Greenhouse gas emissions from drained and degraded peatlands · 2019-02-20 · degraded peatlands A...

Greenhouse gas emissions from drained and degraded peatlands

A brief introduction to the problem and

possible perspectives to address it

Annett Thiele

Landscape Ecologist

Content

• Introduction

• Scientific background

• Accounting method (GESTs)

• Funding mechanisms for now and for the future (VCS, Moorfutures)

• Conclusion

Living peatlands

• long term carbon storage entities

• store two times more than all forests of the world

• 75% of all carbon in the atmosphere

• on the long term – climate neutral

CO2

CH4

Drained peatlands

• Emit huge amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere

• account for up to 6% of the human induced GHG emissions to the atmosphere

• make up to 10 % of the AFOLU emissions (1 Gt of CO2 eq.)

CO2 N2O

Why should we account for carbon emissions from

peatlands?

There are fires from peatlands!

On only 0.3% of the land surface are responsible for 6% of total

anthropogenic emissions!

Present area of natural peatlands: 27,6% of the total peatland area (~178,000 ha), Povilaitis et al. 2011; Taminskas et al. 2012

Peat extraction

Drained peatlands are used for agriculture (60.5%), forestry (34.6%) and peat extraction (4.7%), Povilaitis et al. 2011; Taminskas et al. 2012

We love wet peatlands!

But how to assess the emissions?

Aim: develop a suitable method to assess emissions

to generate tradable carbon credits

Direct measurements

• chamber method measures on a small scale (1*1 m)

Thank you for your attention measurements should take place all around the year

Direct measurements

• Eddy-covariance can measure on a bigger scale (up to hectares)

• hardly transferable to other sites

• costs are approximately 10,000€/ha/yr

• too expensive to do it on every rewetting site

• search for proxies to assess the emissions

eomf.ou.edu

The search for a proxy for emissions

• three parameters might fit as indicator for emissions

– subsidence

– water level

– vegetation

sub

sid

ence

(cm

a-1)

Drainage depth (cm)

The search for a proxy for emissions

• three parameters might fit as indicator for emissions

– subsidence

– water level

– vegetation

sub

sid

ence

(cm

a-1)

Drainage depth (cm)

CONTRA:

1. only for the drained sitution

2. hardly convertable to CO2

numbers, as compaction and

shrinkange add to peat loss

3. for methane and nitrous oxide

not applicable

Proxy für THG aus Mooren

• three parameters might fit as indicator for emissions

– subsidence

– water level

– vegetation

Jurasinski et al. in Wichtmann, W., Schröder, C & H. Joosten (eds.) in Vorbereitung: Paludikultur – Bewirtschaftung nasser Moore - Klimaschutz, Biodiversität, regionale Wertschöpfung – Kap. 6 Ökosystemleistungen von Paludikultur. Paludiculture – cultivation of wet peatlands. Climate protection, biodiversity, regional economic benefits – Chapt. 6 Ecosystem services of Paludiculture, Schweizerbart Science Publishers, ~330 S.

Proxy für THG aus Mooren

• three parameters might fit as indicator for emissions

– subsidence

– water level

– vegetation

Jurasinski et al. in Wichtmann, W., Schröder, C & H. Joosten (eds.) in Vorbereitung: Paludikultur – Bewirtschaftung nasser Moore - Klimaschutz, Biodiversität, regionale Wertschöpfung – Kap. 6 Ökosystemleistungen von Paludikultur. Paludiculture – cultivation of wet peatlands. Climate protection, biodiversity, regional economic benefits – Chapt. 6 Ecosystem services of Paludiculture, Schweizerbart Science Publishers, ~330 S.

Proxy für THG aus Mooren

• three parameters might fit as indicator for emissions

– subsidence

– water level

– vegetation

Jurasinski et al. in Wichtmann, W., Schröder, C & H. Joosten (eds.) in Vorbereitung: Paludikultur – Bewirtschaftung nasser Moore - Klimaschutz, Biodiversität, regionale Wertschöpfung – Kap. 6 Ökosystemleistungen von Paludikultur. Paludiculture – cultivation of wet peatlands. Climate protection, biodiversity, regional economic benefits – Chapt. 6 Ecosystem services of Paludiculture, Schweizerbart Science Publishers, ~330 S.

