RESEARCH PAPER Carbon Sequestration Potential Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NeBIO An international journal of environment and biodiversity Vol. 8, No. 3, September 2017, 197-200 ISSN 2278-2281(Online Version) ☼ www.nebio.in RESEARCH PAPER Carbon Sequestration Potential of phanerophytes used for environmental optimization to mitigate climate change Sharmistha Ganguly1*, Moumita Das2 & Ambarish Mukherjee3 1Central National Herbarium, Botanical Survey of India. 2,3UGC Centre for Advanced Study (Phase II), Department of Botany, University of Burdwan, India. ABSTRACT Global warming is amongst the most dreaded problems of the new millennium. Carbon emission is supposedly the strongest causal factor for global warming. Trees are amongst the most significant elements of any landscape, both due to biomass and diversity. Not only this, but also are important sinks for atmospheric carbon i.e. carbon dioxide, since 50% of their standing biomass is carbon itself. So, the present study works out the natural carbon reservoir potential of nine tree species selected from those growing in the greeneries of Golapbag campus of Burdwan University and were evaluated by non- destructive method. Carbon sequestration is a mechanism for removal of carbon from the atmosphere fallen victim to increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO ) and other "greenhouse" 2 gases. All the selected species, although not dominating in the campus, were found to have good carbon storage potential. The highest value of carbon sequestration was seen in case of Manilkara hexandra (6678.84 g) and the lowest in Acacia auriculiformis (13.15 g). Thus, the Carbon sequestration values of all the species lying within this range indicate them to be gradationally ideal for planting in highly polluted areas for landscape designing and environmental optimization, thereby, showing a judicious use in aesthetic rejuvenation. KEYWORDS: Global warming, carbon sequestration potential, landscape designing, environmental optimization, aesthetic rejuvenation Received 11 August 2017, Accepted 20 September 2017 I *Corresponding Author: [email protected] Introduction Multiple lines of scientific evidence show that the climate system Study Site is warming (Hartmann et al 2013). It is extremely likely that Golapbag the once royal garden of the Maharaja of Barddhaman human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed (Burdwan), is the academic campus of Burdwan University (Fig. 1) warming since the mid-20th century (IPCC, Climate Change 2013). located at 23.25 °N and 87.85 °E with an average elevation of 37 The climate system can spontaneously generate changes in global meters (131 ft) above the mean sea level It is a little less than 100 temperature for years to decades at a time but long-term changes km north-west of Kolkata. With nearly 1200 trees, 154 rare in global temperature require external forcings. These forcings are centuries’ old mahogany trees included, the historic Golapbag has "external" to the climate system but not necessarily external to been recently declared by the Botanical Survey of India as the Bio- Earth (Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 2006, Brown et al diversity Heritage site. A number of factors such as variation in 2015). Possible societal responses to global warming include microhabitats, so much of land open to plantation, ornamentation mitigation by emissions reduction, adaptation to its effects, and botanical studies, plenty of water bodies, diversity of building systems resilient to its effects, and possible future microhabitats in the campus have led to the assemblage of climate engineering. Carbon sequestration involves long-term variable plant species. storage of carbon dioxide or other forms of carbon to mitigate or defer global warming (Sedjo & Sohngen, 2012). It has been Methodology proposed as a way to slow the atmospheric and marine Among the dominating species of the study site as many as nine accumulation of greenhouse gases, which are released by burning species were selected and the girth of each was measured fossil fuels (Hodrien, 2008). Carbon sequestration potential of a conventionally at the breast height (GBH) i.e. near about 1.32m plant is also one of the parameters essential for its selection in above ground surface. Tree diameter (D) was calculated by green belt development. The significant role of biomass of the dividing π (22/7) by the actual marked girth of species (Bohre et tree species in carbon sequestration had long been recognized, al, 2012) i.e. GBH x (7/22). Biomass of the listed phanerophytes and many attempts have been made to estimate the