CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions from an oil palmplantation on deep peat as affected by N fertilisation                         ...
Climate change and greenhouse                  gases Increase in temperatures                                        Cata...
Greenhouse gases and agriculture                        IPCC (2007)Global share GHG Agriculture                           ...
Oil palm World’s most rapidly   expanding crop   (Indonesia, Malaysia)     Expansion to the detriment of natural forests ...
Oil palm Both on mineral (89%)& peat soils (11%)   (Koh et al. 2011)     Voluntary RSPO and Government mandatory rules   ...
Research questions and hypothesis How does N fertilisation affect GHG emissions in an oil   palm plantation on deep peat?...
Location and soil characteristics Climate2466 mm y-1, 26.5°CDriest months: June – Sept. Peat propertiesFibricDepth (8.5 ...
Experimental plot Deforested in 04,   acquired by PT. Bakrie   in 07 in a state of fallow Planted Dec. 09;   measurement...
“In situ” measurements Soil and air temperatures, soil moisture, water table depth Soil effluxes of N2O, CO2, CH4 (close...
Methods 4 replicate chambers per N dose Soil CO2 efflux: “in situ” IRGA Soil N2O, CH4  4 samples/chamber          Trans...
Extrapolation at the plot scale and           emission factor           FZ           Zone   Share plot        N2O assigned...
N2O emissions in the fertilised zone                              700                                          N0     N2O ...
N2O emissions at the plot scale and        emission factor (Ef) Cumulated emissions plot scale            N dose   Cumula...
CH4 emissions fertilised zone & plot scale                                    90                                          ...
CO2 emissions fertilised zone & plot scale                                      450                                       ...
Oil palms response to fertiliser application                                                                              ...
Discussion No correlation with soil and air temperatures, soil  moisture, water table depth: Short period observation Co...
Discussion    Very strong effect of N fertilisation on N2O emissions:       Ef = 2.5%       Peat recently opened and drai...
Conclusions Complementary studies on GHG for improving Ef  - Experimental design improved with measurements in both  fert...
Thank youwww.cifor.cgiar.org      CIFOR advances human well-being, environmental conservation, and equity by conducting   ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions from an oil palm plantation on deep peat as affected by nitrogen fertilisation

8,798 views
9,384 views

Published on

Although nitrous oxide only makes up 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions, it has nearly 300 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide. In this presentation, CIFOR scientist Kristell Hergoualc’h explains results from collaborative research between CIFOR, ICRAF, CIRAD and PT Bakrie, which show that nitrogen fertiliser can exacerbate the production of soil nitrous oxide greenhouse gases when applied to oil palms grown on deep peat. She gave this presentation on 23 February 2012 at the International Conference on Oil Palm & Environment (ICOPE) held in Bali, Indonesia. The conference had the theme ‘Conserving forest, expanding sustainable palm oil production’.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
8,798
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5,473
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
88
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12148 – Burkina FasoWomen collecting Piliostigma reticulatum pods for animal feed.
  • Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions from an oil palm plantation on deep peat as affected by nitrogen fertilisation

