soil carbon sequestration and greenhouse gases mitigation ... · soil carbon sequestration and...

Soil Carbon Sequestration and Soil Carbon Sequestration and Greenhouse Gases Mitigation in Greenhouse Gases Mitigation in

Selected Ecos stems in theSelected Ecos stems in theSelected Ecosystems in the Selected Ecosystems in the PhilippinesPhilippines

Rodolfo O. IlaoRodolfo O. Ilao11 , Edilberto D. Salang, Edilberto D. Salang22 and Januel P. Florescaand Januel P. Floresca33

PhilippinesPhilippines

11Director, Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Director, Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD)Research and Development (PCARRD)

22Associate Professor, Western Mindanao State University (MSU), Associate Professor, Western Mindanao State University (MSU), Zamboanga City, PhilippinesZamboanga City, PhilippinesZamboanga City, PhilippinesZamboanga City, Philippines

33Instructor, Isabela, State Univeristy (ISU), Echague, Isabela, PhilippinesInstructor, Isabela, State Univeristy (ISU), Echague, Isabela, Philippines

Tanay, Rizal

Abra

Mt. Prov.Ilocos Sur

Kal

inga

-Apa

yao

SOIL CARBONSOIL CARBON

General Nakar, Quezon

Mt. Makiling, Laguna Ifugao

La Union NuevaVizcaya

Sub-Prov. of Aurora

Pampanga

Rizal

SOIL CARBON SOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATION IN SEQUESTRATION IN

Laguna

Batangas

Isabela

Rizal

Cavite Laguna

CamarinesSur

Catanduanes

Marinduque

SELECTEDSELECTEDECOSYSTEMS IN THE ECOSYSTEMS IN THE

Guimaras

EasternSamar

Leyte PHILIPPINESPHILIPPINESVerde Island Passage, Batangas

Bukidnon

Agusandel Sur

Davaodel NorteNorth

Zamboangade Norte

Zamboanga del Sur

Brgy. Catmon, Batangas

Cotabato

SouthCotabato

DavaoCity

CompostelaValley

General.SantosCity

SOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATIONSOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATION

GrasslandsGrasslandsBrushlandsBrushlands

Secondary Secondary forestsforestsforestsforests

MangrovesMangrovesDegradedDegraded pasturelandspasturelands

SecondarySecondary Factors affecting SOC Factors affecting SOC Secondary Secondary ForestsForests

sequestration in the sequestration in the Philippines:Philippines:ForestsForests Philippines:Philippines:

1. Natural factorsCli t l il i• Climate – large soil organic carbon (SOC) is associated with higher precipitationwith higher precipitation

• Topography – higher SOC is found in higher elevation gareas

• Natural disturbance 2. Anthropogenic

Secondary ForestsSecondary ForestsSecondary ForestsSecondary Forests

i k/ b li k/ b lCarbon Density (Mg/ha)Carbon Density (Mg/ha)

CarbonCarbon densitydensity inin biomassbiomass andand soilsoil inin thethe secondarysecondary forestsforests

Sink/carbon poolSink/carbon poolGeneral Nakar, QuezonGeneral Nakar, Quezon Tanay, RizalTanay, Rizal

Trees > 10cm dbhTrees > 10cm dbh 64.04 (42%)64.04 (42%) 34.12 (37%)34.12 (37%)

Understory/litterUnderstory/litter 1.58 (1%)1.58 (1%) 3.74 (4%)3.74 (4%)

SoilSoil 84.72 (57%)84.72 (57%) 53.22(59%)53.22(59%)

TotalTotal 150 34 (100%)150 34 (100%) 91 08 (100%)91 08 (100%)TotalTotal 150.34 (100%)150.34 (100%) 91.08 (100%)91.08 (100%)

Secondary ForestsSecondary ForestsSecondary ForestsSecondary ForestsLEGEND:

100

90

LEGEND:

Trees >10cm dbh

84.7284.7280

70

6050

Understorey/litter

Soil

Mg

MgC/ha

C/ha 64.0464.04

84.7284.72

53.2253.22

Mg

MgC/ha

C/ha

40302010

MM

1 581 58

34.1234.12

3.743.74

MM

5

Gen. Nakar Tanay

1.581.58

CarbonCarbon densitydensity inin biomassbiomass andand soilsoil inin thethe secondarysecondary forestsforests

BrushlandBrushland and Grasslandand GrasslandBrushlandBrushland and Grasslandand Grassland

CarbonCarbon densitydensity ofof thethe differentdifferent landland useuse typestypes..

