1. Carbon Budget
in Acacia crassicarpa pulpwood plantation in Peatlands
Workshop Enhancing Sustainability of Forestry Practices on Peatlands
June 27, 2012, IICC Bogor
Basuki Sumawinata, G. Djajakirana, Suwardi, Darmawan

2. ∆ABG - ∑E = ?
ABG : above and below ground
E : emission

3. BG ?
below ground ≈ peat mass
peat mass:
• depth ~ surface level variation
• bulk density vs depth
• depth vs subsidence

4. surface level variation
Microrelief of plots on Acacia Plantation in Bukit Batu, Riau
BBHA Plot R0742 BBHA Plot R0743 BBHA Plot R0744
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
1100 1100 1100
900 900 900
10 m 10 m 10 m
BBHA Plot R3701 BBHA Plot R3702 BBHA Plot R3703
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
1100 1100 1100
900 900 900
10 m 10 m
10 m

5. surface level variation
Microrelief of plots on Acacia Plantation in Bukit Batu, Riau
BBHA Plot R0742 BBHA Plot R0743 BBHA Plot R0744
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
1100 1100 1100
900 900 900
10 m 10 m 10 m
BBHA Plot R3701 BBHA Plot R3702 BBHA Plot R3703
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
1100 1100 1100
900 900 900
10 m 10 m
10 m

6. surface level variation
Microrelief of plots on Acacia Plantation in Sei Tapah, Jambi and Sei
Baung, South Sumatra WKS Plot J131 SBA Plot P21
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
1100 1100
900 900
10 m 10 m
SBA Plot P22 SBA Plot P23
Relatives Height (cm)
Relatives Height (cm)
1100 1100
900 900
10 m 10 m

7. surface level variation
Variation of height difference of peatland surface in
measurements plots in Riau, Jambi, and South Sumatra
Height BBHA/R074 BBHA/R370 WKS/J13 SBA/P2
Differences
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 1 1 2 3
(cm)
0-10 24 24 17 30 19 41 36 38 19 37 29
10-20 32 18 22 30 32 31 26 38 35 18 25
20-30 19 14 18 18 26 18 16 15 13 15 19
30-40 8 9 10 10 12 9 9 7 6 5 3
40-50 5 12 9 3 6 2 5 1 1 1 1
50-60 3 6 6 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 1
60-70 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0

8. bulk density vs depth
Riau, deep peat
Pristine Forest BD of upper layer of the pristine forest
100%
90%
0.20
0.18 <106 µ is comparable and even slightly higher
80% 0.16
70% 0.14 1000-106 µ
than of the plantation area
Fraction
g/cm3
60% 0.12 2000-1000 µ
50% 0.10
40% 0.08 5000-2000 µ
30% 0.06
20% 0.04
> 5000µ
BD
Within the depth of only the upper 1
10% 0.02
0% 0.00 m, variations can be easily measured. It
(a)
is much more difficult to get data at this
Depth (cm)
detail for the lower depth.
9 years A. crassicarpa Plantation on Deep Peat 9 years A. Crassicarpa Plantation on Deep Peat Plot
Plot #1 #2
100% 0.14 100% 0.12
90% 90%
0.12 80% 0.10
80% <106 µ <106 µ
70% 0.10 70% 0.08
1000-106 µ Fracion
60% 1000-106 µ
g/cm3
60%
g/cm3
0.08
Fraction
50% 2000-1000 µ 50% 0.06 2000-1000 µ
40% 0.06 40%
5000-2000 µ 30% 0.04 5000-2000 µ
30% 0.04
> 5000µ 20% 0.02 > 5000µ
20%
0.02 10%
10% BD BD
0% 0.00
0% 0.00
0-10 10-2020-3030-4040-5050-6060-80
(b)
Depth (cm) Depth (cm)

