Building National Inventory Capacity: U.S. Government and UNFCCC Efforts
1 like570 views
The document outlines the collaborative efforts of the U.S. government and the UNFCCC to build greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory management capacity in developing countries. It discusses the current challenges in data collection, institutional memory, and technical expertise and provides a structured approach to improving GHG inventory systems through templates and targeted data collection. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of capacity building determined by the needs of developing countries rather than donors, and highlights past and ongoing projects in regions like Central America and Southeast Asia.
Building National Inventory Capacity: U.S. Government and UNFCCC Efforts
- 1. Building National Inventory Capacity: U.S. Government and UNFCCC Efforts Kimberly Todd Climate Change Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency COP-15, Copenhagen, Denmark December 14, 2009
- 2. Characterizing US Government Efforts on GHG Inventory Capacity Building • Collaborative effort: US EPA, US AID, UNFCCC • Technical expertise for GHG inventories already exists in developing countries – Small teams with multiple responsibilities and limited resources; – Incomplete or non-existent data; – Lack of country-specific emission factors; – Insufficient documentation of methods and data sources used in previous inventories; and – Difficulties retaining capacity and expertise developed during the preparation of the first National Communications • Priorities should be determined by developing countries rather than donors
- 3. U.S. EPA Approach to building GHG Inventory Management Capacity • Component I: Build • Component II: Improve sustainable national GHG estimates inventory systems within each country • Source/sink categories (examples): – Forest C • Activities: – Key source analyses – Soil C – Description of institutional – Soil N2O arrangements – Landfills – Source-by-source • Evaluate current methods background document and activity data – Inventory improvement plan – QA/QC & archiving system • Assist in applying the chosen methods
- 4. Tools for GHG Inventory Development Two complementary sets of tools for National GHG inventories: • National System Templates to document and institutionalize the inventory management process. – Establishing institutional arrangements, QA/QC, archiving, etc. • Targeted data collection strategies and software tools to assist developing countries application of higher tier IPCC methods in key sectors
- 5. EPA Tools for GHG Inventory Development
- 6. Past and Current GHG Inventory Improvement Projects Central America: Regional GHG inventory improvement project with U.S. AID (completed phase I, 2004- 2007), phase II (2007-2009) South East Asia: Regional GHG inventory improvement project in collaboration with UNFCCC, Japan and other regional experts China: Initiated cooperative activities with NDRC, Step 1 translation of existing tools
- 7. Component I: Inventory Management Systems
- 8. Inventory Preparation Process Step-by-step process, ideally becomes a cyclical process: • Inventory Planning – Assign roles/responsibilities – Review of methodologies (read, become familiar with IPCC Guidance) – Data assessment • Inventory Compilation – Data collection – Uncertainty assessment – Estimation of GHG emissions – Key source category analysis – Documentation and reporting • Review, QA/QC • Archiving of calculations and report Process establishes National GHG Inventory system