biomass was calculated by simply applying bio-statistics based on production of forests and their contribution for sequestration of allometric equations. Above ground Biomass i.e. AGB were carbon using non harvest techniques (Das et al, 2017). measured by multiplying the bio-volume to the green wood © 2017. NECEER, Imphal. All rights reserved RESEARCH PAPER Ganguly et al » Carbon Sequestration Potential of phanerophytes used for environmental optimization to mitigate climate change » NeBIO 8(3): 187-190 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- density of tree species. Tree bio-volume (TBV) value was Total biomass is the sum of the above and below ground biomass established by multiplication of square of diameter with height of (Sheikh Mehraj et al, 2011). phanerophytes to factor 0.4. Bio-volume (T) = 0.4 X D x H Total Biomass (TB) =Above Ground Biomass + Below Ground Biomass. AGB=Wood density x T Carbon Estimation Generally, for any plant species 50% of its where, D is calculated from GBH, assuming the trunk to be biomass is considered as carbon (Pearson et al, 2005) i.e. cylindrical, H = Height in meter. Height is measured with the help Carbon Storage/ Carbon sequestration potential = Biomass /2 of the instrument Theodolite. Wood density is used from Global wood density database (Zanne et al, 2009). The standard average On the basis of the Plants height Phanerophytes were categorized density of 0.6 gm/ cm3 was applied wherever the density value as follows (Table1): was not available for tree species. The below ground biomass was calculated by multiplying the above ground biomass (AGB) by Mega- phanerophytes: - Over 30 meter high 0.26 factors as the root: shoot ratio (Hangarge et al, 2012). Meso- phanerophytes:-8-30 meter high BGB =AGB x 0.26 Micro- phanerophytes:-2-8 meter high Nano- phanerophytes: - Under 2 meter Table1. Showing tree species with their family, common name and types of phanerophyte. Sl. no Scientific name Family Common name Types of phanerophytes 1. Acacia auriculiformis Benth Fabaceae Akashmoni Micro- phanerophyte 2. Averrhoa carambola L. Oxalidaceae Kamranga Micro- phanerophyte 3. Bridelia retusa (L.) A.Juss Phyllanthaceae Geio Meso- phanerophyte 4. Holoptelea integrifolia Planch. Ulmaceae Nata karanja Meso- phanerophyte 5. Kleinhovia hospita L. Malvaceae Bola Meso- phanerophyte 6. Litsea glutinosa (Lour.) C.B.Rob. Lauraceae Rattan Meso- phanerophyte 7. Magnolia champaca (L.) Baill. Ex Pierre Magnoliaceae Champa Meso- phanerophyte 8. Manilkara hexandra (Roxb.) Dubard Sapotaceae Khrikiyur Meso- phanerophyte 9. Neolamarckia cadamba (Roxb.) Bosser Rubiaceae Kadam Meso- phanerophyte Figure 1. Showing the map of the study site. 188 NeBIO I ISSN 2278-2281(Online Version) I www.nebio.in RESEARCH PAPER Ganguly et al » Carbon Sequestration Potential of phanerophytes used for environmental optimization to mitigate climate change » NeBIO 8(3): 187-190 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 2. Showing the Carbon Storage/ Carbon Sequestration Potential of different phanerophytes. Carbon GBH Diameter Height TBV AGB BGB Name of plant TB (Kg) Storage (in meter) (in meter) (in meter) (m3) (Kg) (Kg) (Gram) Acacia auriculiformis Benth. 0.32 0.1018 8.4 0.0348 0.02088 0.0054288 0.0263088 13.15 Averrhoa carambola L. 0.60 0.1909 8 0.1166 0.06996 0.0181896 0.0881496 44.07 Bridelia retusa (L.) A.Juss. 1.55 0.4931 15.2 1.4783 0.88698 0.2306148 1.1175948 558.79 Holoptelea integrifolia Planch. 2.04 0.649 14.9 2.4429 1.46574 0.3810924 1.8468324 923.41 Kleinhovia hospita L. 2.02 0.6427 10 1.6522 0.99132 0.2577432 1.2490632 624.53 Litsea glutinosa (Lour.) C.B.Rob. 1.06 0.3372 14.9 0.6776 0.40656 0.1057056 0.5122656 256.13 Magnolia champaca (L.) Baill. Ex Pierre 1.08 0.3436 18 0.85 0.51 0.1326 0.6426 321.3 Manilkara hexandra (Roxb.) Dubard 4.91 1.5622 18.1 17.6689 10.60134 2.7563484 13.3576884 6678.84 Neolamarckia cadamba (Roxb.) Bosser 0.98 0.3118 13.3 0.5172 0.31032 0.0806832 0.3910032 195.5 Result & Discussion greenery of the campus thus generating aesthetic pleasure. Many The carbon sequestration potential of 5 individual trees belonging of them have proved them to be useful in monitoring and to each of six different genera was determined of which scavenging air pollution (Ghosh & Mukherjee, 2003). Manilkara hexandra has registered the highest (6678.84gm) and Acacia auriculiformis the lowest values (13.15 gm). Carbon Acknowledgment sequestration values of other species were 44.07, 558.79, 923.41, The authors are thankful to the Head, Department of Botany for 624.53, 256.13, 321.3 and 195.5 grams incase of Averrhoa providing all facilities and inspiring cooperation. Sincere gratitude