EX-Ante Carbon-balance ToolBy Louis Bockel, Madeleine Jönsson, Ophélie Touchemoulin, FAO (TCSP)

3-4 October 2011

SUMMARY

Why the development of EX-ACT A partnership The need of a new simple tool

Presentation of the tool Role of the toolThe structure and logic of the toolOutputs

Why the development of EX-ACT?

A partnership

Partnership

FAO

Investment Centre TCI

Policy support service TCS

Economic division ESA

IRD (French DevelopmentResearch Institute)

WB

GIZ, IFAD, AFD (France), ADB, SEI (Sweden), ADEME (France)

EX-ACT is a FAO tool to estimate the mitigation impact of agricultural and forestry projects

External partnership

and helps decision-making within agriculture and forestryplanning policies and investment projects

The need of a new simple tool

Lack of tools that would help project designers to integrate significant climate response activities in AFOLU* sectors.

Lack of operational tools

Tools under UNFCCC/KP

Tool =

Flowchart +

Equations+

Default values

*AFOLU: agriculture, forestry and land use

The need of a new simple tool

Lack of tools screening the whole agricultural sector

The need of a new simple tool

Need for an acceptable method which: measures C-balance impact within ex-ante appraisal, complements usual economic analysis, and fits within the time constraints of formulation process.

Simple

Practical

Cost effective

Upgradable overtime

Information that :-scientists can quantify/use, -farmers/project developers can understand/use

Up-scaling(Able to extrapolate to region, watershed and community basis)

Appraisal of agricultural project/programmes

Carbon balance with a reference scenario

Mitigation impacts of policies and value chains

Regular up-dating

Easy to use and implement

International application

Mitigation non integrated within project formulation

Lack of climate impact decision-making tools

Enriching usual economic analysis with a new

indicator

Adapting to project formulation constraints

Legitimity of a new tool

The need of a new simple tool

Presentation of the tool

The Role of EX-ACT

Takes into account activities

that impact GHG fluxes (emissions and sinks)

Deforestation, A-Re/forestation, forest degradation, Restoration of grasslands, livestock, cultivation of annual crops, cultivation of perennial crops, fertilization of crops, installation of building, installation of irrigation systems...

CO2, CH4, N2O

from and to different pools

above-ground biomass, below-ground biomass, soil, litter and dead wood

EMISSIONS STOCKS

Positive result : There are more emissions

Negative result: There are less emissions

MITIGATION !

Carbon balance in t of eq-CO2

The carbon balance, for a specific project (or scenario of action) in comparison with a reference, should be considered as the net balance of all GHG emissions

expressed in CO2 equivalent (sources and sinks) with the atmosphere interface and the net change in C stocks (biomass, soil…).

Future without project

100 ha flooded rice

100 ha degraded pastures

100 animals

Future with project

100 ha improved irrig. rice

100 ha restored pastures

100 High productivity animals

?

more or less GHG released

?

The Role of EX-ACT

The structure and the logic of EX-ACT

Project activities

(identification of expected land use and practices changes)

Project Description

Carbon balance

Climate

Continent

Soil

Duration

DeforestationAfforestation and Reforestation

Forest degradationNon forest land use change

Annual cropsPerennial crops

Irrigated rice Grasslands

Exploitation of organic soilsLivestock

InputsOther investments

Matrix (Synthesis of land

use and land use changes)

-Describe vegetation/animals/inputs concerned

-Describe main management practices

-Area concerned

EXCEL File

-Start situation

-Future without project

-Future with project

I

N

P

U

T

S

N

E

E

D

E

D

Tier 1: IPCC coefficients

Tier 2 : ad-hoc

Land-based system

Mainly IPCC methodology 2006

The structure and the logic of EX-ACT

Time (years)