- 9. Template Approach to Building Inventory Management Capacity Introduction • The preparation of the Report will be as useful as the Report itself: Chapter 1 - Identification of Key Sources 1 Chapter 2 - Documentation of Institutional 2 Arrangements Chapter 3 - Source-by-Source background document 3 (methods and data) Chapter 4 - Description of Archiving system 4 Chapter 5 - Description of QA/QC procedures 5 Chapter 6 - National Inventory Improvement plan 6 The preparation of the report will be as useful as the report itself: • Preparation of National Communication 1 2 3 4 5 6 • Background for future GHG inventories • Priorities for future capacity building projects
- 10. Why use templates? • Focus on documenting essential information in a concise format and avoids unnecessarily long written reports; • Standardize tasks, allowing countries within regions to compare and contrast results; • Accommodate varying levels of national capacity; • Provide an objective and efficient system for identifying priorities for future improvements; • Serve as instruction manuals for future inventory teams • Create transparency in a country’s national system • Adapt to regional, national circumstances
- 11. Goal: Build sustainable National Inventory Coordinators use EPA Templates and Tools GHG Inventory Management systems 1. Key Source LOW TECH! Analysis Report IMPORTANT! 2. Description of Institutional Arrangements 3. Source by Source Documentation of • A country can prepare a GHG Data and Methods for Key Sources inventory at regular intervals 4. & 5. Description of (annually, every 2 years etc.) Archiving Systems and • All information used to prepare the QA/QC inventory is archived 6. National Inventory Improvement Plan • Roles and responsibilities are …Priorities and understood Projects for Improvements • Experts can come and go but the inventory does not suffer • Inventory quality improves over time Country • The GHG inventory meets the needs of Preliminary policy-makers, researchers, and the GHG Inventory public System Report 2009
- 12. Component II: GHG Estimation
- 13. Technical Challenges for Inventory Compilers • Difficulty applying IPCC methods – Particularly in Agriculture and LULUCF sectors • Using higher tier methods for key sources • Limited activity data and data management capability – Complete representation of land – Developing enhanced characterizations for livestock • Recalculating time series • Conducting quality assurance/quality control steps • Lack of institutional memory and inventory archives
- 14. Central America Phase II • Improve land-use/cover maps in Central America – Collect ground - reference data to improve GIS maps for Nicaragua, Honduras, Costa Rica, El Salvador and Guatemala – Designate IPCC Land-Use Categories: Forest land, Cropland, Grassland, Wetlands, Settlements, and Other Land
- 15. Completed Activities: August 2009 to December 2009 • Finalized approach to utilizing ground-based reference data to improve existing maps • Updated existing maps • Assessed accuracy of “improved” maps • Ensured compatibility of “improved” maps with ALU tool • Finalized collection of available forest C factors and incorporate into ALU tool
- 16. Completed/Ongoing Activities: August 2009 to December 2009 • Conducted workshop at CATIE in October 2009 with country focal points and other key contacts – Reviewed process by which the maps were created – Provided overview of how to import maps into ALU and utilize to develop GHG Inventory – Discussed outreach options to make “improved” maps, forest C factors, and ALU tool available and accessible to target audience (Central American GHG inventory compilers) • Continue outreach to increase awareness of “improved” maps and forest C factors (e.g., CATHALAC/SERVIR, CCAD, Environment Ministries)
- 17. Expected results by 2010 • Improved map for 2000 and a change detection product for 2009 for each country – Maps to be made available electronically and/or housed on server • Central American GHG Inventory experts trained on use of maps with ALU Tool – Improvements to GHG estimates for Agriculture and LULUCF for their National Communications • Report on updated forest C factors – Data to be incorporated into ALU