9. bulk density vs depth
South Sumatra (shallow peat) and Jambi (moderate peat)
A.Crassicarpa Plantation on Moderate Peat
(ex overlogged area)
The value of the upper layer BD
100%
90%
0.14
0.12 <106µ
in South Sumatra (shallow peat)
80%
70% 0.10 1000-106µ is higher than the locations with
Fraction
g/cm3
60% 0.08 2000-1000µ
50%
40% 0.06 5000-2000µ deeper peat but the dominance
30% 0.04
20%
10% 0.02
>5cmµ
of coarse fraction is still high.
BD
0% 0.00
This is maybe an indication of
Depth (cm) (a) the compaction of the entire
depth.
A.Crassicarpa Plantation on Shallow Peat
(ex over drained and burn area)
100% 0.25
90% <100µ
80% 0.20
70% 1000-100µ
Fraction
g/cm3
60% 0.15
2000-1000µ
50%
40% 0.10 5000-2000µ
30%
20% 0.05 >5000µ
10%
BD
0% -
(b)
Depth (cm)

10. Subsidence: compaction, depth, BD
9 years A. crassicarpa Plantation on Deep Peat
4
2
300 Riau, deep peat
0 250
Rainfall (mm/week)
-2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 200
-4
Subsidence (cm)
-6 Pristine Forest (MTH)
WT (cm)
SM (%)
-8 150
4 800
-10
100 2
-12 700
-14 0
Rainfall (mm/week)
-16 50 -2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 600
Subsidence (cm)
-18 -4
500
WT (cm)
SM (%)
-20 0 -6
Month -8 400
Rainfall A. Crassicarpa plot 1 A. Crassicarpa plot 2 -10
300
A. Crassicarpa plot 3 A. Crassicarpa plot 4 Water Table -12
Soil Moisture -14 200
-16
100
-18
-20 0
6 years A. crassicarpa Plantation on Deep Peat Month
4 300 Rainfall Pristine Forest
2 Water Table Soil Moisture
0 250
Rainfall (mm/week)
-2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Subsidence (cm)
-4 200
WT (cm)
-6 SM (%)
-8 150
-10
-12 100
-14
-16 50
-18
-20 0
Month
Rainfall A. crassicarpa plot 1 and 2 A. crassicarpa plot 3
Water Table Soil Moisture

11. Subsidence: compaction, depth, BD
Jambi, moderate peat Subsidence over varied between plots even in the
A. crassicarpa Plantation on Moderate Peat
same peatland characteristic and management
Secondary Forest
(ex logged-over area) 650
2 650
Rainfall (mm/week)
0 550
Subsidence (cm)
-2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 450
Rainfall (mm/week)
Subsidence (cm)
-2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 450
WT (cm)
Sm %
-4 350
WT (cm)
SM (%)
250
-7 -6 250
50 -8 150
-10 50
-12 -150
-12 -50
Month
Rainfall Pipe A Pipe B Month
Water table Soil Moisture Rainfall Pipe A
(a) Water Table Soil Moisture (b)
South Sumatra, shallowpeat
1 year A. crassicarpa on shallow peat 4 years A. crassicarpa on shallow peat
4 (ex- over drain and burnt area) 350 4 (ex- over drain and burnt area) 350
2
Rainfall (mm/minggu)
300 2 300
Rainfall (mm/minggu)
Subsiden ce (cm)
0 250 0
Subsidence (cm) 250
WT (cm)
-2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
SM( %)
-2 0 2 4 6 8
WT( cm)
200
SM ( %)
-4 200
150 -4
-6 150
100 -6
-8 100
50 -8
-10
-10 50
-12 0
-12 0
Month Month
Rainfall Plot 1 Plot 2
Rainfall Plot 1 Plot 2
Water Table Soil Moisture Soil Moisture Wate Table

12. AG ?
above ground ≈ biomass
• living trees
• dead wood
• litter

13. Emission: measurement data
CO2 Fluxes in Riau site
50 0
45
50
40
100
35
150
30
g C-CO2/m2/day
Rainfall (mm/week)
25 200
Water Table (cm)
20
250
15
300
10
350
5
0 400
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47
Week
Rainfall A.crassicarpa 3yr A. crassicarpa 1 yr
Pristine Forest Water Table A. crassicarpa 3 yr Water Table A. crassicarpa 1 yr
Water Table Pristine Forest
CO2 fluxes in 3-year old are greater than in 1-year old A. crassicarpa
The highest CO2 fluxes are recorded in week 7 while the lowest water table
measurement recorded in week 30. This indicates no direct correlation between CO2
fluxes and water level.
In a non stagnated condition, CO2 fluxes from pristine forest is quite high

