Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Experience of France for reporting under the Kyoto Protocol Etienne MATHIAS (CITEPA) Nicolas STACH (IFN) – Michel-Paul MOREL (SSP) Technical workshop on.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Experience of France for reporting under the Kyoto Protocol Etienne MATHIAS (CITEPA) Nicolas STACH (IFN) – Michel-Paul MOREL (SSP) Technical workshop on."— Presentation transcript:

1 Experience of France for reporting under the Kyoto Protocol Etienne MATHIAS (CITEPA) Nicolas STACH (IFN) – Michel-Paul MOREL (SSP) Technical workshop on LULUCF reporting issues under the Kyoto Protocol November JRC - LULUCF

2 Plan 1. Global scheme of French LULUCF inventory 2. French reporting under the Kyoto protocol 3. Specific issues related to the Kyoto protocol 3.1. Land use monitoring Annual survey – Mainland Data treatment Remote sensing analysis – French Guiana 3.2. Reporting by region - improvements/difficulties 4. Conclusion November 20082JRC - LULUCF

3 1. Global scheme of the LULUCF inventory France applies the 2003 Guidelines for LULUCF since the submission of April 2006 for the UNFCCC. The discussions on the implementation of the reporting under the Kyoto protocol have begun in the same time. The inventory is based on land use change matrixes which represent all the possible land use changes. For each of this land the net carbon balance is estimated for each carbon pool. Forestland Grassland Cropland Settlements Wetlands Other lands Forestland Grassland Cropland Settlements Wetlands Other lands Aboveground biomass Underground biomass Litter Dead wood Soil November 20083JRC - LULUCF

4 1. Global scheme of the LULUCF inventory On forestland the carbon balance for living biomass is estimated thanks to the method of fluxes. The net balance is estimated by difference between the growth and the harvests. Net carbon balance = carbon growth – carbon harvests For the dead organic matter and the soils, a tier 1 default method is used; emissions and removals are reported when there are land use changes. Carbon = Carbon before conversion - Carbon after conversion A B A=>BB=>A Dead organic matter1year20years Soil20years November 20084JRC - LULUCF

5 2. French reporting under the Kyoto Protocol France chose to submit annually the estimate of the figures for the articles 3.3 and 3.4 under the Kyoto Protocol. France elected the only Forest management option under the article 3.4. The cap for France for this option is 0.88tC/year (3.2 tCO 2 /year) for the commitment period A trial on the year 2006 within the Kyoto format was submitted to the UNFCCC for the 15 th of April November 20085JRC - LULUCF

6 3. Specific issue related to the Kyoto Protocol The reporting under the UNFCCC doesnt perfectly correspond to what is demanded for the Kyoto Protocol especially on two points according to France: –Areas have to be monitored from 1990 to the end of the commitment period –The reporting must be done for smaller regions than the entire territory November 20086JRC - LULUCF

7 3.1. Land use change survey Many ways have been imagined to be able to report under the Kyoto Protocol with : –accuracy (0.5 ha of deforested forestland must be detected), –completeness (all the different land uses, forestlands, croplands, grasslands… must be considered) –representativeness (the entire territory must be covered). France decided to use a national survey based on fixed and systematic sample plots which is named TERUTI. Since 2005, it is named TERUTI-LUCAS because of the harmonization with the other European countries within the framework of LUCAS. In French Guiana, this survey was not available a remote sensing based study has then been implemented November 20087JRC - LULUCF

8 TERUTI concept An annual area frame sampling survey A two-stage systematic sampling design PSUs (Primary Sample Unit) of 324 ha SSUs (Secondary Sample Unit) of 9 m 2 A double observation : for each SSU, the surveyor has to determine, on the spot, land cover and land use (2 nomenclatures). land cover : wetland, broadleaved forest, wheat, roads … land use : agriculture, forestry, residential, leisure … A location based on aerial photographs field documents used since November 20088JRC - LULUCF

9 TERUTI sample A grid of 4,700 elements covers the whole territory 4 to 8 PSUs of 324 ha in each grid element 36 SSUs observed in each PSU Altogether, more than 15,500 PSUs et 555,000 SSUs visited every year November 20089JRC - LULUCF

10 3.1.1 TERUTI sample The SSU represents a surface of 100 ha November JRC - LULUCF

11 LULUCF nomenclature for France November JRC - LULUCF

12 3.1.1 From TERUTI to LULUCF November JRC - LULUCF

13 LUCF matrix from 2003 to November JRC - LULUCF

14 Teruti-Lucas PSUs November JRC - LULUCF

15 Creation of matrixes to implement the inventory For the UNFCCC inventory different matrixes are needed for each year of inventory to separate the land keeping the same land use and the land changing of land use: –1 Land use change matrix for a period of 20 years –1 Land use change matrix for a period of 1 year With the Kyoto reporting another matrix is needed to separate the areas under the articles 3.3 and the 3.4: –1 Land use change matrix for the period between 1990 and the inventory submission November JRC - LULUCF

