Module%203%20Mitigation%20Options

1
Module 3Mitigation Options

• General considerations
• Industry
• Buildings
• Transport
• Energy supply
• Solid waste
• Land-use, land-use change and forestry
• Agriculture
• Note geological sequestration is not covered but
  is a potential longer-term mitigation option.

2
Module 3g

• LULUCF Land-use, land-use change and forestry

3
Key LULUCF Sectors

• 1. Forestry
• 2. Rangelands and Grasslands
• 3. Agriculture

4
Role of LULUCF Sectors in Global GHG Emissions

• Global Emissions per year (early 1990's)
• Fossil fuels Landuse sectors
• Carbon Emissions (GtC) 6.0 - 0.5 1.6 - 0.4
• Methane (Tg) 100 400
• Other GHG (Anthropogenic) Significant but lt 5
  
• Net Sequestration (GtC) 0 0.7 - 0.2
• Climate change impacts (2CO2)
• Projections by three GCMs show an increase of
  total forest area from 8 - 13 of the current
  82.7 Mi km2, and mixed impacts on drylands and
  agricultural areas in different regions of the
  world

5
Key Steps in LULUCF Mitigation Assessment

1. Identification and categorization of the
   mitigation options appropriate for carbon
   sequestration.
2. Assessment of the current and future land area
   available for mitigation options.
3. Assessment of the current and future demand for
   products and for land.
4. Determination of the land area and product
   scenarios by mitigation option.
5. Estimation of the C-sequestration per ha. for
   major available land classes, by mitigation
   option.
6. Estimation of unit costs and benefits.
7. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness indicators.
8. Development of future carbon sequestration and
   cost scenarios.
9. Exploration of policies, institutional
   arrangements and incentives necessary for the
   implementation of mitigation options.
10. Estimation of the national macro-economic effects
    of these scenarios.

6
Potential Area Available for Mitigation in Select
Countries (million ha)
7
Footnotes for Area Availability Table

• Source FAO Forest Resource Assessment 2000,
  with ve figure implying threshold. a 20 crown
  cover. Data are for 1998. b Data for 1995
  cData for 1995-97 d-- Degraded lands in three
  study regions in 2000 e-- Unproductive land,
  grasslands and critical lands f-- Annual average
  for 1990-1997 (includes transmigration and
  agricultural development, forest fire and
  shifting cultivation excludes illegal logging).
  g --Grassland areas, sub-marginal forests and
  brushlands h-- Annual average for 1995-1998
  period i Early 1990s. Forest area includes
  semi-arid vegetation, which accounts for 66 Mha
  j-- Degraded forest land k-- Forested area in
  three study regions. Total forested area is
  158,941 thousand ha l-- Estimated potential for
  natural regeneration, farm forestry and
  plantations from Trexler and Haugen, 1995 m--
  1978 to 1997 data from Brazil web site
  (www.mct.br/clima/ingles/communic_old/amazinpe.htm
  ) n-- Forests and cerrados located in the
  Amazon region only. o--3.5 mi. ha for short
  rotation community woodlots, and 2.5 mi. ha (50
  of the fallow area) for reforestation and 1.5 mi.
  ha for all other forestation including
  agroforestry, long rotation plantations,
  non-forest tree crops (wattle, rubber, oil palm,
  etc). p Figures from Trexler and Haugen, 1995.
  Estimated potential in regeneration, farm
  forestry and plantations between 1990 and 2040.

8
Forestry Mitigation Options

• 1. Reducing GHG emissions through
• - conservation and protection
• - efficiency improvements
• - fossil fuel substitution
• 2. Sequestering carbon through
• - increased vegetation cover
• - increased carbon storage in soils
• - conversion of biomass to long-term products

9
Drylands Mitigation Options

• Rangelands and Grasslands
• Reduction of Emissions
• Improved range and fire management
• Improved animal husbandry
• Biomass replenishment
• Carbon Sequestration
• Biomass replenishment
• Enhanced soil carbon storage