    1. 1. CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions from an oil palmplantation on deep peat as affected by N fertilisation Kristell Hergoualc’h Handayani E, Indrasuara, Samosir Y, van Noordwijk M, Bonneau X, Verchot LTHINKINGbeyond the canopy 23 February 2012 – ICOPE, Bali
    2. 2. Climate change and greenhouse gases Increase in temperatures Catastrophic + consequences 1°C Anthropogenic cause:  GHG emissions F-gaz GHG GWP Share GHG N2O 8% 1% CH4 CO2 1 14% CO2 CH4 25 77% NO2 298 THINKING beyond the canopy IPCC (2007)
    3. 3. Greenhouse gases and agriculture IPCC (2007)Global share GHG Agriculture Atmospheric N2O (ppb) N fertilizer consumption 46% N2O: Nitrogen fertilisation (million tons N) 45% CH4 (livestock, rice fields) 9% CO2 (biomass combustion)Baumert et al. (2005) www.ferilizer.org/ifa/statistics THINKING beyond the canopy
    4. 4. Oil palm World’s most rapidly expanding crop (Indonesia, Malaysia) Expansion to the detriment of natural forests Large C losses(Murdiyarso et al. 2010; Hergoualc’h & Verchot 2011) Biodiversity losses (Danielsen et al. 2008) Biofuel C debt (Fargione et al. 2008) THINKING beyond the canopy
    5. 5. Oil palm Both on mineral (89%)& peat soils (11%) (Koh et al. 2011) Voluntary RSPO and Government mandatory rules forbid forest conversion and use of deep peat Large doses of N fertiliser application: Mineral soils: 50 – 230 kg N ha-1 y-1 Peat soils :50 – 160 kg N ha-1 y-1 THINKING beyond the canopy
    6. 6. Research questions and hypothesis How does N fertilisation affect GHG emissions in an oil palm plantation on deep peat? Short term and moderated  in CH4& CO2 emissions Long term and large  in N2O emissions How does the emission factor related to N2O emissions arising from N fertilisation in an oil palm plantation on peat compare with IPCC estimates? Emission factor > IPCC estimates (recently opened peat with low N availability) Can optimisation of N fertilisation  GHG emissions per unit product? THINKING beyond the canopy
    7. 7. Location and soil characteristics Climate2466 mm y-1, 26.5°CDriest months: June – Sept. Peat propertiesFibricDepth (8.5 m)pH (3.6)Corg (42%)Norg(1.2%) THINKING beyond the canopy
    8. 8. Experimental plot Deforested in 04, acquired by PT. Bakrie in 07 in a state of fallow Planted Dec. 09; measurements Sep. 10 148 palms ha-1 Water table -56 cm Fertiliser trialFactorial design: 3 N x 3 P x 3 K, 2 Ca (54 plots, 8 rows x 4 palms) N0: 0 kg N ha-1 N1:14 kg N ha-1 (20 kg N ha-1 2010, 48 kg N ha-1 2011) N2: 28 kg N ha-1(40 kg N ha-1 2010, 96 kg N ha-1 2011) the canopy THINKING beyond
    9. 9. “In situ” measurements Soil and air temperatures, soil moisture, water table depth Soil effluxes of N2O, CO2, CH4 (closed chamber method) Sampling frequency THINKING beyond the canopy
    10. 10. Methods 4 replicate chambers per N dose Soil CO2 efflux: “in situ” IRGA Soil N2O, CH4 4 samples/chamber Transportation to the Analysis by gas (t0’, t10’, t20’, t30’) laboratory chromatography THINKING beyond the canopy
    11. 11. Extrapolation at the plot scale and emission factor FZ Zone Share plot N2O assigned NFZ 92% N0 FZ 8% N1 / N2 NFZ Example N2O N1 Plot = 8% N2O N1 + 92% N2O N0 Emission factor EfSlope regression between N dose and GHG emissions THINKING beyond the canopy
    12. 12. N2O emissions in the fertilised zone 700 N0 N2O (g N-N2O ha-1 d-1) 600 N1 500 N2 400 300 200 100 0 -100 -1 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 Days after fertilization N2ON2> N2ON1> N2ON0 (P < 0.0001) N dose Cumulated N2O emissions Cumulated emissions (kg N-N2O ha-1 28 days) N0 0.3 ± 0.3 N1 2.4 ± 1.1 N2 8.8 ± 1.7 THINKING beyond the canopy
