Tropical Peatlands and Global Carbon Budget Daniel Murdiyarso Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) I Nyoman Suryadiputra Wetland International – Indonesia Program (WI-IP) Regional Carbon Budgets Workshop: From.
Download
Report
Transcript Tropical Peatlands and Global Carbon Budget Daniel Murdiyarso Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) I Nyoman Suryadiputra Wetland International – Indonesia Program (WI-IP) Regional Carbon Budgets Workshop: From.
Tropical Peatlands
and Global Carbon Budget
Daniel Murdiyarso
Center for International Forestry Research
(CIFOR)
I Nyoman Suryadiputra
Wetland International – Indonesia Program
(WI-IP)
Regional Carbon Budgets Workshop: From Methodologies to Quantification
Beijing, 15-18 November 2004
Outline
Basic terminology and approaches
Global significance of petlands
Degrading peatlands
Role of fires
Methodologies and quantification
Static vs dynamic
Towards modeling/predictive capabilities
Identified gaps
Trends
Conclusions
2
Basic terminology
Carbon stock (mass/area)
Carbon pool (mass)
Carbon flux
Carbon emissions
(mass/area/time)
C-budget: distribution of C in the compartments and flux rate
between them (units??)
Residual: how large?
3
Tropical peatlands
Globally the area of tropical peat is ca. 40 Mha
50% in Indonesia
Formed over a period of 10,000 years
Depth ranges 1-12 m
Store 5,800 t C/ha (> 10 x tropical forests)
4
Decreasing area (Mha)
1990
2002
35-40
25-30
Sumatra
7.2
6.5
Kalimantan
8.4
?
Indonesia
20
17
Southeast Asia
5
Peatlands and C-budgets
Annual GHGs released due to peatland
drainage or degradation 2-20 tC/ha
(Maltby and Immirzy, 1993)
Carbon stored in tropical peatlands
1700-2880 t C/ha (GACGC, 2000)
Forest fires in Indonesia during 1997
and 1998 involved 2.12 Mha of
peatlands (Tacconi, 2002)
The estimated C-loss from peatland
fires in 1997 ranged 0.81-2.57 Gt (Page
et al., 2002).
6
Disturbance regimes and terrestrial C-budget
CO2
Plant
respiration
GPP
Soil and litter
respiration
Shortterm
carbon
uptake
NPP
60 Gt/yr
Mediumterm
carbon
storage
NEP
10 Gt/yr
Disturbance
Long-term
carbon
storage
NBP
1-2 Gt/yr
7
Source: IGBP Terrestrial Carbon Working Group (1998)
Fire & Haze from Sumatra and Kalimantan
Sep 11, 1997
8
Can hotspots tell anything?
Source: Murdiyarso et al. (2002)
9
Estimated C-loss
7 Mt
10
But fire scars may not tell everything
1989
1997
11
Mega rice project – Central Kalimantan
12
LUC is both affecting and affected by climate change
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
El-Nino events
Fire event
1982
1987
1991
1997
Area burnt (Mha)
C-loss (Gt)
3.6
0.1
0.5
11.6 (2.1)
Note: Global CO2 growth = 1.5 ppmv/yr (IPCC, 1995)
0.45
0.01
0.06
1.45 (0.47)
13
From methodologies to quantification?