10
Agriculture Mitigation Options

• 1. Emission Reduction through improved
• Rice cultivation
• Animal husbandry
• Fertilizer application
• Cultivation methods
• 2. Carbon Sequestration in
• Agroforestry
• Agricultural tree crops
• Soil carbon storage

11
Agricultural Sector Mitigation Assessment

• Included Gases and Activities
• CH4 from Livestock
• Enteric Fermentation (digestive)
• Manure Management
• CH4 from Rice Cultivation
• N2O from Disturbance of Agricultural Soils
• Note Open Biomass burning of agricultural waste
  is covered under Land-use Change and Forestry

12
Main Sources of Emissions from AgricultureCH4
Emissions from Livestock and Manure

• Enteric Fermentation
• CH4 emitted from normal digestive processes
• Main source mostly ruminant animals, e.g. cattle
  and sheep, non-ruminants e.g. horses and pigs
• Main factors influencing emissions
• type of digestive system
• age
• weight
• quality and
• quantity of feed intake

13
Main Sources of Emissions from AgricultureCH4
Emissions from Livestock and Manure

• 2. Manure from livestock
• CH4 is emitted from anaerobic decomposition of
  organic matter, mostly slurry/liquid manure
• Main factors are
• manure management system
• temperature
• quantity of manure produced

14
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions
from Livestock and Manure

• Proposed approach
• Identify the target animal types for mitigation
• Estimate animal population by animal types
• Select emission factor per head for each animal
  type
• Tier 1 countries Select from standard default
  values
• Tier 2 countries Develop emission factors based
  on country specific conditions
• Multiply animal population by emission factor to
  obtain baseline emission levels

15
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions
from Livestock and Manure

• Cattle categories
• Dairy cattle Milk producing cows for commercial
  exchange and calves as well as heifers being kept
  for future diary production
• Non-dairy cattle All non-diary cattle, including
  cattle for beef production, draft and breeding
  animals

16
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions
Factors for Enteric Fermentation
17
Strategies for Reducing Ruminant CH4 Emissions

• Improved Nutrition via mechanical and chemical
  feed processing
• Improved Nutrition via Strategic Supplementation
  e.g. providing microbial and/or by-pass protein
  supplements
• Production Enhancing Agents e.g. Bovine
  somatotrophin(bST) and anabolic steroid implants
• Improved Production through genetic improvements
• Improved Reproductive Efficiency.

18
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emission
Factors for Manure Management
19
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emission
Factors for Manure Management
20
Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions from
Livestock and Manure

• Tier 1 Method
• Perform for each animal type for each climatic
  region if applicable
• Annual Emissions PopEFenteric EFmanure
• Note The term Tier 2 applies to those countries
  with large numbers of livestock with substantial
  contribution to national emissions.

21
Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions from
Livestock and Manure

• Tier 2 Recommended Method
• Detailed animal types
• Detailed animal and feed characteristics
• Estimate feed intake
• Detailed manure management data and country
  specific emission factors

22
Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions from
Livestock and ManureRecommended representative
cattle types for Tier 2
23
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions
from Livestock and Manure

• Tier 2 Method for Enteric Fermentation (by
  animal type)
• Emissions (kg CH4/yr) (GE Ym 365
  days/yr)/(55.65 MJ/kg CH4)
• where
• GE daily gross energy intake (MJ/day)
• Ym methane conversion rate (default 0.06)
• GE (NEm NEf NEl NEd NEp)/(NE/DE)
  (NEg/(NEg/DE) (100/DE)
• where
• NE Net Energy DE Digestive Energy

24
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions
from Livestock and Manure

• Tier 2 Method for Manure Management (by animal
  type)
• Emissions (kg CH4/yr) VS 365 days/yr B0
  0.67 kg CH4/m3 ?jk(MCFjk) MSjk)
• Where
• VS daily volatile solids excreted (kg/day)
• B0 maximum methane producing capacity for
  manure (m3 CH4/kg VS)
• MCF methane conversion factor
• MS fraction of animal types manure handled
• jk manure management system j in climate k

25
Manure Management Mitigation Options

• Covered lagoons methane recovered for farm
  energy use
• Small scale digesters enhances anaerobic
  decomposition of organic material which yields
  CH4 for energy
• Large scale digesters for large operations and
  are much more complex but based on the same
  principle.

