Permanence of Carbon Sinks Sten Nilsson, Matthias Jonas, Anatoly - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
permanence of carbon sinks
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Permanence of Carbon Sinks Sten Nilsson, Matthias Jonas, Anatoly - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 07, 2022 106 likes •384 views

Monitoring, Verification and Permanence of Carbon Sinks Sten Nilsson, Matthias Jonas, Anatoly Shvidenko, Vladimir Stolbovoi, Michael Obersteiner and Ian McCallum Forestry Project, IIASA March 2003, Lisbon, Portugal Forestry Project OUTLINE

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Forestry Project

Monitoring, Verification and Permanence of Carbon Sinks

Sten Nilsson, Matthias Jonas, Anatoly Shvidenko, Vladimir Stolbovoi, Michael Obersteiner and Ian McCallum

Forestry Project, IIASA

March 2003, Lisbon, Portugal

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Forestry Project

OUTLINE

IIASA FOR Activities in this Field This Presentation

Full accounting of Kyoto GHGs Full carbon accounting of sinks Uncertainties of GHGs Uncertainties of carbon sinks Verification of GHGs Verification of carbon sinks Missing sink issue The missing carbon sink Spatial verification of GHGs Spatial variability and verification of carbon sinks Temporal verification of GHGs Temporal verification of carbon sinks Biomass and capturing of GHGs Sinks in abrupt climate change Monitoring with help of RS of GHG fluxes Monitoring of carbon fluxes Permanence of GHG sinks Permanence of carbon sinks Verification mechanisms and institutions Policy recommendations for policy makers and the post Kyoto process Suggestions for CarboEurope

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Forestry Project

Full Carbon Accounting for Russia in 1990

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Forestry Project

Input Datasets for and Characteristics of Full Carbon Accounting

Consistency Systems Approach Complete Accounting Uncertainties

Integrated Assessments

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Forestry Project

Russian Terrestrial Full Carbon Accounting Evolution

Inventory Approach RS and Environmental Variables Combination of Process Based Methods with Inventories

Earlier Now

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Forestry Project

Terrestrial Full Corg Balance for Russia (1988–1992)

V

NPP: 4354 ( 118) Con: 682 (41) RO: 62 (14)

HR + Ant: 4026 ( 131)

SRO: 9 (3)

306 (156)

H

62 (14)

L

20 (7)

A

  • 351
  • (176)

Dis: 143 (16)

P

  • 38
  • (155)

Det: 3222 (93) HR: 3201 (123) Leak: 20 (7) URO: 50 (13) Dep: 23 (7) Dep_H: 3 (1) Dep_P: 20 (7) CSRO: 12 (4) DOS: 70 (15)

1990 Mainly Process Based Carbon Scheme

Plab: -69 -(±155) Pstab: 31 (±9)

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Forestry Project

  • 0.80
  • 0.55
  • 0.30
  • 0.05

0.20

Atmospheric Sink Strength [PgC yr-1]

Terrestrial Sink Strength [PgC yr-1]

Russian Terrestrial FCA: 1988–1992

Average Annual Atmospheric Sink Strength

  • 0.35 ± 0.10 (This Study, 2003)
  • 0.15 ± 0.12 (Nilsson et al., 2000)
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Forestry Project

Conclusions for 1990 Estimates

  • Modified systems view with respect to soils

and inclusion of more detailed lateral and horizontal fluxes resulted in doubling the net terrestrial sink capacity

  • The assessment of the atmospheric pool is

sensitive to small changes in surface and sub-surface fluxes

  • The uncertainties are substantially reduced
  • Underlining the need for thorough and full

accounting including all fluxes

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Forestry Project

Status of Inverse Modeling of 1980–1989 Terrestrial C Sources (+) and Sinks (-)

in PgC • yr-1

(Heiman, 2001; Prentice et al., 2001)

[-2.3, - 0.6] [-1.0, + 1.5] [-0.7, + 0.2]

90N 30N 30S 90S

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Forestry Project

Inverse Modeling and the Northern Extra-tropical Belt (Top–Down)

  • Northern Extra-tropical sink strength in PgC•yr-1 for 1980–89

(North America/Eurasia)

Cv = centered view

(House et al., 2003) 90N 30N

North America [-3.16, +0.72] Cv: -1.22 ± 1.94 (±159%) Eurasia [-2.3, +0.72] Cv: -0.79 ± 1.51 (±191%)

[-2.3, -0.6] Cv: -1.45 ± 0.85 (± 59%)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Forestry Project

Up Scaling of the Terrestrial Sink Strength Bottom-up Results for Russia

Region Vegetated Area 1012 . m2

Russia

16

(IIASA) Eurasia

36

(Schimel et al., 2001) Northern Extra-tropics

56

(Schimel et al., 2001)

Inverse Modeling

Northern Extra-tropical Eurasia

  • 1.45
  • 0.79

Up Scaled Bottom-up Values

Northern Extra-tropical Eurasia

  • 1.22
  • 0.77

Valid for the Northern Extra-tropical Region

PgC•yr-1

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Forestry Project

Bottom-up Combined Top Down–Bottom Up Full Account in PgC • yr-1

Extra-tropical North w/o Russia (71% area) Cv: -1.10 ± 0.87 (±79%)

