Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Capacity Building on the IPCC 2013 Wetlands Supplement, FREL Diagnostic and Uncertainty Analysis - Open discussions


Published on

Presented by Daniel Murdiyarso and Rupesh Kumar Bhomia, CIFOR, at Online Workshop Capacity Building on the IPCC 2013 Wetlands Supplement, FREL Diagnostic and Uncertainty Analysis, April 17th, 2020

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Capacity Building on the IPCC 2013 Wetlands Supplement, FREL Diagnostic and Uncertainty Analysis - Open discussions

  1. 1. Session 10 Open Discussions Daniel Murdiyarso and Rupesh Bhomia 17 April 2020
  2. 2. Background • Indonesia is poised to finalize 2nd FREL with significant refinements over last version. • Transition from default Tier 1 to Tier 2 using country specific values for FREL determinations. • Incorporation of UNFCCC Wetlands Supplement (2013) with emphasis on Peatlands and Mangroves. • Various challenges exists in terms of institutional capacity, data availability, enhancing accuracy and reducing uncertainty.
  3. 3. Sessions 1 and 2: Peatlands • Included in AFLOU (NGHGI) – Loss and Gain approach • Peatland Activity and Emission factors • Drained Organic soils • CO2, CH4, N2O • Fires - CO2, CH4, N2O [and mass of peat] • CH4 from Ditches • Offsite - DOC • Rewetted Organic soils - CO2 and CH4 • FREL 2016 to FREL 2020 • Fire • Decomposition • Gaps and data availability
  4. 4. Sessions 3 and 4: Mangroves • Mangroves not included in AFOLU :- Part of appropriate national land-use category according to national forest definition • Stock difference approach for Carbon; Loss and gain approach for CH4 and N2O • Activities relevant to • CO2 EF – Forest management, Extraction, Drainage, Rewetting and revegetation • CH4 and N2O EF – Aquaculture and Rewetting (hydrology changes) • Data on C stocks from protected and degraded mangroves from across Indonesia available; Transition to Tier 2 values possible
  5. 5. Sessions 5 and 6: Uncertainty Analysis and Monte Carlo Simulation • Lack of accuracy ->bias; lack of precision ->uncertainty • Bias to be prevented; Uncertainty to be quantified/reported • Declaring uncertainty in reported Emission Levels is expected by UNFCCC, and required by many RBP programs • Two methods for uncertainty determination • Addition /propagation • Monte-Carlo Simulation (More robust, preferred, time intensive) • Running MC simulation for FREL 2020 • AD and EF per land use type per Island per period per carbon pool (Complex but doable)
  6. 6. Sessions 7 and 8: TACCC Principles and FREL Diagnostics • Transparency, Accuracy, Comparability, Completeness and Consistency • Assumptions and methodologies for FREL are clearly explained • Measure of the exactness of emissions or removal estimates; Uncertainties are reduced as far as possible • FREL emissions are comparable with the BUR/GHGI • Covers all sources and sinks, as well as all gases; Full geographical coverage • Consistent in all its elements with the BUR/GHGI • The countries should include the reasons for omitting a pool and/or activity from the FREL. • Good practice to - document the process, recognize lack of data, use same methodology and units (for AD and EF), estimate uncertainties, cover all potential sources of error.
  7. 7. Sessions 9: How best to support FREL improvement? Efforts to enhance our understanding and data availability on • The selected FREL emissions/sinks • Preferences on how best to support GoI on the non- selected emissions/sources • Description of the MRV system to support FREL 2020 submission • Description of the FREL uncertainty estimates
  8. 8. Acknowledgements The capacity building materials were made possible through a grant given by the Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI) to the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) under the Agreement No. INS 2070-19/0010. While CIFOR gratefully acknowledges the support, the information provided in the materials do not represent the views or positions of the Norwegian Government. CIFOR would like to recognize the support by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in generating some of information used in the materials.
  9. 9. Thank you