Dungbeetle (Junglo) Indigenous Miyawaki Reforestation replenishes local ecosystems in
Bali.
Before humans modified the landscape, Bali resembled the jungles of Kalimantan; there
were tigers, flocks of hornbills, and multiple other animals we rarely see today. It is
impossible to return the entire island to that state, but it is within our grasp to bring back
small pockets of what once was.
Created by Japanese botanist Dr. Akira Miyawaki, the Miyawaki Method focuses on
understanding the original ecosystems and attempting to bring them back. Using a Potential
Natural Vegetation survey, one can obtain enough data to know what and how much to
plant.
Miyawaki Forests are designed to mimic and bring back the forests of old. Thus, they create
complete ecosystems where biodiversity thrives. Our Miyawaki forests are, on average, 30
times as dense as regular reforestation projects, consisting of 4 layers (Canopy, Tree, ST,
Shrub).
Challenges for carbon sequestration calculation
Calculating the Carbon absorption of a Miyawaki forest is a complicated process. No single
calculation defines precisely how much Carbon any given tree sequesters.
According to organizations such as the USDA, the MIT environmental portal, and the
European Environmental Agency, the most accurate average of how much Carbon a single
mature tree absorbs annually is 48 pounds (22 Kilograms).1
While providing a tangible number makes calculations easy, it is only sometimes accurate.
The tree sequestration rate can depend on various factors, such as.2
● Forest Location
● Tree Species
● Soil Biodiversity (Nutrients)
● Water availability
● Sunlight
● Climate
Dungbeetle’s approach for Miyawaki carbon sequestration calculations
We are basing our approach largely on the Winrock International Forest Landscape
Restoration Carbon Storage Calculator. Winrock develops this calculator and pulls data from
their Global Removals Database. With support from the International Union for Conservation
of Nature (IUCN), Winrock gathered data on biomass accumulation and CO2 sequestration
rates in
● Natural Regeneration
● Agroforestry
● Mangrove Restoration
● Planted forests and Woodlands
Their research and review are based on 330+ published studies and reports specialized in
biomass accumulation and CO2 sequestration.
This table summarises some of their data:
(2.)4
Soil biodiversity and forest density are critical players in Carbon sequestration rates. Our
Indigenous Miyawaki reforestation is up to 162x as biodiverse as regular reforestation as
seen in chart (2.) and up to 40x as dense. We plant our forests with an average density of 4
trees/Sqm, or 40,000 trees/ha. Per usual practice, trees are planted with a density as low as
1,000 trees/ha.6
A sample forest of 36 Sqm has 144 trees of more than 42 species, as summarized in Table (4.)
below.
(4.)
(5.)
As seen in Chart (5.) above, the most common estimation of Carbon Sequestration rate per tree per year is 22 Kilograms,
with a variation, as seen in Table (1.), 4.5 Kilograms to 40.7 Kilograms, assuming a density of 1000 trees/10,000 Sqm.
Due to the vast biodiversity and density advantage that the Miyawaki reforestation method represents,
it is safe to assume that the Miyawaki forest sequesters Carbon more efficiently (some estimate up to 265% more efficiently than regular reforestation. )14
(6.)
Based on our sample forest seen in chart (4.), using a number of growth models and allometric equations sampled on native forests by the Waikato Regional Council considering a planting density of 144 stems in 36 square meters, an average tree survival rate of 85%, and a tree to shrub ratio of 91% to 9% we have calculated carbon sequestration rates across shrubs and trees every 10 years for 80 years to demonstrate the trends in carbon sequestration rates.15
(7.) Total Sequestration as seen in chart (6.) split into trees and shrubs over 80 years.
(8.) Average annual carbon sequestration rate for individual shrubs and trees over 80 years. (Kilograms)16
As demonstrated above, sequestration rates vary on the stage of a forest lifecycle.
This is a conservative estimate, claiming less than 50% of what the median reputable NGOs and Institutes do, as seen in chart (5.).
Plenty of verifiable carbon accounting methodologies are often only suitable for large projects
and require budgets not yet available to the smaller dungbeetles. Our calculations provide tangible, and conservative data on our Miywaki forest carbon sequestration.
