31
Greenhouse gas emissions from drained and degraded peatlands A brief introduction to the problem and possible perspectives to address it Annett Thiele Landscape Ecologist
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!
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
