study on soil carbon sequestration in selected …groupexcelindia.com/online_cd/pdf/288.pdf.pdfstudy...

Study on Soil Carbon Sequestration in Selected Mining Areas of Raniganj Coal Field India

Sayar Yaseen*1, Amit Pal2, Siddharth Singh3 and Ashok K. Pandit4 1,4Aquatic Ecology Laboratory, Department of Environmental Science,

University of Kashmir, Srinagar–190006, India 2Institute of Environment and Development Studies,

Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, (U.P), India 3Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research,

(CSIR), Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India *E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Carbon emission is considered as a key driver for global warming. Removing atmospheric carbon and storing it in the terrestrial biosphere is one of the cost-effective options to compensate greenhouse gas emissions. Millions of acres of abandoned mine land throughout the world, if restored and converted into vegetative land, would solve two major problems i.e., global warming and generation of degraded wasteland. Current status and potential of soil carbon sequestration in the mine soils of various land use categories visa- viz the impact of mining operations on soil quality were investigated. It was found that vegetable gardens has a maximum potential of soil organic carbon (48.31 t/ha) followed by reclaimed forest (40.39 t/ha), and agriculture (22.43 t/ha). However, waste lands were found to have less soil organic carbon content (16.77 t/ha) and hence greater potential to sequester the soil carbon.

Keywords: Global Warming, Carbon Sequestration, Mine Land, Soil Organic Carbon

INTRODUCTION

Different human induced activities are increase in the concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gas, resulting in higher global temperatures, higher sea levels, and increased climatic variability, including changes in precipitation patterns and magnitudes (Easterling et al., 2000; Palumbo et al., 2002). In 2004, India’s total fossil fuel CO2 emissions rose 6.3% over the 2003 level, to 366 million metric tons of carbon (Marland et al., 2007). Although India’s per capita emission rate of carbon for 2004 is 0.34 metric tons that is well below the global average (1.23 metric tons), proper management of carbon emission is essential from a global perspective. Stabilization of atmospheric concentration of CO2 to minimize the accelerated greenhouse effect is the current need of the hour. A potential approach to mitigating rising CO2

concentrations is the enhanced storage or sequestration of carbon in terrestrial ecosystems (Paustian et al., 1998; Reichle et al., 1999; Palumbo et al., 2002). Judicious soil management and appropriate land use can minimize the greenhouse effect from agricultural activities by sequestering carbon in soil and enhancing carbon storage within terrestrial ecosystems (Lal, 1999).

mailto:[email protected]

Study on Soil Carbon Sequestration in Selected Mining Areas of Raniganj 289

One approach to terrestrial carbon sequestration is to make use of currently underutilized and degraded lands (Akala and Lal, 2000, 2001; Bendfeldt et al., 2001; Palumbo et al., 2002). Worldwide for example, nearly 2 × 109 ha of lands are considered to be degraded (Oldeman and Vanengelen, 1993) and may be capable of sequestrating from 0.8 to 1.3 Gt C/year (Metting et al., 2001).

Wasteland statistics indicate that about 63.85 million ha, which account for 20.17% of the total geographical area, exists as wasteland in India. Land degradation is caused by various anthropogenic factors like mining. Degraded mine lands are often characterized by acidic pH, low level of key nutrients, poor soil structure, and limited moisture retention capacity (Barnhisel et al., 2000). Despite this fact, degraded mine land shows significant carbon sequestration potential (Akala and Lal, 2001). The total land area disturbed by mining in India is around 1,252.13 km 2, i.e., 0.04% of total geographical area covered. Mining, drastically declined the soil organic matter content in soil (Indorante and Boast 1981). Thus, reclamation of mine land by soil restoration and reestablishment of vegetative cover could lead to carbon sequestration (Akala and Lal, 2000).

It is in this backdrop the current work has been undertaken to evaluate the soil carbon sequestration level and consequently the potential of various land use land cover categories in some selected mining areas of Raniganj Coal field.

SITE DESCRIPTION AND SAMPLING

STUDY AREA

The Raniganj Coalfield is the birth place of coal mining in India, its major portion is located in the four districts of West Bengal(Burdwan, Birbhum, Purulia, Bankura) and little of it is located in Dhanbad district of Jharkhand (Fig.1). It is situated about 185 Km north-west of Kolkata lying between the coordinates 23°37′N-87°08′ E latitude and 23.62°N- 87.13°E longitude.

