Monday, February 8, 2010

Mangrove Forests as Carbon Sinks (Ecosystem Marketplace)

The Allure – and Elusiveness – of Mangrove Forests as Carbon Sinks
Author: Steve Zwick / Ecosystem Marketplace

http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/pages/dynamic/article.page.php?page_id=7441&section=news_articles&eod=1

Mangroves not only protect coasts and nurture young fish, but they could be one of the most potent tools in the battle to slow global warming. Two major reports highlight the ability of mangroves to pull carbon from the atmosphere and bury it in coastal soils, where it can remain for thousands of years. So, why aren’t mangroves the darlings of the REDD set?

7 February 2009 | It’s hard to imagine a more valuable ecosystem than a mangrove forest. These rugged coastal woods protect the shoreline from both sudden storms and gradual erosion; they provide shelter for young fish, breeding grounds for shrimp, and wood for local villagers – all of which are the fruits of clearly delineable ecosystem services, each which has a clear line to who benefits the most.

This should, in theory, make it easy to entice those who benefit into paying for the ecosystem services that mangroves generate. Tourism operators and fishers, for example, could both pay mangrove guardians for the upkeep of coral reefs; fishers could pay for the nurturing of their prey; and anyone along the shore could pay to keep the sea at bay and prevent their houses from falling into the sea.

There’s just one catch: in most developing countries, the people who benefit the most from mangroves don’t have the money to make payments for ecosystem services. This leaves the carbon market as the most promising way to fund the rescue and restoration of mangrove forests, with payments from fishers who export and tourists who visit trailing far behind.

Gold in Blue Carbon

Virtually ignored by carbon markets until recently, “blue carbon” became a hot topic with the 2009 publication of two reports: “Blue Carbon: the Role of Healthy Oceans in Binding Carbon” and “The Management of Natural Coastal Carbon Sinks”.

Both explored the value of ecosystem services that mangroves provide, but they ultimately concluded that more study was needed before such services could form the basis of payments.

The Rising Tide

Mangroves are especially suited for carbon capture because they pile most of their carbon on the ocean floor, while terrestrial forests keep most of it in trees and branches.

Both mangroves and terrestrial forests put down roots and drop leaves, of course, but when mangroves do it, the ground beneath them rises – as does the level of the sea, as it has for thousands of years, says McGill University professor Gail Chmura, who runs the Global Environmental and Climate Change Centre.

“Mangroves accrete soil vertically as the sea rises,” she says. “Then they also accrete laterally – which means they move inland as the sea moves up.”

The same applies to salt marshes, which move so far inland that when Chmura digs into the mud marshes of New Brunswick, Canada, she often finds the remains of forests below them.

As the levels of both the ocean surface and the mangroves soil rise, so too does the amount of carbon sequestered in the earth – and it can stay there for millennia.

That same rise, however, has a downside: namely, it often makes things inhospitable for the species of mangrove that created it, says McGill researcher Paola Fajardo. She’s studying the carbon storage accumulated in the soils of mangroves in Mexico, with an eye towards developing carbon offsets.

It doesn’t take much of a change in elevation for one species to die out and another to take its place – both in nature and in restoration projects, she says. But if there’s no room for the mangroves to move inland, the mangrove forest can die.

“In some areas species can change based on differences in elevation of just centimeters,” she says. “So, if you have a change in elevation of just one centimeter, you may get another species altogether.”

As a result, mangroves tend to be segregated along species lines within a single forest, as different types of trees seek different elevations within that forest.

Salt Please?

And it doesn’t stop there. Different species also have different taste and tolerance for salt.

“Some species can handle up to 90 units of salinity,” she says. “Each specie is adapted physiologically to different conditions, and some die if salinity gets above 36.”

Seawater, by comparison, usually has about 35 units – so some species thrive on the coast, some a bit inland, and others in areas where seawater gets trapped and salinity increases.

Global warming, therefore, poses a double-whammy of rising sea levels and altered salinity levels for these valuable resources – threatening not only mangroves as they exist today, but making it difficult to project with certainty the amount of carbon that any local action can sequester over time.

