Environment and community based framework for designing afforestation, reforestation and revegetation projects in the CDM: WP1: Pre-Feasibility Report Chapare Case Study Figures Robert Zomer International Water Management Institute (IWMI) PO Box 2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka Email: [email protected]Oliver van Straaten World Agroforestry Institute (ICRAF) PO Box 2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka Email: [email protected]Anko Stilma Fundacion Centro Tecnico Forestal (CETEFOR) Casilla 6511, Cochabamba, Bolivia Email: [email protected]Doc. No: WP1: Prefeasibility Report - Chapare Issue/Rev.: 3.0 Date: January, 2006
Transcript
Environment and community based framework for designing
afforestation, reforestation and revegetation projects in the CDM:
WP1: Pre-Feasibility Report Chapare Case Study
Figures
Robert Zomer International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
1
Figure 1: Location of the project area located in the multiple use area in Bolivia.
Figure 2: Communities located within the project area.
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
2
Figure 3: Map of Land Cover Classes (Frohn, 2002; Miranda et al., 2002)
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
3
Figure 4: Meteorological climate stations in the vicinity of the proposed project area.
(FAO, 2003)
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
4
Figure 5: Average monthly climatic conditions at meteorological stations in the vicinity of the project area. a. Average Monthly Precipitation
b. Average Monthly Temperature
(FAO, 2003)
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
5
Figure 6: Map of Soil Texture Classes (Montieth and Quiroga, 1993)
LaKe Suelo Franco, presenta saturación de aluminio, capacidad baja de suministro de potasio y baja capacidad de intercambio catiónico.
LCaK Suelo Franco Arcilloso, presenta saturación de aluminio y baja capacidad de suministro de potasio.
L'aK+S'''aKe Suelo franco, con pocos fragmentos gruesos, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio. Suelo arenoso, con bastantes fragmentos, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio, baja capacidad de intercambio catiónico (CIC).
LaK+ Suelo franco, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio +?
L'aK Suelo franco, con pocos fragmentos gruesos, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio.
LaK Suelo franco, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio.
LgaK Suelo franco, con moteados grises (en los 50 cm.), saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio
LS'''aKg+S''aK Suelo franco arenoso, con bastante fragmentos, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio, con moteados grises). Suelo arenoso, con fragmentos gruesos, saturación de aluminio >60%, con baja capacidad de suministro de potasio.
L'''aK Suelo franco, con bastantes fragmentos, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio.
L''aK Suelo franco, con fragmentos gruesos, saturación de aluminio >60%, baja capacidad de suministro de potasio.
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
6
Figure 7: (a.) Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the Chapare project area derived from SRTM and (b. a slope map derived from the DEM. a. Digital Elevation Model (m asl)
b. Slope Map (% slope)
Source: Digital Elevation Model extracted from SRTM
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
7
Figure 8: Area located within slope classes, and the overall accumulated percentage of area within the project area.
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
8
Figure 9: (a.) Elevation Map of the Chapare project area derived from SRTM, and (b.) a Landsat TM satellite remote sensing image draped over a 3-D Model of the project area.
a. Elevation map
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
9
b. Landsat TM image draped of 3-D Model of the Chapare project area
\
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
10
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
1
Figure 10: Satellite imagery from 1974, 1990 and 200, displaying the landcover changes
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
1
Figure 11: Landcover changes from 1974 to 1990 to 2000
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
2
Figure 12: Results of remote sensing analysis of forest cover, and map of forest canopy density (in % canopy cover) in 1990 (a.) (Landsat TM 5) and 2000 Landsat ETM 7), and showing areas by canopy cover class.
a.) Tree Canopy Density: 1990
b.) Tree Canopy Density: 2000
c. Eligibility for CDM projects based on canopy coverage percent
Area for each canopy class Canopy coverage class (%) 1990 2000
Area (ha) Not eligible 22,657 56%Eligible 1990 & Ineligible 2000 6,767 17%Eligible 2000 & Ineligible 1990 5,945 15%Eligible in both 1990 and 2000 5,239 13% 40,607
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
3
Figure 13: Results from change detection analysis of (a.) forest canopy cover change, and (b.) vegetation (NDVI) change, between 1990 and 2000, based on satellite remote sensing analysis (Landsat TM / ETM).
