k2mmm2zke0z0cyx

STOCKS AND FLOWS:CARBON INVENTORY AND MITIGATION POTENTIAL OF THE RUSSIAN FOREST AND LAND BASE: 

STOCKS AND FLOWS: CARBON INVENTORY AND MITIGATION POTENTIAL OF THE RUSSIAN FOREST AND LAND BASE Dmitri Zamolodchikov Forest Ecology and Production Center Russian Academy of Sciences WRI Side Event SBSTA, SBI 24th session 20 of May, 2006

Slide2: 

Authors Brent Sohngen Kenneth Andrasko Mikhail Gytarsky George Korovin Lars Laestadius Brian Murray Anatoly Utkin Dmitri Zamolodchikov Organizations World Resources Institute FEPC RTI, International US EPA

Reviewing process: 

Reviewing process Peer-Reviewers: Richard Birdsey, U.S. Forest Service Andrey Filipchuk, All-Russian Research Institute for Silviculture and Mechanization in Forestry Alexey Kokorin, World Wildlife Fund–Russia Roger Sedjo, Resources for the Future. At the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the manuscript was reviewed by Ben DeAngelo, Francisco De la Chesnaye, Dina Kruger, and Steven Rose. At World Resources Institute, Rob Bradley, Florence Daviet, and Fran Irwin made substantive comments during the early review of the report.

Purpose of the Report: 

Purpose of the Report What is the status of Russian forestry data for assessing carbon stocks and flows and for conducting analysis of carbon sequestration potential? What is the magnitude of carbon stocks on lands in Russia today, and are these stocks a net sink or source of emissions? What is the economic potential to sequester additional carbon on the Russian forest landscape as a climate mitigation option?

Issues for question 1: 

Issues for question 1 Russia has lots of land, and lots of carbon, but can forestry carbon fit into it’s Kyoto Protocol and UNFCC obligations? What data is available to assess carbon stocks and flows in forests? Where can the data be accessed? Do the data collection methods conform to IPCC Good Practice Guidelines? Can the data be verified?

How is data collected?: 

How is data collected? State Forest Fund Account (SFFA) assembled every 5 years, converted to annual in 2004. Methods of Data Collection Periodic Ground-Inventoried Forests (62 percent of the area; 731 million hectares) Approximately 47 percent of ground-inventoried forests, or 344 million hectares, were sampled in the past 10 years. Periodic Remotely Sensed Forests (31 percent of the area; 370 million hectares): Inventories are conducted via photo-interpretation of aerial photographs and satellite images approximately every 20 to 25 years. Aero-Visual Inventoried Forests (7 percent; 78 million hectares): Inventories were last conducted in the 1950s by visual observations, which involved individual observers taking notes on a map while flying over the forest.

Comparison to International Standards: 

Comparison to International Standards Current practices conform to IPCC Good Practice Guidelines for most regions in Russia. Other industrial countries use plot based inventories, potentially combined with remote sensing Canada, U.S. Sweden, Australia

Trends in Forest Area (Tab. 3-1): 

Trends in Forest Area (Tab. 3-1)

SPOT4-VEGETATION derived land cover map of Northern Eurasia (Bartalev et al., 2003): 

SPOT4-VEGETATION derived land cover map of Northern Eurasia (Bartalev et al., 2003)

Trends in Forest Area: 

Trends in Forest Area

Trends in Forest Biomass Carbon (Tab. 3-2): 

Trends in Forest Biomass Carbon (Tab. 3-2)

Area of forest fires in protected part of forest fund: 

Area of forest fires in protected part of forest fund

Two methods of estimation of forest carbon budget, 1993 – 2003 (Tab. 3-5): 

Two methods of estimation of forest carbon budget, 1993 – 2003 (Tab. 3-5)

Land Area and Carbon Stock (Tab. 3-4): 

Land Area and Carbon Stock (Tab. 3-4)

Estimating C Sequestration Potential: 