- 18. Inventory Framework: ALU Tool GIS Spatial Data: Land Use/Cover, Soils and Climate ALU Inventory Software Tool CARBON SEQUESTRATION RURAL APPRAISAL CURRENT LAND USE INFORMATION FROM LOCAL KNOWLEDGE (SHEET A) STATE INDIANA COUNTY BLACKFORD FOR INDICATED SOILS ON MAP DETERMINE: MUID (STATSGO ASSOCIATION) IN004 IN005 IN029 IN032 LAND USE INFORMATION TOTAL CROPLAND 72.9 90.7 CARBON SEQUESTRATION RURAL APPRAISAL 74 83.4 CLASS I & II CLASS III & IVGENERAL LAND USE INFORMATION FROM LOCAL KNOWLEDGE (SHEET B) CLASS V & VI FOREST OR TREES STATE 10.9 INDIANA 0.9 17.5 11.9 COUNTY BLACKFORD GRASS LANDS 14 7.7 8.5 3.1 CARBON SEQUESTRATION RURAL APPRAISAL WATER / WETLANDS HAS ANY 0.1 0.6 0 1.7 PART OF THE COUNTY BEEN DRAINED (YES/NO): URBAN / OTHER IF YES, ANSWER 0.05 FOLLOWING.LAND USE INFORMATION FROM LOCAL KNOWLEDGE (SHEET C) 2 THE 0GENERAL0 TOTAL 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION STATE DITCH DRAINAGE OPEN INDIANA COUNTY TILE DRAINAGE BLACKFORD FLAT MUID TIME PERIOD OF % OF SOIL TIME PERIOD OFSEQUESTRATION RURAL APPRAISAL CARBON % OF SOIL ROLLING HILLS INSTALLATIONOR MORE OF ANY MUID IRRIGATED (YES/NO): IS 10% DRAINED INSTALLATION DRAINED COUNTY LEVEL FARMING AND CROPPING SYSTEM HISTORY FROM PRE 1900 TO PRESENT (SHEET D) STEEP HILLS IN004 IF YES, ANSWER THE FOLLOWING. FLOOD PLAIN STATE INDIANA COUNTY BLACKFORD IN005 OTHER MUID TIME PERIOD OF % OF SOIL ANNUAL AMOUNT TYPES OF SYSTEMS TOTAL IN029 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% INSTALLATIONTIME FRAME 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% IRRIGATED 0.0% 1970-1990+ 0.0% APPLIED (INCHES) 0.0% ANNUAL CONSERVATION PRACTICES INSTALLED IN004 PRACTICES INSTALLED BY COUNTY AND SOIL TYPE IN032 % ESTIMATE OF COUNTY BEING FARMED DURING THIS TIME FRAME: TOTAL CROPLAND: % OF THIS SOIL IDENTIFIED AS CROPLAND . THE SUM OF LAND CAPABILITY CLASS I & II, III & IV, AND V & VI MUST ADD TO THIS %. 85% CLASS I & II: % OF THIS SOIL THAT IS CLASS I & II CROPLAND. IN005 USE IN REPORTING TO DOE FOR CARBON SEQUESTRATION CLASS III & IV: % OF THIS SOIL THAT IS CLASS III & IV CROPLAND. IN029 CROP ROTATIONS (SPECIFY 1 TO 3) (USE SEPARATE SHEET FOR EACH SOIL MUID) Emission Factors: CLASS V & VI: % OF THIS SOIL THAT IS CLASS V & VI CROPLAND. 1) CORN-SOYBEAN IN032 STATE INDIANA COUNTY BLACKFORD MUID IN004 FOREST OR TREES: % OF THIS SOIL IDENTIFIED AS FOREST OR TREES. 2) GRASS LANDS: % OF THIS SOIL IDENTIFIED AS GRASS LANDS. ACRES OF CONSERVATION PRACTICES INSTALLED (ACRES) WATER / WETLANDS: % OF THIS SOIL IDENTIFIED AS WETLANDS. 3) COMMON CROP ROTATION (s) GRASS TREE WETLANDS URBAN / OTHER LANDS: % OF THIS SOIL IDENTIFIED AS OTHER LANDS INCLUDING URBAN LANDS, DEVELOPED LANDS, ABANDONED LANDS. CONVERSIONS PLANTING CREATED LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION: % OF THIS SOIL IN EACH LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION. AND/OR FOR INDICATED CROPS REDUCED NO-TILL REDUCED NO-TILL RESTORED TILLLAGE TILLLAGE CROP NAME CORN SOYBEAN 1985 YIELD (BU OR TONS/AC) 130 40 1986 N FERT APPLIED (LBS/AC) 110 1987 MANURE APPLIED (TONS/AC) 2 1988 IPCC Defaults or Country-Specific MUID: SOIL MAP UNIT ID FROM STATSGO. (FROM MAP) 1989 TYPICAL TILLAGE OPERATIONS DISK DISK MUID: SOIL MAP UNIT ID FROM STATSGO. (FROM MAP) TIME PERIOD OF INSTALLATION: GIVE THE TIME PERIOD WHEN DRAINAGE PRACTICES IRRIGATION PRACTICES WERE INSTALLLED. (i.e. 1930-1950, 1940-1960, 1970- TIME PERIOD OF INSTALLATION: GIVE THE TIME PERIOD WHEN 1990 CULTIVATE DISK WERE INSTALLLED. (i.e. 1930-1950, 1940-1960, 1970-1990, ETC.) 1990, ETC.) 1991 PLANT PLANT % OF SOIL DRAINED: GIVE AN ESTIMATE FOR THESE SOILS OF THE AMOUNT OF SOILS OF THE AMOUNT OF IRRIGATION INSTALLED. % OF SOIL IRRIGATED: GIVE AN ESTIMATE FOR THESE DRIANAGE INSTALLED. 