vegetation, Soils,

    Understory, Litter &

    Wood Product)

    1. Identify and Screen

    Potential Mitigation

    Options

    10. Discuss Barriers to and Policies Needed for Implementation

    9. Assess Macro-Economic Effects of Scenarios (Jobs, Capital, Exports, GDP, etc.)

    4. Determine Land

    Area and Wood

    Production

    Scenarios by

    Option

    7. Develop Scenarios of Total Cost and

    Carbon Seques-tration by Mitigation Option

    2. Assess Current and Future Forest and Agriculture Land Use

    Patterns

    8. Evaluate Cost-

    Effectiveness Indicators for Ranking

    Mitigation Options

    6. Estimate Unit Costs

    and Benefits by Mitigation Option

    3. Assess Current and

    Future Wood

    Product Demand


    3 carbon accounting

    3. Carbon Accounting

    • Four carbon pools are accounted for

      • Above- and below-ground biomass, detritus, soils and products

      • Carbon accounting is on an equilibrium value basis

    • Annual balance is reported for vegetation carbon

    • All accounting is with respect to a reference case or baseline carbon


    3 1 carbon accounting

    3.1Carbon Accounting

    Forest Protection:

    Mitigation Scenario

    Carbon Stock

    Forest Protection:

    Baseline Scenario

    Natural regeneration

    T

    Plantation operated

    in rotation

    0.5 T

    Time


    F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    3.2 Vegetation Carbon Stock in Study Countries

    30000

    1200

    1000

    25000

    800

    Mitigation Scenario

    Mitigation

    600

    Baseline Scenario

    Baseline

    20000

    400

    200

    0

    Mt C

    15000

    2000

    '12

    '30

    Philippines

    10000

    5000

    0

    2000

    '12

    '30

    2000

    '12

    '30

    2000

    '12

    '30

    2000

    '12

    '30

    2000

    '12

    '30

    2000

    '12

    '30

    Mexico

    Indonesia

    China

    India

    Philippines

    Tanzania


    4 benefit cost accounting

    4. Benefit / Cost Accounting

    • Costs include

      • Establishment or first costs

      • Recurring costs -- maintenance and monitoring

      • Opportunity cost of land

    • Benefits include

      • Revenue from sale of timber and non-timber products -- fruits, honey, etc.

    • Accounting is with respect to a reference case or baseline cost and benefits


    4 1 regeneration project accounting of carbon and costs

    4.1 -- Regeneration Project: Accounting of Carbon and Costs

    G

    Carbon Stock

    Time

    O

    T

    R

    I

    Annual Cost

    U

    V

    T

    Time

    O

    R


    4 2 forest conservation project accounting of carbon and costs

    4.2 -- Forest Conservation Project:Accounting of Carbon and Costs

    Y

    X

    O

    Mitigation Scenario

    E

    A

    Carbon Stock

    Z

    Baseline Scenario

    V

    B

    F

    T

    Tp

    Mitigation Scenario

    M

    C

    Annual Cost

    Baseline Scenario

    D

    L

    Tp

    T

    O

    Time


    4 3 plantation project harvested in rotation accounting of carbon and costs

    4.3 -- Plantation Project Harvested in Rotation:Accounting of Carbon and Costs

    Carbon Stock

    A

    G

    B

    0.5 G

    T

    O

    Time

    R

    N

    M

    Annual Cost

    K

    O

    T

    R

    Time


    4 4 evaluation of project costs

    4.4 Evaluation of Project Costs

    A: Cost of a LULUCF project

    Total Costs

    C: Annualized cost of a LULUCF project

    B: Discounted present value of cost series A

    Converging series

    Time


    4 5 discounting carbon revenue

    4.5 Discounting Carbon Revenue


    F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    5. Forestry Mitigation Potential, Indonesia

    Cost ($/t C) DR = 10%

    100

    Forest Protection

    50

    Reforestation

    Bioenergy

    Reforestation

    Rotation

    Short

    -

    -

    Enhanced Natural

    Rotation

    Long

    -

    -

    Regeneration

    Long

    -

    Rotation Plantation

    0

    0

    500

    1000

    1500

    2000

    2500

    Reduced Impact Logging

    -

    50

    -

    100

    Short

    -

    Rotation Plantation

    -

    150

    Cumulative Carbon Mitigation Potential (Mt C), 2000-2030


    F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    Cost ($/ t

    C) DR = 8-12%

    23

    1 CHSE SRP

    13 CHSE LRP

    25 INS REF

    SRP = Short

    -

    Rotation Plantation

    BR = Brazil

    2 CHSW REG

    14 BR LRP

    26 PHI LRP

    REG = Regeneration

    CH = China

    3 CHSW SRP

    15 IND REG

    27 MEX AGF

    LRP = Long

    -

    Rotation Plantation

    NE = Northeast

    4 CHNE REG

    16 PHI REG

    28 INS RIL

    BIO = Bioenergy

    SE = Southeast

    5 MEX LRP

    17 MEX SRP

    29 PHI FPR

    LRH = Long

    -

    Rotation Hardwood

    SW = So

    uthwest

    6 PHI SRP

    18 MEX BIO

    30 IND SRP

    SRS = Short

    -

    Rotation Softwood

    IND = India

    7 CHSE REG

    19 TAN LRH

    31 MEX REG

    FMG =

    Forest Management

    INS = Indonesia

    8 CHSW LRP

    20 TAN SRS

    32 INS REF

    ENR = Enhanced Natural

    MEX = Mexico

    9 CHNE SRP

    21 MEX FM

    G

    33 INS BIO

    Regeneration

    SRC = Community Short

    -

    Rotation

    PHI = Phillipines

    10 INS SRP

    22 INS LRP

    34 INS FPR

    REF = Reforestation

    TAN = Tanzania

    11 CHNE LRP

    23 INS ENR

    35 IND LRP

    AGF = Agroforestry

    12 BR SRP

    24 TAN SRC

    36 IND FPR

    RIL = Reduced Impact Logging

    5.2 Forestry Mitigation Potential

    (Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Philippines and Tanzania)