“We will be able to do this,” says Fajardo. “But we need to calibrate the soil carbon storage rates with species and salinity.”

Ultimately, that means developing sophisticated coastal plans that take into account the entire ecosystem in which mangroves lie. Many of the current plans for adapting to global warming, for example, involve the erection of dikes to hold back water, while networks of dams have been erected to keep cities from going dry.

Unfortunately, says Fajardo, many of those dikes and dams are altering the flow of runoff from land to sea – depriving the buffering mangroves of the fresh water and sediments they need for the ecosystem to be sustained. Even if done right in the short term, dikes provide a barrier against which mangroves can’t accrete inland – meaning as they rise but can’t migrate inland, they will have to either adapt, perish, or be altered artificially.

When Ecosystem Services Collide

Mangroves are a type of wetland, and one ecosystem service that wetlands provide is filtration: they extract unwanted elements from water passing into them, so that water passing out of them is relatively pure and clean. Chief among these unwanted elements are agricultural nutrients – fertilizers that farmers use to help their plants grow, but which feed unwanted plants like algae when dumped into the sea.

Those nutrients, however, have a tremendous impact on the amount of carbon that mangroves capture and store – and salt has an equally tremendous impact on the net amount of greenhouse gasses that wetlands capture and emit.

Increasing the flow of agricultural runoff from coastal lands can spur the growth of mangroves in height, but it can also diminish the amount of carbon they store in the soil.

“Some counterintuitive things happen when you start to look at root production and soil carbon, at least with grasses in salt marshes,” says Chmura. “For example, the more nutrients you give these grasses, the less root production there is – and therefore the less soil carbon – because the plants don’t need to reach out so much. We suspect it is the same for the mangroves.”

Salt, Again…

On the other hand, she says, more salt in the water usually means more sulphur as well – which usually translates into less methane released into the air and a better impact on the atmosphere, according to research conducted on the Chesapeake Bay back in 1987.

In fact, because methane is 23-times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, many freshwater swamps and bogs may be doing more greenhouse damage than they’re preventing – while saltwater mangroves are, she believes, most certainly doing more good than harm.

Measuring Soil Carbon: the Easy Part

Early research into the amount of carbon sequestered in mangrove soil yielded wildly varying results – but Chmura says that may reflect the fact that most research looks at the percentage of carbon in patch of soil rather than the amount of soil per square meter of territory, which is what the carbon market looks at.

The reason: just as Arnold Schwarzenegger and Michael Moore may weigh the same but be composed differently, soil can be dense or lightweight. Dense soil might have a low percentage of carbon and a high percentage of sediment, while lightweight soil – like the kind in a peat bog – might have a high percentage of carbon and low percentage of sediment. They both, however, sequester the same amount of carbon per meter per year.

“This means that the variability is lower than many people have previously believed,” she says. “We need to take thorough measurements to account for the variability.”

Not Out of the Woods

Both the Clean Development Mechanism and the Voluntary Carbon Standard have established methodologies for measuring, monitoring, and paying for the carbon captured in mangrove forests, but critics say the tools available so far don’t adequately address the most important aspect of mangrove carbon: the soil.

Several efforts are underway to correct this, and one of the most promising is the Danone Fund for Nature, which is an initiative being spearheaded by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands and Danone (aka Dannon in the US).

The fund has developed guidance and standards for sequestering carbon through wetland restoration projects which also deliver community benefits. A first plot project has been undertaken by the Senegalese NGO Océanium to test the efficacy of using carbon finance to fund mangrove restoration in Senegal.

Danone hopes the project will sequester enough carbon to offset some of the greenhouse gas emissions of its Evian mineral water operations, and it enlisted 80,000 villagers from 350 villages to plant 36 million trees last year. The pilot phase is focusing on planting mangroves, while a subsequent phase might look at the broader hydrological stresses of the mangrove systems in Senegal.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Thailand & Mangrove Carbon

Intact mangroves valued at US$1,000 per ha, based on the sale of mangrove fish, storm protection, the sequestration of carbon, and other services.

Vs.

Mangroves are converted to shrimp farms worth US$200 per ha.


Article includes a good review of threats to wetlands

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

http://thestar.com.my/gogreenlivegreen/story.asp?file=/2010/2/2/gogreenlivegreen/5559207&sec=gogreenlivegreen

Wet wonders

By TAN CHENG LI / the Star Online / Tuesday February 2, 2010

WORLD Wetlands Day is celebrated every Feb 2. It marks the date of the signing of the Convention on Wetlands in 1971 in the Iranian city of Ramsar. Celebrated for the first time in 1997, it is a time to recognise the importance of wetlands and learn about their values and benefits to man. This year’s theme is “Caring For Wetlands – An Answer To Climate Change”.

Wetlands encompasses bogs, marshes, peat swamps, freshwater swamps, lakes, mangroves and river systems, and are generally considered low-value lands, making them susceptible to reclamation for agriculture and other purposes. In truth, however, they are rich in species and provide man with numerous ecological services.

Planting mangrove saplings in Jakarta Bay, Indonesia.

The benefits people obtain from wetlands are varied and include water supply, habitats for wildlife, fish breeding grounds, water purification and waste treatment, flood control, storm protection and recreation. These ecosystem services have been valued by some economists at US$14 trillion (RM49 trillion) annually.

In Thailand, intact mangroves are valued at US$1,000 (RM3,410) per ha based on the sale of mangrove fish and the additional value of non-marketed services such as storm protection and the sequestration of carbon. On the other hand, if the mangroves are converted to shrimp farms, their worth plunges to only US$200 per ha.

We cannot afford, for environmental, social or economic reasons, to lose wetlands; yet we have been doing just that. Losses range from 53% in the United States to a staggering 90% in New Zealand. The world has lost half its wetlands and still is, especially in developing countries.

Erosion is eating away at this Maldivian island.

What are we doing to cause losses in wetlands?

Habitat loss through wetlands claimed for agriculture and for urban and industrial development.

Excessive freshwater withdrawals especially for irrigation, and for domestic and industrial water needs. This leads not only to less freshwater availability inland but less freshwater.

flow to coastal areas from rivers, thereby impacting coastal ecosystems.

Siltation in coastal areas from the outflow from silt-laden rivers.

Invasive species have disrupted the abundance and survival of native species. These alien species can arrive as “hitch-hikers” on ship hulls and in ship ballast waters or as escapees from the aquarium and ornamental plant trades. Sometimes species are introduced for agricultural, aquaculture and forestry purposes.

Pollution through: agricultural runoff that releases pesticides and fertilisers into rivers; toxic industrial wastes; and untreated or partially treated sewage.

Over-exploitation of fish, shellfish, prawns, seaweed and wetlands timber, which reduces the capacity of the ecosystem to function.

Nutrient loading from nitrogen, phosphorous and other chemicals – mostly from agriculture but also from poorly treated domestic waste – causes excessive algal growth and the resulting reduction in other species.

The effect of climate change on wetland ecosystems and species

Wetlands found in prairies, tropical and boreal forests, arctic and alpine ecosystems, and coral reefs and mangroves, will be especially vulnerable to climate change because they have a limited capacity to adapt to change.

Expected increases in sea surface temperature of about 1°C to 3°C are likely to result in more frequent coral bleaching events and widespread mortality of corals.

Coastal wetlands, including salt marshes and mangroves, are likely to be negatively affected by sea-level rise, especially where there are inland physical barriers (such as sea walls and dykes); many areas will be damaged by coastal flooding through storms and tidal surges.

Changes in the timing and volume of freshwater runoff from inland wetlands will affect salinity, nutrient levels and moisture regimes in coastal ecosystems – all of which will impact coastal ecosystem functions.

Certain invasive species might spread further with increasing temperatures.

What can be done for wetlands?

Maintain the health of our intact wetlands.

Address the key drivers of wetlands loss and degradation (habitat loss, pollution, excessive water withdrawals, invasive species and over-exploitation).

Identify vulnerable species and ecosystems, and implement action plans for their recovery.

