Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14578/jkfs.2013.102.4.477

Uncertainty Assessment of Emission Factors for Pinus densiflora using Monte Carlo Simulation Technique  

Pyo, Jung Kee (Center of Forest and Climate Change, Korea Forest Research Institute)
Son, Yeong Mo (Center of Forest and Climate Change, Korea Forest Research Institute)
Jang, Gwang Min (Center of Forest Carbon Certification, Korea Forestry Promotion Institute)
Lee, Young Jin (Department of Forest Resources, Kongju National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science / v.102, no.4, 2013 , pp. 477-483 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to calculate uncertainty of emission factor collected data and to evaluate the applicability of Monte Carlo simulation technique. To estimate the distribution of emission factors (Such as Basic wood density, Biomass expansion factor, and Root-to-shoot ratio), four probability density functions (Normal, Lognormal, Gamma, and Weibull) were used. The two sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and cumulative density figure were used to compare the optimal probability density function. It was observed that the basic wood density showed the gamma distribution, the biomass expansion factor results the log-normal distribution, and root-shoot ratio showd the normal distribution for Pinus densiflora in the Gangwon region; the basic wood density was the normal distribution, the biomass expansion factor was the gamma distribution, and root-shoot ratio was the gamma distribution for Pinus densiflora in the central region, respectively. The uncertainty assessment of emission factor were upper 62.1%, lower -52.6% for Pinus densiflora in the Gangwon region and upper 43.9%, lower -34.5% for Pinus densiflora in the central region, respectively.
Keywords
biomass/carbon database; emission factor; monte carlo simulation; uncertainty; IPCC guideline;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Center for Global Environmental Research. 2011. National greenhouse gas inventory report of JAPAN. Ministry of the Environmental, Japan. pp. 41.
2 Dagpunar, J.S. 2007. Simulation and monte carlo. John Wiley and Sons. pp. 75.
3 Dieck, R.H. 2007. Measurement uncertainty methods and application. The instrumentation, systems, and automation society. pp. 39-62.
4 Fan, X., Felsovalyi, Á., Sivo, S.A., and Keenan, S.C. 2001. SAS for monte carlo studies: A guide for quantitative researchers. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute Incorporation. pp. 26-41.
5 Fujiwara. T., Yamashita, K., and Kuroda, K. 2007. Basic densities as a parameter for estimating the amount of carbon removal by forests and their variation. Bulletin of the Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute 6(4): 215-226.
6 Gertner, G. 1987. Approximating precision in simulation projections: An efficient alternative to monte carlo methods. Forest Science 33(1): 230-239.
7 Intergovernmental panel on climate change. 2000. Good practice guidance and uncertainty management in national greenhouse gas inventories. IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. pp. 6.1-6.23.
8 Intergovernmental panel on climate change. 2003. Good practice guidance for land use, land-use change and forestry. IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. pp. 5.8-5.9.
9 Intergovernmental panel on climate change. 2006a. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 1. General Guidance and Reporting. IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. pp. 3.6-3.78.
10 Intergovernmental panel on climate change. 2006b. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 4. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use. IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. pp. 4.73.
11 Jung, H.J. 2011. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of forest carbon stock changes in Korea. M.D. thesis, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University. pp. 59.
12 Kalos, M.H. and Whitlock, P.A. 2008. Monte carlo methods, second, revised and enlarged edition. WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH and Corporation, KGaA, Weinheim. pp. 9.
13 Kangas, A.S. and Kangas, J. 2004. Probability, possibility and evidence : approaches to consider risk and uncertainty in forestry decision analysis. Forest Policy and Economics 6: 169-188.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Korea Forest Research Institute. 2010. The carbon emission factor of major species for national inventory by forestry in Korea. Korea Forest Research Institute. pp. 7.
15 Levy, P.E., Hale, S.E., and Nicoll, B.C. 2004. Biomass expansion factors and root:shoot ratios for coniferous tree species in Great Britain. Forestry 77(5): 421-430.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Lehtonen, A., R. Makipaa, J. Heikkinen, R. Sievanen, and J. Liski. 2004. Biomass Expansion factor (BEFs) for Scotes pine, Norway spruce and birch according to stand age for boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management 188: 211-224.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Monte, L., Lars, H., Ulla, B., John, B., and Rudie, H. 1996. Uncertainty analysis and validation of environmental models : The empirically based uncertainty analysis. Ecological Modelling 91: 139-152.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Ramirez, A., Keizer, C., Sluijs, J.P., and Olivier, J. 2008. Monte carlo analysis of uncertainties in the Netherlands greenhouse gas emission inventory for 1990-2004. Atmospheric Environment 42: 8263-8272.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Monni, S., Peltoniemi, M., Palosuo, T., Lehtonen, A., Makipaa, R., and Savolainen, I. 2007. Uncertainty of forest carbon stock changes-implications to the total uncertainty of GHG inventory of Finland. Climate Change 81: 391-413.   DOI
20 Monni, S., Syri, S., and Savolainen, I. 2004. Uncertainties in the Finnish greenhouse gas emission inventory. Environmental Science and Policy 7: 87-98.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Refsgaard, J.C., Jeroen, P.V.D.S., Anker, L.H., and Peter, A.V. 2007. Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process-A framework and guidance. Environmental Modelling and Software 22: 1543-1556.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 SAS Institute, Incorporation. 2012. SAS/STAT 9.3 User's Guide. SAS Institute, Incorporation. Cary. North Carolina. pp. 439.
23 Winiwarter, W. and Rypdal, K. 2001. Assessing the uncertainty associated with national greenhouse gas emission inventories: a case study for Austria. Atmospheric Environment 35: 5425-5440.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Yanai, R.D., John, J.B., Andrew, D.R., Corrie, A.B., Dustin, M.W., and Edward, B.R. 2010. Estimating uncertainty in ecosystem stock calculations. Ecosystem 13: 239-248.   DOI