Estimating C Sequestration Potential How much carbon can be sequestered above what is expected with no C sequestration activities? Two methods: Top-Down – Model based estimates with aggregate modeling tools. Bottom-Up – Detailed analysis of particular projects Two steps: Estimation of baseline Estimation of potential

Global Timber Model as a tool of top-down analysis: 

Global Timber Model as a tool of top-down analysis The global timber model used in this analysis is built on the model originally described in Sedjo and Lyon (1990) and updated by Sohngen et al. (1999). The model has been widely used for climate policy analysis in recent years (Sohngen and Sedjo, 2000, Sohngen and Mendelsohn, 2003). The model is a dynamic optimization model that maximizes the net present value of consumers’ surplus less costs of managing, harvesting, and holding forests. A global demand function for timber logs is used to estimate consumer surplus in timber markets. For purposes of this study, substantial additional detail on the Russian forestry sector has been incorporated. Specifically, there are 108 timber supply regions assumed for Russia, based on the 2003 SFFA. These timber supply regions differ according to the following categories: 1) region (Europe, Western Siberia, Central Siberia, Far East), 2) climatic zone (North, Central, South), 3) forest type (coniferous, hardwood, softwood), 4) accessibility (accessible, inaccessible). In addition to accounting for the costs of harvesting and accessing forests, land opportunity costs are modeled with land supply functions. The land supply functions represent land moving from nonforest use to forest use in response to an increase in the (rental) value of forest use.

Bottom-Up Analysis: 

Bottom-Up Analysis Consider Four Mitigation Options Improved natural reforestation refers to areas that would regenerate naturally, but which would regenerate to higher stand densities more quickly with silvicultural assistance. Assisted natural forest regeneration refers to areas that can only be reforested with additional silvicultural effort, such as planting trees. Establishing forest plantations refers to afforestation in regions where substantially more productive forests can be established to increase overall productivity of the site. Protective afforestation involves establishing forests in regions where substantial soil degradation has occurred and the forests can help rehabilitate the landscape.

Estimation of baseline and additional sequestration (improved natural reforestation as example): 

Estimation of baseline and additional sequestration (improved natural reforestation as example)

Bottom-up analysis: cost estimations(Tab. 5-2): 

Bottom-up analysis: cost estimations (Tab. 5-2)

Bottom-Up vs. Top-Down: 

Bottom-Up vs. Top-Down

1. What is the status of Russian forestry data for assessing carbon stocks and flows and for conducting analysis of carbon sequestration potential?: 

1. What is the status of Russian forestry data for assessing carbon stocks and flows and for conducting analysis of carbon sequestration potential? Overall, data sources on forest inventories in Russia are available for use within the Russian speaking community. These data are less available for the international community. Efforts should continue to make the data more available to scientists from around the world, such as by publishing the data on the Internet. The scientific community in Russia has produced numerous reports over the years that provide forest stock, wetland, and agricultural area estimates for use in calculating carbon densities in forests, wetlands, and agricultural lands, and consequently carbon stocks. These methodologies follow international standards and protocols. Current Russian practices already conform to international standards.

2. What is the magnitude of carbon stocks on lands in Russia today, and are these stocks a net sink or source of emissions?: 

2. What is the magnitude of carbon stocks on lands in Russia today, and are these stocks a net sink or source of emissions? Russian forest fund currently stores 36.2 (±5.5) GtC in above-ground biomass and 289.4 (±71.8) GtC in total when soils are considered. Agricultural land is estimated to store an additional 44.8 (±14.5) GtC, for a total of 334.1 (±86.3) GtC. Russian forests are a net sink currently. Sequester 40 to 120 MtC/yr Offsets some of current energy emissions of 411 MtC/yr

3. What is the economic potential to sequester additional carbon on the Russian forest landscape as a climate mitigation option?: 

3. What is the economic potential to sequester additional carbon on the Russian forest landscape as a climate mitigation option? Possible to enhance sequestration by 20 MtC/yr for less than $13/ t C. 3.4 BTCE by 2100 Higher levels would be substantially more expensive.

Slide34: 

Thank you for attention!