Prioritise and plan wetlands management and restoration programmes for more variable climate in future.

Restore degraded wetlands since healthier wetlands are more resilient than degraded ones.

Address the additional impact of climate change on wetlands species and ecosystems through climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies.

(Mitigation requires us to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to encourage the removal of such gases already in the atmosphere by “trapping” them in soils and vegetation.

Wetlands species under threat

Waterbirds are more threatened than all birds and their status has deteriorated faster in the last 20 years.

Of the 1,138 waterbird populations whose trends are known, 41% are in decline. Some 140 out of 826 waterbird species are threatened.

38% of the freshwater-dependent mammal species that have been assessed are globally threatened; these include groups such as manatees and river dolphins.

33% of the world’s freshwater fish species are threatened.

26% of the world’s freshwater amphibian species are considered threatened and at least 42% of all amphibian species assessed are declining in population.

65 of the 90 freshwater turtles species that have been assessed are globally threatened. Six of the seven species of marine turtles are threatened.

Three out of five crocodile species assessed are threatened.

27% of coral-building species that have been assessed are considered threatened.

Source: Ramsar Convention Secretariat / Data from the IUCN Red List, BirdLife International and Wetlands International

Monday, February 1, 2010

Wetlands: an answer to climate change - Happy World Wetlands Day!

What do wetlands do for to you?

February 2 marks the anniversary of the signing of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (1971). This year’s theme is Wetlands, Biodiversity and Climate Change, with the slogan “Caring for wetlands: an answer to climate change."

"The role of wetlands in mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change must be central in all future debates about the way forward."

Mr Anada Tiéga
Secretary General, Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
World Wetlands Day 2010: Message from the Secretary General:
http://www.ramsar.org/cda/ramsar/display/main/main.jsp?zn=ramsar&cp=1-63-78^24351_4000_0__


Wetlands play a key role in combating the emission of greenhouse gases - the primary driver of climate change. Although wetlands cover only six per cent of the Earth’s land surface they store about 35% of global terrestrial carbon.

Ahmed Djoghlaf
Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity
Message on the occasion of World Wetlands Day:
http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/wwd/10/wwd2010_rpts_cbd.pdf


(Blue) saltwater tidal marsh wetlands may be the way to go - "Unlike many freshwater wetlands, saltwater tidal marshes release only negligible amounts of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas; therefore, the carbon storage benefits of tidal salt marshes are not reduced by methane production. In addition, as sea levels rise, tidal marsh plains continue to build up to match the rise in water level, if suspended sediments are adequate, continually pulling carbon dioxide out of the air in the process."

Dr. Lynne Trulio, White Paper on Carbon Sequestration and Tidal Salt Marsh Restoration, Dec. 20, 2007

Also:

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands:
http://www.ramsar.org/

Focus on caring for wetlands as an answer to climate change (Philippine Information Agency):
http://www.pia.gov.ph/default.asp?m=12&fi=p100202.htm&no=14

Friday, January 22, 2010

California Tidal Wetland Project Creating Jobs While Countering Climate Change

Did you know that healthy tidal wetlands can actually help us fight climate change?


The Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project (Moss Landing, CA) received $3.9 million in federal stimulus grant funds in July of last year. The project aims to restore potentially 1000 acres of salt marsh ecosystem, an area which has been lost to unsustainable development and erosion. The project is also expected to create 132 local jobs.


Recent reports produced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and United Nations Environment Programme find that, when healthy, saltwater marshlands are extremely effective at storing atmospheric carbon, therefore mitigating climate change.


Coastal restoration projects like this one should be supported and expanded because they create jobs, restore the environment, and counter climate change.


Image: Plovers flying above Elkhorn Slough (credit: Monterey County Mensa)


-Steven


References:


Underwater wall may bring balance to Elkhorn Slough

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_14075938


The Management of Natural Coastal Carbon Sinks, IUCN

http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/carbon_managment_report_final_printed_version_1.pdf

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

A healthy South Florida for a healthy planet

Did you know that a healthy Biscayne Bay can actually help us fight climate change?

