How to interpret Explore API outcomes?

Explore forecasts potential future greenhouse gases for a field given planned management practices.

Context:

DNDC is a model that runs daily. This would be far too much data to make actionable. So we deliver a relative delta over a time range.

In the example below, for a single field, GHG is shown as a single line (e.g. baseline) in a field’s history. At the point of the practice change the graph deviates to a counterfactual baseline line (the red line below) and a practice change line (the green line below).

What Explore estimates is the delta between the green and red lines at the end of the grower’s predicted crop’s cultivation cycle.

Estimates:

After submitting data to Explore API, a user receives the following values per field:

dSOC
Indirect N20
Direct N20
Soil CH4

Units:

All values are in units: tonnes of CO2 equivalents (tCO2e) per field

How should I interpret these numbers?

For Explore API clients, the response will include the following numbers:

	Baseline	Practice change	Offset	Deduction
	Total emissions for the baseline time period (weighted average for multiple values within the baseline)	Total emissions for the practice change scenario.	Delta of Baseline - Practice change reduced by the deduction amount. This number is estimating how much the practice change will reduce emissions when compared to the counterfactual. It answers the question: "How much change in tCO2e is the practice change likely to cause?"	Conservative deduction amount for the practice change. This is applied to all offset estimates. This value is intended to mirror an uncertainty deduction. It is defaulted to 0 unless set by a client.
	History (pre-practice change)	Practice change cultivation cycle	Baseline - Practice (delta)	n/a
dSOC	A negative number means that the field has been sequestering SOC in the soil during its history. (or, said another way, reducing GHG from the atmosphere).	A negative number means that the field is predicted to sequester SOC in the soil given the activities anticipated the practice change scenario (or, said another way, to reduce GHG from the atmosphere).	We want this number to be positive. A positive number tells us that the activities taking place in the practice change are predicted to have an impact on each GHG in the future and by how much.
Indirect N20	A positive number means that N20 is being emitted. Given the characteristics of N20 this is expected on agricultural land and likewise this measure indicates to what degree N20 is being emitted.
Direct N20
Soil CH4	A positive number means that CH4 is being emitted. Given the characteristics of CH4 this is expected on agricultural land and likewise this measure indicates to what degree CH4 is being emitted.
Total emissions reduction	n/a		Sum of all offsets. We want this number to be positive for the field.

Let’s look at an example

	Baseline	Practice change	Offset	Deduction
dSOC	-8 This field was sequestering SOC during its history.	25 Practice change activities predicted to release SOC. This is not a good outcome. This might be an indication to investigate the practice change data.	-25 We always want this number to be positive. A negative means we will be releasing MORE SOC after our practice change. Given the number on the practice change scenario this is not surprising.	-8
Indirect N20	24 This field is currently emitting N20, which is not necessarily unexpected. If the practice change is implemented correctly then there is potential for a large delta.	25 Not the case here.	-1 Again we want this to be positive, but the practice change was not enough to chip away at the baseline.	-.4
Direct N20	23 Same situation as Indirect N20.	27 Same situation as Indirect N20.	-2.7 Same situation as Indirect N20. We want a positive number.	-.9
Soil CH4	-.7269 This field was not emitting CH4 in its history.	-.7349 Practice change activities predicted to remove slightly more CH4 than the baseline.	.005 This result is slightly positive, indicating a good outcome and a possible change in GHG.	.001
Total emissions reduction	n/a		-29 This field and its corresponding historic and predicted practice change is not estimated to have an overall beneficial impact on the world. The practice change scenarios did not result in enough of a delta.