14. Emission: measurement data
50
CO2 Fluxes in Jambi site -50
45 0
40
50
35
100
30
C-CO2g/m2/day
150
Rainfall (mm/week)
25
200
WT (cm)
20
250
15
300
10
5 350
0 400
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
Week
Rainfall A. crassicarpa 3 years Secondary Forest
A. mangium 2 years (Mineral Soil) Water Table A.crass 3 y Water Table Secondary Forest
CO2 fluxes in mineral soil are less than in peat soil
CO2 fluxes from forest plantation almost similar compared to secondary forest
In week 35 – 51, the water level increased, however CO2 fluxes remained high

15. Emission: measurement data
50
CO2 Fluxes, South Sumatra site 0
45
50
40
100
35
Rainfall (mm/week)
C-CO2g/m2/day
Water table (cm)
150
30
25 200
20
250
15
300
10
350
5
0 400
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
week
Rainfall A. crassicarpa 4 yr A. crassicarpa 4 yr (-R-L)
A. crassicarpa 1 yr Abandoned Paddy Field (Mineral Soil) Water Table A. crassicarpa 4 yr
Water Table A. crassicarpa 1 yr Water Table Abandoned Paddy Field
CO2 fluxes in 4-yr old Acacia (with litter & fine roots) are > 4-yr old Acacia
(without litter and fine roots) > 1-yr old Acacia > abandoned paddy field
In 1-yr old Acacia, the highest water level recorded in week 39 – 41, however the
CO2 fluxes are at the lowest level

16. Emission: measurement data
Comparison of CO2 Fluxes in 3-yr old A. crassicarpa
60
With and Without Litter and Fine Roots 0
50 100
40 200
Water Table (cm)
Soil Mostuire (%)
g C-CO2/m2/day
30 300
20 400
10 500
0 600
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47
Week
Water Table A. crassicarpa 3 years A.crassicarpa 3yr A.crassicarpa 3 yr -R-L Soil Moisture
Highest CO2 fluxes were observed when Soil Moisture is between Field Capacity and
Wilting Point.
And CO2 fluxes were observed at the lowest level when Soil Moisture is lower than Wilting Point
, during week 19-30 when the water level is at minimum level.
The difference between CO2 fluxes from Accacia plants with and without litter and roots reflected
the difference of respiration speed and root ‘s exudate.

17. Emission: measurement data
Comparison between A. Crassicarpa 3 year and without
60
root & litter in Jambi site 0
55 50
50 100
45 150
Water Table (cm)
Soil Mostuire (%)
g C-CO2/m2/day
40 200
35 250
30 300
25 350
20 400
15 450
10 500
5 550
0 600
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
Week
Water table A.crassicarpa 3 yr
A.crassicarpa 3 yr (-R-L) Soil Mostuire A.crassicarpa 3 yr
Soil Mostuire A.crassicarpa 3 yr (-R-L)

18. Emission: measurement data
CH4 Fluxes in Riau site
60 0
50 50
40
100
30
150
20
Rainfall (mm/week)
Water Table (cm)
200
mgC /m2/day
10
0 250
-10 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47
300
-20 Week
350
-30
400
-40
-50 450
-60 500
Rainfall A. crassicarpa 3 years A. crassicarpa 3 years -R-L
A. crassicarpa 1 year Pristine Forest Water Table Pristine Forest
Water Table A. crassicarpa
There is no correlation between CH4 fluxes with water table level

19. Emission: measurement data
CH4 Fluxes in Jambi site
70 -50
60 0
50 50
mg C-CH4/m2/day
40 100
CH(mm/week)
WT (cm)
30 150
20 200
10 250
0 300
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53
-10 350
-20 Week 400
Rainfall A. crassicarpa 3 years
Secondary Forest A. mangium 2 years (mineral soil)
Water Table A. crassicarpa 3 yr Water Table Secondary Forest