    $600

    Negative cost potential about half the total

    36

    $400

    $200

    35

    33

    34

    24

    27

    26

    31

    29

    20

    32

    25

    21

    16

    $0

    30

    14

    28

    22

    12

    19

    18

    0

    1000

    2000

    3000

    4000

    5000

    6000

    7000

    10

    17

    8

    13

    15

    11

    9

    7

    ($200)

    6

    5

    4

    3

    ($400)

    ($600)

    2

    ($800)

    ($1,000)

    1

    Cumulative Carbon Mitigation Potential (Mt C), 2000

    -

    2030


    F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    Cost ($/ t

    C) DR = 8-12%

    23

    1 CHSE SRP

    13 CHSE LRP

    25 INS REF

    SRP = Short

    -

    Rotation Plantation

    BR = Brazil

    2 CHSW REG

    14 BR LRP

    26 PHI LRP

    REG = Regeneration

    CH = China

    3 CHSW SRP

    15 IND REG

    27 MEX AGF

    LRP = Long

    -

    Rotation Plantation

    NE = Northeast

    4 CHNE REG

    16 PHI REG

    28 INS RIL

    BIO = Bioenergy

    SE = Southeast

    5 MEX LRP

    17 MEX SRP

    29 PHI FPR

    LRH = Long

    -

    Rotation Hardwood

    SW = So

    uthwest

    6 PHI SRP

    18 MEX BIO

    30 IND SRP

    SRS = Short

    -

    Rotation Softwood

    IND = India

    7 CHSE REG

    19 TAN LRH

    31 MEX REG

    FMG =

    Forest Management

    INS = Indonesia

    8 CHSW LRP

    20 TAN SRS

    32 INS REF

    ENR = Enhanced Natural

    MEX = Mexico

    9 CHNE SRP

    21 MEX FM

    G

    33 INS BIO

    Regeneration

    SRC = Community Short

    -

    Rotation

    PHI = Phillipines

    10 INS SRP

    22 INS LRP

    34 INS FPR

    REF = Reforestation

    TAN = Tanzania

    11 CHNE LRP

    23 INS ENR

    35 IND LRP

    AGF = Agroforestry

    12 BR SRP

    24 TAN SRC

    36 IND FPR

    RIL = Reduced Impact Logging

    5.3 Forestry Mitigation Potential

    (Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Philippines and Tanzania)

    $600

    Negative cost potential about half the total

    36

    $400

    Hypothetical Carbon Price

    $200

    35

    33

    34

    24

    27

    26

    31

    29

    20

    32

    25

    21

    16

    $0

    30

    14

    28

    22

    12

    19

    18

    0

    1000

    2000

    3000

    4000

    5000

    6000

    7000

    10

    17

    8

    13

    15

    11

    9

    7

    ($200)

    6

    5

    4

    3

    ($400)

    ($600)

    2

    ($800)

    ($1,000)

    1

    Cumulative Carbon Mitigation Potential (Mt C), 2000

    -

    2030


    6 conceptual figure impact of barriers on costs and carbon mitigation potential

    6. Conceptual Figure: Impact of barriers on costs and carbon mitigation potential

    F7 Estimate –

    Socioeconomic

    Potential

    Economic Potential

    Market or Achievable

    Potential

    ??

    Cost of carbon ($/t C)

    ??

    Market Failures: Examples

    Ill-defined property rights

    Lack of information

    Absence of markets

    Poor capital markets

    Barriers: Examples

    Carbon leakage

    Class structure

    Gender Issues

    Attitudes and habits

    Technical

    Potential

    Carbon sequestered or emissions avoided (t C)


    F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    2000-2012

    2000-2030

    Cumulative

    (Mt C)

    Annual average

    (Mt C/yr)

    Cumulative

    (Mt C)

    Annual average

    (Mt C/yr)

    F7 Study

    1,851

    140

    6199

    200

    All-Tropics

    2,730

    210

    9,028

    290

    Carbon Benefits:

    Mitigation Options in F7 Studies


    F7 and forclimit projects the tropical forestry and global climate change research network

    Potential Supply


    Future work

    Future Work

    • Estimating mitigation potential of projects taking barriers into consideration

      • Land tenure, rural cultures, risk-averse behavior, lack of product markets, etc.

    • Project-specific analysis of forestry mitigation options

      • Establishing approaches to resolve issues of baselines, permanence, and leakage

    • FORCLIMIT Project

      • Evaluation of one case study to better understand key LULUCF issues about leakage and permanence

    • Global COMAP Model development


    Key concerns about climate change projects

    Key Concerns about Climate Change Projects

    • Tests for additionality and credibility of baselines

    • Estimating and controlling GHG leakage

    • Monitoring and verification of GHG emissions and carbon stock

    • Permanence: Duration of carbon stocks of a LULUCF project

    • Sustainability concerns about LULUCF projects

      The above issues, except permanence,

      are of concern to all climate change projects,

      although their impact varies by type of project


    Leakage

    Leakage

    • Reduced access to land, food, fuel and timber resources without offering alternatives may result in carbon leakage as people find needed supplies elsewhere

    • A few pilot projects have been designed to reduce leakage

      • Multi-component projects: (CARE/Guatemala) increases fuelwood availability and agricultural productivity by encouraging agroforestry

    • Significant leakage may require assessments outside the project boundary

      • Difficult if the assessment is across national boundaries


  • Login