1 / 36

Disturbance, degradation, and recovery: forest dynamics and climate change mitigation

Disturbance, degradation, and recovery: forest dynamics and climate change mitigation. Professor Rod Keenan Acknowledgements to Colin Filer, Julian Fox, Cossey Yosi and the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. 4.2 Pg y -1. Atmosphere 46%. 2.6 Pg y -1. +. Land 29%.

wilmet
Download Presentation

Disturbance, degradation, and recovery: forest dynamics and climate change mitigation

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. Disturbance, degradation, and recovery: forest dynamics and climate change mitigation Professor Rod Keenan Acknowledgements to Colin Filer, Julian Fox, Cossey Yosi and the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  2. Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  3. 4.2 Pg y-1 Atmosphere 46% 2.6 Pg y-1 + Land 29% 7.5 Pg C y-1 2.3 Pg y-1 Oceans 26% Fate of Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions (2000-2007) Global C cycle 1.5 Pg C y-1 1 Petagram = 1000 Megatonnes Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science Canadell et al. 2007, PNAS (updated)

  4. Human Perturbation of the Global Carbon Budget Human perturbation of the global carbon cycle Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science Canadell et al. 2007, PNAS (updated to 2007)

  5. After Bali Two parallel processes • AWGKP • sets rules for post-2012 Kyoto Protocol • AWGLCA • seeks global agreement for further co-operative action, now and post-2012 • engagement with ‘heavy hitters’ (US, China, India) • includes REDD Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  6. Forests leading to Copenhagen • Article 3.3 sinks – no real change • Article 3.4 • Differing positions • Australia remains conservative • Baseline a continuing challenge • REDD+restoration Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  7. Forest-based mitigation options Nabuurs et al 2007 Forestry. in IPCC 4th Assessment report Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  8. Garnaut potential estimates Garnaut review 2007. Includes allowance for 100 GWPs) Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  9. Defining forest degradation • Forest productivity • Genes, tree vigour and quality • Forest species composition compared with a ‘natural’ state • Impacted soils, water, nutrients or broader landscape features • Carbon stock Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  10. Forest degradationa proposed definition ‘A human-induced process that results in long-term reduction in forest carbon stocks’ • forest canopy cover is sufficient for the land to be defined as forest • Challenges • defining ‘long-term’, • extent of reduction in carbon stocks • Forest area considered subject to ‘degradation’ Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  11. Forest management carbon accounting principles • Determine the forest area subject to management • Identify human-induced activities • Assess change in carbon stock associated with these activities • Comprehensive accounting: • include lands subject to past or present management • Balanced accounting • include all changes in carbon stocks Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  12. Balanced accounting • Emissions • Harvest • Removal of wood products • Site preparation • Decay of residues • Fire • Disease • Uptake • Regrowth • Accounting pools • Above and below ground live biomass • Dead organic matter • Soil carbon Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  13. Case studies Australia • Native forest harvesting • Wildfire Papua New Guinea • Forest harvesting • Shifting cultivation Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  14. CO2 uptake in Australian Managed Native Forest 2007 National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Appendix 7.B Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  15. Harvest emissions = Wood removals (m3) * C in roundwood (0.35) * Slash Ratio (0.9) Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  16. CO2 losses due to harvest Net uptake of 32 to 37 Mt CO2 per year Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  17. NF management options • Further reduce removals? • Consider leakage, cost, social impacts • Reduce ‘slash factor’ • greater or less utilisation? • potential impacts on CWD or regeneration success • Increase growth? • Ensure fully stocked stands • Further benefits generally marginal Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  18. Wildfire 2007 Australian National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  19. Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  20. Australian emissions 06 and 07 2007 National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  21. Biomass lost in wildfire assumed to recover in 5 years Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  22. Wildfire human induced? Frequency may increase with climate change This may change species composition and C stock Impacts can be mitigated through education, effective suppression, prescribed burning Better quantify impacts on C stocks Factoring in long-term disturbance cycles Wildfire and carbon Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  23. Fire-harvest interactions Hurteau et al 2008 Carbon protection and fire risk reduction: toward a full accounting of forest carbon offsets. Frontiers in Ecology Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  24. PNG forests Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  25. PNG drivers of forest change • Conversion to plantation agriculture • limited • Fire • Extensive in some regions but forest recovers • Mining • Localised impacts except along Fly River Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  26. Shifting cultivation • 11 million hectares used by local farmers • Fallow • 50% > 15 yrs • 43% 5-15 yrs • 7% • Little conversion of primary forest Allen et al. 2001. Food security for Papua New Guinea: Proceedings of the Papua New Guinea food and nutrition 2000 conference. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (Proceedings 99), Canberra, pp. 529-553 Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  27. Timber harvesting • Last 20 years average of 1.75 M m3 logs exported • 120,000 ha/year harvest area • 3.2 M ha impacted • C stock reduction of 44.4 t/ha • 17 tCO2 per m3 wood removed Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  28. PNG harvest emissions Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  29. PNG regrowth uptake Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  30. PNG net emissions Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  31. Baseline option – base year Base year eg. 2000 7.6 Mt/yr Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  32. Baseline option – Base period Base period eg. 1990’s 21Mt/yr Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  33. Baseline option - BAU ? Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  34. Best options for PNG • Reduce harvest rate • Long term sustainable supply • Management capacity • Accessibility, operability and market factors • Reduce harvest impacts • Support post-harvest regeneration and rehabilitation • Encourage industry diversification Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  35. Degradation? Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

  36. Key points • Definition of forest degradation still uncertain • Need to adopt balanced and comprehensive accounting • Need improved monitoring frameworks based on field measurement • Baseline, leakage and economic and social impacts are important policy considerations Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science

More Related