16 Creation of matrixes to implement the inventory All those matrixes are very difficult to implement for two main reasons: –The 1 year matrixes are used especially to detect deforested areas but according to the survey it is difficult to estimate if a change is temporary or permanent. For example when a forested area is cut for wood production it is not possible to know if there will be a land use change or if the forest will come back. The choice made by France is to consider that if the area remains more than five years without forest it is counted as deforested. A special treatment has then been applied to estimate this deforestation but it means that you can estimate the deforested areas only after five years. –There are different time series of the TERUTI database ( ; ; 2005-…) the differences are some definitions of categories, a different number of sample plots and different places of plots. Consequently, it is not possible to have the monitoring of one plot from 1970 to today. Treatments are then needed to build the 20 year matrixes »To make consistent the different time series of TERUTI. »To estimates all the changes during the period November JRC - LULUCF

17 Case of the French Guiana TERUTI doesnt cover the entire territory, and especially not the department of French Guiana which is essentially covered by rainforest. Moreover there is currently no forest inventory in this area. 2 specific studies have then been implemented within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol –1 study to estimate the area deforested –1 study to estimate the biomass released with this deforestation November JRC - LULUCF

18 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Context : French Guiana Limited deforestation concerning small parcels : a challenge for monitoring French overseas Department ~ km² Cayenne Brazil Surinam Oyapock Maroni Managed forest National Park Petit Saut French Guiana forest – ~ km² of tropical forest. ~ 95% of the total territory ~ 1/3 of total French forest (including mainland) Deforestation causes in French Guiana – Traditional shifting cultivation: Small individual areas (0.3 to 1 ha) – Extension of modern agriculture – Gold mining: Small individual areas - Legal or illegal – About ha since Along streams and rivers – Petit Saut dam: Hydroelectricity – reservoir about ha, Dam filling in 1994 Human activity concentrated in a narrow coastal strip and along main rivers

19 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF French Guiana and Kyoto protocol Specific constraints in French Guiana o France is the only Annex 1 country with tropical forests o No preexisting systematic and exhaustive land use survey Very recent and partial Land use inventory from the Ministry of agriculture (TERUTI LUCAS) French NFI permanent inventory of forest resources is limited to mainland France o Impossibility to carry out a systematic ground based survey o No exhaustive Aerial photography mission o Important cloud cover

20 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Satellite Data : LANDSAT Images from Global Landcover Facility (GLCF – Uni. Maryland) + 1 image USGS All Images around 1990 o From 1986 to 1992 o 62% of the territory covered by 1990 images o Mean acquisition date October 1989 Landsat images georeferenced again using SPOT orthos as references – 24 to 49 tie points between each Landsat scene and the corresponding SPOT images – Bilinear model between Landsat Coordinates and SPOT Coordinates Geometric accuracy from 19 to 27 meters

21 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF SEAS-Guyane Multiple partner Project leaded by IRD Technologic platform for acquisition and processing of High resolution satellite data (SPOT et ENVISAT) o 2005: Installation of a new SPOT/ ENVISAT Ground Receiving Station in Cayenne The Antenna The receiving area Dramatic Increase of SPOT image acquisition capacities over the region

22 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Annex SPOT Receiving station Network

23 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Partenaires Inventaire Forestier National o Porteur du projet / Photo-interprétation / Articulation avec inventaire Kyoto / Appui méthodologique et technique au traitement dimage IGN Espace o Spatiotriangulation, géoréférencement IRD Unité Espace o Acquisition et Traitement des images o Transfert local (résultats et applications) Cemagref UMR TETIS o Appui scientifique (traitement dimages et protocole de Kyoto) ONF Direction régionale Guyane o Expertise forestière locale / Aide à la stratification

24 11/03/08 Assessment of forest cover changes in French Guiana using satellite imagery 24/ Satellite Data : SPOT 2006 Several thousands SPOT scenes acquired at the Cayenne Ground station during 2006 SPOT 5SPOT 4 SPOT 2 Cloud cover < 10 %Cloud cover < 25 %Cloud cover < 75 % Selection of 2 to 7 images per frame (depending on the cloud coverage) –65 SPOT 2 20m multispectral –63 SPOT 4 20m multispectral –47 SPOT 5 10m multispectral –Mean acquisition date : September 2006

25 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Definition of the strata 2km Buffer Source: ONF Source: DAF 2005 Source: ONF Source : Agence Régionale dUrbanisme et dAménagement de la Guyane (ARUAG) 2003 Sources : ONF levés terrain lors de missions aéroportées exploitation légale et clandestine Source: ARUAG Sources : ONF DIREN ONF GIS analysis on existing information –Roads –Agriculture –Human settlements –Cities –Urban areas –Gold mining –Maroni villages –Camopi & 3 Sauts Villages Strata R definition