CONTRA:

1. mapping of water table via satellite

imagery so far impossible

2. direct large scale measurement is

cost and labour intensive

emissions directly depend on the water table depth

vegetation also depends on the mean water table depth

so why not use vegetation as a proy for GHG emissions?!

Deutschland, Anklamer Stadtbruch

vegetation as an indicator for emissions

• integrates other site factors (pH, trophy, shunt species CH4)

• quick

• easy

• cost effective

• reliable… ? method is improved constanly

Greenhouse Gas Emission Site Types (GESTs)

Belarus, Dakudauskaje peatland

Exemplatory rewetting site and

emissions of GESTs

moderately moist cultivated peatland

31.5 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

moist reeds and sedge fens

3 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

very moist sedge reeds

12.5 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

–28.5 –5

Reduction of 19 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

moist bare peat

9 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

very moist Sphagnum-

Eriophorum-lawn

-3 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

–12 t

wet green Sphagnum carpet

2 t CO2 eq. ha-1a1

Reduction of 7 t CO2 eq. ha-1a-1

+5 t

water table below surface [cm]

Co

uw

enb

erg

2012

GHG emissions against water table depth and

possible utilization options

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20

t C

O2-Ä

qu

ha

-1 a

-1

grazing for habitat management

extensive grazing

Reed canary grass

Typha, Alder, segdes

common reed

Paludiculture

Dry agricultural use

peat moss

Carbon credits for peatland rewetting/conservation

• VCS methods for peatlands:

1. deforestation and forest degradation on mineral and peatland

2. rewetting of tropical peatlands in Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei and Papua New Guinea

3. rewetting of temperate peatlands in Europe – currently under second validation

www.database.v-c-s.org

Moorfutures® in Germany

• method based on GESTs applied in three federal states (Mecklenburg-Pomerania, Brandenburg, Schleswig-Holstein)

• you can compensate emissions of events, private or company emissions

• http://www.moorfutures.de

MoorFutures Mecklenburg-Vorpommern

2011: first voluntary carbon credits on the regional scale

MoorFutures-Certificates - an example

55 ha moderately moist grassland

(2+/-) (24 t CO2-Äq./ha/a)

26 ha wet reeds (5+) (8.5 t CO2-Äq./ha/a)

12 ha very moist reeds (4+) (3.5 t CO2-

Äq./ha/a)

17 ha moist meadows (3+) (15 t CO2-

Äq./ha/a) Emission reductions for

50 years: 14.325 t CO2-Äq.

1.300 t CO2-Äq./a 530 t CO2-Äq./a

11.627 t CO2-Äq. are sold for 35€/t

MoorFutures-Standard v. 2.0 Kriterien und Vorgaben

MoorFutures-Methodologie

GHG (GEST)

MoorFutures-certificates t CO2-Äq.

MoorFutures-Methodologie water quality

(NEST)

MoorFutures-Methodologie

biodiversity (BEST)

MoorFutures-Methodologie

cooling (EEST)

…

(…)

+

Einschätzung zusätzlicher Ökosystemdienstleistungen anhand von

Wasserstand und Vegetation

Joosten et al. (2013): Moorfutures. Integration of additional ecosystem services (including biodiversity) into carbon credits – standard, methodology and transferability to other regions. 119 pp.

Conclusion

• peatland rewetting is good for the climate

• we are not the only ones who love wet peatlands!

• additional funding mechanisms will evolve soon for temperate peatlands (VCS) and could be developed for regional markets

• natural peatlands should be conserved and only used if habitat management is necessary!

Thank you for your attention!

I am happy for your questions

annettthiele@gmail.com

Paludiculture

• For more information read:

Carbon credits

• Peatlands and greenhouse gases

• The global peatland CO2 picture

• The GEST approach

• Peatlands & biodiversity

• Land use options for rewetted peatlands

• Summary of the BMU-ICI project

Bundling measurements

Reichelt, 2015