Afforestation is the buzzword these days. And reasonably too. Destruction of forests has been found to be one of the major reasons for increasing Greenhouse Gases(GHG) in the atmosphere. Plants take in carbon dioxide and give out the oxygen that enables us to sustain. They bring rains, fight drought, and increase biodiversity. Besides all of that, forests act as a large sink of carbon in the Earth which is released when we burn them. Deforestation thus upsets the carbon cycle that normally tries to maintain a balance in carbon content in the atmosphere.
The benefits of increasing forest cover are thus clear. And in response, afforestation initiatives have been ongoing around the globe. India has committed to creating an additional carbon sink of 2.5-3 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent through additional forest and tree cover in its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement. The government implement programs such as the National Mission for Green India(GIM) that aim to improve forest cover, improve ecosystem services, and increase the forest-based income of those living near forests. Such afforestation initiatives have helped India to slowly but consistently increase its tree cover. However, that is only one side of the story.
The afforestation initiatives in many parts of the world including in our country have resulted in the planting of trees without being mindful of the suitable vegetation of the area. The compelling motives behind such actions include, besides the benign ones, the value of timber. Thus what might have been once a grassland is now resurrected as a forest[1] with teak, sandalwood, and other ‘high-value’ trees. From loss of habitat for many native species in the area to loss of grazing land of the poor pastoralists in the area, such initiatives thus conflict with our Sustainable Development Goals.
Now, faults in execution aside, the long-term viability of afforestation also needs scrutiny. The average life expectancy of trees varies widely across their species. Even if a particular tree has the potential to live up to 100 years or so, it is equally important to have a mechanism to ensure its protection during its lifetime(post-planting care).[2] This should cover destruction from natural or unnatural causes as well as its utilization for monetary purposes. It is especially relevant since half of our compensatory afforestation programs use five species or less(teak, eucalyptus, etc). Once we manage to protect it for a lifetime, what happens in the event of its end-of-life? Do we plant a new one in its place, wait patiently for it to grow, and reach the carbon storage level of its predecessor? It is imperative that such questions need to be debated in the policy circles.
Another factor that needs to be considered is the availability of land for afforestation. With India’s high population density, ever-growing needs of urbanization, and industrialisation, securing land for afforestation is going to be an uphill task.
This is not to negate the importance of afforestation and the benefits of biodiversity it brings. But we should also be mindful that beating climate change might be a long-term game and hence need more effective approaches.
One such promising technology interventions is Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage(CCUS). It is basically a three step process that involves CO2 capture from its point source, transportation, and finally either utilization or storage away from the atmosphere. The captured CO2 can be utilized for conversion into useful chemicals or oil extraction. If that is not considered then the geologic storage of carbon can be done in unmineable coal seams and Saline formations underground.
The CCUS technologies are being implemented in several parts of the world. A successful model could be seen in the Acquistore Project in Saskatchewan, Canada where CO2 emission from a coal plant is driven 3.4 km underground into saltwater-infused sandstone.
However such technologies do have their drawbacks that range from risk for leakage from underground storage, huge expenses, and unknown long-term implications. But this should not stop us from pursuing them in the age of climate change. Technology has the magic power to outgrow its own limitations. International organizations must thus support more research and development to optimize this technology and encourage innovations. It is welcoming that Elon Musk has recently announced a $100 Million prize for the best Carbon capture technology. We need more of that.
Afforestation indeed helps in mitigating climate change, but by itself cannot completely address the mammoth challenge we have before us. But time is running out and the last thing we can afford is relying solely on traditional approaches. As Greta Thunberg, the climate change activist, said in her Davos speech, “I want you to act as if the house is on fire. Because it is.”
Notes:
[1] – https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/misguided-afforestation-schemes-offer-little-succour-994289.html
[2] – https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/forests/afforestation-how-we-planted-8-000-trees-and-almost-killed-ourselves-72452
Mahesh MS 