Sink/carbon poolSink/carbon pool Carbon density (Mg/ha)Carbon density (Mg/ha)

BrushlandBrushland GrasslandGrassland

BrushBrush 14 73 (20%)14 73 (20%)BrushBrush 14.73 (20%)14.73 (20%)

GrassGrass 2.49 (3%)2.49 (3%) 2.57 (4%)2.57 (4%)

SoilSoil 57.05 (77%)57.05 (77%) 55.00 (96%)55.00 (96%)( )( ) ( )( )

TotalTotal 74.27 (100%)74.27 (100%) 57.57 (100%)57.57 (100%)

BrushlandBrushland and Grasslandand GrasslandBrushlandBrushland and Grasslandand GrasslandLEGEND:

80

70

LEGEND:

Brush

60

50

40

Grass

Soil

57.0557.05 5555

40

30

2014.7314.73

10

5

Brushland Grassland

2.492.49 2.572.57

CarbonCarbon densitydensity ofof thethe differentdifferent landland useuse typestypes

Brushland Grassland

MangroveMangroveMangroveMangrove

CarbonCarbon poolpool status,status, biomassbiomass andand carboncarbon densitydensity distributiondistribution inin mangrovemangroveecosystemecosystem


Verde PassageVerde Passage BrgyBrgy.. CatmonCatmon

BiomassBiomass 103.50 (90%)103.50 (90%) 125.79 (89%)125.79 (89%)

SoilSoil 11.95 (10%)11.95 (10%) 15.92 (11%)15.92 (11%)

TotalTotal 115 45 (100%)115 45 (100%) 141 71 (100%)141 71 (100%)TotalTotal 115.45 (100%)115.45 (100%) 141.71 (100%)141.71 (100%)

MangroveMangroveMangroveMangroveLEGEND:

100

90

LEGEND:

Biomass103.5103.5125.79125.79

80

70

6050

Soil

l

Mg

MgC/ha

C/ha

40302010

11.9511.9515.9215.92

MM

5

Verde Passage Brgy. Catmon

CarbonCarbon poolpool status,status, biomassbiomass andand carboncarbon densitydensity distributiondistribution ininmangrovemangrove ecosystemecosystem

Degraded pasturelandDegraded pasturelandDegraded pasturelandDegraded pastureland


DegradedDegraded pasturelandpastureland withwith kakawatekakawate,, mahogany,mahogany, andand yemaneyemane standsstands

KakawateKakawate MahoganyMahogany YemaneYemane

TreeTree bbiomassiomass 16.41 (21.04%)16.41 (21.04%) 29.35 (35.82%)29.35 (35.82%) 101.16 (66.96%)101.16 (66.96%)

UnderstoreyUnderstorey 1 33 (1 7%)1 33 (1 7%) 0 75 (0 92%)0 75 (0 92%) 0 91 (0 63%)0 91 (0 63%)UnderstoreyUnderstorey 1.33 (1.7%)1.33 (1.7%) 0.75 (0.92%)0.75 (0.92%) 0.91 (0.63%)0.91 (0.63%)

LitterLitter 0.48 (0.62%)0.48 (0.62%) 0.01 (0.01%)0.01 (0.01%) 1.71 (1.18%)1.71 (1.18%)

SoilSoil 58.81 (76.35%)58.81 (76.35%) 51.84 (63.27%)51.84 (63.27%) 41.42 (28.53%)41.42 (28.53%)

TotalTotal 77.03 (100%)77.03 (100%) 81.94 (100%)81.94 (100%) 145.21 (100%)145.21 (100%)

Degraded pasturelandDegraded pasturelandDegraded pasturelandDegraded pasturelandLEGEND:10

1.16

101.

16

100

90

80

LEGEND:

Tree biomass

11

70

60

50

Understorey

Litter

Mg

MgC/ha

C/ha

58.8

158

.81

51.8

451

.84

424250

40

30

20

Soil

MM

6.41

6.41 29

.35

29.3

5 41.4

41.4

20

10

5

K k t M h Y

111.

331.

330.

480.

