Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
fossil fuel substitution is fully credited by
the industrialized countries and the emis-
sions caused by the production of bio-
fuels (up to 20- 40% of the substitution)
that occur in developing countries remain
outside of the purview of the C account-
ants. This discussion on biofuels has
spilled over to palm oil grown for other
uses, and a voluntary standard (Round-
table for Sustainable Palm Oil, RSPO) aims
to mainstream best agroecological practice,
associated with low emissions, by the
avoidance of peatland and forest clearing,
as well as fine-tuned fertilizer applications.
Technically, a carbon-neutral conversion
to palm oil production is feasible and ex-
ists in some 10- 20% of current production
(Khasanah et al ., 2011).
Exploiting the loopholes in inter-
national carbon accounting, the ideas of
biological atmospheric carbon dioxide re-
moval through bioenergy with industrial
carbon capture and storage in importing
countries might allow industrialized coun-
tries not only to shift from GHG-emitting
fossil energy sources to carbon neutral ones
but also even to claim a net atmospheric C
capture, regardless of the ecological and so-
cial consequences in the areas from which
bioenergy would be sourced (Smith and
Torn, 2013). Such approaches have become
the target for the strategies of industrial-
ized countries with strong emission-reduc-
tion commitments, but there are many
unresolved issues surrounding this, some
technical, others institutional on the integ-
rity of international accounting systems
( Table 31.1 ).
Q3: Will The Prices Be Worth
It Once Transaction Costs
Are Accounted For?
With agriculture finally finding its place on
the global climate change agenda at the
Durban UNFCCC Conference of Parties in
2011, the level of uncertainty in changes in
soil carbon stocks linked to land-use change
is likely to get renewed attention. Lipper
et  al . (2011) suggested that soil carbon se-
questration benefits could be 'harvested'.
The question remains at what scale this can
happen.
The analysis of Cacho et al . (2008) still
stands, that measurement costs at the level
of precision required by current C market
standards are a major obstacle for includ-
ing soil carbon in project designs for A/R-
CDM and its voluntary market
counterparts. The standards require evi-
dence that effects on pools that are not
measured will not be negative. Rather than
claiming positive effects, it may be more
economical to collect just enough data to
justify a 'no harm' argument, treating any
additional soil C storage as a co-benefit.
Positive effects of soil organic matter on
reducing vulnerability to climate variabil-
ity may be a further co-benefit.
In the special case of peatlands, the
emissions linked to land-use change are
large (tens of tonnes of CO 2 eq ha - 1 year - 1
over decades) and attention is warranted
and forthcoming, as these still are large
fluxes with large uncertainties and contro-
versies over prospects of restoration activ-
ities. There are some rough edges to the
peat issues in terms of definitions: soils
with less than 50 cm of peat do not clas-
sify as peatlands, yet can cause large emis-
sions. Peatlands gradually merge into other
wetland issues of GHG fluxes, which
merge into temporarily flooded riparian
zones. Mangrove soils with C org levels of
around 10% down to several metres in
depth have recently gained attention, as
little is known about the C dynamics in
these soils or of the fate of C-rich sedi-
ments under coastal abrasion. Lack of clear
definition of such 'special cases' may be an
Overview of options
In the interaction between the above op-
tions and national GHG accounting (Fig. 31.5) ,
we see that national-scale emissions inter-
act with area-based efforts of limited spatial
extent ('projects'), as well as with efforts to
modify the footprint of commodities in
international trade. The interaction between
these two and comprehensive NAMA remains
largely unresolved.
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search