20. Emission: measurement data
CH4 Fluxes South Sumatra site
50 0
45
50
40
35 100
30
Rainfall (mm/week)
C-CH4 mg/m2/day
Water Table (cm)
150
25
20 200
15
250
10
5 300
0
350
-5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56
Week
-10 400
Rainfall A.crassicarpa 4 yr
A.crassicarpa 4 yr (-R-L) A. crassicarpa 1 yr
Abandoned Paddy Field Water Table A. crassicarpa 4 yr
Water Table A. crassicarpa 1 yr Water Table Abandone Paddy Field

21. Year-round Fluxes of CO2 & CH4 in A. crassicarpa and MHW forest in Peatland
CH4 Fluxes
CO2 Fluxes
Land Characteristics Landuse (age) (kg C-
(ton C-CO2 ha-1y-1)
CH4ha-1y-1)
Mineral soil Acacia mangium, 2y 20.23 -2.12
Mineral soil Acacia mangium, 2y –R-L 11.58 -9.25
Mineral soil Eucalyptus, sp 2y 18.10 -4.94
Mineral soil Abandoned paddy field 15.97 1.31
Peat soil, deep Acacia crassicarpa 1y 35.77 -7.33
Peat soil, deep Acacia crassicarpa 3y 52.43 3.86
Peat soil, deep Acacia crassicarpa 3y –R-L 26.04 7.62
Peat soil, deep Pristine forest 33.04 5.42
Peat soil, deep Pristine forest –R-L 20.31 5.15
Peat soil, deep Open area (no vegetation) 11.06 -6.67
Peat soil, moderate Acacia crassicarpa 3y 34.31 12.94
Peat soil, moderate Acacia crassicarpa 3y –R-L 27.16 8.30
Peat soil, moderate Secondary (logged-over) forest 36.52 8.30
Peat soil, shallow Acacia crassicarpa 4y 37.59 -9.25
Peat soil, shallow Acacia crassicarpa 4y–R-L 26.38 14.83
Note: -R-L: without fine root and litter

22. Biomass Study
• Litter Fall
• Biomass Data
• Development DBH-Biomass Model
• Characteristic of Plant Biomass

23. Biomass study
Litter Fall of Acacia crassicarpa
Sei Baung, South
Month Bukit Batu, Riau Sei Tapah, Jambi
Sumatra
Februari 2011 93.59 46.42 19.83
Maret 71.43 37.85 55.33
April 52.17 31.79 45.83
Mei 48.49 121.98 34.33
Juni 45.48 55.40 45.67
Juli 40.91 30.39 49.50
Agustus 43.36 54.41 31.00
September 51.26 38.96 40.83
Oktober 48.52 31.71 29.33
Nopember 48.66 27.36 29.83
Desember 40.57 76.42 40.33
Januari 2012 31.04 86.33
Total (g/m2/y) 637.54 583.73 508.17
Total (ton/ha/y) 6.38 5.83 5.08

24. Biomass study
Litter Decomposition Rate of A. crassicarpa
on the Top Layer at Riau, Jambi, and South
Sumatra sites
100
90
80
70
Biomass (%)
60
50
40
30
20
35% remains
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Month
Riau
BBHA Jambi
WKS South Sumatra
SBA

25. Biomass study
Relationship Between DBH with Height and Age
A. Crassicarpa in Riau site

26. Biomass study
Biomass Equation for Riau site :
a= 192.196 b= 0.763 r2= 0.972
WT= a(D^2*H)^b
WT : Total Weight Wr : Root Weight Wk : Knot Weight
Ws : Stem Weight Wb : Branch Weight Wl : Leaves Weight

