A proposal to integrate biospheric emissions/removals into future climate policy regimes Annette Freibauer 1 Niklas Höhne 2 Anke Herold 3 Ernst-Detlef Schulze 1 1 Max-Planck-Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany 2 ECOFYS, Cologne, Germany 3 Öko-Institut, Berlin, Germany Biosphere in future climate regimes Contents • Biospheric specifics • Challenges for future periods • Proposal to integrate biospheric Biospheric Specifics emissions and removals Challenges Proposal • Implications Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes 1 Biospheric Specifics • Fast C losses versus slow C uptake • Conflicting roles in mitigation • Regional and ecosystem-specific hotspots – land use change – land degradation – change in land management Biospheric • Regional feedbacks with climate Specifics • C stocks at risk hardly protected under the Challenges Kyoto Protocol: Proposal – <30% of C stocks in Annex-I countries – <1% of C stocks in mandatory accounting Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes Key questions • What framework will maximize global emission reductions? • How to protect C stocks in the biosphere? • How can countries with small C losses from the biosphere share the responsibility, Biospheric Specifics and assist other countries in protecting C stocks? Challenges Proposal Criteria and Principles Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes 2 New Proposal • Maximum flexibility in the global emission trading for emissions and removals in order to promote high targets Biospheric • Buffered by a control to conserve Specifics national biospheric C stocks Challenges in order to ensure environmental integrity Proposal Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes 1. Two Interrelated Targets a) “GHG Flux Target” Reducing net GHG emissions in all sectors including biospheric GHG fluxes; with international emission trading. b) “C Stock Target” Biospheric Specifics Conserving the existing C stocks in the biosphere at national level; Challenges domestic target Proposal Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes 3 2. Definitions • Merging of all LULUCF activities into "Managed land" with a new definition in line with IPCC-GPG-LULUCF: "Managed land is Biospheric all land subject to human use, Specifics including production, social and ecological Challenges functions, even at very low frequency or intensity, or subject to any kind of direct Proposal human disturbance" Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes 3. Scope a) Mandatory full GHG accounting of "managed land" in line with the IPCC Guidelines b) Optional full GHG accounting of Biospheric "unmanaged land" Specifics Challenges Proposal Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes 4 4. Accounting rules a) GHG Flux Target: Accounting for GHG fluxes against a base period for all sectors including the biosphere ("net-net" accounting): increases every commitment period Biospheric a) C Stock Target: Specifics Mean national biospheric C stock in all Kyoto pools Challenges on all accounted lands in base period; nationally differentiated according to expected growth Proposal of C stock or capacity to reduce C losses: Implications relatively constant over time Biosphere in future climate regimes 5) Flexible mechanisms a) Emissions trading: GHG Flux Target: fully tradable C Stock Target: NOT tradable b) Projects: GHG Flux Credits accounted in investor country as under present rules. Eventual related changes in the biospheric C stocks of the Biospheric Specifics host country considered in its C Stock Target Challenges c) Full fungibility of GHG Flux Credits between biosphere and Proposal other sectors No fungibility between C Stocks and C Fluxes, but Implications consistency check via C stock changes in biosphere Biosphere in future climate regimes 5 Example: Accounting Country A Country A GHG Flux Accounting C Stock Accounting (Domestic fluxes) (Domestic biosphere) Biosphere Co ) n sis ten cy at start CO2 Sources CO2 Biospheric + ( C stocks N O stocks GHGs other sectors 2 C Specifics of Commitment Period CH4 ∆C CO2 ∆ Challenges C CO2 (C loss) - (Sinks) Proposal A: Debit from selling C A: Credit from buying C Implications CO2 „Reduced C emission from biosphere“ trading Emission B: Credit from buying C B: Debit from selling C Biosphere in future climate regimes 600 Example: 500 400 Targets 300 C-equivalents C-equivalents -1 200 Country B: C from biosphere Tg year Country B: GHGs from Other sectors 100 GHG Flux Target (sum of arrows) 0 2 9 Target 90 9 93 94 96 9 00 9 9 9 9 0 1 1991 19 1 1 1995 1 1997 1998 19 2 period 375000 Biospheric 374000 Specifics 373000 372000 Challenges 371000 Tg C 370000 Proposal 369000 Country B: C stocks in biosphere 368000 C Stock Target Implications 367000 2 5 9 Target 91 9 94 9 98 9 9 9 9 9 1990 1 19 1993 1 1 1996 1997 1 19 2000 period Biosphere in future climate regimes 6 7) Compliance • GHG Flux Target: – not met: emission trading – no postponing! – exceeded: sell credits in international trade • C Stock Target – not met: Biospheric • domestic target – no trade! Specifics • encourage projects to help meeting target! Challenges • meet target in next period (+fine?) Proposal • C losses automatically in E/R – exceeded: automatic creditts in GHG Flux Target Implications Biosphere in future climate regimes Implications • Stronger role of biosphere! • Theoretically, – more sinks to meet commitments – more sources as risk factors – more uncertainties? Biospheric Specifics • Practically, Challenges – towards a cost-efficient global GHG market Proposal – towards higher commitments (PRECONDITION) – towards better protection of regional C stocks Implic- ations Biosphere in future climate regimes 7 Implications •Art. 3.1 UNFCCC: – Protecting the climate system – Equity, sovereignty – Common but differentiated responsibilities • Sound scientific basis: measure, verify Biospheric • Environmental integrity Specifics • Ease of implementation Challenges – consistent with present rules (MA) Proposal – consistent with present reporting formats Implic- ations • Simplicity, flexibility: Ease of negotiation Biosphere in future climate regimes Summary • GHG Flux Target – same rules for all sectors – fully fungible sectors – fully tradable emissions and removals – all managed land mandatory – compliance by trade within commitment period • C Stock Target for biosphere – separate target for conservation – domestic – all managed land mandatory – compliance supportable by projects and external investment Biosphere in future climate regimes 8 Thank you Biosphere in future climate regimes 5) Flexible mechanisms Host Country Investor Country LULUCF Activity GHG emission/ GHG emission/ removal debits C stocks for removal debits C stocks for and credits for C Stock Target and credits for C Stock Target GHG Flux Target GHG Flux Target ARD (Art. 3.3) Forest management accountable, can buy net accountable no credits (Art. 3.4) tradable credits without Cropland, cap Biospheric grassland Specifics management (Art. 3.4) Challenges accountable: net reduction in can buy net Avoided deforestation accountable credits without no credits deforestation Proposal emissions, cap tradable Implications Conservation of Zero, no net C existing C stocks accountable no relevance no credits stock change in the biosphere Biosphere in future climate regimes 9.