Soil samples were collected from different land use/ land cover classes of three mining areas (Mugma, Salanpur and Sodepur) of Raniganj coal field from twelve sites of different land use management practices viz, reclaimed forests, vegetable gardens, agricultural lands and wastelands present in the vicinity of different collieries both open cast as well as underground in nature, the description of which are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Description of Sampling Sites in Raniganj Coalfield Site Sample Description(LU/LC) Soil Classification

I Agricultural land Loamy Sand II Wasteland Sandy Loam III Vegetable Gardens Loamy Sand IV Reclaimed forests Sandy Loam

290 Green India: Strategic Knowledge for Combating Climate Change: Prospects & Challenges

The samples were collected with a clean soil auger, debris was removed from the surface and a hole was dug to a depth of 20–30 cms. The collected top soil samples after coning and quartering, then sieving (2 mm) were used for analysis of different soil quality parameters. Bulk density and water holding capacity was determined by gravimetric method. The soil texture was determined by International Pipette method, pH and Electrical conductivity was determined in (soil/water 1: 2.5) suspension with a pH and conductivity meters respectively. Organic carbon was determined by using the Walkley and Blake method (Nelson and Summers, 1982) and the organic matter by using a conversion factor of 1.724.

All samples were collected at a depth of 15–25 cm, with an average depth of 20 cm.

The amount of soil organic carbon (t/ha) stored in soil was calculated by using the following equation.

SOC (t/ha) = Depth (cm) x Bulk density (g/cm3) x Organic Carbon content (%).

(Broos and Baldock, 2008).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results are summarized as follows:

COARSE FRACTION (PARTICLE SIZE)

The percentage of the total mass in each sieve size fraction: >2 mm, >1 mm, >0.5 mm, > 0.25 mm, >0.125 mm, >0.075 mm, >0.062 mm and < 0.062 mm in the soil samples was found as 15.2%, 17.8%, 22.5%,.15.0%, 14.9%, 5.9%,.3.3% and 4.5% respectively in study area.

(Figure 2) Decreasing particle size brings a great increase in surface area of particles contained within the given volume. The larger particles are all formed exclusively by physical breakdown of the rocks and minerals. But their chemical composition is not significantly different from the parent rock. The coarse fraction or particle size determines the particles of soil deviates from ideal spheres. The coarse fraction of soil had influenced on soil structure, water holding capacity, nutrient storage, water movements and aeration. The average dominant percentage of coarse fraction was that of >0.5 mm size was found 22.5%. Hu et al. (1992) are of the opinion that soil with stone content greater than 50% should be rated as a poor quality.


Location map showing study area

Selected Sites from Different Land Use/ Land Cover Classes

Fig. 1: Location Map of Study Area

Vegetable Gardens

Waste Land

Agricultural Land

Reclaimed Forest


Fig. 2: Coarse Fraction of Study Sites

SOIL TEXTURE CLASSES

The soil texture was determined with help of Standard International pipette method (<1mm soil size) is given in Fig. 3. Soil texture classes were based on varying proportions of sand, silt and clay, expressed as percentages In the soil samples of study area the percentage of sand, silt and clay ranges from (80.64% to 81.52%), (2.36% to 5.82%) and (12.7% to 17.0%) with the average percentage of 81.10%, 3.70% and 14.71% respectively. So the main texture of soil of study area is sandy and loamy sand which is not best for agricultural soils. The intermediate loam textures are generally best as agricultural soils. Ghose, (2005) reported the maximum sand content of 66% and clay only 8.6% in mined soil. Singh et al., (2004) and Singh and Singh, (2006) also reported maximum content of sand (80%) and least content of clay (11%) at the Singrauli Coal field India.