1992 CULTIVATE CULTIVATE ANNUAL AMOUNT APPLIED (INCHES): GIVE AN ESTIMATE OF THE ANNUAL AMOUNT OF IRRIGATION WATER APPLIED IN INCHES. (6 INCHES, 12 1993 INCHES, 15 INCHES, ETC.) TYPES OF SYSTEMS: TYPICAL TYPE OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM INSTALLED. (CENTER PIVOT, GATED PIPE, ETC.) 1994 1995 1996 Comments: 1997 1998 TIM E FRAM E: PERIOD OF TIME AS SPECIFIED. 1999 % ESTIM ATE OF COUNTY BEING FARM ED DURING THIS TIM E FRAM E: GIVE AN ESTIMATE OF THE COUNTY AREA BEING FARMED DURING THIS TIME FRAME. 2000 TYPICAL CROP ROTATION: CROP ROTATIONS INCLUDE (CORN-CORN; CORN-SOYBEAN; CORN-CORN-OATS-MEADOW-MEADOW; CORN-SOYBEAN-CORN-OATS-MEADOW-MEADOW; ETC) MUID: SOIL MAP UNIT ID FROM STATSGO. (FROM MAP) FOR INDICATED CROPS: ACTUAL CROP INFORMATION FOR THE INDICATED CROPS IN THE ROTATIONS. THE TWO MOST COMMON CROP ROTATIONS. IF ONE ROTATION IS >90% OF CROPPED ACRES, CROP ROTATION: PICK CROP: CROP NAME AS SHOWN IN CROP ROTATION. REPORT ONLY THAT ROTATION. TOTAL FOR THE COUNTY SHOULD EQUAL THE CTIC REPORTED VALUES FROM 1989 TO PRESENT. SEE SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. 90 YIELD: CROP YIELD IN BU/AC FOR GRAINS OR TONS/AC FOR HAY. REDUCED TILLAGE: REDUCED TILLAGE FARMING WHICH LEAVE GREATER THAN 15% RESIDUE AFTER PLANTING. (INCLUDES N FERT APPLIED: ESTIMATE OF COMMERCIAL NITROGEN FERTILIZER APPLIED ANNUALLY (LBS/AC). TILL BUT NOT NO-TILL). MULCH TILL, RIDGE M ANURE APPLIED: ESTIMATE OF MANURE APPLIED ANNUALLY (TONS/AC), BY CROP. NO-TILL: NO-TILL FARMING SYSTEM. TYPICAL TILLAGE OPERATIONS: TYPICAL TILLAGE OPERATIONS USED TO GROW THIS CROP. (EXAMPLES ARE FALL PLOW; 80 No-tillage GRASS CONVERSIONS: ALL GRASS PLANTING CONSERVATION PRACTICES. SPRING PLOW; CHIESEL PLOW; DISK; HARROW; CULTIVATOR; DRILL; PLANT; ETC.) (WATERWAYS, BUFFERS INCLUDING RIPIARIAN BUFFERS, FILTER STRIPS, TERRACES, CRP). USE 12' WIDTH FOR TERRACES (LF*12/43560=ACRE). USE 40' WIDTH FOR ALL OTHER PRACTICES REPORTED IN LINEAR FEET (LF*40/43560=ACRE). 70 Conventional tillage TREE PLANTING: ALL CONSERVATION PRACTICES THAT INCLUDE TREE PLANTINGS. (WINDBREAKS, SHELTERBELTS, AGRO- FORESTRY) WETLANDS CREATED AND/OR RESTORED: ALL CONSERVATION PRACTICES THAT INCLUDE THE CREATION OR RESTORATION OF WETLANDS. 60 50 Management Activity Data: 40 30 20 10 National Agriculture and Forestry 0 le le M ville d oy n er er er er fin sh iffin y . L cky ha te W n on S y en o ck ne tta vil vil B st st st st . C et rif st kr K se Gr tu tu te te te B id oo oo oo oo ha ay G rle A en en S oy oy oe af an W W W Statistics H H H K K W S or H
- 19. Implementing Lessons • Targeted efforts to improving inventory inputs should be complemented with parallel focus on building sustainable National Systems and institutional arrangements • Informing countries of expected end-of-project situation and products to be delivered • Consultations are important before even organizing scoping efforts – Important to have commitment and interest from countries
- 20. Implementing Lessons (cont.) • Important to have Regional and bilateral assistance in projects – Regional meetings facilitate exchange of expertise, inventory management strategies – Bilateral assistance important as each countries circumstances and priorities are unique • Direct assistance/resources to countries to complement GEF resources is important – Should have at least 1 in-country staff member with 50-100% time dedicated to project • Tools developed by EPA do not solve the problem of resources but can help address lack of staff continuity
- 21. Looking Forward • ALU software enhancements – Mitigation module – Uncertainty analysis • Guidance manual on enhancing quality of land use maps • Scoping to extend program into new geographic area • Eastern Himalayas REDD+ capacity building initiative
- 22. Thank you!