Eikö Vakkilainen paljastanut lähteitään? Ehkä tuo tieto löytyy kootusti jostain EU-dokumenteista, yritämme etsiä.

Edit: alaviitteet lisätty.

Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2023)653 – EU Climate Action Progress Report 2023

http://www.eumonitor.eu/9353000/1/j4nvhdfdk3hydzq_j9vvik7m1c3gyxp/vm7ligff3vyx#sdfootnote85sym

4. LAND USE, LAND USE CHANGE AND FORESTRY

Even so, based upon a single year of the compliance period, and excluding the other flexibilities available to Member States at the end of the compliance period, nine Member States showed potential accounting debits (86), with France, Finland and Czechia showing the biggest debit. 18 Member States had potential accounting credits (87), with Spain, Germany and Romania having the largest net credit in the EU.

Based on approximated data for 202 (88) with accounting rules applied, 16 Member States had potential credits (89) and ten Member States showed potential debits (90). Czechia and Finland show a decrease in debit while Latvia moves from having a credit to a debit. Italy and Romania show increase in credits. Five Member States submitted 2021 inventory data as approximated data for 2022 (91) (for more details see Chapter 9 of the staff working document – ‘Technical information).

In line with the reporting obligations, Member States reported their projected total LULUCF accounted credit or debit for the period 2021 to 2025. From this, 16 Member States reported projections with existing measures (WEM), and 10 Member States reported projections with additional measures (WAM). After calculations, some Member States show debit accounted emissions per year for each year 2021-2025. This raises reason for concern as there is limited time to develop policies and implement measures to reverse the trend.

Projections on reported emissions and removals, delivered by Member States in March 2023, have been assessed for LULUCF progress towards the 2030 targets. Projections with existing measures show EU total net removals of -239 Mt CO2-eq for 2030 and -260 Mt CO2-eq with additional measures, leaving a gap of around 50-70 Mt CO2-eq to meet the 2030 target. This means that, according to projections, the EU is not on track to meet the 2030 net removal target of -310 Mt CO2-eq.

Alaviitteet:

86 In decreasing order of magnitude: France, Finland, Czechia, Portugal, Estonia, Poland, Slovenia, Belgium and Cyprus show net LULUCF debits.

87 In increasing order of magnitude: Malta, Luxembourg, Latvia, Netherlands, Croatia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Greece, Ireland, Austria, Lithuania, Denmark, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, Spain, Germany, and Romania show net LULUCF credits.

88 Reported approximated data by Member States for 2022, on LULUCF carries uncertainties and it is therefore important to exercise caution drawing conclusions from this data. Seven Member States report 2021 data as approximated data for 2022.

89 Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden.

90 Belgium, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Latvia, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia.

91 Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia submitted same data as reported under 2023 GHGI submission as 2022 approximated data for LULUCF.

AJ:n postauksessa EUn -310 Mt-ekv taivoite 2030 on jäämässä – 239 …- 260. EUn nettonielun nykytaso on n. -350 Mtn-ekv.

Vakkilainen:  Entäpä koko EU, onko maankäytön nielu vakaa? Uusimmat arviot näyttävät että n. 2010-2015 on vakaa nielu taittunut ja nielu onkin pienentynyt noin +100 MtCO2 vuodessa. ESABCC viimeisimmässä raportissaan toteaa että Euroopan metsät on muuttuneet vanhoiksi (ei enää kasva) /8

Vakkilaisen lähde on sitten tämä:

https://climate-advisory-board.europa.eu/

Ei kai tuo itsestään selvää ole että joudutaan  maksamaan. Varsinkin jos joukossa on isoja EU maita kuten Saksa. Kuten Vakkilainen sanoo on menty lupaamaan liikaa ja laskutapa on muuttunut. Jos ilmastonmuutos aiheuttaa metsien kasvun hyytymistä ja hyönteistuhoja ei kai ole oikein laskuttaa jäsenmaata siitä? Tietysti metsät täytyy pyrkiä pitämään nielun puolella.

Jaa, eipä näy Saksassa dynaamisia lämpötilariippuvaisia malleja, vaan orgaanisten maiden päästöt ovat samat joka vuosi. Tuo on jännä että rakennetuillekin alueille lasketaan pieni orgaanisten maiden päästö. Joka tapauksessa Saksalla on samat ongelmat kuin meillä, eli metsänielu on viime vuosina pienentynyt ja orgaanisten maiden päästöt ovat suuret.

Lainaus: ”This is mainly contrasted by the positive net emissions from the agriculturally used areas of the land use categories cropland (16.0 Mt CO2-eq.) and grassland (26.0 Mt CO2-eq.). These two categories show consistently high emissions from drained organic soils over the years (39.9 Mt CO2-eq.); just like the land use categories wetlands (10.3 Mt CO2-eq.) and settlements (1.8 Mt CO2-eq.), whose net emissions are also mainly dominated by emissions from organic soils (7.2 Mt CO2-eq.).”