Carbon Stock Changes due to Land Use. Conversions Between Croplands, Grasslands, Settlements and Wetlands in Turkey

Transcription

1 Carbon Stock Changes due to Land Use Conversions Between Croplands, Grasslands, Settlements and Wetlands in Turkey HAKAN ERDEN 1, YUSUF SERENGİL 2 1 Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock 2 Istanbul University

2 UNFCCC process Mitigation measures towards climate change is becoming more pronounced worldwide as the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) talks advance towards creating a new agreement beyond Position of Turkey in UNFCCC

3 GHG Inventories under UNFCCC Turkey is an Annex-I country under UNFCCC and therefore submits its emissions and removals from anthropogenic sources to UNFCCC secretariat on an annual basis with National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report (NIR). Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) is one of the main sectors in this report that accounts emissions and removals from land uses and land use changes. The GHG inventories of Annex 1 countries are composed of 5 sectors which are; Energy Industrial Processes Waste Agriculture LULUCF (Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry)

4 1990 LULUCF ,60-12% Tarım; ,46; 17% End.İşl.; ,14; 12% Enerji; ,75; 53% LULUCF ,97-11% Atık; ,63; 6% Tarım; ,00; 10% End.İşl.; ,05; 14% Atık; ,25; 5% 2013 Enerji; ,97; 60%

5 LULUCF Sector The LULUCF sector is defined as a complex set of calculations and rules. The land use practices in each land use (Forestland, cropland, grassland, settlements, wetlands, and otherland) is calculated and reported together with the land use changes. As an example good agricultural practices can be calculated for croplands or conversions from grasslands to croplands can be calculated as emissions or removals. The calculations base on IPCC (2006) Guidelines. Other activities reported in the LULUCF sector are; Direct N2O emissions from N fertilization, N 2 O emissions from drainage of soils, N 2 O emissions from disturbance associated with land-use conversion to cropland, Carbon emissions from agricultural lime application, Biomass burning

6 Methods Land Use Definitions Cropland: The following land uses are included in the croplands. Arable land (Non-irrigated arable land, Permanently irrigated land) Permanent crops (Vineyards, Fruit trees and berry plantations, Olive groves) Poplar plantations in or near the agriculture area Grassland: Natural grasslands and pastures are defined as grassland. The grasslands cannot be separated into managed and unmanaged technically. Hence, all grasslands are accepted as managed. Wetland: Only artificial water bodies (dams, irrigation dams and reservoirs) are included in the definition. Settlement: Artificial surfaces are reported under Settlements. These include; Urban fabric (continuous, discontinuous fabric) Industrial, commercial and transport units (Industrial or commercial units, Road and rail networks and associated land, Port areas, Airports) Mine, dump and construction sites (Mineral extraction sites, Dump sites, Construction sites, ) Artificial, non-agricultural vegetated areas (Green urban areas, Sport and leisure facilities)

7 Methods Activity Data The land cover and land cover changes have been determined via CORINE (CooRdinate INformation on the Environment) land cover maps belonging to years 1990, 2000, These maps have been produced by different agencies of the government at different time frames but have the same legend and approach. This enabled us to determine land uses and land use changes more consistent. The land use changes in these periods are given in Table 1. Linear interpolation was performed for the years between and linear extrapolation for the years after Carbon stock change (CSC) in aboveground, belowground, organic and mineral soil pools have been calculated based on IPCC (2006). Cropland areas have been determined as annual crops and perennial woody crops and disaggregated for IPCC climate and soil types

8 Methods Activity Data The land cover and land cover changes have been determined via CORINE (CooRdinate INformation on the Environment) land cover maps belonging to years 1990, 2000, These maps have been produced by different agencies of the government at different time frames but have the same legend and approach. This enabled us to determine land uses and land use changes more consistent. The land use changes in these periods are given in Table 1. Linear interpolation was performed for the years between and linear extrapolation for the years after Carbon stock change (CSC) in aboveground, belowground, organic and mineral soil pools have been calculated based on IPCC (2006). Cropland areas have been determined as annual crops and perennial woody crops and disaggregated for IPCC climate and soil types

9 Methods Land Use Matrix ha FROM Croplands Wetlands Grasslands Settlements Otherlands TO perennial Annual Artificial Green areas Pastures Natural grasslands Settlements Otherland mine areas Croplands Perennial , , ,76 381, , , , ,92 387,34 Annual , , , , , , , , ,68 Wetlands Artificial 2.243, , ,77 142, , ,97 864, ,42 217,05 Green areas 658, ,47 33, ,76 560,16 493, ,87 572,20 1,58 Grasslands Pastures , , ,40 491, , , , , ,09 Natural gr , , , , , , , , ,31 Settlements Settlements 8.607, ,45 332, , , , , , ,54 Otherlands Otherland , , , , , , , , ,98 Mine areas 551, , ,40 367, , , , , , ha FROM Croplands Wetlands Grasslands Settlements Otherland TO Perennial Annual Artificial Green areas Pastures Natural grasslands Settlements Otherland mine areas Croplands Perennial , , , , , , , , ,38 Annual , , , , , , , , ,68 Wetlands Artificial 160, , ,75 67, , ,69 451, ,54 677,45 Green areas 115, ,01 152, ,06 364,74 554, ,51 653,34 105,16 Grasslands Pastures 3.013, , ,40 863, , , , , ,94 Natural gr , , , , , , , , ,20 Settlements Settlements 8.028, , , , , , , , ,71 Otherlands Otherland 4.418, , , , , , , , ,10 Mine areas 212, ,33 567,26 736, , , , , ,07

10 Area (ha) Methods Range rehabilitation Range rehabilitation projects in Turkey The annual amounts of range rehabilitation projects in Turkey since 1962 (GDF, 2015). Years The average annual rehabilitation area has been ha for the last 10 years.