    13. 13. N2O emissions at the plot scale and emission factor (Ef) Cumulated emissions plot scale N dose Cumulated N2O emissions (kg N-N2O ha-1 28 days) N0 0.3 ± 0.3 N1 0.5 ± 0.4 N2 1.0 ± 0.6 1.2 (kg N-N2O ha-1 28 days) Emission factor Cumulative N2O plot 1.0 0.8 0.6 Ef = 2.5% ± 0.1% 0.4 y = 0.025x + 0.03 0.2 R² = 0.94 0.0 0 10 20 30 THINKING beyond the N dose (kg N ha-1)canopy
    14. 14. CH4 emissions fertilised zone & plot scale 90 N0 CH4 (g C-CH4 ha-1 d-1) 70 N1 N2 50 30 10 -10 -30 -1 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 Days after fertilization  No significant between N doses treatments (P = 0.3)  Cumulated emissions N dose Cumulated CH4 emissions FZ Cumulated CH4 emissions Plot Scale (kg C-CH4 ha-1 28 days) (kg C-CH4 ha-1 28 days) N0 0.2 ± 0.2 0.2 ± 0.2 N1 0.6 ± 0.5 0.2 ± 0.2 N2 0.4 ± 0.4 0.2 ± 0.2 THINKING beyond the canopy
    15. 15. CO2 emissions fertilised zone & plot scale 450 N0 CO2 (kg C-CO2 ha-1 d-1) N1 350 N2 250 150 50 -50 -1 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 Days after fertilization  CO2 N2> CO2 N1 , CO2 N0 (P = 0.0002)  Cumulated emissions N dose Cumulated CO2 emissions FZ Cumulated CO2 emissions Plot scale (Mg C-CO2 ha-1 28 days) (Mg C-CO2 ha-1 28 days) N0 1.9 ± 0.5 1.9 ± 0.5 N1 2.1 ± 0.2 1.9 ± 0.5 N2 2.7 ± 0.3 1.9 ± 0.5 THINKING beyond the canopy
    16. 16. Oil palms response to fertiliser application 400 N0 Collar girth (cm) N0 Palm Height (cm) 140 N1 N1 N2 300 100 N2 60 200 20 100 0 6 12 18 24 0 6 12 18 24 280 Months After Planting Months After PlantingFrond length (cm) N0 35 Green leaf number N0 240 N1 N1 N2 25 N2 200 160 15 120 5 6 12 18 24 6 12 18 24 0.8 Months After Planting Months After Planting Hanging female bunches palm-1 24 MAP N0 Vigor index 0.6 10 N1 8 0.4 N2 6 0.2 4 0.0 2 12 18 24 0 Months After Planting N0 N1 N2 No between N1 & N2 treatments THINKING beyond the canopy
    17. 17. Discussion No correlation with soil and air temperatures, soil moisture, water table depth: Short period observation Comparison with literature No study on the effect of N fertilisation on GHG emissions from oil palm plantation Melling et al. (06, 05): No intensive sampling after fertilisation, largest N2O fluxes during wet season N2 O CH4 CO2 (g N-N2O ha-1 d-1) (g C-CH4 ha-1 d-1) (kg C-CO2 ha-1 d-1) This study (N0) 12.2 ± 4.7 6.0 ± 2.7 71.0 ± 10.6 Melling et al. 14 1.2 53 THINKING beyond the canopy
    18. 18. Discussion  Very strong effect of N fertilisation on N2O emissions: Ef = 2.5% Peat recently opened and drained? Young age of the palms?  IPPC guidelines for GHG inventories (2006)* Ef = 1% [0.3% – 3%] Ef calculated as yearly N2O / N fertilisation rate  Effect N fertilisation on palm growth + effect N1 dose but no N1 & N2 doses also observedon coconut palms(Bonneau et al., 93)*Agriculture, Forestry & Other Land Use, Vol. 4, Chap. 11 (N2O emissions from managed soils, and CO2emissions from lime and urea application) THINKING beyond the canopy
    19. 19. Conclusions Complementary studies on GHG for improving Ef - Experimental design improved with measurements in both fertilised and non-fertilised zones (results under analysis) - Yearly measurements including & fertilisation period in a 7- year old plantation GHG emission vs. Crop response to fertiliser N2ON2 = 2 N2ON1 CropN2 CropN1 Reduction of emissions per unit product feasible THINKING beyond the canopy
    20. 20. Thank youwww.cifor.cgiar.org CIFOR advances human well-being, environmental conservation, and equity by conducting research to inform policies and practices that affect forests in developing countries. THINKINGbeyond the canopy

    ×