Implementation phase

With project

Without project

Capitalization phase

Difference used to compute the final C balance in tons CO2 equivalent

Var

iab

le c

on

sid

ere

d(h

a o

f la

nd

use

, nu

mb

er o

f ca

ttle

hea

ds,

…)

x0

x1

x2

3 different dynamics of change(adoption) of practices

Benefits of the project

The structure and the logic of EX-ACTA

bso

lute

Ch

ange

(x1-x

0)

t0 t1

“Immediate” “Linear” “Exponential”

t0 t1 t0 t1

Time (years)

Default optionin Tier 1

3 different dynamics of change (adoption) of practice

The structure and the logic of EX-ACT: Main kind of data/information needed

-Different areas of land uses and land use changes in ha

-Management practices (residue burning, improved agronomic practice, nutrient management, organic management, tillage management)

-Quantities of inputs used

-For livestock, evolution of herd

- Energy consumption

- Investments in infrastructure

Activities foreseen… that may impact on mitigation (GHG reduction/releases)

What is the current situation ?

What would happen in the future if the project

is not implemented ?

What is expected in the future if the project is

implemented ?

• It computes the C balance with and without the project. The difference represents the benefits of the project and indicates the net amount of C sequestered (C sink) as a result of the project.

• It illustrates weather the project is able to supply environmental services in the form of C sequestration, thus contributing to climate change (CC) mitigation.

• Outputs could be used in financial and economic analysis of the project, guiding the project design process and the decision making on funding aspects

• EX-ACT could therefore help project designers to select the project activities which have higher benefits both in economic and CC mitigation terms (added value of the project)

• Put forward the multiple benefit of carbon as public good : Value to farmer, Value to community, Value to society

Outputs of the tool

24/06/2010

Return

24/06/2010

Project Summary Area (Initial state in ha)

Name Forest/Plantation 35000

Annual 12400 Implementation 10

Continent Africa Cropland Perennial 0 Capitalisation 10

Rice 21800 Total 20

Climate Tropical Moist Grassland 40000

Other LandDegraded 28750

Dominante Soil TypeHAC Soils Other 0 Total Area 137950

N2O CH4 Per phase of the project

Biomass Soil Implement. Capital. Total Implement. Capital.

-628907 this is a sink -357207 -271700 0 0 -447773 -181133 -31445 -44777 -18113

-989278 this is a sink -719813 -269466 0 0 -344334 -644944 -49464 -34433 -64494

-188444 this is a sink -8800 -179644 0 0 -68681 -119763 -9422 -6868 -11976

-277879 this is a sink 0 -161220 -32290 -84370 -92626 -185253 -13894 -9263 -18525

-183225 this is a sink -167475 -15750 0 0 -57225 -126000 -9161 -5723 -12600

-48612 this is a sink 0 0 0 -48612 -16204 -32408 -2431 -1620 -3241

-146396 this is a sink 0 -146396 0 0 -48799 -97598 -7320 -4880 -9760

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

91148 this is a source 28358 --- 25980 65168 4557 2598 6517

1463 this is a source --- --- 1463 0 73 146 0

Final Balance -2370130 It is a sink -1189041 -1044176 -3931 -132981 -1048200 -1321930 -118506 -104820 -132193

Result per ha -17.2 -8.6 -7.6 0.0 -1.0 -7.6 -9.6 -0.9 -0.8 -1.0

Components of the Project

Other GHG Emissions

Livestock

Inputs

Deforestation

Afforestation and Reforestation

Other Land Use Change

Agriculture

Project Investment

Annual Crops

Agroforestry/Perennial Crops

Rice

Grassland

1463

All GHG in tCO2eq

Balance (Project - Baseline)

Duration of the

Project (years)

Mean per year

CO2 (other)

---

62790

CO2

-1000000

-800000

-600000

-400000

-200000

0

200000

Deforestation Afforestation and

Reforestation

Other Land Use

Change

Annual Crops Agroforestry/Perennial

Crops

Rice Grassland Livestock Inputs Project Investment

Return

24/06/2010

Return

24/06/2010

Return