C- loss from peatland degradation (field data)
Area of change – remote sensing
Bulk density – lab analysis
C-content – lab analysis
Depth of peat layer – auger bor
Emissions from volatile biomass burning
Future development
Leaching of dissolved elements (organic carbon)
Towards modeling exercises
14
Estimating C-loss from peatlands
n
C-loss = (A x B x C x D)
i=1
Bulk density (gcm-3)
Decomposition
level
i
C - organic (%)
Range
Mean
Range
Mean
Fibric
0.10 – 0.12
0.10
-
53
Hemic
0.13 – 0.29
0.17
39 – 52
48
Sapric
0.25 – 0.37
0.28
29 – 54
45
Peaty soils*
0.22 – 0.69
0.34
29 – 40
35
*) Occupy relatively thin layer of less than 50 cm
15
0o
Estimated C-loss
3.5 Gt
0o
16
Change of stocks
Land-use trajectory and fallow periods
High
secondary
forests
Low
secondary
forests
Primary
forests
Shrubs
Bare
Imperata
Crop-based
systems
|
|
5
10
Medium cycle
Tree-based
systems
|
20 Long cycle 30
|
Logged-over
forests
|
40
Years
(Protected areas)
Short cycle
17
C-stocks in changing land-use
250
3
200
150
2
100
50
1
0
18
CENTURY: Forest - Cassava - Imperata
C Stock
60
SOMT
NPP
400
40
200
20
0
410
SOMT (Mg C ha-1)
NPP (Mg C ha-1 y -1)
Carbon stock (Mg C ha-1)
600
0
420
430
Years
440
450
19
CENTURY: Forest - Rice/Bush fallow
Carbon Stock (Mg C/ha)
600
60
400
40
200
20
0
410
SOMT (Mg C/ha)
NPP (Mg C/ha/y)
C Stock
SOMT
NPP
0
420
430
Years
440
450
20
Emissions from biomass burning - 1997
Emission
(Mt)
CO2
85-316
CO
7-52
NOx
0.2-1.5
Particulate matter
Source: Levine (1998)
4-16
21
Burning and nutrient losses
Nutrient losses due to volatilisation during the burning
of residual biomass are generally higher than the
losses by leaching (Bruijnzeel, 1998)
This is not only for N, which comprise of more than 90
percent of the biomass but often also for mineral
nutrients
Reduction of burning in land clearing practices will
reduce atmospheric losses
Burning also increases leaching losses compared to
non-burning practices (Malmer et al., 1994)
22
Trends – peatland development
Needs of agricultural land expansions
Growing oil-palm and pulpwood industries
People in-migration into the area
Unclear tenure systems (conflicts remain)
23
Trends – fire will be used
Fire is the cheapest method for land clearing
Fire can add ash that temporarily improve soil
conditions
Pests and weeds control
The economic value of the biomass ‘waste’ is so low
Smallholders’ wood pricing discourages producers
24
Economic values of peatlands goods*
No
Product
Annual Quantity
1
Construction
timber
2,850 m3
100,000
0.10
2
Fuel woods
4,400 m3
119,000
0.12
3
Mixed timber
375 m3
67
4
Wooden roofing
52,000 bundles
46,000
5
Bamboo
15,000 pieces
517
6
Rattan
164,273 pieces
7,300
7
Resin
223 kg
17
0
8
Medicinal plant
10,345 items
1,750
0
9
Deer
9,700
0.01
10
Pig
11
Singing birds
12
Fish
Economic value
($) **
168
Relative
contribution
0
0.05
0
0.01
71
625
0
345
137
0
2,850,000 kg
Total
*) Based on survey conducted in East Kalimantan from 100 respondents.
**) Converted using an exchange rate of US$ 1 = Rp 8,500
Source: Wetlands International, 2004
671,260
0.70
956,373
25
Fresh impetus ……
23 Jul 2004 – Indonesian Parliament approved the
Law on the Kyoto Protocol ratification
23 Sep 2004 – Germany geared towards the inclusion
of avoiding deforestation (in addition to A/R) in the
CDM in the 2nd commitment period
23 Oct 2004 – Duma voted in favor of Russia’s
accession to the Kyoto Protocol
ASEAN Agreement on Fires and Haze Transboundary Pollution
ASEAN Peatlands Management Initiative (APMI)
26
Future research questions
What are our fundamental understanding of peatland
ecosystems vulnerability to climate change?
How can the understandings be disseminated to
influence public policy-making?
Are there scientifically sound adaptive management
options for the ecosystems to mitigate climate change?
How accessible the markets are?
Multilateral: e.g GEF/GCF to pay extra for carbon removed in
biodiversity/watershed conservation projects
Bilateral: ODA, DNS
Unilateral: national and local markets
27
Conclusions
Peatland is an important terrestrial C-stocks under
increasing human pressure
Peat forest clearing followed by drainage makes the
landscape more susceptible to fires
Decreasing peatlands area is associated with decreasing
depth and carbon content
C and nutrients are mainly released into the atmosphere
during fire in addition to DOC and nutrient leaching and
drainage
Modeling C-budgets on tropical peatlands requires the
incorporation of human dimensions
28
Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge the support of the
Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA)
29