Disclaimer & References

Disclaimer

The information presented on the Igniting Minds Organization (IMO) website is intended for general informational purposes only. While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date content, we make no warranties or representations, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability of the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

IMO is not responsible for any loss or damage, including but not limited to indirect or consequential loss or damage, arising from the use of this website. Through this website, you may be able to link to other websites that are not under the control of IMO. We have no control over the nature, content, and availability of those sites. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.

Calculation of Environmental Impact Parameters

At Igniting Minds Organization, we strive to provide accurate and insightful information regarding the environmental impact of various activities facilitated through our platform. It's essential to note that the calculation of environmental impact parameters, including CO2 footprint, Land footprint, Water footprint, and Plastic footprint, for eco-activities such as transportation, food & beverage consumption, plastic consumption, among others, is based on established methodologies and data sources.

However, it's crucial to recognize that these calculations involve certain assumptions and approximations due to the inherent complexity and variability of environmental systems. Factors such as regional variations in resource use, technological advancements, and changes in consumer behaviour can influence the accuracy of these calculations.

Therefore, while we endeavour to provide reliable estimates, users should interpret the results with caution and consider them as indicative rather than absolute values. Additionally, we encourage users to consult multiple sources and conduct further research to gain a comprehensive understanding of the environmental impacts associated with their activities.

By acknowledging these limitations and uncertainties, we aim to promote transparency and informed decision-making regarding environmental conservation efforts. We remain committed to refining our methodologies and incorporating the latest scientific insights to enhance the accuracy and reliability of our environmental impact assessments.

Calculation of CO2 Sequestration by Trees

To accurately determine the amount of CO2 absorbed by trees, two critical measurements are taken directly from the tree: its diameter, measured in centimetres, and its height, measured in meters. These measurements are essential for calculating both the Above-Ground Biomass (AGB) and Below-Ground Biomass (BGB). The calculation of these biomass values is based on a specific formula that incorporates these two parameters.

Above-Ground Biomass (AGB) Calculation:

AGB = 0.25 x D2 x H

1. AGB: Above-Ground Biomass (pounds).
2. D: Tree diameter measured at 1.37 meters from the ground (inches). This standard measurement ensures consistency in results. For trees shorter than 1.37 meters, this formula is still applicable.
3. H: Tree height (feet).

The overall green weight of the biomass is estimated to be 120% of the AGB value, based on the assumption that the BGB, which comprises the tree’s root system, accounts for approximately 20% of the AGB. Therefore, BGB can be calculated as follows:

BGB = 0.2 × AGB

From these formulas, we can calculate the total biomass of a tree:

Total Biomass (TB) = AGB + BGB = AGB + 0.2 x AGB = 1.2 × AGB

On average, a tree consists of 72.5% dry matter and 27.5% moisture content. To calculate the tree’s dry weight, we multiply the total biomass by 72.5%:

Total Dry Weight (TDW) = TB × 0.725

Carbon makes up 50% of the total dry weight. Therefore, the total carbon content in the tree is:

Total Carbon (TC) = TDW × 0.5

To find the CO2 equivalent sequestered in a tree, we use the molecular weight ratio of CO2 to Carbon. CO2 has one molecule of Carbon and two molecules of Oxygen, with atomic weights of 12u for Carbon and 16u for Oxygen. The ratio of the weight of CO2 to Carbon is 44/12 = 3.67. Therefore, to determine the weight of CO2 sequestered in the tree, we multiply the weight of carbon in the tree by 3.67:

CO2 weight = TC × 3.67

It is important to note that the CO2 weight calculated above represents the CO2 sequestered over the entire lifetime of the tree. To ascertain the annual or yearly rate of CO2 sequestration, divide the total weight of CO2 absorbed by the tree’s age.

At Igniting Minds Organization, we are committed to providing accessible and actionable information on carbon sequestration by trees. As a part of this effort, we have approximated the value of CO2 sequestration for trees to 650 grams per day for all species. This approximation allows for simplicity and ease of understanding while still conveying the significant impact of tree planting initiatives on reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Please note that this value is an estimate and may vary based on various factors such as tree species, age, environmental conditions, and geographical location.

References

1. Nijdam, D., Rood, G., & Westhoek, H. (2012). The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food Policy.
2. Hamershlag, K. (2011). Meat eater’s guide.
3. Mekonnen, M.M., & Hoekstra, A.Y. (2012). A Global Assessment of the Water Footprint of Farm Animal Products. Ecosystems
4. Mekonnen, M.M., & Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010). The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No. 48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
5. Gerbens-Leenes, W., Mekonnen, M.M., & Hoekstra, A.Y. (2011). A comparative study on the water footprint of poultry, pork and beef in different countries and production systems.
6. Wika Wulandari, Forestry and Carbon Specialist EcoMatcher,
7. Rosi, A., Mena, P., Pellegrini, N., et al. (2017). Environmental impact of omnivorous, ovo-lacto-vegetarian, and vegan diet
8. Exploring dietary guidelines based on ecological and nutritional values: A comparison of six dietary patterns. Food Policy. (2014).
9. Berners-Lee, M., Hoolohan, C., Cammack, H., & Hewitt, C.N. (2012). The relative greenhouse gas impacts of realistic dietary choices. Energy Policy.
10. 2008 Guidelines to Defra’s GHG Conversion Factors: Methodology Paper for Transport Emission Factors. (2008).
11. Walsh, C., Jakeman, P., Moles, R., & O’Regan, B. (2008). A comparison of carbon dioxide emissions associated with motorised transport modes and cycling in Ireland.
12. Meenakshi Kaul, G. M. J. Mohren & V. K. Dadhwal; Carbon storage and sequestration potential of selected tree species in India
13. Why the Amazon doesn’t really produce 20% of the world’s oxygen. National Geographic. (2020)
14. DiRocco, T. L., Ramage, B. S., Evans, S. G., & Potts, M. D. (2014). Accountable accounting: carbon-based management on marginal lands. Forests, 5(4), 847-861.
15. Shadman, S., Khalid, P. A., Hanafiah, M. M., Koyande, A. K., Islam, M. A., Bhuiyan, S. A., … & Show, P. L. (2022).

For any questions or further information, please contact us at:

Email: eic@ignitingminds.in

Phone: +91-9000365000

Address: House No. 6-104, Old Malhar Sahara States, Mansoorabad, LB Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana, Pin-500068, India.