Implementing conservativeness in REDD+ is realistic and useful to address the most uncertain estimates

One of the main challenges in reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+), either within a future UNFCCC mechanism or as part of result-based initiatives, is to design a system which is credible and broadly implementable by developing countries. To ensure credibility of REDD+ high quality monitoring systems are needed, i.e. capable of producing accurate estimates of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals. However, a possible trade-off exists between the high quality system requirement and broad participation: if a significant number of countries will not fully access REDD+ because of not being able to produce accurate estimates, the consequent risk of leakage (i.e. emissions displacement to these countries) could undermine the ultimate scope of REDD+. In this issue, Plugge et al. analyzed the implications of applying the principle of conservativeness in the context of uncertainties of carbon stock change estimates in REDD+. While this principle is included in several UNFCCC documents (e.g., UNFCCC 2006), its application to REDD+ was proposed by Grassi et al. (2008) “to address the potential incompleteness and high uncertainties of REDD+ estimates”; i.e. “when completeness or accuracy of estimates cannot be achieved the reduction of emissions should not be overestimated, or at least the risk of overestimation should be reduced”. Wide interest has been shown in this proposal (e.g., GOFC-GOLD, 2011; Herold & Skutsch, 2011; Meridian Institute, 2011). This comment aims to: • Highlight the technical and scientific differences between the approaches of Plugge et al. (this issue) and Grassi et al. (2008) for the implementation of the conservativeness principle. • Summarize and further discuss a scientifically defensible yet realistic approach to implement conservativeness in REDD+ context.JRC.H.3-Forest Resources and Climat

The role of the land use, land use change and forestry sector in achieving Annex I reduction pledges

Annex I Parties may receive credits or debits from Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) activities, contributing to achieving individual emission reduction targets. In the Durban climate negotiations, Parties agreed new LULUCF accounting rules for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (CP2). By using these new rules, this paper presents key differences among Parties at the minimum (assuming no additional action) and potential (assuming additional actions) contribution of the forest-related LULUCF activities in achieving the pledges for 2020. Overall, the potential contribution of LULUCF is relatively modest (up to about 2% of 1990 emissions) for the EU, the Annex I Parties likely joining the CP2, and for the Annex I Parties that joined the CP1 as a whole. However, for specific Parties, LULUCF can make a substantial contribution to achieving the pledges. For New Zealand, for instance, the potential contribution of future LULUCF credits may equal 33% of its 1990 emission level. For Australia, the pledges are expressed relative to 2000 emission levels including LULUCF emissions. Given that LULUCF emissions have strongly declined between 1990 and 2000, and a further decline in foreseen by 2020 (based on Australia’s projections), the minimum contribution of LULUCF to meet the Australian pledges appears to be about 19% and 7% relative to its 1990 and 2000 emission level, respectively. A further 3% potential contribution is estimated from additional actions.JRC.H.3-Forest Resources and Climat

LULUCF MRV - Analysis and proposals for enhancing Monitoring, Reporting and Verification of greenhouse gases from Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry in the EU

Land use land use change and forestry sector (LULUCF) is a greenhouse gas inventory (GHG) sector that covers anthropogenic emissions and removals from terrestrial carbon stocks living biomass dead organic matter and soil organic carbon following six main land use categories, Forest land, Cropland, Grassland, Wetlands, Settlements and Other land. According to the United Nation Framework Contract on Climate Change (UNFCCC) all Parties shall report periodically an update inventory of anthropogenic emissions and removals of GHG using comparable methodologies provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Additional requirements exist for reporting and accounting emissions/removals from related direct-human induced activities under the Kyoto Protocol (KP), because its accounting quantities are counted towards an international commitment reduction target. International negotiations have resulted in recent years in the adoption of new rules (e.g. mandatory accounting of Forest management) for the second commitment period of the KP (CP2: 2013-2020). Furthermore, Decision 529/2013/EU, going beyond the international negotiation, added the mandatory accounting of Cropland management and Grassland management. All these changes pose new challenges that MS will need to face from 2015 (i.e. for starting to report during CP2). This report describes the actions undertaken in the context of the Administrative Arrangement “LULUCF MRV” (Monitoring, Reporting, Verification) with DG CLIMA, trough a sequence of tasks (described in detailed in the Annexes). The aim of the AA is to support MS in improving the quality and comparability of LULUCF reporting during CP2, in line with IPCC methods and the new rules at UNFCCC and EU level.JRC.H.3-Forest Resources and Climat

