• Energy Research

AbstractPeatlands cover only 3–4% of the Earth’s surface, but they store nearly 30% of global soil carbon stock. This significant carbon store is under threat as peatlands continue to be degraded at alarming rates around the world. It has prompted countries worldwide to establish regulations to conserve and reduce emissions from this carbon rich ecosystem. For example, the EU has implemented new rules that mandate sustainable management of peatlands, critical to reaching the goal of carbon neutrality by 2050. However, a lack of information on the extent and condition of peatlands has hindered the development of national policies and restoration efforts. This paper reviews the current state of knowledge on mapping and monitoring peatlands from field sites to the globe and identifies areas where further research is needed. It presents an overview of the different methodologies used to map peatlands in nine countries, which vary in definition of peat soil and peatland, mapping coverage, and mapping detail. Whereas mapping peatlands across the world with only one approach is hardly possible, the paper highlights the need for more consistent approaches within regions having comparable peatland types and climates to inform their protection and urgent restoration. The review further summarises various approaches used for monitoring peatland conditions and functions. These include monitoring at the plot scale for degree of humification and stoichiometric ratio, and proximal sensing such as gamma radiometrics and electromagnetic induction at the field to landscape scale for mapping peat thickness and identifying hotspots for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Remote sensing techniques with passive and active sensors at regional to national scale can help in monitoring subsidence rate, water table, peat moisture, landslides, and GHG emissions. Although the use of water table depth as a proxy for interannual GHG emissions from peatlands has been well established, there is no single remote sensing method or data product yet that has been verified beyond local or regional scales. Broader land-use change and fire monitoring at a global scale may further assist national GHG inventory reporting. Monitoring of peatland conditions to evaluate the success of individual restoration schemes still requires field work to assess local proxies combined with remote sensing and modeling. Long-term monitoring is necessary to draw valid conclusions on revegetation outcomes and associated GHG emissions in rewetted peatlands, as their dynamics are not fully understood at the site level. Monitoring vegetation development and hydrology of restored peatlands is needed as a proxy to assess the return of water and changes in nutrient cycling and biodiversity.

Input data aggregation affects crop model estimates at the regional level. Previous studies have focused on the impact of aggregating climate data used to compute crop yields. However, little is known about the combined data aggregation effect of climate (DAEc) and soil (DAEs) on irrigation water requirement (IWR) in cool-temperate and spatially heterogeneous environments. The aims of this study were to quantify DAEc and DAEs of model input data and their combined impacts for simulated irrigated and rainfed yield and IWR. The Agricultural Production Systems sIMulator Next Generation model was applied for the period 1998-2017 across areas suitable for potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) in Tasmania, Australia, using data at 5, 15, 25 and 40 km resolution. Spatial variances of inputs and outputs were evaluated by the relative absolute difference (rAD¯) between the aggregated grids and the 5 km grids. Climate data aggregation resulted in a rAD¯ of 0.7-12.1%, with high values especially for areas with pronounced differences in elevation. The rAD¯ of soil data was higher (5.6-26.3%) than rAD¯ of climate data and was mainly affected by aggregation of organic carbon and maximum plant available water capacity (i.e. the difference between field capacity and wilting point in the effective root zone). For yield estimates, the difference among resolutions (5 km vs. 40 km) was more pronounced for rainfed (rAD¯ = 14.5%) than irrigated conditions (rAD¯ = 3.0%). The rAD¯ of IWR was 15.7% when using input data at 40 km resolution. Therefore, reliable simulations of rainfed yield require a higher spatial resolution than simulation of irrigated yields. This needs to be considered when conducting regional modelling studies across Tasmania. This study also highlights the need to separately quantify the impact of input data aggregation on model outputs to inform about data aggregation errors and identify those variables that explain these errors.