When healthy, coastal and marine ecosystems such as seagrass meadows, mangrove forests, and saltwater marshlands absorb carbon dioxide, the leading cause of climate change, and help mitigate this global threat.

Recent reports find that these ecosystems, all found in and around Biscayne Bay and throughout South Florida, are more effective at storing carbon than terrestrial solutions, such as restoring forests.

Conserving our coastal marine ecosystems may also be worth money. Congress is currently considering legislation that could direct billions of dollars towards carbon mitigation activities.

If we can advance policies that appreciate the natural carbon roles our coastal and marine ecosystems play, then their restoration and conservation could potentially create economic stimulus and become a source of increasing revenue for our coastal cities and our state.

In fact, many current South Florida coastal restoration activities may actually already be helping us fight climate change. Potential local projects that come to mind include the restoration of the Everglades and Virginia Key, the Miami Science Museum’s Reclamation Project, and efforts to clean up southeast Florida sewer outfall pipes.

Projects like these should be supported and expanded because they create jobs, restore the environment, and counter climate change. A healthy Biscayne Bay is also vitally important to local tourism and fisheries, including lobster and stone crab fishing.

The call for marine conservation solutions is part of a new and increasing movement. In November of last year, the Blue Climate Coalition, a large alliance of environmental groups, scientists, and other interests, issued letters to President Obama and the U.S. Senate asking for marine conservation options to be included in climate change legislation and international treaties. Many South Florida groups signed the coalition letters, including
Blue Climate Solutions, Friends of the Everglades, Save the Manatee Club, Urban Environment League, Urban Paradise Guild, Reef Rescue, and Cry of the Water.

After the recent Copenhagen climate talks, the eyes of the world will turn to the United States for direction on climate change. Marine conservation options represent an opportunity for our nation to play a leading role in countering this global threat.

Those interested in joining the call for marine conservation solutions to climate change should contact their congressional representatives and let their voice be heard.

For more information and how to join the call for ‘blueclimate solutions:
http://sites.google.com/site/blueclimatesolutions/home
(Click-on ‘Citizen Action Alert’)


Image: Nurse shark searching for lunch off Key Biscayne, FL
(credit: Steven Lutz)


-Steven (Blue Climate Solutions)

Monday, January 11, 2010

Echinoderms and global carbon sink

Echinoderms have been found to be a major part of the global carbon sink.


So where does the carbon come from that these bottom dwellers consume, repackage, incorporate, and store? Directly from the seawater? How about what they eat?


Where else can we expect to find carbon accumulated on the sea floor?


"...sea cucumbers... are by far the most abundant large animals on the sea floor... Another large proportion are sea stars. All belonging to echinoderms, watery creatures with few muscles. Their fairly extensive calcareous skeletons contains most of the weight of the animal."


"Sea stars grow relatively abundantly on sea floors all over the world. Shallow-water sea stars scavenge carnivorously, as do most deep sea stars. But one group of broad, stubby-armed animals from the deep eats mud in a manner of its cucumber relatives. It is peculiar in lacking either an intestine or anus so must void exhausted mud through its mouth. The brittle stars, which seem to row across the bottom on agile arms, also lack intestine and anus. Spiny sea urchins crawl about everywhere, in deep as well as shallow oceans."

- From The Sargasso Sea, 1971.


Food for thought. See the following article, also at:


Starfish Suck Carbon From the Sea

http://news.discovery.com/earth/starfish-suck-carbon-from-the-sea.html


Bottom-dwelling sea animals play surprising role in carbon sequestration

http://news.mongabay.com/2010/0107-hance_echinoderms.html


& an interesting discussion:

Have we factored in carbon sequestration as bones and shells of larger creatures?

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100107130754AAPQLIx

_______________________________________________

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-01/nocs-ect010810.php

Echinoderms contribute to global carbon sink

Echinoderms and carbon

IMAGE: Echinoderms such as brittle stars bury significant amounts of carbon at the seabed when they die and decay.

Click here for more information.

The impact on levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere by the decaying remains of a group of marine creatures that includes starfish and sea urchin has been significantly underestimated.