48 0.75

0.75

0.01

0.01 0.91

0.91 1.71

1.71

CarbonCarbon poolpool status,status, biomassbiomass andand carboncarbon densitydensitydistributiondistribution inin mangrovemangrove ecosystemecosystem

Kakawate Mahogany Yemane

AgroforestryAgroforestryCarbonCarbon statusstatus inin degradeddegraded pasturelandpastureland plantedplanted toto fastfast‐‐growinggrowing treetree speciesspecies

AgroforestryAgroforestry


GmelinaGmelina‐‐cacao multistoreycacao multistorey Alley cropping systemAlley cropping system

Gmelina arboreaGmelina arborea 106.62106.62

Theobroma cacaoTheobroma cacao 8.338.33

UnderstoreyUnderstorey 0 280 28UnderstoreyUnderstorey 0.280.28

NecromassNecromass 0.990.99

RootsRoots 0.240.24

Gliricidia sepiumGliricidia sepium

Biomass totalBiomass total 116.46116.46 1.691.69

SoilSoil 68.1268.12 91.9691.96

TotalTotal 184.58184.58 93.2593.25

AgroforestryAgroforestry LEGEND:AgroforestryAgroforestry LEGEND:

Gmelina arborea

106.

6210

6.62

66

100

90

80

Theobroma cacao

Understorey11

22

91.9

691

.96

70

60

50

Necromass

RootsggC/ha

C/ha 68

.12

68.1

250

40

30

20

Gliricidia sepium

Biomass Total

Mg

Mg

33

20

10

5

Biomass Total

Soil

G li lti t All i t

8.3

8.3

0.28

0.28 0.99

0.99

0.24

0.24

1.69

1.69

CarbonCarbon poolpool status,status, biomassbiomass andand carboncarbon densitydensitydistributiondistribution inin mangrovemangrove ecosystemecosystem

Gmelina-cacao multistorey Alley cropping system

Carbon levels in selected ecosystemsCarbon levels in selected ecosystemsCarbon levels in selected ecosystemsCarbon levels in selected ecosystemsLEGEND:

100

90

Forest

Brushland8585

9292

80

70

60

Grassland

Mangrove5252 5454

6868

Mg

MgC/ha

C/ha

60

50

40

Mangrove

Pastureland

1717

MM

30

20

10

Agroforestry1717

5

Abra

Mt. Prov.Ilocos Sur

Kal

inga

-Apa

yao

SOIL CARBON SOIL CARBON Ifugao


Sub-Prov. of Aurora

Pampanga

Rizal

SEQUESTRATION IN SEQUESTRATION IN AGRICULTURALAGRICULTURAL

Batangas

Isabela

Rizal

Cavite Laguna

CamarinesSur

Catanduanes

Marinduque

AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL ECOSYSTEMS IN ECOSYSTEMS IN

Guimaras

EasternSamar

LeyteSOUTHERN SOUTHERN PHILIPPINESPHILIPPINES

Zamboanga del Norte

ZamboangaCity

Bukidnon

Agusandel Sur

Davaodel NorteNorth

Zamboangade Norte

Zamboanga del Sur

PHILIPPINESPHILIPPINESZamboanga

del Sur Cotabato

SouthCotabato

DavaoCity

CompostelaValley

General.SantosCity

del Sur ZamboangaSibugay

Agricultural ecosystemsAgricultural ecosystemsAgricultural ecosystemsAgricultural ecosystems

Adtuyon SoilsAdtuyon Soils•• developed from weathered developed from weathered

Faraon SoilsFaraon Soils•• derived from weathering of derived from weathering of

rocks that originated from rocks that originated from volcanic lava (lahars) chiefly volcanic lava (lahars) chiefly

d f d it dd f d it d

coralline limestone, includes coralline limestone, includes soils with rolling topography soils with rolling topography t hillt hillcomposed of andesites and composed of andesites and

basaltsbasalts•• pH of 5 31pH of 5 31

to hilly areato hilly area•• pH of 7.18pH of 7.18

l d i dl d i d•• pH of 5.31pH of 5.31•• external drainage is good to external drainage is good to

excessiveexcessive

•• external drainage good external drainage good under forest but becomes under forest but becomes excessive in open fieldsexcessive in open fieldsexcessive excessive

•• internal drainage is fair to internal drainage is fair to goodgood

excessive in open fields.excessive in open fields.•• internal drainage is fair. internal drainage is fair.

goodgood

Tillage and cropping systemsTillage and cropping systemsTillage and cropping systemsTillage and cropping systems

•• TILLAGE SYSTEMSTILLAGE SYSTEMS–– NoNo‐‐tillagetillage

•• CROPPING SYSTEMSCROPPING SYSTEMS–– Corn croppingCorn cropping

–– Conservation tillageConservation tillage–– Conventional tillageConventional tillage

–– CornCorn‐‐legume rotationlegume rotation–– VegetablesVegetables–– Root cropsRoot crops–– Cover cropsCover crops–– Pasture/grasslandPasture/grassland–– BananaBanana–– Fruit cropsFruit crops

Effects of tillage systems on carbon of soils.

