Mangrove deforestation may be releasing more CO2 than Poland, study finds

first_imgA new study calculates that, worldwide, mangroves were storing 4.19 billion metric tons of carbon in 2012, representing a 2 percent loss since 2000. It estimates that number had dropped further to 4.16 billion metric tons by 2017.In total, the study estimates that this lost carbon translates to as much as 317 million tons of CO2 emissions per year, equivalent to the annual emissions of around 67.5 million passenger vehicles in the U.S. and more than the 2015 emissions of Poland.The researchers found Indonesia harbors the lion’s share of the world’s mangroves – around 30 percent – while also experiencing the biggest proportion of its 2000-2012 mangrove carbon loss, with deforestation there accounting for more than 48 percent of the global total. Other parts of Southeast Asia, such as Myanmar, are also undergoing high rates of mangrove deforestation, making the entire region a hotspot of global mangrove carbon loss.Previous research estimates that between 30 and 50 percent of the world’s mangroves have been lost over the past 50 years. Deforestation for shrimp, rice and palm oil are among the biggest drivers of mangrove decline. Seemingly nondescript messes of tangled branches and exposed roots, mangrove forests cling to the coasts of many tropical countries. However, mangroves are far from unexceptional, providing critical ecosystem services like erosion control, flood mitigation and nurseries for fish. Mangroves also store a lot of carbon, with a hectare of mangrove forest sequestering up to four times as much carbon as a similarly sized tract of rainforest.But mangroves are in trouble. Studies estimate between 30 and 50 percent of the world’s mangroves have been lost over the past 50 years as they are deforested for shrimp, rice and palm oil production, drowned by rising seas, and starved of freshwater by dam-building. And as mangroves disappear, so do their wildlife communities and carbon stores.But just how much carbon do mangroves contain, and how much is being lost to their deforestation? To find out, researchers at Salisbury University in the U.S. and National University of Singapore analyzed the carbon content of mangrove vegetation as well as the soil underneath it. Their results were published recently in Nature Climate Change.Mangrove trees are able to survive in environments that would kill most other vegetation.They discovered that, worldwide, mangroves were storing 4.19 billion metric tons of carbon in 2012. Most of this carbon – 70 percent – is locked up in the soil underlying mangroves while the remainder is contained within their living vegetation. The study lists Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea as the world’s top mangrove carbon storehouses, comprising more than half of the total amount of global mangrove carbon.While 4.19 billion metric tons may sound like a lot of carbon, the researchers found that it’s about 2 percent less than the amount stored 12 years prior in 2000. In total, they estimate that this lost carbon translates to as much as 317 million tons of CO2 emissions per year. For perspective, this is equivalent to the annual emissions of around 67.5 million passenger vehicles in the U.S., according to EPA numbers, and more than the 2015 emissions of Poland, according to the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.The researchers found that, globally, mangrove carbon losses were similar year-to-year between 2000 and 2012. They estimate that if mangrove deforestation rates continued at a similar rate after 2012, then by 2017 mangrove carbon should have dropped a further third of a percent to 4.16 billion metric tons.Mangroves support a high level of biodiversity, providing important habitat for both aquatic and terrestrial wildlife.In addition to estimating how much carbon mangrove deforestation released, the study also looked at the impact of this activity on the mangroves’ overall carbon-sequestering ability. They found that had no mangroves been deforested between 2000 and 2012, then they likely would have taken an additional 3.5 million to 4.5 million metric tons of carbon out of the atmosphere.Zooming in, the study found Indonesia harbors the lion’s share of the world’s mangroves – around 30 percent – while also experiencing the biggest proportion of its 2000-2012 mangrove carbon loss, with deforestation there accounting for more than 48 percent of the global total. Other parts of Southeast Asia, such as Myanmar, are also undergoing high rates of mangrove deforestation, making the entire region a hotspot of global mangrove carbon loss.The study singled out Indonesia as the country with both the most remaining mangroves and the the biggest mangrove carbon losses. Data source: Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA, accessed through Global Forest WatchThe researchers write that as disappearing carbon storage powerhouses, “mangroves are strong candidates for inclusion in nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs that financially incentivize the conservation of forested carbon stocks.”However, they say that the emissions inventories and monitoring that are used to determine PES compliance require high-quality datasets that exceed their study’s 13-year period. To fill this gap, the researchers recommend more analyses of mangrove carbon stocks and losses, both to establish baselines further back in time – which, they write, are widely lacking for many tropical countries – as well as modeling what may happen in the future. Article published by Morgan Erickson-Davis Agriculture, Aquaculture, carbon, Carbon Dioxide, Climate Change, Coastal Ecosystems, Dams, Ecosystem Services, Ecosystem Services Payments, Environment, Fish, Forests, Global Warming, Mangroves, Oceans, Oil Palm, Palm Oil, Plantations, Rainforests, Research, Rice, Tropical Forests Citation:Hamilton, S. E., & Friess, D. A. (2018). Global carbon stocks and potential emissions due to mangrove deforestation from 2000 to 2012. Nature Climate Change, 1.FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the editor of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page. Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredlast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *