Carbon Balance and Management(9)

Table 2: Spatial dataset available on a 0.5° × 0.5° grid

Value

Land areaCountryNPP

Population densityPopulation densityGDPBuildupCropProtected

Agriculture suitabilityBiomassForest area

Year20002000-1990 – 20151990 – 21001990 – 21002010 – 20802010 – 2080

2004200220052000

Source[11][12][10][13][14][14][15][15][16][17]Self[11]

of long living products for the time span 2000–2005 [2]are available for each country (table 3).

The values of table 4 are used globally. Monetary valuesare transformed for each country with their price index.Brazil was taken as the price-reference country asdescribed in [8] and [9].

In figure 11 the net primary productivity taken from [10]is shown. The values range up to 0.75 gC/m2/year. Thehighest productivity is near the equator.

In figure 12 the population density in 2000 and in figure13 in the year 2100 is shown. It can be seen, that the high-est population densities are reached in India and in south-east Asia. The densities are also quite high in Europe andLittle Asia, Central Africa and the coasts of America. Themap of 2100 shows an increase in India and in south-eastAsia.

Figure 14 shows a map of the current forest, crop andbuildup land cover. Large regions are covered by forests.Adjacent to the forests, large areas, used for crop produc-tion, can be seen.

In figure 15 the suitability for agriculture is shown. Mostof the high suitable land is used today for crop production(see figure 14).

Figure 16 shows the carbon in forests. It can be seen, thatthe highest densities are located near the tropical belt.One reason for this is, that the biomass in tropical forestsis high. Note that this picture shows the tons of carbon pergrid and the grid size is 0.5° × 0.5° so the grid has it's larg-est size near the equator.

Figure 17 shows the purchasing power parity which wasused to calculate a price-index. It can be seen that thepoorest countries are in Africa and the richest in NorthAmerica, Europe, Australia and Japan.

Figure 18 shows the discount-rates given in [8]. Here alsothe richest countries have the lowest discount rates.Figure 19 shows the effectiveness of the carbon incentives.In low risk countries nearly all of the spent money will beused for maintaining forest sinks in risky countries not allof the money will come to the desired sink.

Figure 20 shows the proportion of harvested wood enter-ing the long living products pool [2].

Abbreviations

αi: Importance of agriculture

γi: Importance of population

νi: Land price level = minimum land price of reference

country × price index (pxi) [$/ha]

Table 3: Country level values

Discount rate

Fraction of long living productsCorruptionPPP

Source[8][2][5][7]