Status and challenges for mapping, monitoring and MRV of SOC

Status and challenges for mapping, monitoring and MRV of SOC

Martial Bernoux

A MRV system refers to any process or system which aims to assess and monitor the impacts of mitigation measures and/or the support provided (measuring) and to document this information in a transparent way (reporting), so that it can be examined for accuracy (verification).

M = Measurement (or estimation), sometime “Measuring” or “Monitoring”R = Reporting (at different level: national, international,…)V = Verification (sometime Verifying) includes Quality Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA)

What is MRV?

MRV of national inventory (e.g. sources and sinks of GHG)

MRV of policy (e.g. NAMA, mitigation measures)

MRV of project (CDM, …)

MRV of implementation (e.g. financial flow)

MRV of a REDD-plus activities

… MRV of soil carbon …or better MRV of soil C sequestration and GHG fluxes related to soil management

Status and challenges for mapping, monitoring and MRV of SOC

Criteria to respect

Consistency: Same methodology apply along years and uses consistent datasets

Completeness: All GHG and all sinks and sources category are reported

Accuracy: Not biased and reduced uncertainty as far as possible

Transparency: Assumptions, hypothesis and methodologies used are explained and documented

Comparability: Comparable methods should be used by all stakeholders of the MRV system

Task Force on National GHG Inventories (TFI)

TFI objective is to develop and refine an internationally-agreed methodology and software for the calculation and reporting of national GHG emissions and removal

The Guidelines evolved concomitantly with UNFCCC/KP and PA needs and decisions

But some invariant principles for AFOLU

For CH4 and N2O

Only fluxes


But for (most) CO2

Mass balance approach

CarbonCarbon

time

DC/Dtime = CO2 emissions 1 year

=



But for (most) CO2

Mass balance approach

C

5 compartments

Above Ground Biomass

Litter

Soil (> 30 cm)

Below Ground BiomassDead wood

Soil is the major pool in Cropland and Grassland



Default values for all N2O, CH4 fluxes and default carbon stocks for the different pools

=X Activity dataEF

Emission estimate




Default carbon stocks

Carte soil EX-ACT

Tier 1 methods are designed to be the simplest to use, for which equations and default parameter values (e.g., emission and stock change factors) are provided in this volume



Default carbon stocksTier 2 can use the same methodological approach as Tier 1 but applies emission and stock change factors that are based on country- or region-specific data, for the most important land-use categories.

Bernoux et al., SSSAJ, 2002

Brahim et al., IJSS, 2010 Henri et al., BGD, 2009



Default carbon stocks

Soil C stock estimates may also include soil inorganic C if using a Tier 3 method

Tier 3, higher order methods are used, including models and inventory measurement systems tailored to address national circumstances, repeated over time, and driven by high-resolution activity data and disaggregated at sub-national level.

Grinand et al., IJAEOG, 2017

Cerri et al., AEE, 2007

Chapter 2 Generic Methodologies Applicable to Multiple Land-use Categories

2.3.3 Change in carbon stocks in soilsIssue 1: Update reference carbon stocks.

Issue 2: Develop new Tier 2 method for mineral soils that requires less activity data than the current default method.

Issue 3:Elaborate Tier 3 Methodologies with case study examples for soils.

Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

Outline of the Methodology Report(s) to refine the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Chapter 6 Grassland

Chapter 4 Forest Land

Chapter 5 Cropland

Issue: Provide guidance and develop new Tier 2 method for mineral soils that requires less activity data than the current default method

Issue 1: Update carbon stock change factors.Issue 2: Develop new Tier 2 method for mineral soils that requires less activity data than the current default method

Estimated results Verified results

Forest Cropland

time

Soil Cstock

measure

Estimate+validation

Specific needs for a MRV of soil C sequestration

Improve low cost C determination

Decrease time need for sampling and preparation

Decrease the costs

© Eco&Sols

Valorization based on the impact/result of the practice / management options

Estimated results Verified result

Adoption of a practice that stores/preserves carbon

Valorization based on adoption of sequestering practices or management options

Forest Cropland

time

Soil Cstock

measure


Decrease the costs…and/or consider the following approach

Estimate+validation

© V

. Cha

plot

– R

ainf

ed R

ice

Lao

PDR

Adoption of a practice that stores/preserves carbon

Valorization based on adoption of sequestering practices or management options

© V

. Cha

plot

– R

ainf

ed R

ice

Lao

PDR


Decrease the costs…and/or consider the following approach•Need to improve our knowledge on soil C sequestration for different practices and contexts.

•Need to organize freely accessible updated datasets for users.

•Need to elaborate adequate MRV rules.•Need to consider also avoided emissions from soil protection / conservation.

•Need for adequate national and international AFOLU policies.

•Need to have robust ex-ante tools for designing adequate AFOLU program/policy (e.g. EX-ACT), but also available for farmers.

• Need to quantify benefits, co-synergies or trade-offs associated to soil C storage (metrics?).

MICCA resources in link with MRV and soils

http://bit.ly/fao-nama-afolu-toolhttp://www.fao.org/3/a-i4642e.pdf

Officially Launch today!

http://www.fao.org/elearning/#/elc/en/Course/NGHGI

MICCA resources in link with MRV and soils

Thanks for the attention!

http://www.fao.org/in-action/micca/en/

Status and challenges for mapping, monitoring and MRV of SOC

Education

Transcript of Status and challenges for mapping, monitoring and MRV of SOC