The role of the land use, land use change and forestry sector in achieving Annex I reduction pledges

n/

Science-based approach for credible accounting of mitigation in managed forests

Abstract Background The credibility and effectiveness of country climate targets under the Paris Agreement requires that, in all greenhouse gas (GHG) sectors, the accounted mitigation outcomes reflect genuine deviations from the type and magnitude of activities generating emissions in the base year or baseline. This is challenging for the forestry sector, as the future net emissions can change irrespective of actual management activities, because of age-related stand dynamics resulting from past management and natural disturbances. The solution implemented under the Kyoto Protocol (2013–2020) was accounting mitigation as deviation from a projected (forward-looking) “forest reference level”, which considered the age-related dynamics but also allowed including the assumed future implementation of approved policies. This caused controversies, as unverifiable counterfactual scenarios with inflated future harvest could lead to credits where no change in management has actually occurred, or conversely, failing to reflect in the accounts a policy-driven increase in net emissions. Instead, here we describe an approach to set reference levels based on the projected continuation of documented historical forest management practice, i.e. reflecting age-related dynamics but not the future impact of policies. We illustrate a possible method to implement this approach at the level of the European Union (EU) using the Carbon Budget Model. Results Using EU country data, we show that forest sinks between 2013 and 2016 were greater than that assumed in the 2013–2020 EU reference level under the Kyoto Protocol, which would lead to credits of 110–120 Mt CO2/year (capped at 70–80 Mt CO2/year, equivalent to 1.3% of 1990 EU total emissions). By modelling the continuation of management practice documented historically (2000–2009), we show that these credits are mostly due to the inclusion in the reference levels of policy-assumed harvest increases that never materialized. With our proposed approach, harvest is expected to increase (12% in 2030 at EU-level, relative to 2000–2009), but more slowly than in current forest reference levels, and only because of age-related dynamics, i.e. increased growing stocks in maturing forests. Conclusions Our science-based approach, compatible with the EU post-2020 climate legislation, helps to ensure that only genuine deviations from the continuation of historically documented forest management practices are accounted toward climate targets, therefore enhancing the consistency and comparability across GHG sectors. It provides flexibility for countries to increase harvest in future reference levels when justified by age-related dynamics. It offers a policy-neutral solution to the polarized debate on forest accounting (especially on bioenergy) and supports the credibility of forest sector mitigation under the Paris Agreement

The key role of forests in meeting climate targets requires science for credible mitigation

Forests contribute to climate change mitigation by conserving and enhancing the carbon sink and through reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation. Yet the inclusion of forests in international climate agreements has been complex, often considered a secondary mitigation option or treated separately, like Cinderella excluded from the ball. In the lead up to the Paris Climate Agreement, countries submitted their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), including climate mitigation targets. Assuming full implementation of INDCs, we show that land use, and forests in particular, emerge as a key component of the Paris Agreement: turning globally from a net anthropogenic source during 1990-2010 (1.3 ± 1.1 GtCO2e/y) to a net sink of carbon by 2030 (up to -1.1 ± 0.5 GtCO2e/y), and providing a quarter of emission reductions planned by countries. Realizing and tracking this mitigation potential requires more confidence in numbers, including reconciling estimates between country reports and scientific studies. This represents a challenge and an opportunity for the scientific community.JRC.D.1-Bio-econom

Sub-luminous X-ray Bursters Unveiled with INTEGRAL

In 2005 March 22nd, the INTEGRAL satellite caught a type-I X-ray burst from the unidentified source XMMU J174716.1-281048, serendipitously discovered with XMM-Newton in 2003. Based on the type-I X-ray burst properties, we derived the distance of the object and suggested that the system is undergoing a prolonged accretion episode of many years. We present new data from a Swift/XRT campaign which strengthen this suggestion. AX J1754.2-2754 was an unclassified source reported in the ASCA catalogue of the Galactic Centre survey. INTEGRAL observed a type-I burst from it in 2005, April 16th. Recently, a Swift ToO allowed us to refine the source position and establish its persistent nature.Comment: To be published in AIP Proceedings - Conference 'A Population Explosion: The Nature and Evolution of X-ray Binaries in Diverse Environments', 28 Oct - 2 Nov, St. Petersburg Beach, F