Fig. 3: Soil Texture of Study Sites

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Agricultural land

Wasteland Vegetable Gardens

Reclaimmed forest

%Ag

e

Sampling sites

<0.062mm

>0.062mm

>0.075mm

>0.125mm

>0.25mm

>0.5mm

>1mm

>2mm

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

I II III IV

Sand

Clay

Silt


Bulk density is a measure of the weight of the soil per unit volume, usually given on an oven dry basis. Most minerals soils have bulk densities between 1.0 gm/cc and 2.0 gm/cc (Braddy & Well, 2002). Soil bulk density was found to be high (1.32 g/cc) at site IV while as lowest (1.29 g/cc) was found at site II. Akala and Lal (2001) also showed that growth and development of roots over time incorporates SOC and loosens up the soil, thus decreasing soil bulk density Soil organic carbon in reclaimed mine spoil Soil organic carbon pool at 0–15 cm depth increased reclamation of mine spoil dump.

Water holding capacity was measured as the amount of water taken up by unit weight of dry soil when immersed in water. Water holding capacity of soil does not show so much fluctuation and ranges from 30.9% to 35.26% with an average of 32.86%.The maximum water holding at Site I is because of agricultural land where paddy is cultivated twice a year.

During the study period, soil pH ranges from slightly acidic pH of 5.79 to a maximum of 6.43 reflecting acidic nature of soils of study area. Soil pH is a significant determining factor in the solubility of metals ( Pendias and Pendias 1992). Hence, the variation in pH can be due to differences in the quantity, quality and activity of carbonaceous or pyritic overburden material (Barnhisel and Hower 1997). Similarly, conductivity in the soil varies from a minimum of 177 µS/cm to a maximum of 349.5 µS/cm with highest at site III and lowest at site II. The highest conductivity at site III may be attributed towards the fact that it is actually vegetable garden where appropriate amount of moisture content is maintained and requisite amount of nutrients are added in the form of fertilizers where as Site II is basically a wasteland where no such processes takes place.

Fig. 4: Variation of pH, Electrical Conductivity, Water Holding Capacity and Bulk Density among Study Sites

1.00

51.00

101.00

151.00

201.00

251.00

301.00

351.00

pH EC(µS) Water Holding capacity(%)

Bulk Density

Agricultural land Wastelands Vegetable gardens Reclaimmed forests


Soil organic carbon is an index of sustainable land management (Nandwa, 2001). Organic carbon levels greater than 0.8% is rated as good quality of soil (Saxena, 1987). A level of organic carbon greater than 0.75% indicates good fertility. The amount of soil organic carbon ranges from 0.65% to 1.86% with highest was at site III (vegetable gardens) and lowest at site II (waste lands). The highest amount of soil organic carbon at site III may be attributed towards the fact that the growers use organic manures like cow dung cakes, yard compost etc. Agricultural fields depicted low level of soil organic carbon due to various agricultural processes like ploughing, excessive tilling, and imbalance in fertilizer use, little or no crop residue returned to soil. (Juwarkar et al., 2010).

The organic matter shows the similar trend as that of organic carbon as both are interrelated with each other. The Organic matter of soil in the studied areas varied between 1.12% to 3.21% with an average value of 2.11%. Soil organic matter is a complex mixture of organic components, ranging from recent plant residues to complex products of transformation processes and including the microbial biomass. Organic matter can be trapped in the very small spaces between clay particles making them inaccessible to micro-organisms and therefore slowing decomposition Organic matter is the major source of nutrients such as nitrogen, and available P and K in unfertilized soils (Donahue et al., 1990). due to higher amount of humic substances present in the soil samples from decomposition of garbage wastes dumped on the soil and also due to addition of domestic wastes.

SOIL ORGANIC CARBON (T/HA)

Soil sequesters carbon in the form of well-decomposed organic matter called humus, which provides more stable form of storage for carbon than biomass. Comparison of soil organic carbon levels in different land use ecosystems Soil studies suggested that vegetable gardens showed the highest amount of carbon, (48.31 t/ha) followed by reclaimed forests (40.39 t/ha), agricultural land (22.43 t/ha) and waste lands (16.77 t/ha). Soil organic carbon, organic matter and SOC (t/ha) of all sites has been shown in Table 2. and Fig. 5. Soil organic carbon is sequestered in soil until micro- and macro aggregates are broken or disrupted by various land mismanagement practices. Vegetable garden soil and reclaimed forest soils on the other hand, showed higher soil organic carbon level, as they remained undisturbed most of the time.

