IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i3p622-d1088112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences in CO 2 Emissions on a Bare-Drained Peat Area in Sarawak, Malaysia, Based on Different Measurement Techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Hasimah Mos

    (Malaysian Palm Oil Board, No. 6, Persiaran Institusi Bandar Baru Bangi, Kajang 43000, Selangor, Malaysia
    Environmental Technology Division, School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia)

  • Mohd Haniff Harun

    (Independent Researcher, Bangi 43000, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Nur Maisarah Jantan

    (Malaysian Palm Oil Board, No. 6, Persiaran Institusi Bandar Baru Bangi, Kajang 43000, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Zulkifli Hashim

    (Malaysian Palm Oil Board, No. 6, Persiaran Institusi Bandar Baru Bangi, Kajang 43000, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Anis Suriani Ibrahim

    (Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Sg. Chuchuh, Arau, Jalan Wang Ulu, Kangar 01000, Perlis, Malaysia)

  • Yusri Yusup

    (Environmental Technology Division, School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia
    Renewable Biomass Transformation Cluster, School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia)

Abstract

The drainage and cultivation of peatlands will lead to subsidence and mineralisation of organic matter, increasing carbon (C) loss as more CO 2 is emitted. There is little information about carbon emissions from bare peat soil. A study was undertaken to measure the CO 2 emissions from a logged-over peat swamp area that was purposely vegetation-free. We aimed to report CO 2 emissions from a bare, drained peatland developed for an oil palm plantation. For 12 months, we used eddy covariance (EC), closed chambers, and soil subsidence measurements to derive CO 2 emissions from a logged-over peat swamp area. Significant variations in the estimated soil CO 2 efflux were observed in the three tested measurement techniques. The average CO 2 flux rate measured by the EC technique was 4.94 ± 0.12 µmol CO 2 m −2 s −1 (or 68.55 tonnes CO 2 ha −1 year −1 ). Meanwhile, the soil CO 2 efflux rate measured by the closed chamber technique was 4.19 ± 0.22 µmol CO 2 m −2 s −1 (or 58.14 tonnes CO 2 ha −1 year −1 ). Subsidence amounted to 1.9 cm year −1 , corresponding to 36.12 tonnes CO 2 ha −1 year −1 . The estimation of the C loss was found to be highest by the EC technique, lower by the soil chamber technique, and lowest by the peat subsidence rate technique. The higher CO 2 emission rate observed in the EC technique could be attributed to soil microbial respiration and decomposing woody residues in the nearby stacking rows due to the large EC footprint. It could also be affected by CO 2 advection from oil palms adjacent to the study site. Despite the large differences in the CO 2 emission rates by the different techniques, this study provides valuable information on the soil heterotrophic respiration of deep peat in Sarawak. Carbon emissions from a bare peat area cover only a fraction of the soil CO 2 respiration component, i.e., the soil heterotrophic respiration. Further investigations are needed to determine the CO 2 emissions by soil microbial activities and plant roots from other peat areas in Sarawak.

Suggested Citation

  • Hasimah Mos & Mohd Haniff Harun & Nur Maisarah Jantan & Zulkifli Hashim & Anis Suriani Ibrahim & Yusri Yusup, 2023. "Differences in CO 2 Emissions on a Bare-Drained Peat Area in Sarawak, Malaysia, Based on Different Measurement Techniques," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:622-:d:1088112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/3/622/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/3/622/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:3:p:622-:d:1088112. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.