11 Methods Generic Equations Used

12 Methods Generic Equations Used

13 Methods Generic Equations Used The below equation of IPCC (2006) has been used to estimate the CSC in case of land use change; ΔCB = ΔCG + ΔCCONVERSION ΔCL Here; ΔCB = annual change in carbon stocks in biomass on land converted to other land-use category, in tonnes C yr -1 ΔCG = annual increase in carbon stocks in biomass due to growth on land converted to another land-use category, in tonnes C yr -1 ΔCCONVERSION = initial change in carbon stocks in biomass on land converted to other land-use category, in tonnes C yr -1 ΔCL = annual decrease in biomass carbon stocks due to losses from harvesting, fuel wood gathering and disturbances on land converted to other land-use category, in tonnes C yr -1

14 Methods Emission-Removal Factors The following tables developed by the TUBITAK Project 112Y096 has been used in calculations as emission/removal factors (Serengil et al., 2015 from NIR 2015). Carbon stocks of various land uses around Istanbul (Serengil et al., 2015 from NIR 2015). soil (t C/ha) Litter (t C/ha) AG (t C/ha) BG 1 (t C/ha) σ σ σ σ Pasture 100,56 36,69 0,06 0,07 0,49 0,36 1,37 NA Croplands (annual) 50,49 NA 0,27 0,36 0,75 0,27 0,00 NA Coniferous 127,38 127,38 4,43 3,27 130,60 77,32 26,12 15,46 Deciduous 97,29 29,98 2,86 1,65 157,75 125,98 37,86 30,23 Mixed (Con-Dec) 122,70 37,15 4,02 1,77 135,16 71,10 28,23 15,03 Deciduous-Recr. 97,77 21,53 1,49 0,70 157,59 125,72 37,86 30,23

15 Methods Emission-Removal Factors Soil Carbon stocks calculated for IPCC climate types in Turkey (NIR 2015). Climate Region (t C/ha) σ (t C/ha) Sample size Perennial Annual Warm-Dry Cool-Dry Grasslands

16 Emissions/Removals (x1000 CO 2 eq yr -1 ) Results Croplands and Grasslands L-CL 824,31 CL-CL -1027,05 L-GL -522,78 GL-GL -230,77 The average annual removal rate of grasslands and croplands between CL-CL L-CL L-GL GL-GL

17 Removals (t CO2 eq.) Results Grasslands Years C stock removals due to range rehabilitation projects in Turkey. The C removals of range rahabilitation projects has been calculated since As seen from the graph (Figure 3) the land area of range rahabilitation projects have increased significantly since 1980s and peaked in The average C removal has been t CO 2 eq yr -1 since The annual removal rate increased up to t CO 2 eq yr -1 in 2014 but we do not have information if this is a sustainable increase or not.

18 Emissions/Removals (CO2 eq yr-1) Results Wetlands and Settlemens The lands converted to wetlands (flooded land) and settlements generally result in emissions due to 2 basic calculation rules; The vegetation together with the soil organic matter instantaneously oxidize immediately on lands subject to a reservoir construction, The settlements have lower C stocks compared to most other land uses. However, the C stock of settlements decreases with the increased ratio of impervious areas. The C stock increases with increased green areas in cities , ,21 CL-CL L-WL L-SL Emissions caused by lands converted to wetlands (WL) and settlements (SL).

19 Conclusions The land use practices (CL-CL and GL-GL) generally result in net C removal in Turkey. The forestlands (see NIR 2015), croplands, and grasslands cause increase in removals while settlements cause decrease considering that urban areas intensify (increasing imperviousness). Wetlands and otherland are generally carbon neutral if there is no land use change. However, there is some amount of peat production which cause emissions from wetlands. The peatlands in the country should be determined with peat production data in order to estimate an accurate GHG inventory that takes this category into account. On the other hand land use conversions except L-FL (See NIR 2015) and L-GL generally cause Carbon emissions. Therefore, C positive land use strategies should focus on better management approaches including conservative agriculture, improved grassland management, range rehabilitation projects and most significantly energy saving practices. These include use of biomass energy (if possible other renewable resources including wind, sun and water), aggregation of croplands to save water and energy, poplar plantations, conservative tillage techniques, promotion of orchards, and organic agriculture.

20 Conclusions The land uses and land use changes were a net emission in 1990 when forestlands were excluded. This situation has changed and became net removals by We believe that the share of land use sector in climate change mitigation will further increase if C negative land use conversions are controlled and slowed down. The C positive land use pratices have a large capacity and this capacity should be used completely. The removals in LULUCF sector has reached up to almost sixty million tonnes by 2013 and larger part of this increase is caused by forests. However, the forest area in the country has reached to 21.8 K Ha and the afforestation/reforestation rate is expected to fall as the suitable land area is expected to diminish in mid 2020s. Therefore, a more significant contribution is needed from Croplands and Grasslands in the coming decades.

21 Conclusions The rate of range rehabilitation projects may increase further due to following reasons; a) The area of rangelands is as large as forests, b) Range rahabilitation is an easier and cheaper project type compared to afforestation/reforestation, c) Despite a) and b) the afforestation rate is higher than range rehabilitation The emission rate from L-WL and L-SL categories reaches up to 2 million t CO 2 eq yr -1. However, the area subject to dam construction has shrank during the last decade as the suitable areas have diminished. The large hydropower plants are not constructed as much as it was during the last century. The major hydropower shiftted to small and micro scale runoff-river type hydropower plants and the flooded area of these power plant type is smaller compared to traditional HPPs. We do not expect an increase in flooded lnd area for the coming decades but lands converted to settlements may increase with the current rate.

22 Thank you very much for listening... For communication;