27. Biomass study
Biomass Equation for WKS : a=142.471
WT= a(D^2*H)^b b= 0.544
r2= 0.494
140 80%
error= 7.674
120 70%
60%
100
50%
Total weight
80
40% %W
60
30%
40
20%
20 10%
0 0%
0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
Age
WT' (kg) Wr' (%) Wk' (%) Ws' (%) Wb' (%) Wl' (%)
WT : Total Weight Wr : Root Weight Wk : Knot Weight
Ws : Stem Weight Wb : Branch Weight Wl : Leaves Weight

28. 250,000
y = -14361x2 + 13528x - 95212
R² = 0.999
200,000
y = -18648x2 + 14015x - 80660
R² = 0.962
150,000
y = -14008x2 + 10451x - 51986
R² = 0.969
100,000
BBHA
WKS
SBA
50,000
-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

29. Biomass study
Riau Prov. Jambi Prov. South Sumatra Prov.
Age Total Total Total
(Years) Popula- Biomass/ Popula- Biomass/ Popula- Biomass/
Biomass Biomass Biomass
tion tree (kg) tion tree (kg) tion tree (kg)
(ton) (ton) (ton)
1 1,933 12.78 24.7 1,767 20.67 36.5 1,800 22.33 40.2
2 2,267 53.04 120.2 1,800 56.95 102.5 1,600 75.95 121.5
3 1,967 91.72 180.4 1,700 84.12 143.0 1,533 121.66 186.5
4 1,700 126.53 215.1 1,233 105.79 130.4 1,033 160.46 165.8
5 1,411 157.94 222.9 1,010 123.66 124.9 821 194.17 159.4

30. Carbon Budget

31. Description (kg C/ha) Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V
Deadwood stock from last year - 11,006 22,319
litter stock from last year 140 749 1,312 1,711
litter fall this year 400 1,999 3,000 3,577 3,706
deadwood this year 13,758 16,892 22,822
E0 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 11,000
Decomposition of litter 260 1,391 2,437 3,178 3,521
Decomposition of deadwood 2,752 5,580 9,028
260 1,391 5,188 8,757 12,549
Total C decomposition 11260 12,391 16,188 19,757 23,549
litter stock 140 749 1,312 1,711 1,896
Deadwood stock - 11,006 22,319 36,113
Total stock 140 749 12,318 24,030 38,009
Harvest
Plant remain 44,571
Root remain 2,500
Reject wood/plant 11,143
shrub 1,000
budget 96,222 55,000
Sequestra-
Total C lost (kg/ha/5 y= 83,085 tion 41,222

32. Tahun I Tahun II Tahun III Tahun IV Tahun V
deadwood stock from last year - 3,365 22,453
litter stock from last year 268 847 1,346 1,429
litter fall this year 766 2,150 3,000 2,736 2,620
deadwood this year - 4,206 24,702 13,788
E0 11000 11,000 11000 11000 11000
Decomposition of litter 498 1,572 2,500 2,654 2,025
Decomposition of deadwood - - 841 5,613 7,248
498 1,572 3,341 8,267 9,273
Total C decomposition 11,498 12,572 14,341 19,267 20,273
litter stock 268 847 1,346 1,429 2,025
deadwood stock - - 3,365 22,453 28,993
Total C stock 268 847 4,711 23,882 31,018
Harvest
Plant remain Kg C/ha 24,979
Root remain 2,500
Reject wood/plant 6,245
Shrub 1,000
budget 65,742 55000
Total C loss: 77,952 kg C/ha/5y sequestration 10,742

33. Conclusion
• Calculation of carbon budget in peatland using the model of
∆ABG - ∑E = ? is facing uncertainty with respect to
below ground carbon stock measurement/estimation due to
great variation in land surface and BD.
• An alternative concept of carbon budget calculation is by
considering all possibility of C sequestration from produced
biomass and the emission of just from the peat material
decomposition.

34. Conclusion
• Calculation of Carbon budget of Acacia Crassicarpa
plantation on peatland using the alternative concept shows
that the carbon budget tends to be positive depending on the
plantation management, in that the highest the production
the highest the sequestration.
• With a constant emission from peat decomposition, then
high production as the reflection of best fit management is
the measure for reducing emission.