a. Forest canopy cover change between 1990 and 2000 (based on Landsat TM / ETM)
b. Vegetation (NDVI) change between 1990 and 2000 (based on Landsat TM / ETM)
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
4
Figure 14: The five tree species proposed for the project area:
a. Centrolobium tomentosum
b. Dipteryx odorata
a. Guarea rugby
b. Schlizobium amazonicum
d. Terminalia amazonica
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
5
Figure 15: Ecological and land suitability maps for five proposed tree species.
a. Centrolobium tomentosum
b. Dipteryx odorata
c. Guarea rusby
d. Schlizobium amazonicum
e. Terminalia amazonica
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
6
Figure 16: Growth and yield curve estimation, and aboveground carbon accumulation, for five proposed tree species.
a. Growth and Yield Curves
b. Aboveground Carbon Accumulation
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
7
Figure 17: Estimated carbon accumulation and average carbon stock for five proposed tree species growing in the Chapare region.
a. Centrolobium tomentosum
b. Dipteryx odorata
c. Guarea rusby
d. Schlizobium amazonicum
e. Terminalia amazonica
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
8
Figure 18: Baseline average carbon stock by each landuse type
Carbon Baseline By Landuse Types
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
9
Figure 19: Map of average net carbon (a.), i.e. project carbon sequestration and (b.) predicted net revenues from thinning and final harvests. Adoption rates per farm and species mix proposed for this production activity are given.
Project type: Plantation Planting density: 1111 stems/ha Criteria: Net Carbon > 0, Net revenue > 0 a. Map of Predicted Average Net Carbon (Sequestration)
b. Map of Predicted Net Revenue from all Thinnings and Final Harvest
c. Adoption rates per farm and species distribution percentages Average area planted per farm = 2.1 ha (12% of farm) Total planting area = 2,500 ha Centrolobium tomentosum 30% Dipteryx odorata 20% Guarea rusby 10% Schlizobium amazonicum 25% Terminalia amazonica 15%
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
10
Figure 20: Map of average net carbon (a), i.e. project carbon sequestration and (b.) predicted net revenues from thinning and final harvests. Adoption rates per farm and species mix proposed for this production activity are given.
Project type: Agroforestry Planting density: 555 stems/ha Criteria: Net Carbon > 0, Net revenue > 0
a. Map of Predicted Average Net Carbon (Sequestration)
b. Map of Predicted Net Revenue from all Thinnings and Final Harvest
c. Adoption rates per farm and species distribution percentages Average area planted per farm = 1.2 ha (7% of farm) Total planting area = 1400 ha Centrolobium tomentosum 15% Dipteryx odorata 15% Guarea rusby 35% Schlizobium amazonicum 25% Terminalia amazonica 10%
WP 1: Prefeasibility Report Chapare Case Study www.joanneum.at/encofor Zomer et al - IWMI Issue/Rev.No.: 3.0
11
Figure 21: (a.) Adoption rates per farm and species distribution percentages and (b.) Map of average net carbon, i.e. project carbon sequestration, and (c.) Predicted net revenues from thinning and final harvests
Project type: Agroforestry Planting density: 555 stems/ha Criteria: Net Carbon > 0, Net revenue > 0 a. Map of Predicted Average Net Carbon (Sequestration)
b. Map of Predicted Net Revenue from all Thinnings and Final Harvest
c. Adoption rates per farm and species distribution percentages Average area planted per farm = 1.8 ha (10% of farm) Total planting area = 2100 ha Centrolobium tomentosum 15% Dipteryx odorata 15% Guarea rusby 25% Schlizobium amazonicum 40% Terminalia amazonica 5%