26 11/03/08 Assessment of forest cover changes in French Guiana using satellite imagery 26/ Sampling design StrataTotal AreaSampling type Sample size Sample points distance N Normal P Reinforced R Reinforced Systematic/random grid –Square grid m between points –Random origin and inclination Permanent sampling : same sample in 1990 and 2006 Good estimation of Land Use areas AND Land Use Changes Localization of the 3 strata Sample definition – Strata R : All Grid points – Strata P : All Grid points – Strata N : sub-sample 1 point out of 9

27 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Photo interpretation Gold mining Agriculture extension Shifting Cultivation Petit Saut Reservoir Landsat 5 TM GLCF SPOT – © CNES Landsat 5 TM GLCF SPOT – © CNES SPOT – © CNES

28 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Results: Land uses 1990 & 2006 Land use 1990 / 2006

29 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Results Analysis forest changes in French Guyana Total forest / non forest conversion: ha – standard error 12 % ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Usual deforestation Punctual event 1994 std. err. 4% Natural changes St. err. 67% ha (standard error 4%) ha/year Forest 1990 / Gold mining 2006 Forest 1990 / Other settlements 2006 Forest 1990 / Croplands 2006 Forest 1990 / Other Land uses 2006 Forest 1990 / P. Saut Reservoir 2006 Mangrove 1990 / sea ha

30 13-14 November 2008JRC - LULUCF Emission factors ONF / CIRAD/ CNRS Dendrometric expertise o Dispositifs Autres compartiments - étude bibliographique : > Biomasse épigée vivante autre que les arbres > 10 cm : 15 à 30 T/ha ; > Biomasse épigée morte (litière et bois mort) : 20 à 40 T/ha ; > Matière organique du sol : 75 à 100 TC/ha Biomasse épigée totale des arbres de plus de 10cm > Volume sur écorce, densité, facteurs dexpansion > Terre ferme 350 T/ha ± 25 > Marécages 290 T/ha ± 30

31 3.2. Reporting by regions In the framework of the Kyoto protocol, France has to report by smaller geographical units than the entire country. The administrative level of the regions has been chosen for this reporting which means that 26 results are reported for the LULUCF sector for the 26 different regions (with oversea territories). –It has been an opportunity to take more specific parameters –Many parameters and data dont exist with this accuracy and must be estimated –It represents a lot of work November 2008JRC - LULUCF31

32 3.2. An opportunity for improvements One of the base of the LULUCF inventory is the cross between the land use data (TERUTI) and the Forest inventory data (IFN), the results of land use survey can perfectly be given by region the result for => France is the sum of the regional data, of course the accuracy is lower when we just look at the regional level, but it doesnt change anything for the total November JRC - LULUCF The IFN was able to provide data of growth and carbon stocks by super regions (5 super regions in France). => This changes a lot the results compared to the previous submission to the UNFCCC and should improve the relevancy of the result. The data for soils were also improved with updated data by region for each type of land use. => This changes the results too.

33 3.2. Estimation of unknown regional parameters The harvests are well known by department (smaller geographical units than regions) except for fuel wood, the national consumption of wood fuel is estimated thanks to the energy data to not forget non commercial consumption. But this data is not available by region each year. Moreover it is very difficult to estimate the transport of fuel wood between regions. => For the last test submission we considered that there is no transport of fuel wood between regions but inconsistencies can appear and corrections could be necessary November JRC - LULUCF

34 4. Conclusion on the submission within the Kyoto format This regional reporting demands a lot of work but has been an opportunity to look for more accurate data. It is difficult to estimate the relevancy at the level of the region but French local actors feel really more concerned with this level of result. The monitoring of the surfaces remains a very difficult issue especially to have time and geographical consistency (especially because the Kyoto Protocol put the stress on afforested and deforested areas which are very small areas compared to the lands without change) No big trouble was met with the filling of the new reporting tables November JRC - LULUCF

35 4. Conclusion on the submission within the Kyoto format France was very involved to estimate the balance of the article 3.3, and the first estimate for the year 2006 gave a net sink of tons of carbon which means clearly nothing according to the level of uncertainty (impossible to know whether the future balance will be positive or negative). If the trends and the methodology were completely stable we could assume that the balance would be positive for the commitment period but it is currently not the case. It is very difficult to communicate with these different estimates under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, for example because the afforested areas in the Kyoto Protocol (since 1990) are not the same than in the Convention reporting (for 20 years). The future French submissions for the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol should be completely harmonized and consistent but there is no way to check this consistency November JRC - LULUCF

Download ppt "Experience of France for reporting under the Kyoto Protocol Etienne MATHIAS (CITEPA) Nicolas STACH (IFN) – Michel-Paul MOREL (SSP) Technical workshop on."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google