Wasteland statistics indicate that about 63.85 million ha, which account for 20.17% of the total geographical area, exists as wasteland in India. The total land area disturbed by mining in India is around 1,252.13 km 2, i.e., 0.04% of total geographical area covered. Mining, drastically declined the soil organic matter content in soil (Amonette et al., 2003). Thus, reclamation of waste lands,other mining affected lands adopt recommended management practices in agriculture soils can lead to increase soil carbon sequestration and can help us to mitigate climate change.(Akala and Lal, 2000).


Fig. 5: Variation of Organic Carbon, Organic Matter and SOC (t/ha) Among Study Sites

Table 2: Physicochemical Characteristics of Soil Samples Collected from Different Land Use /Land Cover Categories of Study Area

Parameters Units 1 II III IV Min Max. Avg. Bulk density (g/cc) 1.30 1.29 1.30 1.32 1.29 1.32 1.30 Max. Water holding capacity (%) 35.3 32.0 33.3 30.9 30.90 35.26 32.86 pH 6.4 5.8 6.4 6.4 5.79 6.43 6.25 EC (µS/c) 244.8 177.0 349.5 203.5 177.03 349.47 243.71 Organic Carbon (%) 0.86 0.65 1.86 1.53 0.65 1.86 1.23 Organic Matter (%) 1.48 1.12 3.21 2.64 1.12 3.21 2.11 SOC (t/ha) 22.43 16.77 48.31 40.39 16.77 48.31 31.98

Fig. 5: Bray-Curtis Diagram showing Similarity Indices of Different Sampling Sites

0.5

10.5

20.5

30.5

40.5

50.5

Agricultural land

Wastelands Vegetable gardens

Reclaimmed forests

SOC (%)

OM(%)

SOC(t/ha)


From Bray-Curtis Diagram maximum similarity was found between Sites II and IV, Site I also shows significant similarity with the site II and IV. But Site III is totally dissimilar with other sites in terms of environmental setting based on various physicochemical characteristics of soil.

CONCLUSION The potential of Soil organic carbon sequestration was of the following order: Waste lands > agriculture lands>vegetable gardens > forest lands. These soils have lost a significant part of original SOC, and have the capacity to sequester carbon by converting it to a restorative land use and adopting recommended management practices. Whereas land misuse and soil mismanagement have caused depletion of soil organic carbon with an emission of CO2 and other green house gases into the atmosphere, there is a strong case that enhancing soil organic carbon pool could substantially offset fossil fuel emissions. Thus, carbon sequestration in soils, i.e., increasing soil organic carbon in agricultural soils through proper management, provides a multitude of environmental benefits. The goals to sequester soil organic carbon is to create a win-win situation to improve soil productivity, reduce unnecessary inputs, and promote sustainability.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are highly thankful to Director, Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (CSIR) Dhanbad Jharkhand India for providing laboratory facilities to carry out the research study.The first author is indebted to Mr. K. K. Singh laboratory Assistant and Bipin kumar Mandol (Project associate ) for helping during collection of soil samples.

REFERENCES [1] Akala, V.A., & Lal, R. (2001). Soil organic pools and sequestration rates in reclaimed minesoils in

Ohio. Journal of Environmental Quality, 30, 2098–2104 [2] Akala, V.A., & Lal, R. (2000). Potential of mine land reclamation for soil organic carbon

sequestration in Ohio. Land Degradation Development, 11, 289–287. [3] Amonette, J. E., Kim, J., Colleen Russell, K., Palumbo, A. V., & Lee Daniels, W. (2003). International

Ash Utilisation Symposium, Centre for Applied Energy Research, University of Kentucky, Paper 47 [4] Barnhisel, R.I., & Hower, J.M. (1997). Coal surface mine reclamation in the eastern cropland.

Advances in Agronomy, 61, 233–275. [5] Barnhisel, R.I., Darmody, R.G., & Daniels, W.L. (Eds.)(2000). Reclamation of drastically disturbed

lands. Agronomy monograph No. 41, American Society of Agronomists/ Crop Science Society of America/ Soil Science Society of America, Madison WI (pp. 1082).

[6] Bendfeldt, E.S., Burger, J.A., & Daniels, W.L. (2001). Quality of amended mine soils after sixteen years. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 65, 1736–1744.

[7] Brady, N.C & Well, R.R. (2002). The nature & properties of soils, Pearson Education Ltd, [8] Broos K and Baldock J (2008). Building soil carbon for productivity and implications for carbon

accounting, in 2008 South Australian GRDC Grains Research Update cropping and agro-forestry systems in Eastern and Southern Africa. Nutrient Cycling in Agro ecosystems 61, 143–158.

[9] Donahue, R.L., Miller, R.W., and Shickluna, J.C. 1990. Soils: An introduction to soils and plant growth (5th ed.).Prentice-Hall: 234


[10] Easterling, D.R., Meehl, G.A., Parmesan, C., Changnon, S.A., Karl, T.R., & Mearns, L.O. (2000). Climate extremes: Observations, modeling, and impacts. Science, 289, 2068–2074.

[11] Ghose, M.K. 2005. Soil conservation for rehabilitation and revegetation of mine-degraded land. TIDEE –TERI Information Digest on Energy and Environment 4(2), 137-150

[12] Hu, Z., Caudle, R.D., and Chong, S.K. 1992. Evaluation of firm land reclamation effectiveness based on reclaimed mine properties. International Journal of Surface Mining Reclamation and Environment 6, 129- 135.

[13] Indorante, S.J., & Boast, C.W. (1981). Surface mining and reclamation: Initial changes in soil character. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 36, 347–350.

[14] Juwarkar, A.A., Mehrotraa, K.L., Nair, R., Wanjari, T., Singh, S. K. and Chakrabarti. T. (2010) Carbon sequestration in reclaimed manganese mine land at Gumgaon, India, Environ. Monit.Assess. 160:457–464

[15] Kabata-Pendias, A., & Pendias, H. (1992). Trace elements in soils and plants (2nd ed.) Boca Raton, FL: CRC. 365p.

[16] Lal, R. (1999). Soil management and restoration for C sequestration to mitigate the accelerated greenhouse effect. Progress in Environmental Science (Tokyo), 1,307–326.

[17] Marland, G., Boden, T. A., & Andres, R. J. (2007). Global, regional, and national CO2 emissions. In Trends: A Compedium of data on global change. Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy.

[18] Metting, F. B., Smith, J. L., Amthor, J. S., & Izaurralde, R. C. (2001). Science needs and new technology for increasing soil carbon sequestration. Climatic Change, 51, 11–34.

[19] Nandwa, S.M., 2001. Soil organic carbon (SOC) management for sustainable productivity of cropping and agro-forestry systems in Eastern and Southern Africa. Nutrient cycling in agro ecosystems 61, 143–158.

[20] Nelson, D.W& Sommers, L.E. 1982. Methods of soil analysis, Part II, 9, American New Delhi, India. [21] Oldeman, L.R., & Vanengelen, V, W.P. (1993). A world soils and terrain digital database (SOTER)—

an improved assessment of land resources. Geoderma, 60, 309–325. [22] Palumbo, A.V., Daniels Lee, W., Burger, J.A., McCarthy, J.F., Stan Wullschleger, S.D., Amonette, J.E.

(2002). Prospects for enhancing carbon sequestration and reclamation of degraded lands with fossil fuel combustion by products. Advances in Environmental Research, 8, 425–438.

[23] Paustian, K., Cole, C. V., Sauerbeck, D. & Sampson, N. (1998). CO2 mitigation by agriculture: An overview. Climatic Change, 40, 135–162.

[24] Reichle, D., Joughton, J., Kane, B., & Kemann, J. (1999).Developing an emerging technology road map for carbon capture and sequestration. Carbon Sequestration Research and Development. USDOE Office of Science, Washington, DC; DOE/SC/FE-1.

[25] Saxena, M.M., 1987. Environmental analysis water, soil and air, Agro Botanical Publication, Bikaner, India.

[26] Singh, A.N., Raghubanahi, A.S., and Singh, J.S. 2004. Impact of native tree plantations on mine spoil in a dry environment. Forest Ecol. Management 187, 49-60.

[27] Singh, A.N., and Singh, A.N. 2006. Experiments on ecological restoration of coal mine spoil using native trees in a dry tropical environment, India: a synthesis. New Forests, 31.25-39.

study on soil carbon sequestration in selected …groupexcelindia.com/online_cd/pdf/288.pdf.pdfstudy...

Documents