Cv = centered view

90N 30N

[-2.3, -0.6] Cv: -1.45 ± 0.85 (± 59%)

Russia (29 % area) Cv: -0.35 ± 0.18 (± 51%)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Forestry Project

Conclusions

  • Our full C account of Russia is closer to

atmospheric inversion than existing C inventory + model techniques

  • Combined top down–bottom up based

approach has smaller uncertainties than pure top down approach

  • The combination of bottom up (FCA) with

top down (atmospheric inversion) is the way to achieve ultimate verification

  • No “Missing Sink”
slide-14
SLIDE 14

Forestry Project

Missing Sink

  • The missing sink issue is a result of the introduction of

land use changes in the balance

  • Our bottom up approach for 1990 and the 1990s are

sufficiently taking care of the effect of historical land use changes (including vegetation replacement and the changed production and consumption of products from converted land)

  • The inverse modeling also reflects historical land use

change

  • Based on the good correspondence between the top

down and bottom up approach, and with this no identification of any missing sink, leads us to conclude that the missing sink issue is reduced to an issue of relevant accounting

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Forestry Project

Input Datasets C-flux Algorithms C-flux Spatial Locator

GIS Database

   

2 1 2 2 2 2 _ 2 2 2 _ 2 2

1 1                

RO SROs Leak SROs Leak Leak SROs Leak

RO RO        

  2 1 2 2 2 _ 2 2 2 2 _ 2 _

              

RO SROs SROs DetA Trans Trans tot Trans

RO DetA       

 

   

Dis Con Det NPP Ant Det NPP dt dV       

Spatial Accounting Concept

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Forestry Project

Geographical Distribution of Terrestrial Sinks/Sources in 1990

Value

Sink Source

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Forestry Project

Spatial Variability

  • Large variations between sub regions and different

ecosystems in the sink strength capacity

  • We are working on the uncertainty assessments of the

spatial calculations

  • The uncertainty assessments are needed for the

verification

  • This work is an important step towards regional

verification by inverse modeling in the future

  • This tool is aiming at supporting carbon management
  • f land resources within the framework of the Kyoto

Protocol

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Forestry Project

Dual Constrained vs.Temporal Verification

Temporal Verification Working Conditions

  • National Scales
  • Split of Biosphere into

Kyoto/Non-Kyoto Biosphere Dual-constrained Verification (Bottom up–Top down) Working Conditions

  • Well Defined Test Sites

(“Zero-leakage systems”)

  • No split of Biosphere into

Kyoto/Non-Kyoto Biosphere

Atmosphere “Surface System”

(No spatial or thematic restriction)

Net flux – atmospheric measurement(s) Net flux – “surface system” measurements

Verification: Identical net fluxes?

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Forestry Project

Temporal Verification

Net Emissions Verification Time

Time for Achieving Reduction Commitment

Time t1 t2 Signal

Reduction Commitment

Total

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Forestry Project

Time Stock

Permanence: Stock

t S   

= Unchanged Long-term Trend

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Forestry Project

Time Stock

Permanence: Stock Change

= The realized long-term stock change should

  • utstrip the variability of the stock

(at a given confidence level)

*

t t   

 

S t t S S

Conf x t %

      

*

t  t  S 

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Forestry Project

Permanence is Multi-dimensional

  • Huge stocks and small sink

= High Permanence

  • High temporal variability of stocks = Low Permanence
  • High spatial variability of stocks

= Low Permanence

Spatial and temporal variabilities impacting permanence are partly manageable

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Forestry Project

Permanence Specifics: NBP from Russian Forests (1961–1998)

Net Biome Production, PgC yr-1 Observations

Annual variability 0.05 to 0.60

  • Increasing stocks over

time  Permanence of stocks

  • The degree of

permanence depends

  • n the monitoring

period Variability of 5 year averages 0.24 to 0.32 1961–1998 average 0.28 ± 0.06

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Forestry Project

Driving Forces for Sink/Source Changes Impacting Permanence

  • Land use change
  • Change productivity
  • Changed disturbance regimes
  • Changed climate conditions, etc.
slide-25
SLIDE 25

Forestry Project

Implications for Monitoring and Verification

  • The monitoring system design for sinks

should be based on the demands:

  • Full accounting
  • Satisfy uncertainty assessments
  • Satisfy verification conditions
  • Continuously monitoring
  • Due to the variability in the sink capacity

between individual years the verification should also be based on multi-year periods

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Forestry Project

Suggestions to CarboEurope and the Post Kyoto Process with respect to Sinks

  • Introduce full accounting
  • Improve uncertainty assessments
  • Develop solid verification mechanisms
  • Spatial verification
  • Temporal verification
  • Design monitoring systems to handle the above
  • Contribute to establishment of institutions for

implementation of the above

  • Introduce bifurcation rules