1 / 16

A Comparison of No Till Protocols for Agricultural Carbon Offset Projects in Canada Dennis Haak, Agriculture & Agr

A Comparison of No Till Protocols for Agricultural Carbon Offset Projects in Canada Dennis Haak, Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada October 29, 2008. No Till Protocol Development.

krisalyn
Download Presentation

A Comparison of No Till Protocols for Agricultural Carbon Offset Projects in Canada Dennis Haak, Agriculture & Agr

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Comparison of No Till Protocols for Agricultural Carbon Offset Projects in Canada Dennis Haak, Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada October 29, 2008.

  2. No Till Protocol Development • Pilot Emission Reductions, Removals, and Learnings (PERRL) Initiative, Environment Canada (EC), Saskatchewan Soil Conservation Association, 2003 – 2005 • Environment Canada Offset System Development, 2005 – 2006 ISO 14064 based draft by Soil Management Technical Working Group (SMTWG) 3. C-Green (CCX) 2006, Canadian Prairies 4. Alberta’s Specified Gas Emitters Regulation, 2007 5. Various initiatives currently in development stage (provincial and federal)

  3. Important Note This comparison not part of a formal review process

  4. Common Elements of Regional Coefficient Approach • Coefficient(s) based on model output, developed and validated with research data (eg. Century for soil carbon) • Tillage activity definitions • Monitoring and verification of activity • Minimize administration costs - treat large groups of farmers the same - cheaper to monitor/verify activity than direct GHG impacts

  5. Scientific Basis for Raw Coefficients

  6. No Till Activity Definitions

  7. No Till Activity Definitions (cont’d)

  8. Baseline Approach

  9. Non-Permanence of Soil Carbon Beyond Crediting Period

  10. No Till Example: Dry Prairie Region

  11. Baseline and Crediting Period

  12. No Till Reduced Till

  13. Tillage Activity Monitoring & Verification

  14. Relative Rating of Protocol ElementsNote: Ratings reflect author’s opinion, not a formal review process

  15. The Future • Proposed Environment Canada Offset System - will not lead but rather review / approve protocol development - Alberta protocol placed on fast track list for early consideration • Other provinces considering Alberta protocol for their own system • Standardized approach would reduce uncertainty • In Canada no till adoption is high - hard to have both additionality and project feasibility - need to focus more on policy to support maintenance of practice (eg. EG&S that includes other environmental benefits)

  16. Thank you Questions and Discussion

More Related