G3 app climate change


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

G3 app climate change

  1. 1. WELCOME
  2. 2. SCIENTIFIC RANGELAND MANAGEMENT FOR CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION BY CARBON SEQUESTRATION IN NEPAL Group III Roll No. 11 Indira Sharma Roll No. 12 Kabita Pandey Roll No. 13 Krishna K Yadav Roll No. 14 Krishna P Acharya Roll No. 15 Mahesh K.C. (Team Leader) B.V.Sc. & A.H. 8th Sem
  3. 3. INTRODUCTION • Environment can withstand climate change up to certain level. – Long term unmitigated climate change will exceed the capacity of natural and human systems to adapt. • The most climate-sensitive economic sectors are agriculture, livestock and rural poor communities. • Carbon sequestration in soils is low-cost climate- change-mitigating strategy. – movement of carbon from air to soil can be increased while the release of carbon from the soil back to the atmosphere is decreased. This transformation has the potential to reduce atmospheric CO2, thereby slowing global warming.
  4. 4. • Enhancing carbon sequestration into soil through environmentally sound scientific rangeland practices offers a potentially useful contribution to climate change mitigation. • The same rangeland will act in diverse way - potential carbon sink, constant grazing land for livestock and low cost climate change mitigation strategy.
  5. 5. • Burning issue - climate change, low cost climate change mitigation strategy. • 64 % accessible rangelands out of the 1.7 million ha are 3.5-37 times overstocked and remaining are inaccessible, which decrease the potentiality of rangeland to sequester the Carbon. • Grassland are an irreplaceable source of livelihoods and foods security for the poor. The project focuses on the diverse use of the same rangeland - from climate change mitigation to livestock and livelihood improvements. RATIONALE OF STUDY
  6. 6. • Carbon is major contributing factor for climate change. Royal society (2001) said that terrestrial vegetation and soils have been absorbing approximately 40% of global CO2 emissions. • Implementing practices to build or rebuild soil carbon stocks in grasslands could lead to considerable mitigation, adaptation and development benefits. • No one knows what amount of carbon is sequestrated in soil of Rangeland. The finding of research will give the amount of carbon in soil of rangeland and its contribution in carbon sequestration.
  7. 7. Problem Tree Climate change Decrease in potential carbon sink Excessive production of Carbon Decrease in green vegetation Rangeland deterioration Deforestation Overgrazing Human pressure Human settlement issuesSocial issues Environmental issues Increased green house gas production Effect on livelihood and Agriculture
  8. 8. Objective Tree Climate change mitigation Increase in potential carbon sink Decrease in production of carbon Increase in vegetation Potential rangeland management Scientific livestock grazing Rotational grazing Proper stocking rate Seeding Brush management Fertilizing Mechanical treatmentWater spreading Decrease industrial production Low environmental problems Strengthening of society Potential greenery maintenance Decreased green house gases Improved livelihood and Agriculture
  9. 9. OBJECTIVES General objective: To mitigate climate change by soil carbon sequestration in scientifically managed rangelands of Nepal
  10. 10. Specific objectives: • To increase soil carbon sequestration through maintenance of potential grazing lands with different livestock grazing patterns. • To mitigate climate change using a low cost measure. • To address the burning issues of carbon stock quantification in rangeland of Nepal. • To find out the amount of carbon in rangeland of Nepal and its contribution in carbon sequestration.
  11. 11. • Soil carbon is an important part of terrestrial carbon pool (Lal and Kimble 1998) and soils of the world are potentially viable sinks for atmospheric carbon (Lal et al. 1998; Bajracharya et al. 1998a; Singh and Lal 2001). • Kirschbaum (2000) estimated that world’s soil contain about 1500Gt of organic carbon to a depth of 1m and a further 900Gt from 1-2 m. However, soil is deteriorating at an alarming rate in developing countries like Nepal due to land use changes (IPCC 2000), lowering C sequestration. • Gradual conversion of forest and grassland to cropland has resulted in historically significant losses of soil carbon worldwide (Lal 2002). • Grassland accounts for 12% of the total land area of Nepal (LMP 1993) which will be a good source for carbon sink. LITERATURE REVIEW