TILLAGE SOC, % SEQUESTEREDTILLAGE SYSTEMS

, SEQUESTERED CO2

EQUIVALENT

Faraon

No Tillage 2.01 256

ConservationTillage

2.04 261

Conventional 1.75 227ConventionalTillage

227

Adtuyon

3 14No Tillage 3.14 393

ConservationTillage

3.10 382TillageConventionalTillage

3.09 383

Adtuyon vs FaraonAdtuyon vs FaraonAdtuyon vs. FaraonAdtuyon vs. FaraonCROPPINGCROPPING SOC %SOC % Sequestered CO2 EquivalentSequestered CO2 Equivalent

Effect of cropping systems on carbon of soilsEffect of cropping systems on carbon of soils

CROPPING CROPPING SYSTEMSSYSTEMS

SOC, %SOC, % Sequestered CO2 Equivalent Sequestered CO2 Equivalent (Mg/ha)(Mg/ha)

AdtuyonAdtuyon FaraonFaraon AdtuyonAdtuyon FaraonFaraon

Annual cropping systemsAnnual cropping systems

CornCorn 3.0.3.0. 1.881.88 352352 241241

CornCorn‐‐LegumeLegume 3.123.12 1.901.90 368368 244244gg

VegetablesVegetables 3.03.0 1.861.86 371371 249249

RootcropsRootcrops 2.982.98 1.851.85 361361 243243

Covercrop and forage cropping systemsCovercrop and forage cropping systems

CovercropCovercrop 3.293.29 2.592.59 394394 328328

PasturesPastures 3.263.26 2.282.28 398398 326326

Perennial cropping systemPerennial cropping system

BananaBanana 3.273.27 2.582.58 389389 325325

F iF i 3 133 13 1 851 85 387387 321321FruitcropsFruitcrops 3.133.13 1.851.85 387387 321321

Adtuyon vs. FaraonAdtuyon vs. FaraonSoil types and soil organic carbonSoil types and soil organic carbon

00 0101 107

107

106

106

0505

100

90

80

9696

100

100 1010

9898

8989

118989

10108787

80

70

60

6666 6666

6868

6666

Mg

MgC/ha

C/ha

50

40

30

MM

20

10

5

Corn Corn‐legume Vegetables Rootcrops Covercrop Banana Fruitcrops

Adtuyon soilsAdtuyon soils Faraon soilsFaraon soils

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

1. Soil capacity to sequester carbon is dependent on soil type, y ysoil ph, tillage system, and type of vegetation

2. Adtuyon soils sequstered more carbon than faraon due to its idit th t l d t l i bi l d itiacidity that led to less microbial decomposition

3. No tillage has highest carbon sequestration due mainly to no or no disturbance of soil structureor no disturbance of soil structure

4. Tillage favors decomposition so less sequesterd carbon.

5 High bulk density of soil can be an indicator for high carbon5. High bulk density of soil can be an indicator for high carbon sequestration

Abra

Mt. Prov.Ilocos Sur

Kal

inga

-Apa

yao

ASSESSMENT ANDASSESSMENT ANDIsabelaProvince Ifugao


Sub-Prov. of Aurora

Pampanga

Rizal

ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT AND VALUATION OF VALUATION OF

Province

Batangas

Isabela

Rizal

Cavite Laguna

CamarinesSur

Catanduanes

Marinduque

GHG MITIGATION GHG MITIGATION IN LOWLAND RICE IN LOWLAND RICE

Guimaras

EasternSamar

Leyte AGROECOSYSTEMSAGROECOSYSTEMS

Bukidnon

Agusandel Sur

Davaodel NorteNorth

Zamboangade Norte

Zamboanga del Sur

Cotabato

SouthCotabato

DavaoCity

CompostelaValley

General.SantosCity

AgroecosystemAgroecosystemg yg y•• Provide updated information on the current Provide updated information on the current GHGs emitted from rice cropping in lowland GHGs emitted from rice cropping in lowland pp gpp grice agroecosystems in Isabela as affected by rice agroecosystems in Isabela as affected by different farm management practices and the different farm management practices and the amounts and economic values of GHG amounts and economic values of GHG reduction of changing to a more climatereduction of changing to a more climate‐‐friendly farm management practices. friendly farm management practices.

