Evaluation of different peatland management scenarios to reduce GHG emissions from fires. A case study in tropical peatlands in Ogan Komering Ilir, Indonesia.

Abstract

Tropical peatlands play an important role as carbon pools, storing approximately 350,000 TgC. Over the last decades, changes in land use and land management practices for forestry and agricultural plantations, such as the use of fires and drainage, have led to a significant amount of carbon loss. In Indonesia, these fires affect both the economy and the public health of the entire region. In this thesis, we considered different mitigation scenarios to reduce peatland fires, such as converting aboveground biomass into bioenergy or other bio-products. First, we estimated a business as usual (BAU) scenario by evaluating sources of emission of the current land management. We then investigated potential mitigation scenarios, including biomass valorization and peatland restoration, as alternative land management options. Finally, we evaluated the impact in terms of climate change and socio-economic criteria of the implementation of these mitigation scenarios. This study was based on a case study in the Ogan Komering Ilir (OKI) district of Indonesia. The analysis of GHG emissions in the BAU scenario shows that areas affected by fire release 70.60±30, 139.40±31 and 159±27 Mg CO2-eq ha-1 yr-1 for degraded peatland, oil palm plantations and pulpwood plantations, respectively. Areas not affected by fires release 18.45±12, 85.08±21 and 108.3±15 Mg CO2-eq ha-1 yr-1, respectively. For the restoration scenario, we found similar GHG emissions of -0.9 Mg CO2-eq ha-1 yr-1 for the three land uses. Following this assessment, we evaluated the feasibility of the biomass valorization scenarios in OKI based on socio-economic criteria. In the areas where creating such a biomass market is feasible, we predicted a reduction of between 4 % and 6 % of GHG emissions compared with BAU. Boosting the biomass market in these areas could make it possible to reduce fire occurrences without government investment. On the contrary, industry will not be able to valorize the biomass in the case where no economically viable biomass market is feasible. For these areas, we instead suggest focusing efforts on incentive payments or peatland restoration strategies. We concluded by presenting biomass valorization as a promising alternative to current practices, potentially reducing the negative impact of fires while generating a new income for the population.