  12. 12. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY • Geographic location: Sub-tropical and temperate rangeland will be selected randomly in each development regions of Nepal. • Local survey will be done for stocking density and carrying capacity. • Stratified sampling method with plot size 1m*1m will be used to estimate the productivity of the rangeland for Biomass and Dry Matter. • Stratification of rangeland will be done into broad classes i.e., high yield, fair yield and low yield grassland types (Chen et al. 1998).
  13. 13. • At least five soil samples from each plot using ring sampler (4.8cm diameter, 10cm long) will be taken and soil testing will be done in lab. • The carbon sequestrated by the rangeland will be estimated by data analysis and calculations. • Intensive training and education regarding the importance and diverse use of grassland will be provided.
  14. 14. • Seeding, watering, fertilizing, scientific grazing, brush management and mechanical treatment will be done. • In every month of implementation period monitoring, evaluation, and data collection will be done. • New data of the rangeland and carbon content will be collected at the end of project period. • Data analysis and publication will be done finally.
  15. 15. EXPECTED OUTCOME • Climate change mitigation. • A model for a potentially inexpensive option with environmental co-benefits for carbon sequestration. • A well established range land. • Enhance productivity of livestock. • Increase the status of most climate-sensitive economic sectors - agriculture, livestock and rural poor communities. • Increase the livelihood.
  16. 16. TIMELINE AND BUDGET Timeline • Project period: 1 year – Determination of rangeland productivity, stocking density, initial carbon content of the rangeland: 3 months – Method demonstration regarding stocking rate, education, trainings, rotational grazing, enclosure from livestock grazing: 1 month – Project Implementation period: 6 months – Determination of net effect of the project regarding the final capacity of the rangeland, amount of carbon sequestrated: 2 months
  17. 17. Timeline Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Survey Education and training Project implementati on Reporting
  18. 18. • Estimated budget: • Pre-survey, data collection regarding rangeland area, type, climatic condition, livestock population: NRs.2,00,000 • Determination of rangeland dry matter, livestock stocking density, carbon contained in the soil of rangeland: NRs.5,00,000 • Education to livestock farmers, training to VAHW, DFOs, local leaders: NRs. 2,00,000 • project implementation: NRs.13,00,000 • Different purchases, utilities, stationery materials, and other seen and unseen expenses: NRs. 5,00,000 • Data collection and analysis: NRs. 3,00,000 • Total : NRs. 30,00,000
  19. 19. References Bajracharya, R.M. et al. (1998a) Long term tillage effect on soil organic distribution in aggregates and primary particle fractions of two Ohio soils. In : Lal, R. et al, (eds.) Management of carbon sequestration in soil, pp 113-123. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. Chen, Y. and Fischer, G. (1998) A new digital geo-referenced database of grassland in China. International institute for applied systems analysis interim report, IR-98- 062.Laxenburg (Austria): IIASA. Craig, S. (1996) Pasture management, indigenous veterinary care and the role of the horse in Mustang, Nepal. In: Miller, D.J. and Craig, S.R. (eds.), Rangelands and pastoral development in the Hindu Kush – Himalayas, ICIMOD, Kathmandu, Nepal, pp. 147- 170. IPCC (2000) The Intergovernmental panel on climate change, special report on land use, Land- use change and forestry. Cambridge university press, Cambridge, UK. Kirshbaum, M.U.F. (2000) Will changes in soils organic carbon act as a positive or negative feedback on global warming? Biogeochemistry 48(1):21-51. Lal, R. et al. (1998) Land use and C pools in terrestrial ecosystems. In: Lal, R. and Stewart, B.A. (eds.) Management of carbon sequestration in soil, pp1-10 CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. Lal, R. (2002) Soil Carbon dynamics in cropland and rangeland. Environ pollution 116:353-362. LRMP (1987) Land resources mapping project, His Majesty Government of Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal. Maharjan, M. (2010) Soil carbon and nutrient status of rangeland in upper Mustang. Thesis Report (M.Sc.) Institute of Forestry, Trivhuwan University. Singh, B.R. and Lal, R. (2001) The potential of Norwegian soils to sequester carbon through land use conversion and improved management practices. Ohio States University, USA.
  20. 20. End of the slides for presentation
  21. 21. THANK YOU