"Climate models must take this carbon sink into account," says Mario Lebrato, lead author of the study. The work was done when he was at the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton (NOCS) and affiliated with the University of Southampton's School of Ocean and Earth Science (SOES); he is now at the Leibniz Institute of Marine Science in Germany.

Globally, the seabed habitats occupy more than 300 million million square metres, from the intertidal flats and pools to the mightiest deep-sea trenches at 11,000 meters. The benthos – the animals living on and in the sediments – populate this vast ecosystem.

Calcifying organisms incorporate carbon directly from the seawater into their skeletons in the form of inorganic minerals such as calcium carbonate. This means that their bodies contain a substantial amount of inorganic carbon. When they die and sink, some of the inorganic carbon is remineralised, and much of it becomes buried in sediments, where it remains locked up indefinitely.

Lebrato and his colleagues provide the first estimation of the contributions of starfish, sea urchins, brittle stars, sea cucumbers and sea lilies – all kinds of echinoderm – to the calcium carbonate budget at the seabed. They estimate that the global production from all echinoderms is over a tenth (0.1) of a gigatonne of carbon per year – that is, more than a hundred thousand million kilograms.

This is less than the total biological production in the main water column, or pelagic zone, which scientists believe to be between around 0.6 and 1.8 gigatonnes of carbon per year. But echinoderms apparently deliver more carbon to the sediments than do forams, for example. These microscopic animals live in vast numbers in the oceans and are traditionally regarded along with coccolithophores (single-celled marine plants surrounded by calcium carbonate plates) as one of the biggest contributors to the flux of calcium carbonate from the sunlit surface waters to the ocean's interior – the so-called 'biological carbon pump'.

"Our research highlights the poor understanding of large-scale carbon processes associated with calcifying animals such as echinoderms and tackles some of the uncertainties in the oceanic calcium carbonate budget," says Lebrato: "The realisation that these creatures represent such a significant part of the ocean carbon sink needs to be taken into account in computer models of the biological pump and its effect on global climate."

There is a worry that ocean acidification due to increased carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels could reduce the amount of calcium carbonate incorporated into the skeletons of echinoderms and other calcifying organisms.

However, different echinoderm species respond to ocean acidification in different ways, and the effects of rising temperatures can be as significant as those of rising carbon dioxide. How this will affect the global carbon sink remains to be established.

Lebrato concludes: "The scientific community needs to reconsider the role of benthic processes in the marine calcium carbonate cycle. This is a crucial but understudied compartment of the global marine carbon cycle, which has been of key importance throughout Earth history and it is still at present."

Friday, January 1, 2010

Blue Carbon and Copenhagen

A blue carbon blog from Dave Helvarg, President of the Blue Frontier Campaign. Thanks Dave!


For the Blue Frontier Campaign see: http://www.bluefront.org

__________________________________________________________

http://www.bluefront.org/bluenotes/bluenotes.php?recordID=69

We could still turn the tide and avoid the worst impacts of climate change if we mobilized allied nations as we did in World War Two. Instead the recent UN Summit in Copenhagen suggests we're treating our greatest global threat like the invasion of Grenada. One of the few solid agreements to come out of the talks was for the establishment of a multibillion-dollar fund to reduce deforestation. The burning and clearing of forest is the second largest source of human-generated carbon after the burning of fossil fuels. A recent UN report on "Blue Carbon" suggests that funding needs to be expanded to protect carbon sequestering coastal habitats, specifically mangroves, salt marshes and seagrass meadows that also function as the nurseries, filters and storm barriers of the sea. Sea turtle hatchlings need healthy coastal and marine ecosystems in order to survive. It just so happens that we also need the same healthy ocean ecosystems to survive on this blue planet," notes coral scientist Steven Lutz who's organized an international 'Blue Climate Coalition' working to bring the Blue Carbon discussion into the mainstream of policy and action.

For a more detailed story on this see my "Blue Bayou Climate Solution" in Huffington Post at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-helvarg/the-blue-bayou-climate-so_b_388065.html