26
Baseline Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions
from Flooded Rice Fields

• Overview
• - Decomposition of organic material in flooded
  rice fields produces CH4.
• - CH4 escapes to the atmosphere primarily by
  diffusive transport through rice plants.
• - Flux rates are highly variable, both spatially
  and temporally -- depending on water management,
  soil temperature, soil type and cultivation
  practices.
• - The method is revised in the Revised 1996 IPCC
  Guidelines

27
Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions from
Flooded Rice Fields

• Definitions
• - Growing season length The average (for the
  country or subcategory) length of time in days,
  from seeding or transplanting until harvest
• - Continuously flooded Fields inundated for the
  duration of the growing season
• - Intermittently flooded Inundated part of the
  time
• - Dry (upland) Fields seldom flooded during the
  growing season
• - Harvested area Accounts for multiple cropping
  per year harvested areagtcultivated area.

28
Mitigation Options for Rice Cultivation

• Nutrient Management Using N fertilizers and
  reducing use of raw organic materials can reduce
  CH4 emissions from paddy fields
• Water management Intermittent draining of rice
  fields during the growing season or between
  croppings. Also by increasing water percolation
  rate in fields.

29
Estimating Emissions from AgricultureCH4
Emissions from Flooded Rice Fields

• Apply to each water management regime
• Emissions (Gg CH4) Harvested Area (Mha/yr)
• x Growing season length (days)
• x Emission Factor (kg Ch4/ha/day)
• Emission factors depend on water management and
  average growing season temperature

30
Emissions from AgricultureCH4 Emissions from
Flooded Rice Fields

• CH4 Emissions ?i Harvested Area x SFi x CFi x
  EFi
• Where
• SFi scaling factor for each water management
  system i.
• CFi Correction factor for organic amendments
  applied in each water management system i.
• EF Seasonally integrated emission factor for
  continuously flooded rice without organic
  amendments

31
Emissions from AgricultureEmissions from
Agricultural Soils

• Overview
• Agricultural soils may emit or sequester N2O, CO2
  and CH4
• Fluxes are affected by a wide variety of natural
  and management processes, the effects of which
  are not clearly understood
• The methodology currently only includes N2O
• The methodology is significantly revised in the
  Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines

32
Emissions from AgricultureEmissions from
Agricultural Soils

• Recommended Methodology
• N2O Emissions (103 tN/yr)
  ?i(Fmn Fon Fbnf) x Ci x 44/28)
• Where
• i low, medium, high
• Fmn amount of mineral fertilizer applied
• F amount of organic material (animal manure and
  crop residues) applied
• Fbnf amount of biological N-fixation added
• C Emission coefficient

33
Emissions from AgricultureEmissions from
Agricultural Soils

• Ranges of Emission Coefficients for N2O from
  Agricultural Soils Tg (N2O-N)
• Emission type Expert Group Alternative Recent
• Recommendations Calculations2 Analyses3
  
• 
  19931
  
• Low 0.0005 0.0014 0.0025
• Medium 0.0036 0.0034 0.0125
• High 0.039 0.037 0.0225
• Footnotes
• 1 Values were suggested by an expert group during
  the Amersfoot workshop (Bouwman and Mosier,
  1993). They are not representative of global
  figures because they are based on mineral
  fertilizer use for each type.
• 2 In response to comments on the draft
  Guidelines, a range of coefficients was
  calculated based on figures in Table 5-9 of the
  OECD/OCDE (1991) report.
• 3 Provided by Mosier (1994) based on detailed
  analysis of currently available measurement data.
  In these Guidelines, these are the recommended
  coefficients.
  
  

34
Emissions from AgricultureEmissions from
Agricultural Soils

• Revisions in the Revised 1996 Guidelines
• Revised methodology takes into account both
  direct and indirect emissions of N2O and includes
  additional sources of N that are applied,
  deposited or made available in the soil.