Finally, it is worth noting that our calculations are continually updated as we learn more about the science and more research is done by us and others.
The Carbon Sequestration of a Miyawaki forest represents just a fraction of the benefits of planting using the Miyawaki method. The significant additional advantages over other reforestation methods are biodiversity, decreased local temperatures inside the forest, and 15% of micro-particles in the air are cleansed by the leaves and bark.17
In a study conducted in the Netherlands (Alterra - Animal Ecology et al., 2018), two Miyawaki forests were planted in 2015; two years later, in 2017, scientists compared the biodiversity in these forests (appearing in green in chart (9.)) with surrounding woods (appearing in brown in chart (9.)).17
(9.)17
Despite the Miyawaki forests being just 2-3 years old and the surrounding woods being 10+ years old, the Miyawaki forests were, on average, 18x more biodiverse (ranging from 2x - 162x as biodiverse).17
In a study (Long et al., 2019), scientists recorded the temperature differences between forests depending on their location. The different tree locations included:
- Trees Isolated and decorative (landscape)
- Trees at the edge of urban forests (edge)
- Trees within the urban forest (interior)
(10.)17
The difference was significant; the samples were produced at the canopy level. The result was a temperature difference of up to 2° Celsius. In chart (11.), the temperature changes are illustrated using boxplots; the boxes represent the IQR, and the lines on the bottom and top of the boxes represent measurements outside the middle 50%.17
(11.)17
In another study, the theory that Miyawaki forests create localized climates that benefit people outside the forests was reaffirmed (Howe et al., 2017). Using access to 10 identical whether stations along high-resolution land cover imagery and land use data available in Knoxville, Tennessee, scientists analysed the microclimate of a mid-sized city with a temperate climate.
While the city had been experiencing frequent heat waves, the scientists concluded that the temperatures varied greatly depending on the density of tree cover surrounding the specific weather station as seen in chart (12.).17
(12.)17
The results, as seen below in chart (13.), demonstrate that tree cover density significantly impacted climate and temperature in the surrounding area (the closer R2 is to 1, the more significant the role of canopy density) when P<0.05, the data is deemed "statistically significant" which is why they appear in bold.17
(13.)17
Howe et al., 2017 confirmed that within a 500m radius, a neighborhood with more tree density had a significantly lower minimum temperature during the day and night.17
Another benefit of Miyawaki forests is their effect on air quality; in a study (Nowak et al., 2014), scientists calculated the cleansing capacity that urban forest density played in cities. They measured across pollution types: (CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5, SO2). On top of this, they also measured the related economic and health-associated benefits.
This is the conclusion of (Nowak et al., 2014):17
- “The total amount of pollution removal in the 86 cities in 2010 was 16,500 t (range: 7500 t to 21,100 t), with a human health value of $227.2 million (range: $52.5 million to $402.6 million).”
- ‘’Maximum annual air quality improvement among the cities averaged around 0.01 percent for CO, 2 percent for NO2, 3 percent for SO2, 4 percent for O3 and 15 percent for PM2.5.’’‘
- “The greatest effect of urban trees on ozone, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide is during the day time of the in-leaf season when trees are transpiring water. Particulate matter removal occurs both day and night and throughout the year as particles are intercepted by leaf and bark surfaces. Carbon monoxide removal also occurs both day and night of the in-leaf season, but at much lower rates than for the other pollutants.’’
- “Ozone studies that integrate temperature, deposition and emission effects of trees are revealing that urban trees can reduce ozone concentrations.’’ ‘
- “Under stable atmospheric conditions (limited mixing), pollution removal by trees could lead to a greater reduction in pollution concentrations at the ground level. Large stands of trees can also reduce pollutant concentrations in the interior of the stand due to increased distance from emission sources and increased dry deposition (e.g., Dasch, 1987; Cavanagh et al., 2009).’’
- ‘’Forest canopies can limit the mixing of upper air with ground-level air, leading to significant below-canopy air quality improvements.’’