•• ClimateClimate‐‐friendly farm management practices friendly farm management practices in lowland rice agroecosystems include those in lowland rice agroecosystems include those that have less emission of GHGs by avoiding that have less emission of GHGs by avoiding

bi d i i h d ibi d i i h d ianaerobic decomposition such as reducing anaerobic decomposition such as reducing the amounts and duration of irrigation, use of the amounts and duration of irrigation, use of low methane emitting variety and rice straw low methane emitting variety and rice straw compostingcompostingcomposting. composting.

Farm management practices that add Farm management practices that add to GHG emissionto GHG emission

ClimateClimate‐‐friendly farm management friendly farm management practicespractices

Valuation: Lowland rice field and GHGValuation: Lowland rice field and GHGValuation: Lowland rice field and GHGValuation: Lowland rice field and GHG

FARMING PRACTICE ANNUAL CH4EMISSION tons CH4 % tons CO2e US$/yr P Million/yr

VALUE *REDUCTION

Values of CH4 emission reduction based on 2009 World Bank Carbon Price.

EMISSION tons CH4 % tons CO2e US$/yr P Million/yrtons/yr

EXISTING PRACTICE 5,882.93 0 0 - -MID-SEASON DRAINAGE 3,059.12 2,823.81 48.00 59,300.01 711,600.12 34.16COMPOSTING 2,126.49 3,756.44 63.85 78,885.24 946,622.88 45.44DRAINAGE + COMPOSTING 1,105.77 4,777.16 81.20 100,320.36 1,203,844.32 57.78

* WB PRICE = US$ 12/ton CO2e; P48/US$

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

1. Mid-season drainage rather than continuous flooding will have 2,823.81tons/year or 48% methane reduction in 7,789.34 ha service area of 30 selectedIAs in NIA-MRIIS District 2 with tradable CO2 equivalent of P34.16 million/year.

2. Application of rice straws composted aerobically rather than incorporated inflooded rice fields will have 3,756.44 tons/year or 64% methane reductionservice area with a tradable CO2 equivalent of PhP45.44 million/year.2 q y

3. Simultaneous mid-season drainage and application of aerobic rice strawcompost rather than existing farming practices (continuous flooding and ricestraw incorporation in flooded fields) will have 4 777 16 tons/year or 81%straw incorporation in flooded fields) will have 4,777.16 tons/year or 81%methane reduction in the with tradable CO2 equivalent of PhP57.78million/year.

4. Incremental benefits of shifting from existing farming practices (continuousflooding and rice straw incorporation) to climate-friendly farming practices (mid-season drainage and rice straw compost application) will be PhP138.95

illi /million/year.

SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Development of cost-effective methodological tools andtechniques in analyzing and determining soil organic carbon Thistechniques in analyzing and determining soil organic carbon. Thiswill allow quantification of carbon stocks and sequestration ratesof carbon in the various ecosystems. For instance, dataaggregation from a plot scale to national scale is a big barrier toaggregation from a plot scale to national scale is a big barrier toovercome in carbon stock assessment.2. Conduct of valuation studies for carbon trading purposes.Determining the actual value of SOC will bring appreciation at itsg g ppimportance to policymakers.3. Promoting activities that will enhance the potentials of variousecosystems to serve as carbon sinks rather than sources.While soil carbon storage plays a crucial role in GHG mitigation, strategies to reduce carbon emission must be carried out with full understanding that there should bebalance between environmental benefits and need for food and fiber

THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

Greenhouse GasesGases from Rice fieldGreenhouse GasesGases from Rice fieldFactors affecting GHG emission:

• Land preparation

• Seed preparationSeed p epa at o

• Rice varieties

• Fertilizer application• Fertilizer application

• Water management

• Harvesting and fallow

h dd f ld

• Harvesting and fallow period

• Rice straw management:Methane emission in a paddy rice field (Macandog & IRRI, 2007).

Rice straw management: burning and incorporated

soil carbon sequestration and greenhouse gases mitigation ... · soil carbon sequestration and...

Documents