1 / 19

Local mitigation to climate change in the ASB: Potential for small-scale afforestation

Local mitigation to climate change in the ASB: Potential for small-scale afforestation. J. Franz, A. Khamzina Center for Development Studies (ZEFb) ‏ Department of Economic and Technological Change University of Bonn, Germany. Outline. Motivation Climate change predictions in the ASB

morgan-durham
Download Presentation

Local mitigation to climate change in the ASB: Potential for small-scale afforestation

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. Local mitigation to climate change in the ASB: Potential for small-scale afforestation J. Franz, A. Khamzina Center for Development Studies (ZEFb)‏ Department of Economic and Technological Change University of Bonn, Germany

  2. Outline • Motivation • Climate change predictions in the ASB • Activities that are affected by and contributing to further climate change • How local strategies are beneficial for sustainable development and reducing GHG emissions • Possibility for Afforestation/Reforestation (AR) under the CDM • Preliminary conclusions/future work

  3. The Aral Sea Basin (ASB)‏

  4. Climate Change in the ASB • ASB naturally arid • Agriculture relies 100% on irrigation • More than 8 million ha irrigated • Poor water management/planning has led to the Aral Sea Crisis • Temperature increases will place further pressure on water resources(long-run)‏ • Predicted increase in temp. above global mean: 3.7 C (long-run)‏ • Glaciers shrinking 1% annually • Reduces downstream water flow by 30-40%

  5. Climate Change in the ASB • Countries in the ASB also contributing to further climate change • GHG emissions have increased since 1992 in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan above the global mean • Per capita ghg emissions and water consumption are among the highest in the world • Agricultural sector will be affected by climate change but also contributing • Degradation leading to desertification

  6. Climate Change in the ASB • The countries in the ASB are non-Annex 1 • Not obliged to reduce emissions • Significant opportunities for Annex 1 countries to offset in these countries • C consumption for oil/gas very high • Natural conditions good for solar/hydro/wind • Large scale projects receive more interest • Low-hanging fruit principle • Small-scale projects have greater potential for sustainable, direct benefits, while decreasing GHG emissions

  7. Afforestation/Reforestation • Small-scale (SSC) Afforestation/Reforestation (AR)‏ • CDM for reducing GHG emissions • Co-benefits for sustainable development • timber/non-timber products • New M&Ps making SSCs more financially attractive • Increased permits from 8000 tons to 16000t of CO2 • Transaction costs reduced for small-scale projects • Special permit scheme under SSC A/R to account for permanence problem

  8. Afforestation/Reforestation • Currently 25 AR projects in the validation stage • Of these 9 small-scale projects • 200-400 ha each • Satisfy additionality more easily than full-scale projects • Remain financially unattractive under most circumstances • Long-term benefits not adequately considered

  9. Uzbekistan

  10. Uzbekistan

  11. Potential in Uzbekistan • Uzbekistan highly dependent on agricultural sector • Climate change threatens productivity/sustainability • Current practices have led to significant land degradation • Over 50% of irrigated land considered salt-affected • Salinization leads to degradation • Marginal lands widely available • Present low cost opportunity for A/R projects

  12. Potential in Uzbekistan • Preservation of forests part of national environmental action plan • Recognition that timber/non-timber products in short supply • No existing tools for dealing with marginal lands • Developed an enabling environment for carbon financing • 0ver 60 PINs at various stages of planning • oil/gas; municipal services • One on afforestation-rejected

  13. Potential in Uzbekistan • Afforestation demonstrated in the Khorezm region • Under ZEF/UNESCO Project • Source of ecological and economic benefits for rural farmers • Multipurpose trees well adapted to the region • Marginal lands with zero opportunity cost used • No longer sown to cotton/wheat

  14. Potential in Uzbekistan • Multipurpose trees planted on 2 ha experimental site • Experiment ran over 5 years • Irrigation 1/10 of what is required for cotton/wheat production • Saline shallow ground water table appropriate • Above ground/below ground biomass approx. 35 t/ha • Approximately 21 t C captured by 5th year

  15. Khorezm, Uzbekistan (March, 2004)‏ Potential in Uzbekistan

  16. Khorezm, Uzbekistan (Spring, 2006)‏ Potential in Uzbekistan

  17. Potential in Uzbekistan • Profitability demonstrated • Net revenue approximately 2000 USD after 5 years • Sale of timber/non-timber products • Shortage of fodder and fuel in rural areas • Initial investment in tree plantations still too high for farmers • 1000-2000 USD per ha • Small-scale loans unavailable • SSC/AR projects may provide additional revenue to make project go beyond profitability threshold

  18. Conclusions/Future work • Ex-ante assessment needed • SSC AR has not been sufficiently explored in the Uzbekistan context • Revenue from SSC AR permits still insufficient to cover initial outlay • Even under revised M&Ps • If long-term benefits to farmers considered projects sustainable option for local mitigation and income • Could the SSC/AR permits promote interest in afforestation in UZBs

More Related